Ty's candidate
 

You're conceptualizing what I'm talking about as a hammer. Think tentacles. I'm talking about administrative strategy moves that start a process rolling no one can stop without dire political circumstances. In organizations of this size, there are a million ways to get around the "CEO."

Ty's candidate
 

For every tentacle of influence a Democrat had in 2003/2004, there were squads of Republican octupi countermanding that influence.

NO heads have rolled in this administration due to pressure from Democrats until after the election in 2006. And there have been innumerable fuckups that Democrats have whined about.

And don't bring up Heck uv a Job Brownie. His screw up was too obvious on every side of the aisle for him to stay around.

ETA: Why the hell is this the Democrats fault anyways? At best it's Joe Wilson's fault, which isn't the same thing. Certainly Democrats were happy to have ANY support that the administration acts inappropriately, but Wilson (and later Plame) were the ones that kept the thing going on for as long as they did.

I should have known better, given the whole "sexual relations with that woman" speech and moreso given our success in hunting down Osama bin Ladin, but I honestly thought that when Bush said he'd fire whoever leaked, he actually meant that he supported an investigation, wherever that may lead. That it led to his boss's chief of staff was something he should have known before announcing an investigation.

This whole thing was just poorly handled by every single person who touched it. But then, given every other aspect of the war, I shouldn't have been surprised.

Fuck it up, cover it up, then deny it's as bad people seem to think.

Ty's candidate
 

I concur. He should have fired Dick Armitage immediately.

Ty's candidate
 

No, he was true to his word. He said that he would "take care of" whoever leaked Plame's name. Take care, indeed.

This Is Horrible
 

only those close to me realize how creepy this is.....

The change has come, she's under my thumb.
 

Might as well be.

S_A_M

Hehe. I caught that part too.

S_A_M

This Is Horrible
 

Exactly these kind of accidents have happened before.

I think John Edwards won a big verdict for one child victim, in his prior career.

S_A_M

This Is Horrible
 

He did, and its been debated that his closing in the case was among the most grotesque things every scripted and allowed to pollute the air of a courthouse. That and the expert he relied on was full of shit.

This Is Horrible
 

I link to one of the neatest short stories in recent american letters, and the only response is SS's sicko sock? Fuck this. I can't educate this rabble on any level.

Bush and his Terrorist Friends
 

We didn't talk about it at length, but they were all describing him as having mainly local ambitions. None of them viewed him as the most dangerous option in Iraq; all thought our presence and strategy was pushing him toward the more dangerous alliances.

I try to just listen and ask an occassional question during these discussions. I find you get very different perspectives when it's military talking among themselves than when its a debate among a mix of military and civilians.

This Is Horrible
 

You can read about the case here: http://www.monkeytime.org/lakey.html (spree: a collection of excerpts on the case from the Raleigh News & Observer). Experts had little to do with the case. I think the jury was persuaded mainly by the fact that so many other people had been killed/maimed in similar accidents, which could have been prevented by simply putting some fucking screws in the fucking drain cover.

I linked this not because I wanted to discuss Edwards' merits as a trial lawyer (by all accounts, he was really, really good). I found it interested that Drudge posted this story with the linK "SHOCK: Little Girl Disembowled by Pool Drain" (or something like that). Trial lawyers are a favorite target of Drudge and his ilk, and yet they are SHOCKED when someone gets maimed by a defective product.

Who should they trust to put an end to this SHOCK? They want smaller government, so Congress/Adminstrative Agencies are out. Pool drain (and other consumer product) manufacturers have proven they can't be trusted. Who is left to make sure little children can play in a wading pool without having their intestines sucked out of their bodies and being fed from a tube in through their chests for the rest of their lives?

This Is Horrible
 

It is pretty clear you have never worked anywhere near a PI lawyer, plus you are preternaturally gullible.

Every products case starts with the PI guy doing a patent search to show how many simple great solutions are out there and the bad manufacturer ignored them because of GREED!!! Of course the fact that there are massive practical problems with the available solutions gets pushed under the rug.

I worked at a firm that had a PI dept. They were asked to speak at a firm meeting. They had just hit on a massive judgement against a hot water tank manufacturer. A 2 year boy was left alone in his basement. The proud parents also stored gasoline in the basement. The little boy started pouring the gas on the floor. fumes came up and the pilot light on the hot water tank ignited the fumes. the boy was horribly burned.

Our white hat guys jumped in. They created the theory that if only the pilot light had a tube extending 10 inches higher, then the American family man could safely ignore his child and not worry about him having access to the gasoline storage areas. It was a bullshit theory, but there it was. Until, in a needle in the haystack document inspection they found a sketch by an engineer of a tube to raise the pilot light. It never went anywhere because you cannot restrict airflow to the pilot light, but so what!! We made zillions. Actually the money came in the month before I made partner:(

Somehow, I don't see how we helped society.

People want spas and hot tubs and swimming pools. All of those require water to circulate. Manufacturers try to make them safer, but they still have to be workable. Life is unsafe.

Here's an interesting Federalist Society debate about the Al-Marri case.

I particularly agree with the fellow who says this:

• This is going to sound awfully political, and I don't mean it to be, but when Congress passed the AUMF in the immediate aftermath of 9/11, it had no idea what its authority would be used to justify in 2007 six years later. But I fault Congress now, not then. Congress now needs to step back into the fray (campaign year--fat chance) and redefine precisely what powers it wants to give to the Commander in Chief in light of our experience since 9/11 and the present reality. Some may believe that the President has pushed the envelope too far, but Congress never sealed the envelope.

This Is Horrible
 

If you'd sued, maybe you could have found a document suggesting you might have made partner earlier.

This Is Horrible
 

Which one of the kids was Clinton?

This Is Horrible
 

Different facts, different case. If you'd read the link, you'd know it was a failure to warn case, anyway.

This Is Horrible
 

huh?

This Is Horrible
 

I'm afraid to get past the "you're full of shit" barrier, you're going to have to come up with at least one plausible problem created by screwing the drain cover down that outweighs the statistically reliable likelihood of a hundred or more deaths a year from kids getting their arms, legs, hair, etc. caught in a pool drain.

That way we can avoid the inherent grossnesss of a kid getting her guts sucked out.

This Is Horrible
 

Even the blog makes clear that the drain cover was manufactured to be screwed down.

This Is Horrible
 

And I've done enough defense work to know that when you have $22.5 million in liability coverage and a horribly injured child, your opening offer needs to be more than $100,000.

This Is Horrible
 

True. because of trial attorneys.

This Is Horrible
 

This argument carries so much more weight with people who don't know how much lawyers make (and add to the overall cost of doing business) in every commercial or financial endeavor.

This Is Horrible
 

You think $100,000 would be adequate for her injuries? I don't think a jury would.

I used to get frustrated at insurance companies agreeing to settlements far greater than what I thought was warranted (in a case where liability was not contested, it was only causation/damages). They just wanted to free up their reserves.

This Is Horrible
 

I didn't know they had contests for that sort of thing.

Trials (especially jury trials) are all about who lied, cheated, or stole. The best story-teller usually wins. (Being the best-prepared helps a lot too.)

All any lawyer is supposed to do at trial is win for their client, acting within the bounds of legal ethics and the court rules. I know you don't like Edwards, SD, but that seems a bit much.

I'll weep for the poor manufacturer another time.

S_A_M

He's a Cancer
 

Happy Birthday, W.

This Is Horrible
 

I was pointing to SS's assumption that a company that manufactured a perfectly safe product, that had been misused, was wrong in "only" offering 100K initially. This is a tax on all consumers that increases how much pools/spas cost us so that we can give an out of line windfall to someone who was horribly injured, but not due to the company's negligence.

This Is Horrible
 

If it makes you feel any better, it took about 3 healthy glasses of Lagavulin to get that friggin' awful image of the "sea serpent" out of my mind.

This Is Horrible
 

If only they'd had your brilliant defense.

This Is Horrible
 

I am not saying I wouldn't have offered a few million. I was simply pointing out that the argument the company should have offered a few million actually proves the point that thngs are haywired.

This Is Horrible
 

Hey, I miss lawn darts as much as the next guy, but I don't see anything haywired in this case.

eta: If the settlement was so outrageous, how come little kids' bloody guts are still being fished out of pool filters?

This Is Horrible
 

this actually helps my argument. If this type case was anything more than a tax, and actually did some good, then we wouldn't still be doing that.

This Is Horrible
 

Or perhaps the settlement needed to be higher to send a real message? It would have been interesting to see what the punis would have been.

This Is Horrible
 

what message? stop making pool products? the product was safe, just used improperly.

This Is Horrible
 

You're an IP guy, it can't be that hard to design a safe way to circulate water. If you go back to the story linked on Drudge, you'll note that legislation is pending to require pools to have multiple drains to ease the force of the suction since nobody can seem to come up with a way to keep the drain covers on. Is this just another act of liberal, nanny state regulation? If it was your daughter, how would you suggest this problem be addressed?

This Is Horrible
 

that is a fine regulation. it doesn't change that there are existing pools with only 1 drain. that drain will need a cover. the cover needs to be removable. the problem is that the maintenence guy got lazy and decided not to put the screws back in one time. what if the company put a lock on it? it wouldn't help is the maintenence guy didn't lock it.

Ted Nugent hacks the WSJ
 

He's in rare form. One wonders why the WSJ decided to give Ted its platform. Maybe they're preparing themselves for Murdoch's purchase.

This Is Horrible
 

How about a pump that won't work unless the drain cover is properly installed? Feel free to pass that along to one of your clients.

:love:

This Is Horrible
 

• Vacuum relief safety valve for a swimming pool filter pump system United States Patent 5,682,624
  
  
  Abstract
  A method and device are provided for preventing a child or an object from being trapped by suction to a drain of a swimming pool filter pump system. The invention entails a safety valve capable of causing the filter pump to immediately lose its prime when a child or object becomes trapped against the drain of a swimming pool, so that the vacuum created by the filter pump is completely eliminated. The valve of this invention can be mounted directly to a suction line fluidically interconnecting the drain and the filter pump, and is constructed to permit air to rapidly flow into the suction line if a predetermined vacuum level is exceeded within the suction line, as is the case if the drain becomes partially or completely obstructed. The influx of air causes the filter pump to rapidly lose its prime, thereby completely eliminating the vacuum and the resulting hazardous condition.
  
  
  --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Inventors: Ciochetti; Michael James (Hialeah, FL)
  Appl. No.: 08/483,531
  Filed: June 7, 1995

it's from 1995. Back before Bush stopped all the funding for pool related safety inventions.

This Is Horrible
 

Another great idea. It's good to see that Edwards' litigation is leading to safer products.