I'MMA LET YOU FINISH
When you need someone to take apart the spin, turn to...Entertainment Weekly.
We'll take it where we can get it!
hastert! daschle! er, what was I supposed to say?
Stop the pain! Stop the pain!!!
Finally some critics have found the balls to point out that right-wing pundits are vicious.
About f*cking time!
Tell Sharon Percy Rockefeller that Tucker Carlson's cynacism is an insult to the moral values of greater Washington.
Warning: Shameless self promotion to follow:
Check out my song!
www.simplefears.com
The republicreeps can point out that Edwards is a trial lawyer all they want. The fact of the matter is that if -- god forbid -- YOUR DAUGHTER had her guts ripped out and needed to be fed through a tube for 12 hours a day, a lawyer would be a good thing to have.
Compare this to the republicreeps who want to cap awards at $250,000 to help their big business fat-cat cronies.
New Yorker had an interesting article a few weeks ago about how PBS has shifted to the right in order to obtain funds. It's sad; they used to have a lot of good shows.
Tucker Carlson's an ass. When informed of the facts behind his cruel phrasing, he should have said, "You're right. I'm sorry. That was pretty callous of me. Obviously, that was a terrible tragedy for that little girl and her family. I got carried away trying to be cute. However, . . ." Then he could have gone on to his next brilliant point which is apparently that Edwards should have worked for free.
The level of discourse in this country has been so degraded by these talking heads that I don't know how we'll ever get it back to even semi-civilized.
Really. Check it out. You will like it. I promise.
Yes we prefer Tucker Faye filtered
and fact checked
Carlson is a quicker debater than any of the Crossfire hosts
Is that accurate? Do the talking heads on Crossfire debate?
The republicreeps can point out that Edwards is a trial lawyer all they want.
Make that public protection lawyer. Did anyone else see Lakoff on NOW with Bill Moyers last night? The show was great.
Isn't Tucker Carlson somebody's son, like Bush? I assume that's the real reason he's all over the media.
Speaking of the media, CSPAN is re-running (and probably will again) the press conference of Hastert, Hunter, et. al. from Thursday discussing implementing the 9/11 commission report. There were actual journalists there, asking some good questions. Hastert, of course, couldn't resist spinning: "Of course, I tried to get this report out in the spring, so we would have time to talk about changes before we leave" giving the impression of course, that the commission dragged its heels. What a fuckwit. Anyway, check it out if you can, it gives hope for journalism.
Sounds like a lot of you missed last night on ABC's 20/20 John "RNC Talking Points" Stossell.
His seg was announced by their melodramatic male voice, "John Edwards made millions as a trial lawyer; at who's expense?" And then he went into the ususal winger blather about the evils of trial lawyers.
I couldn't take it and wrote back asking for a "fair and balanced" take, like: "The Bush's and their friend made billions off of their Saudi connections; at who's expense?" Or, "Dick Cheney made millions as Halliburton CEO via illegal deals with Iran and Iraq; at who's expense?"
We have GOT to take back the media.
Hang this one too.
Support the economy: hire your local gallows-builder.
Is that accurate? Do the talking heads on Crossfire debate?
viz. "professional wrestling".
Boy how time flies?
It seems like only yesterday that this blog and others were defending Tucker for making statements in opposition to Bush and this administration? We opposed the outing of his home phone number and the insinuations made by the fascists that people intimidate or attack him for making those statements.
MYOB'
.
OoOoo, the best part of this presser was at the end, when the camera went up and people were still talking, you have Tom Delay saying some pretty nasty things about the democrats. Can't he get voted out of office? Ugh.
OK, I want credit for this - I posted the same quote at 11:41 in the Judy Woodruff thread. [/shameless self-aggrandizing]. Another goodie from the same article:
Unfortunately, Crossballs doesn't swipe at what's most ripe for ridicule in these shows [Crossfire and Hardball]--their pointless clinging to the fraying labels of "liberalism" (now most often wishy-washy centrism) and "conservatism" (which has taken a radically hard-right turn).
Kudos to the author, Ken Tucker.
New Yorker had an interesting article a few weeks ago about how PBS has shifted to the right in order to obtain funds. It's sad; they used to have a lot of good shows.
Remember when Gingrich was trashing them all the time? Nova became "The Mighty American Aircraft Carrier and Submarine Show" for awhile then. I was waiting for Joe Camel to appear on Sesame Street.
Whores. I don't watch PBS any more.
Entertainment Weekly published the above excerpt? Holy shit.
I said this the first time this particular issue came up here, and I'll say it again: As we all know, Carlson's peddling his fat ass on behalf of an extremist political faction that has already threatened his wife and small children. This is a demonstrable fact. I'm not sure what this says about the man, but it can't be good.
Come to think of it, this could be more of an effort to move further towards the far right so he isn't mistaken as a potential "enemy" again by the thug crowd he's pandering to. Compared to many in the whore media, Carlson has sometimes come off as fairly moderate for a Republican, i.e. "not insane." Making such ugly remarks about a mutilated little girl may well be his strategy towards moving even more in a rightwards direction.
Damn. Entertainment Weekly? Nice to see things filtering down to the plebians.
Kind of sad when the TV critics are paying more attention than the news reporters, but what can you do?
"Make that public protection lawyer."
-- monica_nyc
We should always refer to Edwards as a former public protection lawyer and make that our new mantra. we can repeat memes as fast as anyone, and this one's true.
Whenever we hear about John Edwards being a trial lawyer we should remind folks that james Sharp is a trial lawyer. An excellent trial lawyer from what I hear, how else could be representing both Ken Lay in the Enron scandal and GW Bush in the Valerie Plame case.
Compared to many in the whore media, Carlson has sometimes come off as fairly moderate for a Republican, i.e. "not insane." Making such ugly remarks about a mutilated little girl may well be his strategy towards moving even more in a rightwards direction.
I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and assume he took the part line about trial lawyers without doing his homework, that it was simply a boneheaded gaffe.
Mr. Bow Tie with 2 last names should be castrated.
Or maybe he has been. Or he never actually went through puberty.
"Crossballs" doesn't have any. it's stupid, boring and meaningless, and suffers mightily by (temporarily) following The Daily Show. CB is simply unwatchable.
it was simply a boneheaded gaffe.
SWR,
If it were simply a gaffe, he should have apologized for it when it was called to his attention, I think.
If it were simply a gaffe, he should have apologized for it when it was called to his attention, I think.
Was it called to his attention? What was his response?
Carlson often makes my blood boil, but PBS also carries Bill Moyers NOW, the only show out of 100+ channels' worth that I ALWAYS watch if it's on. It is thoughtful, thorough, interesting, and consistently liberal. I don't expect PBS to exclude conservative partisans if they include Bill Moyers, though it's unfortunate that Bill Moyers and David Brancoccio are actual journalists and Tucker to me is just another pretty hack.
Isn't Tucker Carlson somebody's son, like Bush? I assume that's the real reason he's all over the media.
If I understand correctly, his dad Richard Carlson ran PBS back in the 1970s.
I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and assume he took the part line about trial lawyers without doing his homework, that it was simply a boneheaded gaffe.
Ah, nuts to that.
"When informed of the facts behind his cruel phrasing, he snapped, 'Oh, I know. I've heard that,' and then pressed the point that Edwards took money for getting the girl a $25 million settlement."
For me, the benefit of the doubt gets taken away just around the point where the guy is informed of his mistake and goes on attacking the crippled girl and her lawyer.
Incidentally, anyone have a guess as to what that girl's medical expenses would be? $25 million doesn't even sound like that much considering the care she probably needs.
Anyone watch Tucker on PBS last night? I was bored, it was an hour before NOW, so I thought I'd tune in to see if maybe he would be a little more rational under the PBS format. I was able to make it through his intro and that was it. I was punching myself in the face for turning it on, so I may have missed his point, but he was going on and on about the "terror in the skies" caca, with his point being that people need to stop being worried about being branded a racist. He presented the story as though Jacobsen wasn't the one who wrote the piece. He talked about "reports" that this had happened, and finally Jacobsen came forward and wrote her column. Did I imagine this in my face-punching stupor, or did he really say that?
Was it called to his attention? What was his response?
SWR
I know someone who has zero attention span.
he snapped, "Oh, I know. I've heard that," and then pressed the point that Edwards took money for getting the girl a $25 million settlement.
I've heard that doctors take money for healing their patients, too. And Halliburton is taking money for rebuilding Iraq. Bastards.
Is he really any worse than Begala?
edwards got paid? damn him to hell! fucking jacuzzi lawyer.
Was it called to his attention? What was his response?
SWR,
Atrios' post says, "When informed of the facts behind his cruel phrasing, he snapped, 'Oh, I know. I've heard that,' and then pressed the point that Edwards took money for getting the girl a $25 million settlement."
Is he really any worse than Begala?
shiko
Begala and Novak are dismissed completely:
Begala and Novak are both hopeless, utterly predictable not just in their opinions but in the maundering way they deliver them. Carville is a pistol, but .... His drawling sneer is a tired act.
Carlson, however, is a different matter...[as quoted]
Was it called to his attention? What was his response?
SWR
I know someone who has zero attention span.
Something doesn't smell right about this.
Who exactly would say he's for little girl's being disembowled?
Even if he were a complete bastard, would he come out with it? I'm sorry but this just seems like a gaffe to me and he's not aware of the moralistic high-dudgeon being generated against him.
Prove me wrong if you can, but would anybody really be that stupid?
Kind of sad when the TV critics are paying more attention than the news reporters, but what can you do?
The TV Critics Association just gave The Daily Show with Jon Stewart an outstanding news or information program, beating out other nominees like Sixty Minutes, Nightline and Frontline.
Sounds about right to me.
Recently I have thought blogosphere should start donating to WETA. Then we could replace the current board of directors with people who would fire Lehrer, Ifill, Carlson, et al and replace them with journalists.
Here's the exact quote, via Salon:
And there's Tucker Carlson again, this time on a "Crossfire" episode last week: "My question is a very, very simple one. And I just want your honest answer. If [Edwards] is out to protect the weak, say, a little girl who was injured, terribly injured, in this Jacuzzi accident, why is it compassionate for him to take tens of millions of dollars of her settlement? Why doesn't he give that money back if he cares for the little girl?"
I don't get his logic and the phrasing is pretty bad, but I still don't see it as making him evil.
I just see the right using something like this against Kerry or Edwards.
Imagine a scenario where Kerry criticizes the war and you get Little Green Footballs or some site pushing a story about how Kerry said something like "well. Of course I'm against Saddam's rape chambers but why didn't the Republicans take out Saddam in 1991."
People should call up PBS while Tucker is on and un-pledge.
Was the "pool drain" in question actually made by the Jacuzzi company, and if not, has Tucker heard from Jacuzzi's lawyers yet?
Arthur 'Big Guy' Carlson, ran WKRP in Cincinatti for a while too.
SO we have EW going after the Screamer Shows as I call them, Maxim Magazine does an article on the Texas Cyanide bomber domestic terrorist case, and the self proclaimed "fake news show" The Daily Show does a segment on the Moon Coronation in a Senate office building with congressmen attending.
Its pretty sad when we have to rely on these sources for real news while the supposed mainstream media sleeps.
Does anyone (outside of this intelligent crowd) ever consider what happens in cases like these, where a lawyer doesn't get paid until s/he wins the case? Edwards gambled and poured his own time, effort and MONEY, into that case. He could very well have lost in court, and all of that would have been for NOTHING. He's also calling upon the effort of assistants, paralegals and the like, who are depending on him to do well, or they don't have a job. He must pay them in the meantime, however. They don't work for free.
Anyway, if trial lawyers didn't accept cases now/pay me later, it would be the rare American who got a day in court against a corporation.
Is he really any worse than Begala?
Whatever the criticisms of Begala and Carville, they're a huge improvement over the "left" co-hosts Crossfire has had over the years. They're actual liberals--not centrists, as most of the Crossfire "left" co-hosts have been--and aren't afraid to call right-wing lies and smears right-wing lies and smears.
In fact, the first "left" co-host, Tim Braden, was actually slightly to the left of Bob Dole. Michael Kinsley was slightly better--he was actually slightly left of center and was a much better debater than Braden (which isn't saying much)--but he's still a much better writer than TV performer.
I belive Tuckers daddy was an anchor at some news program in LA.
They just hate John Edwards, because he was a successful civil attorney.
The don't like us comparing him to (for example) Nero, who has been a complete failure at everything in his life, or Big Time Dick, whose only real success has been as a war criminal and profiteer.
you know Im not suprised if "the Big Guy" over at WKRP was Tuckers daddy.
Anyone remember the episode where he came back from Military School and called Venus Flytrap "boy" ?
In fact, the first "left" co-host, Tim Braden, was actually slightly to the left of Bob Dole. Michael Kinsley was slightly better--he was actually slightly left of center and was a much better debater than Braden (which isn't saying much)--but he's still a much better writer than TV performer.
I used to like Curtis and Kuby where you had a sort of right-wing populist against an actual Communist.
Why not have, say Michael Moore vs. Rush?
I bet the ratings would be through the roof.
>Carlson's previous connection to public broadcasting was through his father, Richard, who was CPB president from 1992 to 1997. Richard Carlson is now vice chairman of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, an anti-terrorism think tank.
http://www.current.org/prog/
prog...21carlson.shtml
The President gets paid. The Veep gets paid. The TV bigmouths get paid. They've done this country more harm than good.
The only thing wrong with the settlement Edwards got for the little good is that $25 million ain't squat when you require 12 hours of IV feeding every day for the rest of your life and home nursing care. But then, $25 million is better than zero.
When a 'fake' news show consistantly delves deeper into issues than real news shows, and an Entertainment periodical can call a spade over spade when newspapers keep falling into the same pitholes of 'balance', you KNOW the media has not just failed, but crashed, burned, and dropped out of special ed.
ok, for the little "girl." oops
political satire is high art. ask Voltaire.
SWR, I think that's what he said after his first remark had been called into question. First he said that Edwards was a trial lawyer specializing in "jacuzzi cases."
If you didn't know the whole story, and Tucker certainly didn't tell the whole story, you'd assume that this statement meant something like Edwards made his money suing Jacuzzi for rich folks who were unhappy that their hot tubs leaked onto their Marin County teak decks or something. You certainly wouldn't get that Edwards rather masterfully handled a suit and settlement negotiations for a little girl who was horribly wounded and disabled by a company that is not in any way associated with Jacuzzi.
And, even when the facts were pointed out to him, he didn't apologize or anything. He snapped that he'd already known that at the time he made the first statement. Which makes the first statement anything but a mistake.
So I'm not giving him a pass.
Nor do I agree with him that it makes any sense to suggest that lawyers can somehow afford to try cases like this for free. Does Tucker do what he does for free?
So I'm not giving him a pass.
I'm not really either, just expressing my disbelief that somebody (somebody who isn't Hannibal Lector) would consciously come out and mock a little girl who got disembowled.
My first impulse is to think there's some mixup in communications. I could be wrong but it just doesn't seem right.
"The connection between vice and meanness is a fit subject for satire, but when the satire is a fact, it cuts with the irresistible power of a diamond." - Thomas Paine
no imagination - Ooooh...good quote. Must put that as my sig at DKos now. :D
Thomas Paine is one of my favorite political writers, and highly quotable to boot.
What?
Is Tucker Carlson using SWR's handle? Because otherwise, I can't think of any logical explanation for willful ignorance on SWR's part. And I seem to remember that we had a name-stealing troll who was very worried about defending Tucker's reputation earlier this week.
Nor do I agree with him that it makes any sense to suggest that lawyers can somehow afford to try cases like this for free. Does Tucker do what he does for free?
You know, I think Tucker's problem is that he's so devoid of human empathy that he's incapable of understanding compassion except through abject caricature. It's a common affliction among republitards.
Is Tucker Carlson using SWR's handle? Because otherwise, I can't think of any logical explanation for willful ignorance on SWR's part.
I'm held over at the airport, bored as hell, and playing devil's advocate for lack of anything better to do.
If I were Tucker, I'd be in a nice hotel right now.
I'd like to disembowel Tucker the Fucker and then mock him.
SWR ... but would anybody really be that stupid?
Yes, I can think of somebody that stupid ...
Kudos to Janet for the inspiration.
You know, I think Tucker's problem is that he's so devoid of human empathy that he's incapable of understanding compassion except through abject caricature.
For the last time, you can't psychoanalyze somebody you haven't met Dr. Krauthammer.
SWR ... but would anybody really be that stupid?
Yes, I can think of somebody that stupid ...
Kudos to Janet for the inspiration.
51st state | Email | Homepage | 07.24.04 - 2:22 pm | #
OK. Forget I said it. He's a witch, burn him. Get the rope and let's string him up.
Have I vindicated my intellect in your eyes?
more from the ew article, which compares Crossballs (parody), Hardball and Crossfire:
"...Crossfalls doesn't swipe at what's most ripe for ridicule in these shows-- their pointless clinging to the fraying labels of "liberalism" (now most often wishy-washy centrism) and "conservatism" (which has taken a radically hard-right turn)."
Ken Tucker gives Hardball a "B" because Chris Matthews is "smart enough to know he'd become his own caricature" vis a vis SNL parodies with Darrell Hammond. He's recently dialed down his "yelling, yammering, leather-lung lug persona," and while he still "does lame things like repeating the Howard Dean screaming clip for the 4,000th time," he will, "like the good Catholic-school debater he was reared as...also point out any illogic."
Ken Tucker gives the other two programs a generous C-.
the other day i saw a few min. of norville. she's been having progeny of ex politcos on. surprised to learn that dan qauyles sons name is tucker. stupid name.
i don't mean to imply anything. indeed i think tucker carlson is very bright, and i when it comes to repugs, i really hate the smart fuckers.
NPR gave him his own show? that's just wrong. George Bush is ruining this country. come to think of it, when it comes to repugs, i hate the dumb fucks too.
I'm not surprised at all. When Edwards ran the president last year, this story came up and a wingnut forum poster blamed the little girl for her injuries. He claimed she was sitting on the drain and tried to lift the cover and therefore it was all her fault. Next on the agenda will be the trashing of Edwards' son who was killed. They will start to spread rumors that he was drunk and driving the car (he was a passenger) and that there was cocaine and whiskey bottles under the seat. Like Tucker, the cons are real creeps.
Tucker Carlson voluntarily sat on the Republican drain and allowed his soul to be sucked out. Too bad there's not a trial lawyer in the nation who would take his case.
Tucker is an ass, but he doesn't deserve all the blame. Crossfire is one of the worst things that has ever happened to American political discourse. It's debate, not inquiry, and the prime directive is *never, ever, ever admit that you might be wrong.* In terms of intellectual honesty, Carlson is really no worse than Carville. The comment in question is particularly heartless, but the show is set up kind of like speed chess (er, well, more like speed checkers...or speed tic-tac-toe...), and everybody just says the first damn thing that comes into his mind so long as it somehow indicates that the guys on the other side of the aisle suck.
Framing.
What is this Rovespeak about progressives (Edwards) making money? I've noticed the same spin about Michael Moore making money on F911.
It's this Rove strategy of taking the things that the Right is most vulnerable and spinning and attacking the left for it. IE Kerry's military record, rich elite brie eating progressives. It's a kind of projective schizophrenia.
Did anyone else see Lakoff on NOW with Bill Moyers last night? The show was great.
Yes. Lakoff rocked. I hope the Kerry/Edwards communications people were taking notes.
I have a sneaky feeling that the critic's dismissive remarks about Carville and Begala--which are kinda general and not really that bad anyway--are designed to inoculate himself against the inevitable freeper firestorm he'll reap when they get word about the Tucker Carlson comments. The extra-chromosome crowd will be screaming, "LIBERAL MEDIA BIAS!!!!! LIBERAL MEDIA BIAS!!!!" and the critic can just point and say, "Hey, I was fair and balanced...I criticized Carville and Begala too."
Carlson's peddling his fat ass on behalf of an extremist political faction that has already threatened his wife and small children. This is a demonstrable fact. I'm not sure what this says about the man, but it can't be good.
Mebbe it says that Carlson is a McCain Republican.
Carlson's offense here is that his desire to speak ill of Edwards encompasses a denigration of the person and family whom Edwards represented.
His disregard of that family doesn't have to be willful to be offputting.
I can't imagine Ken Tucker caring much what the wingnuts might say. maybe I'm naive, but...it's just TV, after all. He's judging entertainment value, not policy.
OT, re: "the triumph of the telegenic."
Current issue of Harper's, Lewis Lapham talking about the Cult of Reagan:
"Applauding the spectacle of his funeral as joyously as they had applauded the romance of his presidency, the media also applauded themselves. They had changed the seriousness of politics into the stuff of trivial entertainment...Reagan at least had sense enough to know that he was an actor...George W. Bush thinks the movie is real."
I do so love Atrios' "heh" stories. Heh, indeed.
Carlson first brought up the Jacuzzi meme during the primaries, saying on February 18, 2004:
I mean, he's not running for the Senate again. He's already sort of closed out that possibility. He's got nowhere to go. He'll have to go back to representing, you know, or attacking jacuzzi manufacturers after this if he's, you know, out of politics for good. So will he attack John Kerry, thereby sort of closing off the vice presidential option? I don't know. I can't wait -- I can't wait to watch it. I hope he goes harshly negative. I think that'd be interesting.
Harshly negative, eh? I bet you'd find that interesting, Fucker, Since that's your primary M.O. Go iron your bow ties.
Next on February 20, 2004 we have this:
John Edwards is a former trial lawyer, specializing in Jacuzzi cases and a soon-to-be former U.S. senator from North Carolina.
Then we have on July 5th:
CARLSON:In other words, the guy is a lightweight. He was a trial lawyer specializing in Jacuzzi cases just six years ago, and now wants do be vice president.
ANN LEWIS: Let me be very clear. One, that Jacuzzi case that you're making a joke of is a child who was tragically harmed.
CARLSON: Oh, I know, I've heard that, yes.
LEWIS: And John Edwards went into court and got some compensation for the parents and the child. That was a great...
CARLSON: And for himself, yes.
Finally, on July 15th:
Compare that to John Edwards, this is his background. He has served less than one term in the U.S. Senate. Before that he was a trial lawyer specializing in Jacuzzi cases. This is my favorite. This is John Kerry's rationale, he says that John Edwards ought to be vice president because, quote: He has devoted a lifetime of caring."
(all quotes are from Crossfire)
"Carlson is a quicker debater than any of the Crossfire hosts..."
I guess that makes him a master debater. Seriously, though, Tucker's just one of the many stenographers in the media who are dutifully regurgitating the RNC-generated "John Edwards is a RICH, TRIAL LAWYER!" meme (see Jon Stewarts brilliant bit about conventional wisdom, to understand how this sort of thing comes about). The Edwards camp should really take this and use it against the GOP in some really good attack ads against bushco's corporate connections. They could finish the ad with the question "Who would you want to fight for YOUR rights?" I personally think it would be pretty effective, if the Democrats grow a pair of balls and actually do it.
Renato,
Thank you for being the only person in this thread who correctly spelled "disembowEled". That little girl didn't lose her "bowl"; she lost her "bowel".
Atrios, if you have a minute, could you correct that spelling?
As for tucker, the comment about him sitting on the GOP drain and having his soul sucked out hits it about right, that is, if he HAD a soul.
I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and assume he took the part line about trial lawyers without doing his homework, that it was simply a boneheaded gaffe.
No. I believe he said it on several other occasions as well.
And there's no excuse for him not to have done his homework on Edwards. I'm surprised that Jacuzzi hasn't sued him for libel, for connecting their company to such a horrific case.
OT, re: "the triumph of the telegenic."
K Stone
This is not off-topic at all, since it is in the original quote. I believe that the campaigning Bush twins are further evidence of this phenomenon which has been a huge part of American politics for many, many years.
And let's not forget Ahnold the Governator of CA - lately he couldn't resist revisiting the campaign trail to get some cheap thrills by repeating TV and movie phrases when his attempts to get a budget through weren't working as easily as rhetoric.
I must take issue with this: "Carlson is a quicker debater than any of the Crossfire hosts, and he's a good-looking twerp."
Good-looking, right. He looks like he needs something to gnaw on. Who the hell's idea was it to put a ferret in a bowtie and set it loose on cable news?
When is national "punch a pundit in the face" day? Just wondering. I need to work on my left hook and would like to be ready.
Seriously, the US's little love affair with the right, which is going very badly at this point, might turn out to be a boon of sorts. I wonder how many more people are skeptical of the media. Or how many people have finally realized O'Reilly et al are just a bunch of assess. I remember when O'Reilly hit the scene, lots of people saw him as a 'straight talker' but I don't think many hold that opinion anymore.
It does look pretty grim out there, but watching all these guys shoot themselves in the foot on a daily basis pushes away everyone but the true believers. I say let them keep up the lousy work. Ratings and subscriptions will fall (who wants to pay for hate?). Sober moderate voices will get a word in edgewise now and again. There's only so much cognitive dissonance people can handle.
Reagan at least had sense enough to know that he was an actor...George W. Bush thinks the movie is real.
Priceless.
As always, the thing that's hardest to understand about Tucker's meanspirited and insensitive comments is that he has children. Did he just for a second try to imagine what he would do if one of his children suffered irreparable damage and had to be bedridden for the REST OF HER LIFE as a result of an indifferent corporation's proven negligence? What agony for the
parents and the child! All the monry in the world isn't going to restore their contentment. John Edwards only managed to lessen their grief a little bit.
Geez, Tucker, a little empathy here. God forbid you should find yourself in a similar situation someday.
Does the desire to score political points trump common decency?
Dear SWR,
Hi! Thanks for all your comments! Thanks for not harshing on our Dad's mouthpiece, Tucker! So he made a few jokes about some bimbo in a whirlpool! Why should everyone harsh him out for that? Of course, we love jacuzzis! With soy lattes and sushi! While we listen to Bob Marley, who is like, totally a black person.
Oh, and SWR, please don't forget to vote for our Dad because our Dad is very resolute and totally came to a few of our soccer games. So he'd make a totally awesome president and, just one more thing, why do you all watch these political shows anyway? "What Not to Wear" is on almost every day now!
Oh, and SWR, they have bars in airport lounges, don't they?
Almost all the debate on tv is done in a form where you can't elaborate on anything, where you can't get deeper into a question. And you have to either hate broccoli or love broccoli and nothing inbetween. It's intended to dumb down the audience and to attract an audience that wants to be dumbed down in the first place. It's also all intended to affect your brainwaves while you are unaware of this, so you wake up muttering to yourself about islamofascists and bush is great and tucker is so erudite.
It's crap.
I hated to see this because Carlson was actually one of the few conservative pundits I could stomach, but he's a creep.
If anyone still believes that Tucker Carlson is not an awful human being, they should take a look at Hunter's diaries in Daily Kos. Apparently Carlson has been playing with the "jacuzzi cases" meme for several years now, and has been called on his bullshit several times. The fact that he keeps doing this shows that he chooses to belittle the tragedy of a little girl for political purposes.
But you guys have to read Hunter to get the full measure of how MAD you should be at this creep.
Go here: http://tinyurl.com/6l966
And here: http://tinyurl.com/5tlpx
It's a sad state of affairs (has someone said this already? Just got here, no time to read all the posts) when you get such truthful commentary from an entertainment magazine, or an entertainment cable TV show ("The Daily Show").
Why haven't Blitzer and Rather and Brokaw and Jennings and Koppel resigned in shame, yet?
"As always, the thing that's hardest to understand about Tucker's meanspirited and insensitive comments is that he has children."
Pie, these guys simply don't think in those terms. When they've got the mic, any shred of humanity goes out the window. They know who's signing their paychecks, and they serve their masters well. "Whore" is simply too mild a term for what lowlifes like Tucker Carlson, et al do. To borrow a line from the brilliant George Carlin (in a bit about guys named "Tucker"): "Fuck Tucker; Tucker sucks!"
Thanks Janet. I just meant it was off-topic because I can't bear to watch the telegenic ugliness of people like Carlson.
I'm hoping that coverage here as well as on media matters is getting people concerned enough to write in to PBS. I have, but no response.
While I don't understand the relationship between CPB and PBS, I do recall from the New Yorker article that CPB funds "Unfiltered", but not "NOW".
This, as they say, is double-plus ungood.
If there's a focused campaign to get Carlson off the air, I'd be happy to volunteer time and money to make that happen. If there's a mechanism to donate to "NOW", but not "Unfiltered" or the planned Gigot show, I'd like to do that as well.
Maybe if Fucker Carlson had been disembowelled like the little girl he wouldn't be able to get his head up his ass so easily.
The Guff ran empty before Tucker was born.
Who the hell's idea was it to put a ferret in a bowtie and set it loose on cable news?
A picture of Carlson
the weasel inspired by Mary with apologies to Athenae 
It's also all intended to affect your brainwaves while you are unaware of this, so you wake up muttering to yourself about islamofascists and bush is great and tucker is so erudite.
Actually, it's because people would simply rather watch sceam fests than "Firing Line."
I never liked Buckley, but the conversation was always civil.
Bread and circuses, bread and circuses. Only this time, we are feeding ourselves. The "glory" of the marketplace. The downside to 'freedom of choice.'
Oh, and SWR, they have bars in airport lounges, don't they?
You would know.
OK, the more I look into it the more I'm inclined to believe Tucker has more in common with Rush than I've imagined.
It wouldn't surprise me that Rush would say something like that. Perhaps I'm being lookist and ageist, cutting Tucker slack because he seems normal.
BTW. You're going to make Ricky Vandal jealous.
FEAR NOT, because i SWEAR i am coming for that asshole, and all like him.
The floor has been laid, and the wheels are turning.
I wait my turn
Isn't "Entertainment Weekly" that communist propaganda sheet that featured Michael Moore on it's cover recently ? Why should I believe their jabs at Tucker Carlson when I have a PBS press release right here that says he's a terrific wit and an insightful commentator.
Pretty soon you'll be trying to tell us that Comedy Central has more incisive analysis than the Newshour. Or that Tucker got his job because his father ran the outfit that funds PBS...
Christ, you bloggers just spout any crazy thing that pops into your heads.
Does anyone have a few thoughts on why average folks hate trial lawyers? I mean, what's the real revulsion people feel when they hear about people getting money for pain and suffering? Erin Brokovitch was a hit movie, so how is this anti-trial lawyer stuff connecting?
I can't imagine Ken Tucker caring much what the wingnuts might say.
Perhaps I should've elaborated more. The wingnuts will be screaming, "LIBERAL MEDIA BIAS!!! LIBERAL MEDIA BIAS!!! LIBERAL MEDIA BIAS!!!" not only to him but also to his bosses at Entertainment Weekly and Time Warner, which owns EW. So, when his bosses come to him complaining about the complaints, he can just point to the comments he made about Carville and Begala and say, "See, I was fair and balanced. I said bad things about the liberal hosts too."
Even if Ken Tucker doesn't care about what the wingnuts say, I'm sure he does care about what his bosses say, as is the case in any job.
Wouldn't it be great if Andrew Sullivan OD'd on testosterone, bent Tucker Carlson over a chair, and ass-raped him until he was left a sobbing heap on the floor, blood dribbling out of his ass? That would be cool.
He'd probably need a lawyer.
As pointed out above, the "jacuzzi" meme is intended to make Edwards sound like his clients are wealthy spoiled brats who file frivolous suits. The 5 year old girl was actually in a PUBLIC WADING POOL when she was disemboweled by a too powerful drain pump. It could have happened to any number of kids. In fact, James Baker's granddaughter drowned in a similar accident. Yes, THAT James Baker.
"PBS also carries Bill Moyers NOW, the only show out of 100+ channels' worth that I ALWAYS watch if it's on. It is thoughtful, thorough, interesting, and consistently liberal. I don't expect PBS to exclude conservative partisans if they include Bill Moyers, though it's unfortunate that Bill Moyers and David Brancoccio are actual journalists and Tucker to me is just another pretty hack."
You're referring to the soon-to-be-cut-to-half-hour NOW, which will then be the soon-to-be-canceled NOW.
Two organizations I never send money to: PBS and the DNC.
If I want Republicans to have my money, I'll send it to them directly, not to their bent-over, bleeding-from-the-asshole slave bitches.
I can't get over that mild-mannered Ken Tucker has the nerve to say something so obvious in Entertainment Weekly (of all places) as the supposedly serious press looks the other way.
It's about time. I'm sick of these moralizing prigs whining about liberals to disguise the fact that they're utterly witless and heartless.
The 5 year old girl was actually in a PUBLIC WADING POOL when she was disemboweled by a too powerful drain pump.
Not to mention the obvious: why the hell is a pump with that kind of suction permitted on the market in the first place?
That, after all, was no doubt the crux of the case.
Wouldn't it be great if Andrew Sullivan OD'd on testosterone, bent Tucker Carlson over a chair, and ass-raped him until he was left a sobbing heap on the floor, blood dribbling out of his ass? That would be cool.
You know, if you made a rape joke about any woman save Ann Coulter people would be pissed.
I think Andy's a receiver not a giver anyway.
Robert:
The pump could have been made safe with a larger drain opening and grate to prevent the suction from being concentrated. The bottom line, of course, is the few extra dollars it would have cost to make it safe.
"Does anyone have a few thoughts on why average folks hate trial lawyers?"
Same reason that average people hate unions and the ACLU. They'd rather bend over and spread their cheeks for a thug like Bush than support somebody who actually represents their best interests.
In other words, they're clueless idiots with no understanding of history or real politics. Twenty years from now, they'll be whining about how liberals destroyed Social Security and Medicare, and probably voting for the Bush twins.
"Does anyone have a few thoughts on why average folks hate trial lawyers?"
Do "average people" hate trial lawyers? I dunno.
I do know a lot of small business types who hate lawyers (partly because they get hit with lawsuits) but I'm not so sure if the average person working for a salary or an hourly wage does.
"Does the desire to score political points trump common decency ?"
Well, duuuhhhhh !!!!!
I don't know what the public in public television refers to any longer. I certainly don't recognize it at all. They've completely lost any audience under the age of about 60. Even Frontline has become flabby.
I wouldn't give them even a penny. It would just encourage them. It would be like giving to the RNC despite the endless reruns of Peter Paul and Mary (the only remaining scrap thrown to birkenstock liberals they always point to). And now Tucker the F**ker. Cold, dead eyes, indeed. Cold, like hard currency.
Well, duuuhhhhh !!!!!
I know. It just felt good to say it.
I do know a lot of small business types who hate lawyers (partly because they get hit with lawsuits) but I'm not so sure if the average person working for a salary or an hourly wage does.
Back when I was practicing law (over a decade ago, now, so this may have changed), all PI and Insurance Defense lawyers knew that the most favorable plaintiff's juries in Texas were in the Beaumont area.
Largely, it was widely believed, because it was so blue-collar.
White collar managers and corporations, who get sued, also own the outlets (media) to complain. Which explains a lot.
Now, the perfect statement on Tucker Carlson and "Crossfire," and all "talking heads" shows now, from P.J. O'Rourke, of all people:
"If the world is mad at America for anything, it should be for the invention of the phone-in talk show. The idea of a news broadcast once was to find someone with information and then to broadcast it. The idea now is to find someone with ignorance and spread it around."
O'Rourke is referring to callers, of course. But it applies to "talking heads," too. Especially now that they are "shouting heads."
I stopped giving PBS money about 8 years ago when they turned over all their animated children's shows to Nelvana -- a non-union Canadian company. Their contract with Nelvana has since run out, but I'm still pissed -- and the turn to the right they've taken has not helped them persuade me to open my wallet.
EW suprisingly does some cool things considering it is a popular culture magazine. Ken Tucker steps up to the plate and rightfully states what a cold-hearted prick Tucker Carlson is.
m&s
Why is Tucker Carlson pro- child mutilation?
Why haven't Blitzer and Rather and Brokaw and Jennings and Koppel resigned in shame, yet?
Ha ha ha, yeah right.
Why trial lawyers are hated:
- Envy of people who win lottery-like payouts, usually for something caused by their own stupidity, or that they faked the damage caused to them;
- Lawyers twist things around;
- Lawyers take 1/3 of the payout, which can be millions, even though they suffered no damage;
- Yada yada.
Christ, some of the above comments are as rabid as ones you'd find on, say, that ultra-right wing watchamacallit Rotweiler site. You know, the one for idiots... And that site's a *parody* site! (It *is* a parody site, right? Right???)
I'm a little shocked by the rabid anti-SWR comments and all the weird Tucker-oriented rape fantasies...
A grip should be gotten, by some of us, dear friends.
Want to express you viewpoint on Tucker?
Go to the PBS Tucker/Unfiltered forum.
http://tinyurl.com/47w23
I b'lieve someone mentioned children.
advertisement
States Cut Health Insurance for 145,000 Kids
NEW YORK (Reuters) - Some 145,000 poor children were dropped from a U.S. federal-state health insurance plan in the second half of 2003, with more than half the cuts made by Texas, a health-care research foundation said on Friday.
"The drop in (the) State Children's Health Insurance Program is a major setback when millions of uninsured children are eligible but not yet enrolled," said Diane Rowland, executive director of the Kaiser Commission on Medicaid and the Uninsured.
Net enrollment in the program, which mainly benefits working families, fell last year for the first time since it was launched in 1998, the Washington, D.C.-based Kaiser Commission said in a report.
In many cases, states made the cuts because a weak economy left them with huge budget deficits.
Along with Texas, two other states -- Maryland and New York -- accounted for most of the cuts in the program last year. The two eastern states each cut 23,000 low-income children, the report said. ...
I'm a little shocked by the rabid anti-SWR comments and all the weird Tucker-oriented rape fantasies...
Hey. You be quiet. That really is Jenna Bush and she really does like me. Don't spoil the fantasy.
The Tucker rape thing was, hmm, in questionable taste.
I was trained to work on swimming pools and still do a little of it for some extra undeclared cash. You know about all sorts of horror stories like that. I remember one pool for a country club I worked on. It had a open suction drain located on the wall of the pool--older pool. This little girl swam up to it to look inside and it sucked her eyeball out. I capped that suction pipe off so it wouldn't happen again. I don't know if the country club was sued.
That's why many swimming pools are closing down because they're so dangerous especially the older ones with the overly huge pumps and the owners, whether public or private, can't afford the liability insurance.
Envy of people who win lottery-like payouts, usually for something caused by their own stupidity, or that they faked the damage caused to them;
Absolutely no experience in PI cases, do you?
I suppose the young girl in question pulled her own intestines out her anus and blamed it on the suction pump.
Or she was stupid enought to be in a swimming pool in the first place, and deserved to be injured by a mechanical device designed to clean the pool so people could swim in it.
Or my brother-in-law's child, whose foot was mutilated by an escalator. He was stupid enough to be riding the thing in the first place, huh?
Smarter trolls, please.
People hate trial lawyers because they've been told to hate trial lawyers. The only cases that get publicity are the ones that sound the most ridiculous, like the McDonald's coffee case. Also, really large judgments gets publicity, unless there is an order not to reveal the amount of a settlement, which is common. But people hear or read $25,000,000" and freak out, without knowing the first thing about the reasons behind the amount.
People don't get it. Trial lawyers do, as was pointed out, put their own money and their own resources into contingency cases. That's what "contingency" means. So, yeah, if a trial lawyer wins a big one, the lawyer makes some bucks. But it's a gamble and they don't always win.
That said, there are bad, unscrupulous plaintiff's attorneys, just like there are bad, unscrupulous insurance defense attorneys. But they work for big ass firms and they get paid regardless.
Basically, people tend to want to blame the lawyers when they should place blame on the manufacturers and the insurance companies.
Without further comment here is the description of 'Unfiltered' from the WGBH (Boston) web site:
Tucker Carlson: Unfiltered
In a series designed to bring fresh, provocative voices to public television, Tucker Carlson: Unfiltered encompasses a wide range of issues and views, but its core is Tucker Carlson, the independent-minded writer and television commentator.
A regular on CNN's Crossfire, Carlson combines a conservative and libertarian take on the news with a wry skepticism and unconventional opinions. This program showcases his view of the world — as well as the perspectives of key newsmakers and commentators that run the gamut of the political spectrum — to get at the underlying (and often unspoken) issues behind the news.
Tucker Carlson: Unfiltered examines subjects that affect how Americans live their lives, covering topics and trends that are political, social, and cultural. Each episode opens with Carlson's commentary on an issue that piques his interest and concludes with a conversation with a noted author or social thinker. Joined by contributors from across the political spectrum, Carlson leads a spirited discussion on the American scene.
Lawyers take 1/3 of the payout, which can be millions, even though they suffered no damage;
(never thought I'd find myself defending PI lawyers)
Any idea how much costs the lawyers front in PI cases? Expert witnesses, medical fees, investigators, etc.
And how many suits they file and lose? It's a lottery, not a bank withdrawal. You hear about the rich PI lawyers, and the big cases. The minority, in both cases.
Incognito - yes, and people blame lawyers for the pool closings, instead of the insurance companies, who are basically given a license to steal by the government. It's sickening - I think insurance should be illegal.
Well, I see Tena beat me to it and (as usual), said it better.
The pumps aren't forced water displacement type pumps, it's just that they're so powerful, you can get stuck on them and drown if you get close to the drain.
After googling around for a bit, Carlson's phrase "specializing in Jacuzzi cases" is deliberately false:
1. It is a criticism of Edwards implying, as has been discussed, trivial cases with rich clients getting unwarranted damages.
2. There is only ONE case, so "specializing" and "cases" are false.
3. The company that manufactured the drain was Sta-Rite and it was a wading pool not a whirlpool, so Jacuzzi, even if intended as a generic reference, is not only false, but again implies a scenario that bears no relation to the incident.
Completely cynical crap.
Absolutely no experience in PI cases, do you?
Uh, you took what I wrote exactly backwards.
Completely cynical crap.
Not to be harsh, but...
what was your first clue? Maybe this?
When informed of the facts behind his cruel phrasing, he snapped, "Oh, I know. I've heard that," and then pressed the point that Edwards took money for getting the girl a $25 million settlement.
Facts, after all, are so... "factesque."
Was it the obnxious 20/20 or the ever-egregious Dateline that had an "expose" at least two years ago on dangerous pool and Jacuzzi drains, showing the significant number of drownings and desembowelments brought to you courtesy of a pool and spa association that can't be bothered to put the heat on its manufacturer-members? I don't suppose they'd like to revisit this topic now. The whole purpose of the episode was to jack up ratings, not to stay on the case and make sure these corporations stop killing and maiming people. Disgusting.
Time for me to go swimming and drinking, (don't worry it's a small pool) and leave you with one of my favorite quotes that bears repeating:
"The connection between vice and meanness is a fit subject for satire, but when the satire is a fact, it cuts with the irresistible power of a diamond." - Thomas Paine
The only cases that get publicity are the ones that sound the most ridiculous, like the McDonald's coffee case.
Tena
And some of the common perceptions of the McDonald's case are incorrect, also.
Link
Tena, I remember reading that the MacDonald's coffee case wasn't that trivial either. The woman had to have multiple skin grafts because of the burn damages.
There are trivial cases, of course. Any system we set up will allow some misuse, and the idea is to minimize the misuse, not end the system. The wingnuts don't think that way. If there are some who cheat the welfare system then we shouldn't have a system at all. It's like saying that we shouldn't bother to have laws against violence because not everybody is caught.
Carlson does had cold dead eyes like a reptile.
Uh, you took what I wrote exactly backwards.
Then I owe you the civility of an apology.
But be careful with sarcasm. Unless handled extremely well, it is almost impossible to distinquish from foolishness.
"Or my brother-in-law's child, whose foot was mutilated by an escalator. He was stupid enough to be riding the thing in the first place, huh?"
Robert, the wingnut obsession with lawsuits stems from the same sociopathic tendencies which prompt people to vote for the Rightwing in the first place. Just listen to them sometime: It's all about "ME". Black people are cheating "ME";feminists are cheating "ME", foreigners are cheating "ME"; horribly injured plaintiffs in lawsuits are just getting a free ride and taking money out of "MY" pocket. What about "ME"?? And the Rethuglicans are masters are playing on that sick twisted, white (mostly male) percerption that everyone is cheating them. I have this fear that the American obsession with "ME", coupled with a complete inability to see beyond their own selfish interests will result in our once great country venturing down the path to Fascism. We may very well find ourselves on the losing side of the next World War.
People might want to consider that the insurance defense firms makes huge fucking retainers that they are paid regardless of whether they win or lose. Huge. Like $350 per hour, every time the lawyer happens to have the client's name cross his or her mind.
Adding to Incognito's pool trivia.
I use to clean, repair, and lifeguard pools in high school. One of the most dangerous things other than these high suction drains (mainly in old pools) is the electrical lights immersed in water on the sides of the pool.
I can't remember how many times I went to change a pool light to find it half full of water due to the rubber seal being rotted away. If the water gets into the electrical bulb plug, and their is no safety breaker switch, it can electrify the pool.
We had a guy dive into his pool last year in Houston and of course died instantly due to electrical shock. Me, if the pool is empty, I always put my toe in first (don't just dive in).
End of trivia safety bulletin.
talking heads i have seen 'drunk' on the air.
laurie malorie (at 10am)
christopher hitchens
susan estridge
mary maitlin (ok, it was a party)
tucker reminds me of one of those guys that even at 20, wore a suit and tie to class, you know those guys that first came of age when reagan ruled, and began the ruin of this country. pathetic attempt to prove they were grown up? i hardly think a man (who looks like a little boy) should be excoriating edwards for making a boatload of cash defending the rights of the greviously injured when he makes such an outrageous living spewing unsubstantiated venom for the right.
i did once spill a cup of mcdonalds coffee right you know where. god dammit that hurt. then i heard what that old lady got, all i could think was, it didn't hurt that much. but they cooled the coffee down.
gene214, I think it's all over so after this election, I'm going to duck-out and pretend it's not happening.
Like $350 per hour, every time the lawyer happens to have the client's name cross his or her mind.
Actually, to bring this to reality, I spent almost 4 years working for an insurance defense firm. And while they were paid steadily, they never made anything like the money a plaintiff's lawyer could make on a contingency case.
And they didn't charge the top $$ to insurance companies that some firms charge to represent corporations, or other large businesses.
In fact, insurance companies tended to scrutinize bills more closely than other clients, and to insist on lower billing rates, and as much work as possible done by paralegals (which is what I was, at the time).
oh yea, ken allard that col. or gen. on msnbc, saw him drunk on air once too. i watch too much t.v.
Carlson does had cold dead eyes like a reptile.
Incognito | Email | Homepage | 07.24.04 - 4:39 pm | #
Well, Rush did say Kurt Cobain was a miserable waste of life right after he shot himself and James Taranto mocked Rachel Corrie after she got her skull crushed.
But in both cases, we're talking about adults who in some sense pushed their fates.
Tucker seems to take it a step beyond talking about a little girl. That's honesly why I have trouble believing it.
Then I owe you the civility of an apology.
Accepted
But be careful with sarcasm. Unless handled extremely well, it is almost impossible to distinquish from foolishness.
Which is what makes sarcasm potent.
Anyway, what I posted is what people really think. It's not sarcasm. The GOP exploits this attitude to benefit companies which want to decrease their compensation payouts, which cut into their profits.
People hear "25 million" and their eyes get all big, and they start salivating. Never mind calculating what her medical costs will be *over a lifetime*, especially if she ends up having further health complications from this horrific injury. Once you sign off on a settlement, you can't go back years later and say, my client is now even worse off than she was at trial and needs numerous operations, that's the final deal.
From the excerpts posted from the EW article, Ken Tucker doesn't make it clear that Jacuzzi had nothing to do with the accident. I wonder if Jacuzzi will get letters, or phone calls to 561-514-3838, or if people will walk in to their local showroom and mention to the sale manager, "You know, I wanted to buy a Jacuzzi..then I heard Tucker Carlson say on CNN that they had to pay $25 million to a little girl because she was disemboweled." I wonder what the letters to Jacuzzi would say? Maybe something like this:
Mr. Donald C Devine
President, Chief Operating Officer
Jacuzzi Brands, Inc.
777 South Flagler Dr., Ste. 1108 W.
West Palm Beach, FL 33401
Dear Mr. Devine:
I read recently in Entertainment Weekly that Jacuzzi Products was involved in that horrific accident which caused the disembowelment of a little girl. According to the article, the accident and Jacuzzi's role in the tragedy was mentioned by a television political debater, Tucker Carlson, who appears on CNN and PBS. Apparently, vice-presidential candidate John Edwards defeated Jacuzzi in court, and Jacuzzi had to pay $25 million dollars to the little girl and her family.
Mr. Devine, all politics aside, I was dismayed to hear of Jacuzzi's role in mangling this child. Furthermore, I must wonder why this case went to court at all; surely if Jacuzzi took responsibility for its product, such a high settlement would have been unnecessary.
I therefore must inform you that if I should ever consider installing a whirlpool or spa in my home, Jacuzzi will not be an option. And I am telling all my friends about Jacuzzi's shameful behavior.
Sincerely,
angry consumer
When your intestines are sucked out, they can't just put them back in. They have to be surgically removed. That's the way you will be the rest of your life.
Anyway, what I posted is what people really think. It's not sarcasm. The GOP exploits this attitude to benefit companies which want to decrease their compensation payouts, which cut into their profits.
You are right. And in a knee-jerk manner, I attributed it to you.
I should know better, and I'm glad you clarified it.
" but the conversation was always civil."
Like when he called Gore Vidal a queer and threatened to deck him on live television? C'mon, man, I'm a troll, don't make me come up with your own damn talking points!!!!
Lucille - lol, beautiful, just fucking beautiful.
Carlson does had cold dead eyes like a reptile.
Maybe he had his reptile eyes implanted, because his original eyes were sucked into a swimming pool drain.
Sheesh Incognito, now I fear swimming pools. That does it, from now on I'm swimming in the ocean.
Is that a tail fin?
People hear "25 million" and their eyes get all big, and they start salivating. Never mind calculating what her medical costs will be *over a lifetime*, especially if she ends up having further health complications from this horrific injury. Once you sign off on a settlement, you can't go back years later and say, my client is now even worse off than she was at trial and needs numerous operations, that's the final deal.
Precisely. The trade is this: your health, or $25 million to pay the medical bills.
Payments for "pain and suffering," of course, cancel out neither. It's a way of punishing the company that should have known better.
After all, a stump or shallow water in a "swimming hole" is a situation of nature. Pool drain systems are not.
Like when he called Gore Vidal a queer and threatened to deck him on live television? C'mon, man, I'm a troll, don't make me come up with your own damn talking points!!!!
The exception that proves the rule.
Really. I'm so impressed you remember that incident. And your point? In the context of what passes for "discussion" on TV "news" channels today?
Straining at gnats and swallowing camels. It was ever thus....
Some time shortly after the McDonalds coffee case, Ted Koppel had a program discussing all the hoo-hah over whether it was "frivolous." He showed several pictures of the woman's injuries. They were horrific. It was actually nauseating to see. The worst kind of burn damage. She spent a lot of time in a burn unit, and as someone else mentioned already, required numerous surgeries.
Me, if the pool is empty, I always put my toe in first (don't just dive in).
Did anyone else have the image of someone diving head-first onto concrete? And think WTF?
It took me about three takes to work out that 'pool is empty' meant empty of people.
I stopped giving to PBS this year on the last campaign. It really hurt to do it, because the local programming is good and the locals are out there working all the time. It's the national part that sucks. I wrote them to say that until something is done about the national news -- the adverts and the inability to deliver real news like they did 25 years ago -- I could not in good conscience continue to support them.
It's like Macdonald's hamburgers. Every couple of years I'm in a town and I think they might be good and go out and buy one, and then have to work to keep from wretching. Watching Jim Lehrer and most of Washington Week in Review generates the same sensation. I stay away, come back, and am always disappointed at the pap they put out. To bring up an old quote: I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take it any more.
"Carlson is a quicker debater than any of the Crossfire hosts..."
I guess that makes him a master debater.
Actually, I think it makes him more of a master baiter.
Isn't this whole trial-lawer thing a rebublican attempt at class-warfare? I thought they were against that last time around.
talking heads i have seen 'drunk' on the air.
Has Christopher Hitchens ever appeared sober on the air?
Yeah, I know it's a rhetorical question.
Why, didn't the Chimperor just hire a trial lawery himself a few weeks ago?
Isn't this whole trial-lawer thing a rebublican attempt at class-warfare? I thought they were against that last time around.
Like the argument (now blessedly defunct) about "political correctness."
It always comes from those decrying the evil they describe.
Something to do with the log in their own eye, I think....as well as an effective rhetorical tool, since it keeps you in control of the terms of the discussion.
Believe it or not, of all the PBS talk shows the often-cartoonish MacGlaughlin Group has had the consistently most critical discussions of the war. With paleo-connish McGlaughlin and Buchanan regularly joining Eleanor Clift and another liberal in slamming Bush's war rationales, it's often 5-1 against the slovenly Moonie-Times mouthpiece, Tony Blankley whenit comes to Iraq.
didn't the Chimperor just hire a trial lawery himself a few weeks ago?
8643 | Email | Homepage | 07.24.04 - 5:08 pm | #
IOKIYARTL = It's okay if you're a Republican trial lawyer.
SWR -- do you still have trouble beliving it after reading Hunter's post at DailyKos that were linked to upthread?
Corr. - substitute "cartoon-like" and "4-1 against Blankley". sorry.
And what's with his hair anyway?
Lucille, I second chris/tx. I'm inagining someone at Jacuzzi reading that letter and saying WTF??!!!
SWR -- do you still have trouble beliving it after reading Hunter's post at DailyKos that were linked to upthread?
I have trouble believing any human being would dismiss a little girl getting disembowled.
But Tucker does seem to be in Rush territory here I'll admit.
Someone told me that Tucker Carlson has four children. Man, do I feel "sorrow" for his kids. I also feel sorry for his parents.
I wish there was a good Curse word I could come up with to rhyme with "TUCKER".
But I can't think of one.
Oh well, Tucker you are a real Cheney-er.
has Barney Frank been reading this blog?
Magnum - I'll work on my grammar. Yeah, diving into an "empty" pool would be a bummer.
"the often-cartoonish MacGlaughlin Group"
the only one I could ever stomach on that show was Jack Germond . . .
Tucker Carlson is Ann Coulter in drag(or was it the other way around).
Thanks for the link Charley, that is hilarious. Good for the Boston Phoenix for printing it.
Personally, I think Tucker and Coulter are the same person--both viscious, antisocial pundits of undetermined gender.
She spent a lot of time in a burn unit, and as someone else mentioned already, required numerous surgeries.
Kate, i did not know that. guess i was lucky. at any rate the coffee was too damned hot, and they did cool it down.
what's bush's plan for tort reform? 250,000 cap? bastards!
Why haven't Blitzer and Rather and Brokaw and Jennings and Koppel resigned in shame, yet?
Maybe because they know they're hacks, but that the people behind them are even worse. Just a guess. And one that keeps me from switching from Vicodin to OxyContin.
The Actual Facts About
The Mcdonalds' Coffee Case are not as CW would have us believe.
"Does anyone have a few thoughts on why average folks hate trial lawyers?"
1) All those cop shows, where the bad guys get off on a technicality a lawyer jimmied up, thereby causing hero cop to go it alone in his certainty of knowing the bad guy is guilty. Bad guy will commit even more horrific crime because lawyer cheated the system to get him free. If the scriptwriter is really whipped into a frenzy, he'll have the cop taken down with the bad guy. Depends on the hack factor, I suppose.
It's amazing how easily people buy into this bullshit. They forget that judges and juries have more say in the process than the lawyers do. All the lawyer does is present the arguments for one side or the other. The judge and/or jury make decisions on whose argument works or doesn't work.
2) It's in the elite's interest to make us hate the people who can most help us fight their power in the courts when government fails us. Which it does, far too often.
2) It's in the elite's interest to make us hate the people who can most help us fight their power in the courts when government fails us. Which it does, far too often.
A tactic favored by white factory owners and businessmen in the South ever since the end of the Civil War. Convince the poor whites their enemy is the poor blacks, not the business owners who screw the employees blind.
Effectively exclude unions, and keep the animosity aimed at someone as bad off as you are, but within reach, and the majority poor never organize to take on the minority rich.
One more reason, IMHO, the GOP is so popular in the South. People grew up on that reasoning, and while the Dems represented it for generations, now the GOP does.
Isn't this a tactic to promote class warfare? Yes.
Same with class action suits. Remember Congress voted to limit them again? Yes, they are abused, and badly. But they are often the only way people without any other resources can get redress for their grievances. Same with plaintiff's actions, which are abused, worker's comp, which is abused, and our criminal justice system, which is abused. Thing is, all of our legal systems also have the inherent ability to produce just results for people. We have the best legal system on the planet for that. The Republicans can't stand it.
Robert - When did you work for an insurance defense firm? They've raised their rates over the last decade or so. I don't doubt that the clients scrutinize their bills, but I've worked for hourly billing rates myself, and I know how it works, too.
""Does anyone have a few thoughts on why average folks hate trial lawyers?""
Gee whiz, do you think it may have something to do with the cost of malpractice insurance driving health care costs through the roof?
Yikes. Meant the cop will take down the lawyer with the bad guy. Waking up is such a pain...
"All the lawyer does is present the arguments for one side or the other. "
Yeah right. Ambulance chasers are a mythical beast.
Just read in the NYT that the Bush Repubs have been actively going to court to block individuals from launching a lawsuit if they've been injured by any prescription drug or medical device that's been approved by the FDA. My God this is what America has come to - governnment of the corporation, by the corporation, for the corporation.
How about a Boston Tea Party next week?!
So, is anyone gonna call Jacuzzi and ask them if they've made improvements to the design of their dangerous drains? I did. You know, I'm just worried about my daughter being disemboweled by our whirpool tub's drain. It was funny.
The sales goons there on the weekend are completely unprepared for such questioning. I'll be calling back Monday when the tech staff is in.
Robert - When did you work for an insurance defense firm? They've raised their rates over the last decade or so. I don't doubt that the clients scrutinize their bills, but I've worked for hourly billing rates myself, and I know how it works, too.
Admittedly, it was decades ago. And I wasn't quibbling with the hourly rate your cited; I just remember the times when the ins. clients would start examining the bills with a careful eye, and insisting on lower charges, or they'd find other counsel.
There's never a free lunch, although sometimes it gets cheaper, and then after awhile the price goes up.
Yeah right. Ambulance chasers are a mythical beast.
No. I knew a lawyer (in Austin, many years ago), who sued the maker of the "Big Wheel" because the one the little boy rode out into the street was black.
It was a shady street, and the car, of course, didn't see him. And Mom was in the house, watching through a window. Not exactly wise, with the risk of your child riding into the street.
Anyway, he sued on the grounds it was an unreasonably dangerous device, because it wasn't bright orange, and therefore more visible.
I think they settled, to avoid the expense of the suit. (ins. cos. pay lawyers whether they win or lose).
Gee, Sherlock, do you suppose that the insurance companies who are setting those malpractice rates might have something to do with that?
Do you have any idea how difficult it is to win a medical malpractice suit? Do you have any idea how expensive they are to try? Do you have any idea how lax many state medical boards are in policing their doctors? I can tell you that the board in Texas is so lax that the Repug Dallas paper has been taking them to task for the last 2 years for failing to do anything about blatantly mishandled medical cases.
And again, the problem is insurance.
My mother, who is in medicine, complains about the insurance companies even more than she does about the lawyers. She can understand a lawyer suing her if she messes up--if she messes up, a lot can go wrong. Up to and including death. Yeah, it's a bitch to pay a lawsuit, you get really mad at the thought of a patient trying to bilk the system (it happens), but, in a legit case, the patient deserves something. I don't think the good doctors and nurses out there would argue with that.
What makes her mad about Insurance companies is that they are telling medical personnel how to do their jobs. They didn't go to medical school, or nursing school. They don't have that license on the wall, which requires hundreds of hours of additional training for the rest of their careers--at their own expense oftentimes--to maintain. Our medicos did and do.
The last thing any of them wants or needs is for some suit or bean counter to second-guess their decisions before allowing them to proceed. If an MD says a patient needs X drug and/or Y procedure, they need it, and the insurance companies don't know enough to make that call.
Sure, get a second opinion before shelling out the big bucks (and since you want it, insurance, YOU pay for it). Make sure fraud isn't going on. But don't make patients suffer because there are some flaws in the system, some people who take advantage.
Robert - Like I said in the rest of that comment, I have no doubt that the companies went over their legal bills very carefully and I've not worked for an insurance defense firm. Like I said, too, I have worked in that ol' hourly billing structure, and that always has the potential for a lot of play, or it did where I worked.
Sherlock, you moron.
The lawyer can chase all the ambulances he wants, but s/he STILL DOESN'T MAKE THE DECISION THAT GRANTS AN AWARD TO A PLAINTIFF. A judge or jury decides against or in favor of a plaintiff, based on the arguments presented by lawyers in the case.
You are really too stupid to exist.
LJ - Interesting. My doctor, whom I saw for 17 years, finally retired several years ago because the insurance companies were driving him crazy.
By the way, my neighbor here is a retired surgeon. I asked him the other night how he feels about the pharmacists who refuse to fill prescriptions for reasons of "conscience". He thinks they should be shot, summarily. Then fired. Most doctors really take a dim view of anyone who wants to get between him or her and his or her patient.
Like I said, too, I have worked in that ol' hourly billing structure, and that always has the potential for a lot of play, or it did where I worked.
Oh, yeah.
Made a lot of money for others in my day by letting a client "cross my mind."
And LJ--
the other side of that insurance dilemma, for doctors, is that they weren't rich, once. Until a third party started paying the bills.
As recent as the old "Dr. Kildare" movie (the one with Lionel Barrymore), one of the interns dreams of marrying a rich woman, so he can live well as a doctor.
It's been a two-edged sword (though I wholly sympathize with doctors who don't want insurance companies telling them how to practice medicine. It seems like a new kind of malpractice, to me, and one they have no control over).
But the solution is to cut fees and junk the insurance payments. Which, of course, would impoverish doctors, again.
And while it's a calling, it's not exactly a religious practice, is it?
LJ you ignorant whore, it takes a lawyer to bring a frivolous lawsuit. If juries roamed the earth awarding frivolous judgments indiscriminately we might have a different problem.
It takes a bank to cash the check to the plaintiff, so I guess the banking system is to blame.... how stupid can you get?
If people were not able to use legal recourse to address their grievances, they would come up with other, less civilized options.
If the Halliburtons and Enrons of the world would prefer that sort of remedy, so be it. If corrupt corporations insist on removing our rights as citizens to use the courts to hold them responsible for their crimes, they will eliminate their right to complain when someone finds a more harmful alternative.
Not true, anyone of sound mind can file a lawsuit.
Jeez, Sherlock, I don't know... how stupid CAN you get??? It's interesting to see you stretch your wings here.
Sherlock Holmes,
Um, no, you're not.
Please don't disgrace the name.
The solution is single-payer insurance, a la Canada.
Doctors deserve to get paid for the amount of training they undergo and their hard work. It is hard work. I would never argue with that. But I agree that doctors have benefitted from having a guaranteed pool of income.
Still, it wasn't this way even 20 years ago. I wasn't paying so big a portion of my check for health insurance, and I was getting more and better care. Whatever I needed done, got done.
Now...? Sometimes things get done. Sometimes they don't. It depends on how good your insurance is. If you're lucky enough to have it. If not, hope you live near the border (Canada for meds, Mexico for meds and services).
Oh, I don't know. Sherlock might be fitting as he was also a ficticious charachter.
Sherlock:
You're still a moron.
Any citizen can file a lawsuit, with or without an attorney's help. The attorney acts as YOUR (a citizen's) representative. He acts on YOUR behalf. He can try to get you to hire him but YOU make the decision of hiring him or not. No one else. He cannot act on your behalf without the legal right to do so.
Oh, I don't know. Sherlock might be fitting as he was also a ficticious charachter
You don't know what?
And how are your typing skills?
Or is it your spelling that's at fault?
Sadly, 8643, though anyone can indeed file a lawsuit, it takes a lawyer to competently defend against one.
Obviously you have never been sued and/or never had to pay for malpractice insurance. I bet you've whined about the high cost of health care plenty, though.
Rowwwwwrrrrrr! Catfight!
Cool.
Wow, spellchecking on a comments thread... do you really want me to go there, Mavis Beacon?
More more more!
Wow, spellchecking on a comments thread... do you really want me to go there, Mavis Beacon?
Ah, so you can't spell.
I bet you've whined about the high cost of health care plenty, though.
And the high cost of health care has what to do with malpractice rates, darling?
Please enlighten us, with proof, please.
And now we're back full circle, Sherlock.
You choose the lawyer. The other side chooses a lawyer. The lawyers make the case. The judge/jury decides on the case.
Now how is all of that process either lawyer's fault? Seems like the major choices and decisions are out of their hands.
"- On June 24, 1993, five-year-old Valerie Lakey, playing in a recreation club’s wading pool became lodged in a drain cover opening. The suction pulled out almost 80 percent of her small intestine and about 70 percent of her large intestine. The pool equipment manufacturer knew of at least 13 similar injuries but failed to put warnings on its covers until mid-1987. After the case was filed, the company changed its warnings and instructions regarding the safe use of its drain covers. The case later caused an industry-wide recall of pool drain covers." from here
And another case involving the same pump company Sta-rite: Miami Jury Awards $104 Million in Pool Mishap
Hey--am I the only one having the main page load weird? The left frame is almost half the page now.
California had jury caps, the type of "tort reform" being suggested now to stem the rising cost of malpractice insurance.
And it didn't do anything, and they got rid of them.
Malpractice insurance is expensive because of deregulation of the insurance agencies, allowing investment of pay-out kitties into the stock market, which I hear recently didn't do so well.
Also - because malpractice insurance isn't prorated, a doctor who has never had any mistakes will pay the same premium as a negligent doctor who has settled 5 claims. That just don't make sense, and accounts for why something like 10% of doctors account for 90% of insurance payouts in terms of dollars.
Fix insurance, and leave the jury trial alone.
re: Sherlock Holmes
Wiener can call himself Savage, but that doesn't change the fact that he is still Wiener.
Also - because malpractice insurance isn't prorated, a doctor who has never had any mistakes will pay the same premium as a negligent doctor who has settled 5 claims.
I saw something on teevee that said that the same doctors are the ones who are ruining it for the rest of them. The medical profession has suffered for the mistakes of a few.
Of course, they protect their own, so why have they complained when it ends up coming out of their pockets?
Too bad. So sad.
Pie - yes, and add to that the fact that most Malpractice insurance companies are run by former physicians.
One of the biggest lobbyists for tort reform and against insurance reform is the American Medical Associations.
The phrase: "Physician, heal thyself" has never been more apt, though they would do pretty well to "first do no harm."
Arrrgh, why haven't they complained!
And I think they have.
Sure there are frivolous lawsuits.
But objectivity must rule.
Hmmm.
Yeah, Sherlock disappeared.
quel surprise.
Hmm. When all else has been eliminate, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.
I guess since "No Shit Sherlock" eliminated himself, our argument remains true.
=)
Not only do lawsuits have nothing to do with insurance rates (as they discovered in California, as mentioned above), lawsuits do have a lot to do with bedside manner.
A recent study found that doctors with good communication skills who develop trust with patients are much less likely to get sued, even if the patient has a bad outcome.
It's no surprise that medical schools completely fail to teach how to develop effective relationships with patients. That's what needs to change to reduce malpractice lawsuits.
But hey, the AMA couldn't admit that fundamental failings in the medical education system are to blame. It's way easier to whine about those nasty bad lawyers.
Yo, Sherlock. The insurance companies are making billions and raising their rates, and you think that's because of malpractice suits?
Smarter trolls, please.
Maybe if we all contact Jacuzzi about the lies being spread about them by Tucker, he'll care about the difference of some of these things.
PBS gave him HIS OWN SHOW?
And people believe in a just and caring intervenionist god....
If SWG had been a TV exec instead of a movie mogel.
- But, he's a moron, he can't handle the news it's too complex.
- Exactly, that's why I want the boy with the best complexion.
How bad can it get?
Tucker on public TV
US in decline.
The fact that Carlson now has a spot on PBS just makes the case that PBS needs to be put out of it's misery. Liberals in congress need to go after PBS for putting someone on who constantly lies and covers up the truth. Surely there must be something in the PBS charter that prevents this???
minor dipshits such as tucker grovel
and spew the party line...Carville is
faster, smarter and better looking...
tucker smells of paid shill while pretending to be a journalist as does
bob nofax(professional shill and part
time traitor)...the underage gop fools
as in right wing college thugs look to tucker as a role model...you can see the displaced logic on any of their
websites that celebrate hatred and
offer no real ideas but parrot the
rovian aim and will leave them behind when they have no jobs and no health insurance...then the example of tucker will show it's truth, that the small
income he got by sucking up to the
scum on the right isn't available to the smirking fools next in line...
fuck them all...
why do assholes hate america?
he should have eaten his shoe.
All sides of this lawyers=fees/doctors-malpractice/insurance companies-rates argument have made some erroneous statements whilst putting blame on one player or the other. Since I have a lot of personal experience with insurance accounting and rating let me list a few tidbits:
1. Professional liability insurance is rated based upon the previous claims experience of the individual or professional office insured. This goes for malpractice insurance for lawyers as well. Yes, there is a base rate, but claims experience as well as loss control measures taken can reduce or increase the rate. In addition, certain types of professional practice (such as surgery or criminal law) are surcharged or refused coverage altogether due to increased hazard of being sued.
2. Admitted insurance companies are regulated as to the type of investments they can make with the monies used to back the liability for claims that they contract for, playing the stock market is out. "Admitted" means that they are licensed by the state that they do business in and their operations, investments, rates, rules and forms are regulated. Non-admitted carriers of insurance are not so regulated and are allowed to write insurance in a state only if the particular applicant cannot get coverage from an admitted carrier. Professional liability is often written in the non-admitted market because companies that want to remain solvent avoid it like the plague.
3. If you do not have knowledgeable professionals (actual doctors or lawyers) to evaluate the applicants your chances of getting bad risks increase.
I'm sorry but this just seems like a gaffe to me and he's not aware of the moralistic high-dudgeon being generated against him.
It's not a gaffe, it's quite intentional. He's been doing it for the last two years now, seemingly whenever he talks about John Edwards.
The phrasing "Jacuzzi case" is deliberate, and yes, he knows exactly what case he's talking about -- the one in which a 5-year-old girl was pinned to the bottom of a wading pool and disemboweled by a product that had previously injured at least a dozen other children. And it wasn't a jacuzzi, it was a public wading pool, and he knows that too.
Tucker has been calling John Edwards a "lawyer specializing in Jacuzzi cases" -- that exact phrase -- since 2002. He has repeated that phrase over and over since then, even though he has been told the "real" facts of the case numerous times, on air, by guests who correct him.
We have done quite a bit of research on Tucker's "Jacuzzi Case" at dKos: click here for the takedown. Short version: he's a complete bastard.
I don't think Tucker believes half of what he says. He's getting paid to entertain folks by riling them up, and if you don't keep upping the outrageous ante, people get bored.
He's gotten way too mean lately for my taste (I can't even bear to watch 5 minutes of Crossfire anymore) but part of it is the system he lets pay him. However, he does seem to enjoy it just a tad too much.
"if Andrew Sullivan OD'd on testosterone, bent Tucker Carlson over a chair, and ass-raped him until he was left a sobbing heap on the floor, blood dribbling out of his ass?"
Gee, where's Patterson complaining about how homophobic the Democratic party/left-wing in general really is?
Tucker is a fucking hack. End of story.
I sent an email to Jacuzzi starting with a preface about how I was thinking of installing a Jacuzzi but was not keen on having my guts sucked out. They could use some reminding of how Tucker has damaged their brand name and how his employers might want to know what Jacuzzi thinks about it.
I hope they'll be getting quite a few.
Customers talk... Tucker walks.
Around these parts, insurance defense lawyers bill $80-$140 per hour, not $350/hr. A lot of associates quit and go into plaintiffs' work because of the low salaries that defense firms pay (typically less than $50K for a lawyer with a few years experience in litigation).
Is there anyone who would take it upon themselves to be so heroic as to hunt down Tucker Carlson and beat the fucker to within an inch of his life?
I mean, as in really kicking the shit out of him?
It would be so cool to see his face reduced to a bloody pulp and his ass in an ICU for several weeks.
Anyone? Anyone?
"Carlson is a quicker debater than any of the Crossfire hosts . . ."
Bull fucking shit. Maybe back when Bill Press was on, but Begala is a hell of a lot quicker and wittier than Carlson. Tucker's just a petty asshole whose arguments are strikingly lacking in substance even by Republican standards, and, man, is he *mean.* I'm glad someone's finally taking Tucker on.
Public Broadcasting in this country (and yes, that includes NPR) that is funded by the Corporationa for Public Broadcasting is largely a joke.
For the details, check out David Barsamian's "The Decline and Fall of Public Broadcasting" from South End Press.
"Carlson is a quicker debater than any of the Crossfire hosts . . ."
Bull fucking shit. Maybe back when Bill Press was on, but Begala is a hell of a lot quicker and wittier than Carlson. Tucker's just a petty asshole whose arguments are strikingly lacking in substance even by Republican standards, and, man, is he *mean.* I'm glad someone's finally taking Tucker on.
"Carlson is a quicker debater than any of the Crossfire hosts . . ."
Bull fucking shit. Maybe back when Bill Press was on, but Begala is a hell of a lot quicker and wittier than Carlson. Tucker's just a petty asshole whose arguments are strikingly lacking in substance even by Republican standards, and, man, is he *mean.* I'm glad someone's finally taking Tucker on.
Wow, mean m-f'er -- not only are you obviously very mean and tough, but you have a mean and tough screen name. You deserve a free year of Internet Tough Guy magazine!
Tucker Carlson isn't quick, he's fucking clever in the most dishonest way, he's a little scheisstype. Somebody asked about Ashcroft's trustworthiness in investigating someone Ashcroft was good cronies with, and Tucker twisted Ashcroft into a mere employee of the government--you know, like a mail carrier--and said, "really, you're asking me to believe that everyone in the Justice Department is completely dishonest." And on to the next question, so that the asker couldn't point out that if you could only have one dishionest Justice Department employee, the top would be an effective spot for the bastard.
Some people are just fucking stupid.
Tucker Carlson. I feel the slimy grit of feces spread across my teeth as I speak his name. Why does he make me do this?
The crime of this skidmark fuckstain asswipe, the crime he shares with his felching kakiocratic ilk...is that he does not fucking care that he craps in the pool in which he swims, he does not care that he lays a big turd in the punchbowl from which he drinks.
Tatty little bowtied turd. I hope Tinkey Winkey corners him at the PBS studio, bends him over and gives him what-for.
markitos=Jeremiah=David Patterson
have you ever noticed when something happens to the Rethugs personally they all of a sudden get involved in social causes? The Reagans, Strom Thurmond, that Senator from Oregon, etc.
I dont wish any harm on Tucker's children, but it would take something unfortunate to them to wake him up.
Notice the rethugs also dont have a problem with lawsuits when it comes to "obscenity" eg. Howard Stern?
Tucker Carlson the "Jacuzzi Journalist".
The name fits. He's a lot of hot air in shallow water going up the people's ass...
"Wow, mean m-f'er -- not only are you obviously very mean and tough, but you have a mean and tough screen name. You deserve a free year of Internet Tough Guy magazine!"
AGGGH too funny!!!!
The amazing progression of the definition of "left" is amazing! When I was a lad I served a term as office boy to an attourney's firm..No, wait... Ah- "Left Wing" used to mean someone who was in favor of nationalising industrial firms, or large government sponsored social programs. Now, "left" is used to refer to anybody who evinces (if evinces is the word I want. Is it evinces, Jeeves?) the slightest concern for anybodies suffering, except their own. What we used to call "common decency", a character trait expected of all but sociopaths.
Onward and upward to the nadir we go.
Anomie here we come.
I wouldn't be too tough on Carlson, though. The Bushies have absolutely no love for him.
Back in early 2000 when the Weekly Standard was endorsing McCain, Carlson wrote a piece referring to Bush as a "frat boy" and a "towel snapper." He reported Bush's mockery of Karla Faye Tucker in the same article.
He's also said some extremely nasty stuff about the personal character of Karl Rove and Karen Hughes.
This guy can certainly be a turd, but he's no Bush Kool-Aid drinker.
I should add that this is fairly magnanimous on my part, since the little twerp wears a bow-tie. Generally, my visceral impulse toward pundits of that type is to use a pair of barbecue tongs to shove the bow-tie up their ass until they scream like little girls.
A little information about medical malpractice, and insurance rates, and their effect on the costs of health care, for anyone who's interested.
Nora, your link concentrates a good deal on jury awards, and not very much on out-of-court settlements, whose value now constitutes the bulk of receipts from malpractice litigation.
Sherlock, how about a cite for your statement?
Here's something in the article I cited which is, in my opinion, the heart of the problem:
So what explains the recent explosion in malpractice insurance costs? The insurance companies' fortunes in the stock and bond markets. Simply put, when the
insurance companies lost money in the markets, they increased premiums they charge doctors in order to maintain their profits. Rates have skyrocketed in the last
few years because low interest rates in the bond market and the stock market's fall in 2001 reduced insurance company profits; they raised their rates in response.
It's not about payouts; it's about profits.
This article suggests that, like most things, there are a lot of factors. Also, please note while reading it that insurance companies tend to have investments of 70-80% in bonds, not stocks.
Lest you think I am trying to be an apologist for insurance companies, I think what is really needed is regulation of insurance rates AND underwriting. The typical insurance cycle involves:
Profitable investments=rates too low and underwriting too loose.
Companies can make more money on the investments of their reserves than they can on "underwriting profit" or premium charged less claims and expenses, so the market goes "soft" and they undercut each other for market share of the investment dollars.
Unprofitable investments=rates jacked up (without accounting for previous investment profits) and very restrictive underwriting.
Companies demonstrate their previously inadequate rates with current loss statistics and the current low investment returns to gain a very steep rate increase AND start pulling out of riskier coverages.
Therefore, when the downturn is in full swing, their insureds are shocked by huge premium increases and non-renewal notices as everybody stops their competition for any premium dollar they can get and start competition for the cream-of-the-crop risks priced at top dollar and the rest of the insured's become uninsured or pay even more exhorbitant rates.
Good insurance regulations should enable checking for both too-high and too-low rates in order to stabilize pricing. The next step is to prevent the underwriting rules to be changed at the same moment that rates are changed without taking that underwriting change into account in the justification for the rate hikes or decreases (they do happen).
"The exception that proves the rule."
That's "prove" as in "test", guy. Thou quotest Shakespeare without understanding his Englishe.
"Gee, where's Patterson complaining about how homophobic the Democratic party/left-wing in general really is?"
Maybe he got sick of responding to every last Atrios post alluding to faggotry and ass-rape. What is with you guys and the homo talk?
Most doctors and lawyers are well-meaning and may even help people if it doesn't get in the way of their getting rich. The problem seems to be insurance companies. Like the house in Vegas, they never lose.
And, I think Tucker Carlson and Andrew Sullivan would make a very cute lesbian couple...
"Like the house in Vegas, they never lose."
Except those times when they actually lose their shirts to outrageous judgments and are driven from the business altogether. Which is precisely what happened to the St. Paul Companies, whose demise incidentally also had very little to do with stock market speculation as someone ludicrously posited upthread. Rather, as a consequence of a billion dollars in LOSSES from medical malpractice suits and settlements.
Insurance companies are as noted generally holders of long dated fixed income instruments, whose values have benefitted mightily from a 5-year steady slide in interest rates.
This study dispenses cleanly with the myth that premium hikes are related in any way to investment income. Pay special attention to the rocketing "paid loss ratio" variable which includes both jury awards AND settlements.
"Yo, Sherlock. The insurance companies are making billions and raising their rates, and you think that's because of malpractice suits?" -
Interrobang
That's exactly what I'm saying, numbnut. Learn something about the medical malpractice insurance industry before making a public fool of yourself, please.
Fun fact WRT Bush admin priorities.
Their plan for medical malpractice limits: $250,000
Their plan for penalties for illegally downloading a song off the internet $150,000.
ie: 2 downloaded songs is worse than accidentally cutting the wrong leg off.
I still wonder if we might solve a lot of tort with a good national health care system. Would the McDonald's woman have needed to sue at all for her $20,000 to pay her medical bills if her health plan had just paid them?
"Their plan for penalties for illegally downloading a song off the internet $150,000."
"Their plan" is actually an RIAA plan, which derives more support from Democrats in the media and entertainment fields and whose plank is pushed by Democratic party members Feinstein (D-California) and Hollings (D-Disney Corp.) right alongside [somewhat fewer] right wingers.
Kaaa-pow! Amazing such a mainstream, usually middle of the road publication like this would nail Carlson for the pandering, uber-white-prep-school prat he truly is. I can't believe he learned nothing from his encounter with Jon Stewart, and the cancellation of his tiresome screamfest on CNN. Hey Tucker, here's a tip; try living in THIS century. I mean really, a freaking bowtie? It barely worked for Sen. Paul Simon, but at least HE was over 60. What a maroon.
information tramadol information tramadol information tramadol. fun las o slot vegas fun las o slot vegas fun las o slot vegas.
Characters Remaining:
Commenting by HaloScan
