Some serious issues are coming home to roost

[Old Cardinal]

I see where there is a rebellion taking place, whereby an increasing number of the medical community are refusing services to Trial Lawyers and their families. It appears that the Trial Lawyers are seizing bogus opportunities to file malpractice on Doctors, Clinics and Hospitals. The odds are astronomical that Trial Lawyers are going to "create something" that can line their pockets via the courtrooms of America. I guess they can go to Mexico and get medical help since they have caused this sad situation. I kind of think that Doctors have no choice because of the soaring malpractice insurance and the way the Trial Lawyers have become sue happy leeches on our system....

I see the Republicans are again trying to push through a much needed Energy and Natural Resource Bill while the Democrates are trying to stop the House Bill when it hits the Senate! That piece of vital legislation can kick us over the top as a nation to not be dependent of foreign sources. The same jokers that have accused the the Bush Administration for fuel rises are the very ones that killed this vital legislation to help rectify the cousumption increases to fuel an even better economy, several times now. We have just got to revamp our nations energy policies; it a top priority..It amazes me that the same ones that are causing the problem can accuse someone else that is franically trying to solve the problem and the liberal media is right there to back the culprits! COMMENTS?

[bullfrog_alumni_02]

my comments are that lawyers are out to make money. doctors are out to make money. we are all out to make money. only some people wish to cut corners take the easy way instead of the proper way and earn it. our country has become to sue-happy, and needs to step back and get itself into its old values again. the world is changing, and we have to change w/ it to keep up, but we dont have to belittle ourselves every chance we get. everything our nation does from make a law to buy a candy bar revolves around something bigger and get blown way out of proportion like a chain reaction, and it all starts at the core just working its way outward

[BIG BLUE DEFENSIVE END]

Yeah, well perhaps some of the Bills that Republicans are presenting have certain side issues or clauses that Democrats cannot pass because they will benefit some people and hurt others. The last energy bill we had, created by Dick Cheney, has got us into the predicament that we are in now. This is an issue I know very little about, so I'm going to sit back and hopefully learn something. :D

[Gilmer Buckeye]

Proposition 12 passed at the polls in Texas last September. It places limits on medical malpractice damage awards.

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/topstory/2097196

If malpractice insurance premiums are too high, I would place the blame on insurance company mismanagement of the premium money from now on. This is one of the downsides of having a nearly zero interest rate in place for years. The insurance companies are used to parking their money in risk-free instruments which normally yield seven percent or more.

Insurance companies "own" Rick Perry. A lot of the doctors, as rock-ribbed an overall GOP group as you'll ever find, deserted him and supported Tony Sanchez in 2002.

[Old Cardinal]

Voiding a double-post sorry...

[Old Cardinal]

BBDE:
There has not been any energy bill passed...It has been presented several times; passed by the House and killed in the Senate. That seems to be the problem as to where we are sitting right now on this issue. No bill passed and therefore no direct action to remedy some acute gaps......BBDE, long before your time there was an interesting scheme proposed during the Reagan era to drill a grid of 6000' deep wells-- one mile apart across all of the land territory of the USA. The purpose was to get an inventory of the total natural resources of our nation. They planned to run Mass-Spec, Atomic Absorbsion, UV, InfraRed and all sorts of organic and inorganic qualitative and quanatitive test to really pinpoint new sources of usable elements. It was estimated that oil, gas, uranium, precious metals, helium and many many other resources would have paid for this massive drilling project TEN TIMES over in the short pull and would have had a great wealth building effort as these findings were developed....I thought it was kind of a neat idea...What do you think?

[Old Cardinal]

So you think it's not the Trial Lawyers-it's the insurance companies?? The Lawyers are the ones doing all the sueing and the insurance companies are doing all the paying for spurious cases. But it's the Doctors that are having to pay the higher and higher premiums so the insurance companies can imburse the friends-of-Kerry-Trial Lawyers who are the parasites. When it all plays out the Trial Lawyers are all just extracting from all the people ultimately.
If I were a Doctor or Hospital I would turn the Lawyers away-to try to keep from be wrongfully sued! What a pathetic so-call profession....

[BIG BLUE DEFENSIVE END]

Originally posted by Old Cardinal
BBDE:
There has not been any energy bill passed...It has been presented several times; passed by the House and killed in the Senate. That seems to be the problem as to where we are sitting right now on this issue. No bill passed and therefore no direct action to remedy some acute gaps......BBDE, long before your time there was an interesting scheme proposed during the Reagan era to drill a grid of 6000' deep wells-- one mile apart across all of the land territory of the USA. The purpose was to get an inventory of the total natural resources of our nation. They planned to run Mass-Spec, Atomic Absorbsion, UV, InfraRed and all sorts of organic and inorganic qualitative and quanatitive test to really pinpoint new sources of usable elements. It was estimated that oil, gas, uranium, precious metals, helium and many many other resources would have paid for this massive drilling project TEN TIMES over in the short pull and would have had a great wealth building effort as these findings were developed....I thought it was kind of a neat idea...What do you think?

In reality, it does seem like a great plan. It would be nice to know I was sitting on an oil bed right now and all I had to do was dig, but it's common knowledge there is nothing here...I wish there was though.:D I think that it would be an even better idea if there was a way to narrow it down to certain places, that way we don't destroy our environment or the ecosystems of many animals. I mean, 6000' deep wells spread one mile apart across the U.S.? How would we fill the holes that were not in use, and think about the collecting of water and the danger that it creates for small children, and others alike? What about the land of citizens being taken away via eminent domain? There are a lot of questions behind this. True, the outcome would be great as far as the amount of natural resources gained, but there are a lot of pro's and con's presented. Personally, I think today we have the technology to search the land, and I'm glad that it didn't happen and was well thought about. I think it was a pretty neat idea, though. I'm just curious as to how they would dig a mile deep hole....:confused:

[BIG BLUE DEFENSIVE END]

Originally posted by Old Cardinal
So you think it's not the Trial Lawyers-it's the insurance companies?? The Lawyers are the ones doing all the sueing and the insurance companies are doing all the paying for spurious cases. But it's the Doctors that are having to pay the higher and higher premiums so the insurance companies can imburse the friends-of-Kerry-Trial Lawyers who are the parasites. When it all plays out the Trial Lawyers are all just extracting from all the people ultimately.
If I were a Doctor or Hospital I would turn the Lawyers away-to try to keep from be wrongfully sued! What a pathetic so-call profession....

I too think that malpractice suits being presented today are ludicrous, but just because they are wrong doesn't mean they are associated with the Democrats! There are many parasites that support both parties. I will admit there are a lot of Democrats out there that are poor citizens and leech off the hard work of others, but there are Republicans out there all the same. Yes, I agree with you that the Trial Lawyers are extracting from the citizens of the United States, but how do we stop them? There are people out there with legitimate cases who deserve reimbursement for injuries caused by arrogant doctors. I think that it lies souly in our Judicial system to weed out the cases that are undeserving and brought forth soley for monetary gain. We can't point the finger at either party for this, the only people we can blame are the people do this.

[Sans Couth]

I used to put a lot of the blame on the Trial Lawyers for the problem with outrageous lawsuits. I also agree that the insurance companies are not doing as well as in times past due to low interest rates. But I have taken some time to think about it, and here is my two cents.

It is not the Trial Lawyers who are to blame for ridiculous jury awards. It is liberal minded judges and juries who are to blame.

I am, and probably always will be, a conservitive, however I do have a problem with TORT Reform.

While it pains me to see a person awarded millions of dollars for spilling coffee on themselves, or another person awarded millions because a doctor made a mistake, and now they have to pee six times a day instead of five. It hurts even more to think of a man or woman being seriously crippled for life, or for them to lose limbs, due to someones gross negligence, and only be awarded a small amount of money because of limits on lawsuits.

There is no easy answer on this one. The only way we could ever hope for justice, would be to send every case before an honest judge or jury, who had enough common sense to know the difference between an inconvenience and a c catastrophe.

[Old Cardinal]

To BBDE: The oil wells that are "dry holes" are filled and sealed with concrete; thus protecting the ground water. The same thing would happen to these oil well type hole used for core sampling. On the ones that "hit" something, royalty would be paid to the landholders. Of course, land surface use would have to be paid wherever the wells holes were dug. I am sure if you had a 1/8 th mile varience as to where the well site would be in the grid, that someone would be more than willing to have the digs on their property, especially if there was a chance of big (on going) royalty checks. There is a Federal law that says the land surface has to be returned to the original status. I agree it is an interesting concept.

On the other subject, yes there are some real and needed lawsuits; however we are talking about the Trial Lawyer that "creates" suits just to settle with the Malpractice Insurance Co. as and ongoing scam. The reason I harp on the Democrats is that a large portion of the incoming contributions is from the giant Trial Lawyer firms! I saw the figures for Jefferson County and nearly all of the campaign donations for the presidential elections were from the big mega-rich law firms--all of them supporting the Democratic candidate: the Republican party had a large varied assortment of contributors. It's a national level scam-the controllers of the Democratic party nationwide are all Trial Lawyers and their candidate is one also. Of course there are some Christian Lawyers out there, but they are getting harder and harder to find, those milking the system are getting real easy to find.

[SintonFan]

Originally posted by BIG BLUE DEFENSIVE END
I too think that malpractice suits being presented today are ludicrous, but just because they are wrong doesn't mean they are associated with the Democrats! There are many parasites that support both parties. I will admit there are a lot of Democrats out there that are poor citizens and leech off the hard work of others, but there are Republicans out there all the same. Yes, I agree with you that the Trial Lawyers are extracting from the citizens of the United States, but how do we stop them? There are people out there with legitimate cases who deserve reimbursement for injuries caused by arrogant doctors. I think that it lies souly in our Judicial system to weed out the cases that are undeserving and brought forth soley for monetary gain. We can't point the finger at either party for this, the only people we can blame are the people do this.
.
.
In reality, we CAN point a finger of blame.
You said,"We can't point the finger at either party for this, the only people we can blame are the people do this."
It IS ACTIVIST JUDGES who allow these suits to go on. Case in point: Have you ever heard of the 'Fifth Circus Court of Appeals'? From Cali they have allowed and made many judgements in the last 10 years that have become landmark and US changing decisions! You should know what I'm talking about. I CAN proove my words on this. Look it up. To make a long story short, most of those judges are from what party? I can tell you there are few "elephants" there.:D
.
.
I understand about the malpractice suits personally. When did this great country stop talking responsibility for it's own actions?!? My wife "had an accident" during are second child's birth. The cauturizer fell on her stomach after the C-section and burned a hole in her tummy!:eek: :eek: The hole was over an inch across and over an inch deep! It penetrated her abdominal wall. She was in severe pain for over two weeks! DID WE SUE???!!!
NO WE DIDN'T!!!!! EVEN THOUGH she was in too much pain to nurse our own daughter.
The doctors came in after the incident and profusely apologized for the the accident. We accepted their apology.
Unfortunately I don't see most folks doing what we did. You see, they might have thought they had "hit the lottery";). Especially if they(hypatheticaly) had talked to a lawyer.
Our moral is many don't take any responsibilities period. At least the doctors came in afterward and apologized. They then took responsibility for their actions IMHO. Yeah, it was tough for her but she's a great person and very resiliant. I bet any doctor couldn't do that now for fear of a slam dunk case! That is a shame...:(

[Old Dog]

IMO, many of the problems we face today are the result of pure unadulterated greed. The greed is not limited to Lawyers or Doctors, but there is plenty to go around. Seems like many people are looking for their "get rich quick scheme". Why do you think the lottery is so popular?

On another line, does anyone recall maybe 15 years ago a man from the Houston area ( I think ), posed a question that seemed to have some merit. "Is it not a conflict of interest for a practicing attorney to be a member of any legislative body". In essence the person enacting congressional bills is also an officer of the court that can profit from the very same bills he helped establish. When looked at in this manner, it's a pretty sweet deal! How about some comments from some of you astute thinkers................

[SintonFan]

At that point Old Dog, they CAN take care of themselves and their friends...
GREED is a motivating factor without a doubt. What is the old saying? "Power corrupts but absolute power..."
Clinton showed us during the 90's IMHO what the revisionists have been trying to say about the 80's for over ten years.:(

[Sans Couth]

Greed is a good thing.

If it were not for some good ole fashioned Greedy Capitalists, we would be living in a 3rd world right now.

Lets all tell the truth here. You are either a greedy capitalist....or you work for one. Either way, you better be thankful.

[fred grunden]

Here's my 2 cents:
I have been a Certified Registered Nurse Anesthetist for over 25 years. I always bought malpractice insurance, a million dollars of coverage for a potential incident. Last year I could only obtain $200,000 in coverage because Texas has become notorious for big judgements and insurers were unwilling to write policies for
Texas providers of health care. To limit their losses, they limited their exposure. Of course I had to pay as much as I once paid for $1,000,000 in coverage. And I was limited where my policy would cover me. I could not practice in Harris County, or any of the counties that border Mexico. Does that tell you something? Yes, those folks, our "good" neighbors to the south, come across the border and are looking to sue. They all want their babies to be born here. They get our Medicaid to pay for their medical care and if anything happens, they sue, sue, sue. And lawyers are out there advertising to help them do this. All babies must now be born perfect or there will be a lawsuit. No such thing as genetics making a baby retarded, it must be a care-givers fault. $200,000 will not even cover my legal expenses if I get sued, much less pay a million dollar judgement.

Now for a little of the other side. Doctors are supposed to police themselves through peer review. This is not a very good thing because it is hard for them to officially criticize each other. The policing of doctors should be done by an outside group, not other local doctors. Fear of lawsuits can make a good doctor overly cautious, even drive them out of private practice, but the bad ones (and there are some) need to know they can be held accountable and should not be attempting procedures they are not well skilled in doing just to get the reimbursement.

As for lawyers not getting medical treatment, a few of them do not deserve it. But they know they cannot be refused emergency treatment. Nor can anyone else, citizen, illegal alien, criminal, anyone with an emergency must be treated to care for that emergency. There needs to be some risk assumed by the patients who sue. They pay nothing if they lose. Oh yes, they may be supposed to pay the doctors legal fees, but with what? You can't get blood out of a turnip. So why not have the plaintiffs lawyers responsible for the doctors legal fees. Any doctor who gets sued loses money, even if he wins. His ins. goes up, his legal fees pile up, he gets his reputation dented, and he has to take time away from his practice. It isn't fair that the other side
pays no penalty.

And yes, there is a get rich quick, stick it to the doctor/insurance company mentality among jurors. Juries are supposed to be your peers, but have you ever heard of doctors being jury members when another doctor is sued?

I could go on forever, but this isn't football and is probably boring for most of you.

[Old Cardinal]

Thank you Fred--I found your information both interesting and informative! If there are no books out there covering these points, I would bet you could write a bestseller.

[Gilmer Buckeye]

Even the GOP leaders see that it's not just the evil trial lawyers who are to blame here.

*******

Dewhurst critical of three insurers

By R.A. Dyer
Star-Telegram Staff Writer


AUSTIN - Citing limited consumer savings and court action from insurers, Lt. Gov David Dewhurst called Wednesday for a second look at recently adopted insurance legislation.

He said legal action by two of the state's largest home insurers have inflated premiums for up to 40 percent of the market. Likewise, a major medical malpractice insurer has been sidestepping rate controls through a legal loophole, Dewhurst said.

"Today, I'm concerned that insurance premiums are not dropping as fast as the Legislature intended," said Dewhurst, a Republican. "While I want to see all businesses doing well in the state, I don't want it to be at the expense of hardworking Texans and their families."

Dewhurst called on the Senate's Business and Commerce Committee to review both a law that places limited rate controls on home insurers and one that limits damages in lawsuits.

The Texas Legislature adopted both during the regular session of 2003. Lawmakers said the new laws would lower insurance premiums for homeowners and doctors.

But rates remain too high, Dewhurst said, "and I don't think that's fair."

Dewhurst blamed State Farm and Farmers insurance companies, which together control about 40 percent of the market. He said other major home insurers have agreed to lower rates -- for current homeowner premiums.

State Farm and Farmers continue to fight rate reductions in court, and Dewhurst questioned whether the action amounted to "stalling" -- and whether lawmakers should adopt greater penalties to discourage such tactics.

"With the exception of State Farm and Farmers, all the companies that have been ordered to take rate reductions have done so," said Dewhurst. "Current filings indicate that when the State Farm and Farmers [legal] appeals are settled, then rates will go down 12 percent."

Farmers spokeswoman Michelle Levy said that the company has already reduced rates and that it should not have to implement additional reductions in light of nearly $1 billion in recent losses.

"Furthermore, we have continued to make every good-faith effort to successfully resolve this matter with the Texas Department of Insurance and continue to do so," Levy said.

In a prepared statement, State Farm also said it continues working with insurance regulators. "The Texas Department of Insurance remains stuck on a rate rollback amount that is not justified -- State Farm believes it has challenged the rollback hearing on legitimate grounds," the company said.

Dewhurst also said that a major medical malpractice insurer, the Medical Protective Co., has attempted to sidestep an ordered 19 percent reduction by moving its business to an unregulated entity.

The company, which insures about 7,000 doctors and controls about 20 percent to 30 percent of the market, "is looking for loopholes, by transferring 100 percent of its book business to what it believes is an unregulated company," Dewhurst said.

"As a result of this shell game, not only are the doctors who are covered by Med Pro not seeing their rates go down, but I'm told that some doctors and surgeons are seeing increases by as much as 40 percent. And that's outrageous."

Jay Thompson, an attorney representing the Indiana-based company, disputed that Medical Protective sought refuge in a legal loophole.

"We simply used a mechanism that has been used by several competitors for 10 years -- and the department has never regulated them," Thompson said. "If it's inappropriate for us, then why isn't it inappropriate for our competitors? ... Why is Medical Protective being discriminated against?"

Dewhurst said the Legislature could consider changes to both laws during the next regular session, in 2005, or during a special legislative session that may be called to overhaul the state's school finance laws.

http://www.dfw.com/mld/dfw/business/8944387.htm

[BrahmaMom]

Fred and SintonFan, I'm in your corner. Let the trial lawyers see what they've created. Anyone can sue anybody at any time for any reason, creating frivilous lawsuits. These are a given in medicine and all the attorney groups count on it, stir it, perpetuate it, and gain from it. Covering themselves and giving the insurance companies the paperwork they need to justify treatment that in a doctor's professional judgment is necessary is driving wonderful doctors out of the field of medicine. When all we have left is non-thinking technicians to perform experimental surgery, the ones to blame are the trial lawyers. My husband is a retired physician and we would never encourage any of our four boys to go into medicine, with the way it is practiced now. That is a sad statement to have to make. I think it is smart to refuse non-emergency medical care for the families of those trial lawyers. I've said it should happen for years. Along with the Congress having to submit to any medical plans they propose for five years beofre it becomes law. I'm ready for football, much more fun than this quagmire!

[Sans Couth]

It is easy to sit back and point the fingers at the dirty lawyers. But I have a question for some of you.

Tell us how you fix the problem and still protect the innocent victims of gross negligence. As much as I don't want to believe it, there are bad doctors as well as bad lawyers, bad bankers, bad dads, bad moms, and bad quarterbacks.

Along with complaining about the problem, please tell us the solution. How do you protect the innocent victims while trying to kill the sharks? Show me a practical solution, and I will jump on board.

[JasperDog94]

Originally posted by Sans Couth
It is easy to sit back and point the fingers at the dirty lawyers. But I have a question for some of you.

Tell us how you fix the problem and still protect the innocent victims of gross negligence. As much as I don't want to believe it, there are bad doctors as well as bad lawyers, bad bankers, bad dads, bad moms, and bad quarterbacks.

Along with complaining about the problem, please tell us the solution. How do you protect the innocent victims while trying to kill the sharks? Show me a practical solution, and I will jump on board. Easy:

If you lose a lawsuit and the judge (or jury) deems it frivilous, you pay for ALL attorney's fees for both sides. People would think twice before suing someone.

[Sans Couth]

Originally posted by JasperDog94
Easy:

If you lose a lawsuit and the judge (or jury) deems it frivilous, you pay for ALL attorney's fees for both sides. People would think twice before suing someone.

That sounds great on paper. But when you have precedents of cases where a woman spills coffee on her "self" and gets awarded millions, how do you expect a judge or jury to make the right decision when deeming something "frivilous"?

The problem does not lie with the lawyers or the plantiffs wanting something for nothing. The problem lies with liberal minded judges and juries that award such frivilous amounts. How do you fix that?

[fred grunden]

Originally posted by Sans Couth
It is easy to sit back and point the fingers at the dirty lawyers. But I have a question for some of you.

Tell us how you fix the problem and still protect the innocent victims of gross negligence. As much as I don't want to believe it, there are bad doctors as well as bad lawyers, bad bankers, bad dads, bad moms, and bad quarterbacks.

Along with complaining about the problem, please tell us the solution. How do you protect the innocent victims while trying to kill the sharks? Show me a practical solution, and I will jump on board.

You are off to a good start in identifying the problem. I don't pretend to have all the answers, but I did give some suggestions in my previous post. Moms and dads who are themselves jumping to blame others for any problem, and looking to get easy money without thought of the consequences for others, instill that attitude in their children. They become jurors that want to give big monetary awards regardless of the merits of the case and/or
patients who have the attitude of looking hard for anything to sue about. I have had patients tell me prior to a surgery that if
anything goes wrong, I will sue you. I already know I am likely to get sued if something goes wrong, but the person who is already hostile to me before surgery, gets my attention. I have refused to give anesthesia to some of these patients. The surgeon involved has also refused to do the surgery even after the patient was
brought to the operating room because of the attitude of the patient and him/her threatening to sue. As long as we have a pervasive attitude throughout society that anytime there is a liittle wrong done, it merits big monetary awards, then we will have this problem. Attitudes need to change.

I would personally like to see a complete revamping of the medical training process. I think more exposure to patient care much earlier in the process would help weed out those who are not interested in human suffering and are going into medicine just for the money. The number of years to create a doctor can be cut, and the cost of training can be cut. About ten years ago I was told by an admissions official at UT School of Medicine that to be competitive, an applicant needs to show some work hours spent in a facility such as a nursing home(volunteer or salaried) or
hospital, or clinic. Even a vet clinic because those who love animals generally take an interest in their care and do the same for people. She said they were trying to weed out those applicants who are only intersted in making money. I thought that was a step in the right direction.

I would like to go back to the old days when doctors and lawyers did not adveritise. I hate the lawyer adds all over the covers of telephone books. I hear them on TV begging for clients. No one could possibly forget about sueing, its being screamed at them all the time. I am also leery of doctors who advertise excessively.

All I have addressed here are attitudes. Now if we could get law schools to screen their applicants to reduce the parasites they inject into the legal profession, maybe we could have balance. If someone wants the nitty-gritty specifics about what can be done, just ask for it and I will give you my thoughts.

[BrahmaMom]

Fred and JasperDog, you both seem to fully understand the problem. The "sue" mentality and unwillingness to take responsibility for self and those you bear responsibility for feeds the greed. Limiting the amounts for "pain and suffering" and not allowing the first charges to be gross negligence and first set of demands to include the physician's financial statement are great first steps. Yes, there are bad doctors and they should be stopped from practicing. Absolutely. No question. If they gave consequences to the doctor that didn't include money other than expenses to the patient and/or family but included community service and donations to charities, I'll bet we'd see the number of malpractice suits plummet. Because the reality is, even malpractice carriers will insist on paying an amount to get rid of a "nuisance" claim. It doesn't affect their reputation and is cheaper than fighting the case and proving the claim invalid. I hate this subject. It drives a lot of wonderful caregivers out of the field. Think about that the next time someone you love requires medical attention that you are unable to provide because it doesn't exist or there is nobody doing it anymore.

[JasperDog94]

Originally posted by BrahmaMom
It drives a lot of wonderful caregivers out of the field. Think about that the next time someone you love requires medical attention that you are unable to provide because it doesn't exist or there is nobody doing it anymore. That's the truth if it were ever told!

[Ranger Mom]

My dad was in an explosion in 1981.....the accetelene tank in his Southwestern Bell Truck had a leak and a battery tester sparked when he went over a bump and KABOOM!!

The only thing that saved his life was the fact that he was wearing a down-filled vest at the time and that somewhat cushioned the blow.

He was in ICU for 10 days and to this day suffers extreme back pain due to all the nerve damage he sustained.

He never even thought about sueing. He was paid his workman's comp for 6 months and was back at work. He retired from SWB in 1999. The insurance still pays for the majority of his medication that he will be on for the rest of his life.

Today....he was would have all kinds of ambulance chasers beating down his door. I actually wish we WOULD have sued and got some kind of compensation....he has held menial maintenance jobs since then to make ends meet! If he could have received something for his injuries, maybe he could finally relax and not have to suffer so!!

[Sans Couth]

"Limiting the amounts for "pain and suffering" and not allowing the first charges to be gross negligence...."

What limit would you put on pain and suffering. If it were your child that were crippled for life due to someones gross negligence how much would be enough?

I don't disagree with your ideas, but give me a fair number. How much is a leg worth ? How much is an eye worth? Do you know anyone personally that has been injured or maimed because of somone's gross negligence? Do you know anyone that is missing a limb? Have you any idea what it is like to be crippled? I agree that there is a problem....I agree that commons sense should prevail.....but I still have not met a man or woman yet, than can tell me what a body part is worth. Do I believe a person that cuts themselves shaving deserves 10 million dollars? Absolutley not. But do I believe the answer to the problem is to put limits on lawsuit amounts? NO WAY

Case in point.

A man goes into surgery to have his appendix removed.

The hospital makes a mistake, and puts him on the wrong table. He gets mixed up with another patient that is supposed to have his leg amputated above the knee.

He wakes up later with his leg missing. He is 30 years old and has worked for the past 12 years in a job that requires both legs. He earns 75 thousand dollars a year.

How much do you pay him for the mistake? Before you answer.....How much would it take to let me cut YOUR leg off?

Do you think the limit amount is going to be anywhere near the amount you answered?

Yes...there is a problem. But putting limits on the amount for damages is not the answer.

[BrahmaMom]

Sans, the insurance company has already placed a specific dollar value on a life, each limb, loss of wages, loss of affection, I don't have to set a value. In addition to being a physician, my husband is also chronically ill with several illnesses. He HAS been in the situation of a doctor mishandling his case and causing harm (though minor, in our estimation). Mistakes that were made were honest mistakes, the intentions were good, and we didn't sue. Yes, if a doctor cuts off the wrong leg, affects a livelihood, leaves instuments in during a surgery, permanently disables someone or makes them a vegetable--those are all valid reasons to sue. I am a social worker by training, so I am an advocate for those who have been victimized and would be the first to support such a suit. Most of the suits I've seen in the newspaper were frivilous, which could be why they made the media. When harm has happened, the judgments have been appropriate lately. To me, the shame is that after the judgment has been assessed, the lawyers take their 35% off the top. I don't think we disagree that much in actual cases, just in global thinking. And, I wonder about the cost of putting a patient and/or family through a lengthy lawsuit--there is no dollar figure out on that, but to me it is a high price to pay.

[Old Cardinal]

I too agree that Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst is a very compassionate man, also willing to take on the insurance companies. I fail to see how the wrongs of say Farmers Insurance-- gives the Trial Lawyer the right to go out and try to "manufacture" bogus claims.
To me it is two shady groups both trying to end up with money that they did not earn. The insurance co. wants of keep the big premium money paid in and the Trial Lawyer wants to create a mechanism to get the money away from the insurance company.
On the issue of insurance, that Farmers is the worst I have ever seen. I know a guy that was one of their most successful of all agents. They fired him for no apparent reason than the fact he was nearing retirement and would get a major amount of money generated by his extreme efforts. I hope they are not successful in this slick little move.

Down in our area a State Representative named Ritter voted for the "Tort" reform...So the Trial Lawyers led by Walter Umphrey and others spent literally millions in relaliation trying to get Ritter unseated in the last election backing a Trial Lawyer politician named Bernsen. They were fused together to beat this Representative and spend vast amounts of money-luckily the people saw through their ploy and put the Ritter fellow back in office.
(I might add this was a Democrate on Democrate fight!)

[BrahmaMom]

RangerMom, I grew up along the Houston Ship Channel, where the accidents like your dad had were all too common. Nobody ever sued, the companies did the right thing and took care of the men and their families, eliminating the clogging of courts and lining of attorneys' pockets. My biggest fear is that someone I love will have a medical need that can't be met, not because of lack of technology but because it's too "risky" from a liability perspective. Case in point: My husband had bilateral lung volume reduction surgery in 1996, experimental removal of 50% of one lung and 30% of the other, by a gutsy surgeon who took the risk for us and saved my husband's life, giving my 14 year old, 11 year old, 4 year old and 3 year old sons their father for many more years. I looked him up last year, he's in his 50's, he no longer practices here and has probably returned to South America where his courage and skill are always appreciated. If my husband has any more pulmonary problems, I have no one to turn to that will tackle his medical condition, for all the money in the world. That's what the trial lawyers have done to medicine. Not to say that the insurance companies are to be ignored in the mess, they certainly have driven us all past the point many times. A complete overhaul of the system, not socialized medicine, is necessary. We need to give incentives to physicians to remain in the field and pursue answers to pain and suffering. And let them use their judgement instead of the insurance making medical decisions based on costs.

[fred grunden]

The fact that lawyers get so rich and can control the legislature is one of the main things that infuriate doctors. Not that doc's begrudge a man the money he makes, just that lawyers get rich beyond the ordinary and can throw their money around and control the legislature either by getting so many lawyers elected to the leg. or by supporting relatively poor candidates who become their puppets. Beaumont and Jefferson County is known as a plaintiffs court. Whatever the plaintiff wants, the plaintiff gets and then some. When the insecticide plant blew up in Bopthal, India, lawyers wanted to take the company to trial in Beaumont, Texas, just because of this.

The potential vice presidential candidate, John Edwards, made his money as a trial lawyer, mostly off tobacco lawsuits. He would be very slick with his nice guy personna, winning over the jury, and sticking it to the companies. All my life, and it goes back to the 40's, I have heard that Tobacco was bad for you. My dad used to raise it, just enough for his own consumption, had the good sense to quit using it, and believed it was bad for people. I would not have been allowed on one of the tobacco juries due to my disbelief that there was wide spread ignorance about the harmful side of tobacco.

[BrahmaMom]

Yep, fred, the reality is both doctors and lawyers like to be in control--that's a big part of the problem. I have heard attorneys say many times they have to "get control" of their clients--infuriated me! Then, they do make sure the juries don't contain bias, which sometimes would be a good thing, as in the case of tobacco bias. Our legal system could use some revamping, too, couldn't it? It comes down to the one with the most money (influence) wins. I have also had an attorney tell me his fees were so high because he contributed to all the judges' campaigns to have "rapport"--somehow that rubbed me the wrong way, seemed kinda crooked. And, to be fair, there are attorneys out there keeping criminals off the streets and protecting the little guy and all our rights, too. They just don't make the headlines as much.

[fred grunden]

BrahamaMom, you will appreciate this little story more than most.
One day the local surgeon and I were sitting in the doctor's lounge. He says to me, Fred, we need to put in a hot dog stand and get out of the medical profession. I said to him , no, we need to start preaching. He was taken aback by that statement and I asked him if he'd ever heard of a preacher getting sued for malpractice. By the time his follower finds out he's been duped, he's already dead and his family thinks he's in heaven. The surgeon had a good laugh.

[spiveyrat]

Originally posted by BrahmaMom
I have also had an attorney tell me his fees were so high because he contributed to all the judges' campaigns to have "rapport"--somehow that rubbed me the wrong way, seemed kinda crooked.

No doubt about it, that IS crooked! OBVIOUSLY a conflict of interest. Oh the bitter irony of a lack of ethical behavior in our judicial system.

:rolleyes:

[Old Cardinal]

I WOULD LIKE TO THANK THE MONITORS OF THE MESSAGE BOARD FOR ALLOWING US TO DISCUSS 'POLITICS' IN A RATIONAL MANNER. I THINK THERE HAS BEEN AN EXCELLENT EXCHANGE OF INFORMATION....I ALSO THINK THIS HAS BEEN A REVELATION TO THE YOUNGER GENERATION ON HERE THAT ARE GOING TO BE STEPPING INTO ADULTHOOD SOON AND WILL JOIN THE BATTLE TO RIGHT SOME APPARENT WRONGS---THANKS AGAIN FROM ALL OF US!

[BrahmaMom]

Great story, fred! Spiveyrat, that conversation was in regard to the Harris County Court system. Crooked, I say very possibly. In family court, I've seen them deal with a child custody case and NEVER interview the child, or even lay eyes on the child, or ask what was best for the child--thye were more interested in protecting the parental rights of an alcoholic, verbally and psychologically abusive parent. Yes, the younger generation needs to observe closely, as I don't see justice from the judicial system. I see abuse of power at the law enforcement level, potentiated by the threat of terrorism. We are teaching our children to beware, police are not always your friends. My husband has been cynical for years, I fought it till I witnessed it first-hand more than once. I hate the thought that it has become an issue of power, control, and money.

[BIG BLUE DEFENSIVE END]

Originally posted by Old Cardinal
I WOULD LIKE TO THANK THE MONITORS OF THE MESSAGE BOARD FOR ALLOWING US TO DISCUSS 'POLITICS' IN A RATIONAL MANNER. I THINK THERE HAS BEEN AN EXCELLENT EXCHANGE OF INFORMATION....I ALSO THINK THIS HAS BEEN A REVELATION TO THE YOUNGER GENERATION ON HERE THAT ARE GOING TO BE STEPPING INTO ADULTHOOD SOON AND WILL JOIN THE BATTLE TO RIGHT SOME APPARENT WRONGS---THANKS AGAIN FROM ALL OF US! I too would like to thank the moderators for allowing this discussion. I don't know too much on this issue, and many of you have taught me something. I wish that I could reply, but everybody out here is right, except in some cases where the term "liberal" was applied to every crooked person :D .

[sinton66]

I'm pretty sure I can speak for all of the moderators here. We don't mind political discussion as long as both sides remain civil. I personally just don't want to see any thread degrade into name-calling and one-upsmanship games. As long as we can discuss things like this in a civil manner with mutual respect for one another, I have no problem with it.

[BIG BLUE DEFENSIVE END]

SIDES???? It's the whole board vs. BBDE! Even though severely outnumbered, I always win. :D

[sinton66]

You may well feel that way, but you are NOT the only democrat on this board. But, yall are outnumbered by a bunch.;)

[BrahmaMom]

Just remember, BBDE, when you go into an Emergency Room, there isn't a physician in the world who cares what your political affiliation is or what your bank balance is. Can you say that about going into an attorney's office? I've cut checks for retainers in what I considered to be emergency situations. And I've walked out of an emergency care clinic, in a medical emergency, with the staff rushing me out of there, not caring about payment.

[BIG BLUE DEFENSIVE END]

Originally posted by sinton66
You may well feel that way, but you are NOT the only democrat on this board. But, yall are outnumbered by a bunch.;)

Yeah, but I'm one of the few who posts anything political on here. I do enjoy to do it though, well, sometimes I do. One thing I have learned is to never argue with a Republican...they're too hard headed. :D

[sinton66]

Not to mention usually right.:D

[bullfrog_alumni_02]

im a republican myself, and i dont always think we are right, but i do think that right now the democratic party has their heads too far up their rear-ends to see some of the delimas in our country that are bigger than who's right and who's wrong.

[BrahmaMom]

BBDE, I don't think the two party system is the greatest thing in the world, but it's what the greatest nation in the world uses, so maybe I am wrong. I am Republican and a social worker. I have a hard time with some of the social policies of the Republican party. But, you know what, as a social worker, the Democratic social policies actually seem to end up hurting the very people they are designed to "help"--they keep them "downtrodden" (in the vocabulary of the 60's and 70's) and dependent on the system. I saw that over and over in my caseloads in different fields of social work. There is no perfect answer, BBDE, we are human and imperfect as individuals and as a society. But once you pay enough in taxes, you'll be a Republican, too, fiscally. Otherwise, you'll be the recipient of my tax dollars--AND "downtrodden" and dependent! We are in 3A districts, we are unique communities; I don't want someone in Washington, DC making decisions for Bellville, TX. What do you want?

[BIG BLUE DEFENSIVE END]

Originally posted by sinton66
Not to mention usually right.:D
Right about what? Maybe when you say the earth is round and revolves around the sun, but nothing else....Republicans don't seem to be the brightest crayons in the box...at least that's what I've gathered with a few of my run ins with them on here...especially that guy who posts under the name Sinton66...I swear, whoever put him as a moderator must have been nuts! :D ;)



Another thing...Democrats are ALWAYS right. :cool:

[sinton66]

Take that up with Matthew328. Seems like everyone else thought it was a wise choice, so like the rest of your fellow democrats, there you are out in left field........again.:D

[BIG BLUE DEFENSIVE END]

LOL, yeah, I think I'm going to...we don't need incompetent moderators on this forum. :D J/K '66, I thought Matthew made excellent choices for moderators. I don't play baseball, so I can say I've never been out in left field. Why do the Republicans make everything about baseball, anyways? :confused:

[Old Tiger]

it's the only thing they can rely on :D

[Sans Couth]

I don't think all democrats don't have a clue. I just don't think YOU do.:D

[sinton66]

"Left field"=no clue. Apparently, Sans Couth and I have reached a concensus here.:D

[Sans Couth]

Show us how smart you are BBDE.

Answer these simple questions.

If you were in charge of everything....

1. How would YOU divide the tax burden, and how would you spend it?

2. How would you fix the Social Security problem? (tell us the solution, don't tell us who is responsible for it being broken)

3. How would YOU handle the war on Terrorism?

4. What would you say to the American people if tomorrow all of the "Wealthy" decided to retire, and there were no corporations, auto makers, or computer companies to employee the masses?

[BIG BLUE DEFENSIVE END]

First, I would give all the tax money to myself and my rich buddies, so I could be rich and laugh at you. I would then say forget the social security problem and collect all of the money for myself and my rich buddies, as well. Then, I would invade a third world country and make more terrorists out of people. After I did all that, my buddies and I could retire and leave the country in turmoil....OH WAIT, that's what the Republicans want to do...

[Sans Couth]

I knew you didn't have the nads to try and answer the question.

[Sans Couth]

You had better go and ask your alter ego for help on this one.

[BIG BLUE DEFENSIVE END]

Originally posted by Sans Couth
I don't think all democrats don't have a clue. I just don't think YOU do.:D

I do too, it's in a box in my closet. :rolleyes:

[Ranger Mom]

Originally posted by BIG BLUE DEFENSIVE END
First, I would give all the tax money to myself and my rich buddies, so I could be rich and laugh at you. I would then say forget the social security problem and collect all of the money for myself and my rich buddies, as well. Then, I would invade a third world country and make more terrorists out of people. After I did all that, my buddies and I could retire and leave the country in turmoil....OH WAIT, that's what the Republicans want to do...

HEY!!! That was ugly!! That isn't what I want to do at all!!:rolleyes:

[BIG BLUE DEFENSIVE END]

Originally posted by Sans Couth
You had better go and ask your alter ego for help on this one.

My alter ego? Maybe you should stop being bitter towards the fact that a 16 year old can write better than you and has better mechanics and grammar usage than you could ever dream of. Maybe you should stop being bitter towards the fact that a 16 year old is as equally as smart as you and can step in and argue with you on a subject that even YOU don't comprehend. Maybe you should have the "nads" or the fortitude to face up to the fact that I am a 16 year old, and as much as you hate to admit it, I am right. I'm sorry if I have to sound so conceited about the whole thing, because in my opinion I am not. This is the only reasonable way that I have left to explain myself. I don't know a lot about some things, but very few people on here have made concievable points themselves, and I don't know the answer to every question, either. The one and only reason you say anything about my age is because I am a passionate Democrat and voice my opinions, opinions which you do not share, and use it as a to get around trying to disprove what I say. I'm not the person who is a self-proclaimed genius, nor do I accuse you of not being the age that you are. Only because I like to have fun at times, and others I am more serious makes it seem that I COULD be a different person. I like to have fun, but other times, like now, I have to be serious. If I have to defend myself this way, then so be it. Maybe you should grow up a little Sans, because even at 16, I'm way ahead of you, and you admit it yourself.

[BIG BLUE DEFENSIVE END]

Originally posted by Ranger Mom
HEY!!! That was ugly!! That isn't what I want to do at all!!:rolleyes:

Sorry, the REPUBLICAN POLITICIANS.

[Sans Couth]

You still have not even tried to answer a single question. If you want to convince yourself that you are smarter than me, then that is ok. But your little rant, and your attempt to change the subject will not work with me. Show us how smart you are, and answer the questions.

[BIG BLUE DEFENSIVE END]

To the Moderators:

I'm sorry that I said some of the things that I did and changed the mood of this thread. I enjoy talking to the people on this website, but I feel as though Sans Couth crossed the line, and I am only defending myself. I will not retract any of my remarks, I would not have said them if I had not meant them. I'm not trying to malicously cut down other posters, nor am I trying to cause feud on this webpage, I am only defending myself. If I crossed the line, I apologize to all of the moderators and the rest of the posters on this forum.

[Sans Couth]

Yawn

[BIG BLUE DEFENSIVE END]

Originally posted by Sans Couth
You still have not even tried to answer a single question. If you want to convince yourself that you are smarter than me, then that is ok. But your little rant, and your attempt to change the subject will not work with me. Show us how smart you are, and answer the questions.


I wish that I could answer the questions that you set before me, but I cannot. I admitted to that much in one of the previous posts. I haven't taken college level government or economics, nor do I have the right to vote or pay any taxes. I honestly don't know the answers to the questions you have presented before me. Why don't you use your infinite wisdom to answer the questions yourself?

[spiveyrat]

Originally posted by BIG BLUE DEFENSIVE END
My alter ego? Maybe you should stop being bitter towards the fact that a 16 year old can write better than you and has better mechanics and grammar usage than you could ever dream of. Maybe you should stop being bitter towards the fact that a 16 year old is as equally as smart as you and can step in and argue with you on a subject that even YOU don't comprehend. Maybe you should have the "nads" or the fortitude to face up to the fact that I am a 16 year old, and as much as you hate to admit it, I am right. I'm sorry if I have to sound so conceited about the whole thing, because in my opinion I am not. This is the only reasonable way that I have left to explain myself. I don't know a lot about some things, but very few people on here have made concievable points themselves, and I don't know the answer to every question, either. The one and only reason you say anything about my age is because I am a passionate Democrat and voice my opinions, opinions which you do not share, and use it as a to get around trying to disprove what I say. I'm not the person who is a self-proclaimed genius, nor do I accuse you of not being the age that you are. Only because I like to have fun at times, and others I am more serious makes it seem that I COULD be a different person. I like to have fun, but other times, like now, I have to be serious. If I have to defend myself this way, then so be it. Maybe you should grow up a little Sans, because even at 16, I'm way ahead of you, and you admit it yourself.

When you get around the age of 22-25, you're going to start realizing that it is a big world that we live in and you don't know as much as you think you do. College taught me a lot and one of the things I learned is that there is a lot of stuff I DON'T know. I think it's great that you have a mind you aren't afraid to use. Your grammar and spelling are better than a lot of emails I get from co-workers. But remember, wisdom won't come from within yourself, it will come from others who have had more life experience than you.

[BlueBlood]

It's the old religion and politics thing--if you want to discuss it you are going to have arguments. People, even 16 year-olds, are going to have opinions. Posts like these are inviting hard feelings. People don't get quite as passionate about sports (after all they are just games). So whats the purpose of this post? First, if you are going to respond to a post like this, then expect some arguments and hard feelings are realize ahead of time that people are going to take exception to your remarks. Secondly, no one will win an argument of this kind (YOU CAN'T WIN). Thirdly, everyone will be Kung ** fighting, those kids are fast as lightning, and frankly it will be a little bit frightning, but they will fight with expert timing, your going to get those funky Chinamen from funky Chinatown involved.

[BrahmaMom]

BBDE: I admire your opinions and am thrilled to see a 16 year old have convictions and beliefs (the old social worker in me coming out). Again, I say, when you have paid enough taxes, you, too, will be a fiscal Republican I would wager. But don't ever lose that passion of convictions and beliefs. Even when you are wrong (and someday you will be wrong, I'm sorry to say) it at least keeps your intentions good. That's all we can ask of our politicians and leaders. When you run for office, put BBDE on your ads so we all know it's you. You may even get a few Republican votes from those of us who are sentimental!

[spiveyrat]

Originally posted by BrahmaMom
BBDE: When you run for office, put BBDE on your ads so we all know it's you. You may even get a few Republican votes from those of us who are sentimental!

THAT will depend on how far from the left he will have moved! :D

[BIG BLUE DEFENSIVE END]

Yes, I know that I know very little in contrast to the older, more mature posters on this board. I hated to sound conceited whenever I posted that, and I know that I did, but that was the only defense that I had for myself. I know that I don't know everything, and there are times that I am wrong, everybody is going to be wrong at some time in their lives. I'm not trying to cause tension between posters, or any hard feelings, I'm just a kid trying to voice my opinions and have a little bit of fun. Personally, I don't think that I will ever be a Republican. I've been a Democrat ever since I've learned anything about government and economics, and I'm quite stubborn if many of you haven't found out yet. Yes, I do have aspirations for holding a political office someday in the future. The thought has crossed my mind many times when I was trying to decide what my future would be, but I personally don't know if I could be cut out to be a politician. I know that I am in way over my head whenever I discuss politics with the likes of Pudlugger, and Old Cardinal, and Spiveyrat, but I hope that one day I can be able to step in and give them a better fight than I have given them in the past. The posters on here have taught me a lot, and I appreciate their opinions and absorb what they say. I just wish that I could actually teach them as much as they have taught me in return. I may disagree with them sometimes, but that's the beauty of our country, we can actually voice our opinions, and if another person does not like it, that's tough. From now on, I'm going to try to keep away from the political threads as much as possible, but I may drop in from time to time to see what the word is and what propaganda the Republicans are posting ;) .

[Sans Couth]

YAWNNNNNNNNNNNNN

[BIG BLUE DEFENSIVE END]

Originally posted by Sans Couth
YAWNNNNNNNNNNNNN

It's people like you Sans who try to start things on here about politics. If somebody doesn't share the same political views as you do, you'll try to exploit the fact that they do not know the answer to every question. Then you try to accuse them of having somebody else post under their name. Honestly, you should act more your age. I expected a lot more out of a poster of your stature. I guess it takes politics to show your true colors and bring to light your immaturity.

[Sans Couth]

Originally posted by BIG BLUE DEFENSIVE END
It's people like you Sans who try to start things on here about politics. If somebody doesn't share the same political views as you do, you'll try to exploit the fact that they do not know the answer to every question. Then you try to accuse them of having somebody else post under their name. Honestly, you should act more your age. I expected a lot more out of a poster of your stature. I guess it takes politics to show your true colors and bring to light your immaturity.

I have decided to stop talking to you. Because I never know if it is you or your silly father that gets on here and spews his political banter while he hides behind his child's screen name. I don't want to argue with a kid, and I darn sure don't want to argue with some silly 40 year old that would act like your daddy.:p :p

[turbostud]

hehe

[BIG BLUE DEFENSIVE END]

Keep pushing it Sans.

[BIG BLUE DEFENSIVE END]

You have no right to speak about me or my father the way you have. You do not know my father. He has no aspirations or reasons to get on my name and post. He is 55 years old. He grew up on a dairy farm and had it tough as a kid growing up. He served in the Air Force and is a Vietnam veteran. He worked hard to get him and my family to where it is right now, and you have no right to throw mud on his name. He is my father, and the most influential person in my life. I would do anything for him, and I am not and will not stand by and allow you to speak about him the way you have. He would get on here and embarrass you in a political discussion if he wanted to. He is more passionate about it than I am. He is a great man, a better man than you could ever wish of becoming. At least he would have the testicular fortitude to say something about you to your face and not post it on a website for the rest of the people on here to see.

[Sans Couth]

Yawnnnnnnnnn

You started with me junior. You insulted me first, and you are way out of your league.

[BIG BLUE DEFENSIVE END]

Started it with you? I vaguely remember you saying, "You don't have the nads to answer the question." Then you go as far as accusing me of having somebody else post under my name AND insult my family. I am within anybody's league, and that's a fact.

[Sans Couth]

I asked you a simple question because you paint the Republican Party with a broad brush of contempt, but you can't even take out a pencil, and answer some questions about how YOU yourself feel about the issues.

You then act like It is my fault that you don't have an opinion of your own, and instead, you try to paint me as a bully with your big fat brush of hatred.

Why can't you just answer the questions?

[Sans Couth]

Originally posted by BIG BLUE DEFENSIVE END
..... I am within anybody's league, and that's a fact.

I am a Disabled American Veteran, Father of Three, who has put in more overtime hours on Saturdays away from my kids, than hours that you have been alive. I have contributed more dollars to the general fund, than hours that you have spent on the planet. Yes Junior OR DADDY which ever one of you is here now.....you are out of your league.

Yawwnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn

[Ranger Mom]

OKay!!

I have finally had enough!! Either this thread takes an entirely different tone or it will be locked!!

I don't agree with the majority of was BBDE says politically, but to call his father "pathetic" is pathetic in my opinion.

I would appreciate that thread being edited, or I will do it myself.

*Ranger Mom's first warning!!*

[Sans Couth]

Party Pooper.

[BIG BLUE DEFENSIVE END]

Yeah, you edit your post to make the whole thing look like a joke, but those who saw know who you really are Sans. I didn't have to paint you out like the bad guy, hopefully you did that yourself and everybody on this board had the opportunity to read it.

[Sans Couth]

I only edited it, because a moderator told me to. I meant every word of it.

And if changin two words makes the whole thing look like a joke, then it must now have been TOO bad.

[sinton66]

Okay, BOTH of you need to ignore each other for awhile and let this fade away. The thread is being locked so that cooler heads might prevail.