Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : GOPwinger Lies/Distortions/Omissions/Perversions of Truth -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: American Spirit who wrote (111888)	1/6/2008 11:03:27 PM
From: TigerPaw	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 173976

Kerry tried to avoid the Vietnam issue completely Was I the only one who went "HuH?" when Kerry saluted at the convention and said "Ready for Duty" and went completely into some kind of Vietnam shtick? It was so unlike the rest of his campaign. It's not that I objected, but it was so unlike his campaign up 'till then. It was like he was play-acting and that just buttered him up for the charges that he play-acted his whole Vietnam experience. Not that I cared, but the rest of his campaign was stuck in 30 year old defense and he never could address Junior George and his really stupid war plan again. I don't want to see a repeat. TP

To: American Spirit who wrote (111888)	1/7/2008 9:21:11 AM
From: Bill	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 173976

<< Actually Kerry tried to avoid the Vietnam >> Absolutely right, he tried but failed to avoid Vietnam. His undergrad deferment ran out after four years, and then his grad school deferment application was turned down, and then he joined the reserves. But the reserves got called up and he was forced to go. Glad to see you acknowledge such, Cliff.

To: American Spirit who wrote (111888)	1/7/2008 12:41:34 PM
From: Brumar89	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 173976

his clients were mainly children with cerebral palsy. And cerebral palsy is not caused by doctor error as Edwards contended. Edwards's cerebral palsy cases: a good perspective There's an excellent column in today's Wall Street Journal on John Edwards's history of trying infant cerebral palsy cases. The piece is written by David Robinson, not the former NBA MVP (who was given a Simon Award for public service this year by the Manhattan Institute, my employer and this site's sponsor), but a 2004 Rhodes Scholar, who just happens to have cerebral palsy. Notes Robinson, "I have cerebral palsy, and it's not my doctor's fault." Robinson writes, "John Edwards built his career suing doctors and hospitals, claiming that maternity-ward missteps caused newborns to develop cerebral palsy. The theory that doctor error is a common cause of CP was dubious when Mr. Edwards used it to win his cases, from the 1980s to the mid-1990s, and is universally rejected by experts today. . . . What is more, attacks on alleged negligence in the maternity ward may actually have hurt the quality of patient care. Many CP lawsuits, including one that Mr. Edwards describes in his book, turned on the theory that doctors could have prevented CP by ordering a cesarian section. Such suits put nonmedical pressure on doctors and hospitals to choose c-sections. In the past 30 years, the proportion of births by c-section has gone up fivefold. But a 2003 study in the American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology found that the rate of CP remains constant." (For a fuller discussion of the cerebral palsy cases, see our editor's Wall Street Journal column from last year, my NRO column from this winter, and back postings on overlawyered.com.) Robinson's broader point is that Edwards's philosophy is fundamentally misshaped by his trial lawyer background, because he sees the world in terms of "victims" and "villains," i.e., that everyone in society who suffers from misfortune must have had that misfortune caused by some nefarious actor: "The real error of Mr. Edwards's approach[] goes beyond costs and benefits. In his world, there is an alluring symmetry between victims and villains. He writes of wanting to represent people who 'had the scales tipped' against them--and presumes, without saying so outright, that someone involved in his clients' care must have done the tipping. For a self-described religious man, he seems to allow remarkably little room for the notion that some human misfortunes are not in human power to prevent." That, in a nutshell, describes Edwards's "two Americas" message. Having made a livelihood out of redistributing wealth in a (very inefficient) zero-sum game (and enriching himself in the process), he's utterly incapable of comprehending positive-sum games from free exchange and commerce. Thus, free trade is bad, rich people are bad, corporations are bad -- and trial lawyers are good, because they help the "victims" and punish the "villains." Such stuff may make for good Grisham novels, but it's a scary thought that this mindset could be a heartbeat away from the presidency. Posted by James R. Copland pointoflaw.com Edwards should have known cerebral palsy wasn't caused by doctor error: Edwards argued his first cerebral palsy case in 1985 and was pressing such cases at least through 1995, according to the NYT. As the Times notes, "in the 1980's, scientists began to challenge the premise that medical care during delivery had much to do with cerebral palsy." A two-volume report from the Institute of Medicine, entitled Medical Professional Liability and the Delivery of Obstetrical Care, in the course of exploring its subject, built a substantial case that many obstetricians were being wrongly sued. It appeared in 1989. In his widely reviewed book Galileo's Revenge, which was and remains the leading popular work assailing "junk science", my Manhattan Institute colleague Peter Huber accords a central role (and a full chapter) to cases charging obstetricians with causing cerebral palsy. Huber's language in discussing those cases is far more caustically negative than mine. Galileo's Revenge appeared in 1991. overlawyered.com