Breaking News
Hurricane Ida Targets US Gulf Coast
Only in RepublicanworldTM is a rich lawyer turned rich judge a symbol of the working middle class and the Democratic party’s supposed rejection of said class. Thanks, David Brooks, I think you’ve sufficiently filled the right’s Recommended Daily Allowance of Stupid.
Kristy Sanchez-Trujillo
T-Mobile Outage
T-Mobile
Megan Gale
Sylvie Van Der Vaart
Clash Of The Titans
Ashley Neufeld
Afton Williamson
Kyrstin Gemar
Tesla Coil
Xperia X10
Cany Vossough
Reza Vossough
Ninel Conde
Julia Louis Dreyfus
Guardians of Childhood
Botox
Chase Utley
Prince Of Persia Sands Of Time
Cherokee
Christopher Lee
Prince Charles
Prince William
Prince Harry
Cleveland Browns
Ernie Accorsi
Reina Flynn
Reid Gray
Cole Hamels
Brett Myers
Quinn Gray
SEPTA
Burlington Northern
Star Wars The Old Republic
Nightmare On Elm Street
Gerard Butler
Amrit Dhaliwal
Louise Linton
Gwen Stefani
Curtis Lavelle Vance
Anne Pressly
H1N1 Vaccine
Melody Ross
Oasis Of The Seas
Disney Cruise
Selita Ebanks
Anthony Sowell
JJ Redick
Axe Body Spray
Christopher Walken
Dragon Age Origins
I not going to be bothered with TimesSelect, but is the article about John Edwards?
Excuse me, but what evidence do you have that Alito is just some rich guy? His parents were both school teachers. They were a middle class family.
And what evidence do you have that he was a “rich lawyer?” It would be a first for a guy working in the government to find such a windfall. He’s 55 years old and has a total net worth of $1.7 million which includes his house which is valued at like $800,000. Considering he lives in New Jersey, 800K is not a palace. My brother-in-law lives in small house in Lodi that he could sell for $425,000.
How exactly is Alito not an example of working middle class success?
I tend to think of millionaires as people who have a million dollars, not people who own a million dollars worth of stuff.
Orwellian, you come from one of the poorest states in the Union. I live in one of the richest counties in the Union. My near $30,000 a year puts me below the poverty level. There are millionaires all over the place around here.
It’s all relative.
Honestly, I tend to think of millionaires (which is what someone with a net worth of $1.7 million IS) as rich. Sorry. Maybe I’m just some backwards-thinking guy from poor America and my views are distorted, but if he came to West Virginia, he could live as a king. I will likely never see that much money in my life.
Orwellian might have a point if Alito were born into that money.
As it were, we’re left with the logical conclusion that…I don’t know…HE EARNED IT!??
This is ridiculous, Oliver. Even for you.
“I not going to be bothered with TimesSelect, but is the article about John Edwards?”
No, it’s about George Soros.
Honestly, I tend to think of millionaires (which is what someone with a net worth of $1.7 million IS) as rich. Sorry. Maybe I m just some backwards-thinking guy from poor America and my views are distorted, but if he came to West Virginia, he could live as a king. I will likely never see that much money in my life.
He’d have $1.7 million if liquidated all of his assets. In addition, all of this apparent wealth is where he’s at after working and saving for over THIRTY YEARS.
Oliver’s smear is that this is some priviledged guy who’s always been rich and wouldn’t know anything about being middle class.
It’s funny when Republicans claim that people who have $1.7 million worth of anything aren’t rich. And they call us out of touch.
OK, net worth of $1.7 million, a crappy little shack worth $800,000, that leaves $900,000 in other assets.
What percentile do you think he falls into? Top 20? Top 10? Top 5?
He ain’t Warren Buffet, but “rich” sounds like a fair qualifier to me.
I will by the time I’m retired, and my wife and I are both public school teachers. We will have worked hard, saved, and invested. I guess once I’m rich I’ll be criticized for having worked hard and used my money wisely. So be it.
“It s funny when Republicans claim that people who have $1.7 million worth of anything aren t rich. And they call us out of touch.”
It’s funny when Oliver insinuates that everybody who is rich started out life that way.
It’s simply beyond his level of comprehension that somebody might have actually started from humble beginnings but worked their way to this point in life.
Since when did “rich” become a perjorative? Just because you guys aren’t smart, or talented, or driven enough to make something extraordinary out of yourselves doesn’t mean you should start smearing this guy. Lord knows I’m not, and as a result I’m not rich. But I am not going to hold it against anyone who excels by working hard and making good decisions. Hell, that’s the damn American Dream.
I think John Edwards and Ted Kennedy would be much better symbols of the working middle class.
As an aside, when Teddy was naming his dog “Splash” didn’t anyone tell him that maybe he should think of anohter name? No one?
You’d think the guy belonged to the KKK or something.
In 2004, apparently.
As I recall, a great deal conservative observation on Mssrs. Kerry and Edwards concerned their personal finances.
Shoot, no! Sure, he once boasted of belonging to an organization that wanted to prevent other hard-working, good-decision-making people from achieving something because they weren’t the “right” color or because they had “different” genitals. But let’s not smear the guy.
If he had, he might not remember it anyway.
What percentile do you think he falls into? Top 20? Top 10? Top 5?
Net worth does not determine the percentile people fall into. Income does. And I doubt US judges are making big bucks.
It s funny when Republicans claim that people who have $1.7 million worth of anything aren t rich. And they call us out of touch.
Excuse me. You claimed he was rich before he even became a Judge. What evidence do you have that he was this supposed “rich lawyer”? And again, you’ve gone at the man like he’s always been this rich white guy, completely out of touch, when in fact he was raised in a middle class home and has obviously invested and saved his money wisely. Shit, I thought that was something to be admired.
Contrast that with Ted Kennedy. Born of priviledge. Never had to work for a freaking thing in his entire life and has been enjoying living off the government tit for the last 40 years in addition to the millions he has from his bootlegging Daddy.
He’s a liar. The man will say anything to get the post. Do we really have to dwell on his views of class priviledge to know he isn’t worthy of being on the Supreme Court?
Better yet, consider George W. Bush. Got into the best colleges in the country on “legacy” affirmative action. Failed to find oil in Texas, but was consistently bailed out by his father’s lobbyists and friends. Used Daddy’s influence to ram through an eminent domain ruling, so that the Rangers could build the ballpark in Arlington. Became president despite losing the popular vote through the influence of Daddy’s lawyers and Daddy’s Supreme Court nominees.
What the hell?
Jay, you can take any statistical distribution and divide it into percentiles. Where did you come up with the notion that you can’t divide the distribution of wealth by percentile?
My question was regading net worth, not income.
Do you think he’s in the Top 20 percent? Top 10? Top 5?
Or would you rather duck the question with nonsensical arguments?
Former Third Circuit Judge Timothy Lewis (a black Clinton appointee who says he is appropriately on the far left of the panel of testfying judges, is openly and unapologetically pro-choice ) just testified about Judge Alito’s intellectual honesty I cannot recall one instance when Judge alito displayed anything remotely approaching an ideological bent.
Judge Lewis says he is here to testify out of my own sense of justice and fairness.
randy, Peter Kirsanow, Commissioner, U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, is now also testifying to Judge Alito’s “intellectual honesty” and that he is well within the mainstream with respect to his decisions on civil rights.
Let’s be specific: wanting to keep women and minorities out of Princeton does, in fact, illustrate a desired to prevent achievement by others. Yes.
So opposing coeducation and quotas equates to the desire to prevent the achievement of others?
Hedley,
I wish I could have seen this -
“Perhaps it was Judge Aldisert’s resume –a campaign worker for Jack Kennedy in West Virginia, an LBJ appointee supported by Bobby Kennedy when RFK was senator from New York– that prompted Teddy to flee, or the patient, sincere, steady rumble of a barely concealed outrage from across the long panel of judges at the treatment their obviously deeply respected colleague had received at the hands of the Senate Democrats that routed Schumer, Durbin and even Leahy. But whatever the reason, all that blather about judicial independence and ethics melted away in the rain of approval from Judge Alito’s robed colleagues.”
The argument against quotas is not the same as trying to prevent entrance by everyone from a particular group. It is an argument against admiting people solely based on race.
As far as a group being against coeducation equating to their desire to see women fail, I wonder if you are against all single-gender educational facilities?
“How Many Dems Could Be Confirmed?”:
Not Ted Kennedy: for obvious reasons.
Not Joe Biden: he has a plagiarism problem.
Not Dianne Feinstein: she’s had a Guatemalan houskeeper issue, was fined $190,000 in 1992 for failing to properly report $3.5 million in campaign expenditures, and her husband runs a company that scored a $600 million Iraq war contract in 2003. Imagine what the Dems would do with this last one.
Not Charles Schumer: two of the people under his employ at the DSCC are currently being investigated for illegally obtaining Michael Steele’s credit report last year. In 1983, Schumer narrowly escaped indictment for misusing state funds in his 1980 Congressional race. The U.S. Attorney in the case, Raymond J. Dearie, actually recommended that Schumer be indicted, but the Reagan Justice Department turned down the request citing “lack of jurisdiction.”
Not Dick Durbin: he would never get around his pro-life past. Durbin is on the record in the 1980’s saying that he “believed that Roe v. Wade was incorrectly decided” and that “the right to an abortion is not guaranteed in the U.S. Constitution.
Or would you rather duck the question with nonsensical arguments?
The question was stupid as it means nothing when considering Oliver’s smear has Alito being some rich priviledged kid when in fact he was a middle class guy who made good. Does the fact that he has a net worth of $1.7 million now mean he was never middle class? But go ahead and keep trying to change the subject.
Let s be specific: wanting to keep women and minorities out of Princeton does, in fact, illustrate a desired to prevent achievement by others. Yes.
Yeah well, when you guys tell Grand Wizard Byrd to take a hike, I’ll take seriously your ‘concerns’ about Alito’s membership in some college organization.
Pathetic.
Are you clowning on purpose?
Within the same topic you post this:
(when, in fact, I didn’t change the subject at all–I asked a question, and then repeated the question because you’re apparently too mathematically illiterate to answer it.) And then you immediately posted this:
So which is it, Jay? Is changing the subject OK or not?
But since you bring up Mr. Byrd, I should note that even though he’s almost 90, he seems to be able to remember his Klan days well enough to repent of them.
Mr. Alito’s memory seems somewhat less reliable.
There’s a big difference between being rich and working to keep other people from climbing up (Alito, Bush, etc.) and being rich while working to keep the avenues of wealth creation open to people (John Edwards). I certainly respect John Edwards and Bill Clinton for earning their wealth from basically nothing moreso than those who have been handed it (George Bush, Ted Kennedy). But its also important what you do with it once you get it.
You’re right. The Democrats are working to help K12 students to choose the best school possible…oh wait…never mind.
There s a big difference between being rich and working to keep other people from climbing up (Alito, Bush, etc.) and being rich while working to keep the avenues of wealth creation open to people (John Edwards).
Stop it Oliver. I’m starting to get weepy.
Please spell out for us the ways Judge Alito is preventing you from climbing up.
But its also important what you do with it once you get it.
Actually, no, Oliver. Here in America, we are free to do what we want with our money. As one comedian put it, “We can wipe our asses with live rabbits, and throw ‘em out the window.”
The “obligation” to do neat things with our wealth exists only in the minds of leftists, who have gone from being socially concerned to being redistributionist, socialist wannabes.
He s a liar.
The man will say anything to get the post.
Do we really have to dwell on his views of class priviledge to know he isn t worthy of being on the Supreme Court?
Three unsupported, undocumented statements from a leftist.
With enemies like this, Alito is a shoo – in.
Look at it this way: Every time a Democrat picks on Alito, another Independent votes for a Republican.
Good luck in November.
I never said that Frank, but when I did, I was basing it on Alito not remembering doing things but knowing why he did them.
and being rich while working to keep the avenues of wealth creation open to people (John Edwards)
Have you lost your mind?
Edwards is an ambulance chaser! He destroyed small businesses that were TRYING to help people (doctors). He destroyed them because they had bad outcomes, not because anyone did anything wrong.
Edwards was helping trial lawyers get rich playing “hospital roulette”, all the while taking outrageous fees away from the families of people who had devastating medical probelms.
You should be ashamed at this revisionism OW
Do you have some specific examples in mind? Or are you just Democrat-bashing again?
Who are the doctors that Edwards “destroyed”?
” During his 20 years of suing doctors and hospitals, he pioneered the art of blaming psychiatrists for patients who commit suicide and blaming doctors for delivering babies with cerebral palsy, according to doctors, fellow lawyers and legal observers who followed Mr. Edwards’ career in North Carolina.
“The John Edwards we know crushed [obstetrics, gynecology] and neurosurgery in North Carolina,” said Dr. Craig VanDerVeer, a Charlotte neurosurgeon. “As a result, thousands of patients lost their health care.”
And before you start bashing Dr VanDerVeer, lets all remember that you are a limosine liberal living in ventura, Ca who knows virtually nothing about medicine and less about North Carolina, while the good Doctor is a practicing neurosurgeon who lives there.
Unfortunately you lefties believe everyone’s opinion carries equal weight, which of course is ridiculous. Opinions are like a**holes, everyone’s got one……
“I don t have, nor does there exist, a list of doctors run out of business by edwards”
Thank you. Drive Through.
That’s a nice article (however unsourced), Peedro, but you didn’t answer the question.
Who are the doctors that Edwards destroyed?
Let me count the ways…
I don’t live in Ventura or California
My sister is a doctor and my mother is a pharmacist
I was born in North Carolina
And you didn’t answer the question.
Never mind, I found it:
http://www.washtimes.com/national/20040816-011234-1949r.htm
Gee, wonder why you didn’t post the link to the Moonie Times. Maybe because you knew it was lies and you didn’t want to be called out on them?
Wow, I have a father and mother who are democrats….one of my cousins won a nobel prize, I once visited Helsinki…..
I don’t have, nor does there exist, a list of doctors run out of business by edwards. The Wash Times article nicely describes the situation that Edwards and his ilk have put that state into.
My point is made….I am not interested in another one of your puerile attempts at blocking a point by constantly demanding some other piece of information.
The American people clearly recognized the problem, and adequately addressed it.
If you want to spend time rationalizing the exorbinant fees and the chilling effect of frivolous lawsuits…be my guest.
Other?
No, I was just asking for the information you only hinted at before:
You have responded adequately by admitting that you made it up.
Stop it, fastcheck and Quaker. The story of the effects of John Edwards’ lawsuits on the practice of medicine in North Carolina have appeared in print many a time.
No has ever come forward to refute those stories, in fact, I have never heard of any one demanding proof, except here.
My money’s on VanDerVeer.`
And it’s no coincidence that all of those stories are preciously worded, like this:
See how deceptive that is? They don’t say: “John Edwards put a doctor out of business.” They say: “Lawsuits such as the ones John Edward won…” and then they let a trade association jack them up into a crisis. (Suddenly, conservatives trust the AMA?)
Why do they do it? So people like peedro will read carelessly and pass the word along: “John Edwards destroyed doctors and caused a crisis.”
You have problems with the way the American legal system works? OK by me. But it’s ridiculous to pin the blame for all of its problems on one guy.
Good. Then you’re learning something.
Like I said, you want to stand up for trial lawyers, be my guest. But why show some stones and come right out and say it, make an argument.
Instead you hide behind the goal line, which is constantly moving.
No, what you said was: “John Edwards destroyed doctors.” And you made that up.
A neurosurgeon practicing in North Carolina says “The John Edwards we know crushed [obstetrics, gynecology] and neurosurgery in North Carolina,
Point,Set, Match.
Go to sleep and dream more revisionist history cracker, please. You are embarassing yourself more than the democrats on the senate judiciary committee…..
What are you smokin’ peed’?
Still nothing to back up your made up “fact”?
Oh, I forgot:
Forget about a list. I’d settle for just one name.
Not really on topic, but just to pop the bs about trial lawyers being out of control:
From the National Center for State Courts:
Personal injury and other tort filings, when controlled for population growth, have declined nationally by 8 percent since 1975, and have been falling steadily in real numbers since 1996. (meaning that for the last ten years the numbers have been falling regardless of population growth, making the “crisis” even more absurd than before)
In Texas tort filings fell 37 percent between 1990 and 2000.
In California filings have plummeted 45 percent over the past decade (so much for blaming liberals).
From the federal government’s own Bureau of Justice Statistics:
In 2001, juries voted against plaintiffs in 75 percent of all medical malpractice trials.
Fun facts about the supposed $200 billion drag on the economy from what can collectively be called “ambulance chasers:”
The cost estimate comes from the insurance-industry consulting firm Tillinghast-Towers Perrin (TTP), which includes in its definition of the “tort system” insurance company administrative costs and overhead and the salaries of highly paid insurance company CEOs (in other words, anything and everything the insurance industry wants to toss in to pad the numbers).
————–
As for Alito, 1.7 (or 2.1 according to some sites, oeven 1.6 according to others) million may not be “wealthy” in the Bush/Cheney sense (does Alito have anymore relatives waiting to take a dirt nap and kick him some stock?), but it definitely is way above middle class.
Bill,
Both California and Texas are examples of states with caps on noneconomic damages in malpractice suits. Your evidence demonstrates that medical malpractice reform helps to keep insurance rates lower.
Additionally, your “8 percent” statistic is a nation-wide average based on the number of filings, so individual states can vary a great deal. And states that don’t cap damages see some very high jury awards, even if there are fewer filings, which lead to higher insurance costs for everyone in the state.
http://pn.psychiatryonline.org/cgi/content/full/38/9/25
Soaring Liability Premiums Force Practice Changes (May 2, 2003)
http://wwwc.house.gov/smbiz/hearings/databaseDrivenHearingsSystem/displayTestimony.asp?hearingIdDateFormat=050217&testimonyId=247
AMA testimony in the House of Representatives (Feb 17, 2005)
Quaker:
So, what you’re saying is that Sen. Edwards ran a multi – million political campaign, and was challenged that he personally chased obstetricians and neurologists out of the stae of North Carolina, and no one challenged this statement throughout the campaign, including you Dem / Libs, and now you’re doing evidence
Fuhgeddaboudit!
Wow Bill, a huge post supporting the argument that lawyers are just protecting the little guy…..written by a bunch of lawyers
Why do you even waste my time.
That’s not even up to your standards, Frank.
If you can’t remember anyone calling bullshit on that…well, bullshit, you’re really doing yourself a favor by coming here. You really ought to keep reading something other than whatever fevered rants have kept you so misinformed.
Still waiting for those names.