Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ustwo
You mean you don't know the history of John Edwards as a lawyer, where he made his millions and what it did to the medical profession, and the number of increased c-sections despite you voting for him for vp in the last election?
This wasn't covered in truthout.org?
Oh my. I covered this before.
Edwards is a disgusting human being of the worst kind, I'd vote for Kusinich before I'd vote for him, without regret. I'd rather a left wing loon than a stereotypical shyster.
|
Here are some of Mr. Edwards cases
http://news.findlaw.com/newsmakers/john.edwards.html
Several of them have to do with C-sections, and cerebral palsy.
The argument seems to be:
o Edwards represented people in lawsuits that alleged that the doctors should have performed a c-section in a given case instead of proceeding with vaginal delivery.
- Obviously true, see the link.
o The cases were decided incorrectly. In other words, the doctor wasn't at fault, or, at least, had know way of knowing he or she was doing anything other than providing the best care.
- Highly debatable. I'm not a medical or legal expert. Prove it.
o These particular lawsuits then affected other doctor's decision making, and caused them to sometimes choose a c-section when a vaginal birth would have been a better medical decision.
- Very hard to prove. I can't imagine a doctor admitting he or she gave something other than what he thought was the best care. Medical malpractice insurance is obviously very expensive, and no one wants to be sued. Even if this bit is true, then I still wouldn't fault Edwards for it if he believed that the individuals in his cases were harmed, and proved it in court. He isn't responsible for other people's paranoia or fear of being sued.
o The increase in c-sections harmed people.
- C-sections are generally more dangerous than vaginal birth for obvious reasons. Doctors should be making the decision based upon their medical judgment instead of fear of being sued. If fear of lawsuits is really affecting Dr.'s judgment, then perhaps some action is needed.
o Edwards made a profit from these cases.
- Obviously true. That's is job.
o Edwards knew, or should have known, that these cases were frivolous, yet took them on anyway.
- If true, then he's a scumbag ambulance chaser. Prove it.
So, prove to me that these lawsuits were frivolous, and that Edwards new it. Then maybe I'll listen to you. Otherwise it's just more right-wing blather, which starts with the assumption that lawsuits are Bad because businesses might have to be responsible for their actions.
(If you've already proven such in another thread, point me at it and I'll take a look).
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ustwo
I'm sorry but I can't believe Mr. Google can't figure this one out for himself. John Edwards is a shyster, anyone who knows his history knows this, most of you don't know his history obviously.
Hell host used walmart as an example of poor employment and ignored that unemployment in the country is 5% all while being condescending in that he somehow did his homework. Well to hell with that crap. All he does lately is blame the source and post his usual spam.
|
Google shows me a lot of what I classify as untrustworthy rightwing blather. Not that people with an agenda smearing politicians on the internet ever happens, or anything. I just have trust issues.