Dr. Tyler; Captain America

It's not a major part of his campaign. It is one for Edwards. ANY reform that doesn't include "loser pays" doesn't fix a single thing. -=Mike Actually, it's not. It's just one of his positions, just like Bush. Seriously, I AM leaving this time.

By, George, I think he's got it! But hold on a second! You don't like the lawyers because they make life difficult on doctors. So rather than support the plan that helps doctors, you support the plan that makes life difficult on lawyers. That's not any less destructive. AND, it does nothing to stop the flow of frivilous lawsuits or phony malpractice suits. It simply means less profit is being generated from each one. Which could, in theory, increase the number of phony malpractice suits that doctors face. If Edwards wanted ACTUAL tort reform, he'd back "Loser pays". Anything less is nothing. -=Mike So, then, Bush doesn't want tort reform? G'night, folks!

No, and I fail to see how that matters. Because that would've been political suicide in the same manner as if Edwards preached against tort reform.

How is this any different from Bush's proposals?

They can't, for certain, say that Bush directly approved the actions, no. However, he certainly benefitted from shady accounting at Harken. No more than Bush is beholden to corporate interests, so how is Bush not a hypocrite for preaching corporate accountability?

No, because Bush hasn't done anything to kill corporate accounting. Now, if I were to hear Clinton say it, yeah, I'd probably call him on it. -=Mike His argument is that since Edwards was once one of these individuals who benefitted from the system, he's a blatant hypocrite and is less than human. Bush benefitted (in Arbusto, Harken Energies, etc.) from shady corporate accounting during his reign on the boards of those organizations. He has also spoken out for corporate accountability. I fail to see how this is any different.

So he proposed a plan. Shit, I can propose a plan, doesn't mean it's going to pass. He certainly hasn't emphasized it at all, and nothing is coming into fruition from this plan. He's had 3 years to accomplish this goal, and has done next to nothing. So, why are you so high on him again?

...I'd suggest you withdraw that statement.

He's been in office for 3 years and he's done what about the problem?

So if you hear Bush speaking out about corporate accountability, do you rush to the boards to call him a hypocrite?

So is Edwards. ... And he's actually trying to help combat the costs of healthcare in other significant ways, too! ... .... .... Bush isn't proposing anything of the sort. I ask again. What am I missing here?

Okay, and your argument is to vote for someone who is suggesting absolutely NOTHING in reforming this process. .... So you're going to go and vote for him?!?!

And he's arguing that it needs to be controlled. ... What am I missing here?

By the way, during your hysterical rant on the healthcare crisis in America, you mentioned the fact that it's impossible to find doctors to perform surgery, etc. I had a complicated, expensive procedure performed on my elbow in the last year, and I had absolutely no problem finding a doctor to perform it. So, I guess I'm not an average American, or something... since John Edwards' malpractice suits during the late 90's seem to have not affected me quite as much as it's obviously personally affected you.

To instead vote for a man who has done NOTHING to combat the same issue, and is tight with corporate CEOs and made millions on alleged insider trading and corporate welfare? Jeebus, you're a complicated guy.

Except, Edwards is campaigning on lowering the costs of healthcare for every American. So.......... What am I missing here?

Edwards hasn't publicly recieved Dean's support. Simply his supporters.

No, actually, I have plenty to dispute about the validity of the article, including the fact that--as you so eloquently passed over it--Edwards IS campaigning on tort reform and has virtually turned his back on the trial lawyer lobby. I can bring up any number of things that Bush did in his past and disavowed prior to his candidacy, and none of them will be a factor in this election, either (including the aWol issue, trust me).

Your source is still theagitator.com. I could post any number of articles from rabidly anti-Bush sources, too, and you would probably discount them just like I'm discounting this. As will (and do) most Americans.

Considering he grew up poor and worked his way up, he has every right to say that. Unless you've got some evidence beyond anectodal RNC lines, please stick to just mindlessly trolling and leave the analyses to the people who understand politics.

After looking at Edwards' positions more closely, there DOES seem to be a major focus on the outsourcing issues. While it hasn't necessarily made a huge dent quite yet (after all, he's only won one state), I'd bet that his trade positions in general--in addition to the aforementioned IT jobs outsourcing--will gather him quite a few votes in the manufacturing states, too. With the latest Gallup poll putting Edwards, too, up 10 points on Bush, it's starting to look a little rosier on this side of the aisle.

Okay, whatever makes you feel special, but how about we discuss something of relative importance instead of mindlessly trolling? With Edwards' strong showing in Wisconsin, I think it's relatively plausable that he could have set himself up for a big Super Tuesday, which would, effectively, let him back into this race. If you go over to the Edwards blog--if a blog is any indicator of support--there seem to be quite a few of the former Dean supporters now shifting to the Edwards camp. As I stated above, if even 1/3 of the Dean supporters had broken to the Edwards campaign last night, Edwards would've won Wisconsin. There is very little of a chance that the Dean supporters--which are far more numerous than you people are giving them credit (he WAS second in delegates before he dropped out)--would choose Kerry over Edwards, so what do you guys really think about this race at this point?

Look, I'm not going to stoop down to your level and start a flame war over this. Go ahead and flame yourself if you want. You're allowed to have whatever stupid, hateful, and irrational opinion you want, and there's nothing I can or would want to do about it. But if you're trying to bait me into a flame war about this, you're going to be disappointed.

I'm gonna be advertising for my new site in a few weeks, so I'll probably just wait until then to change my sig.