Damn, that’s some scary stuff. The justice system freaks me out sometimes, though. How is facing “as many as 70 years in prison” going to make up for what the people who are now ill are going through – or for the damage don that nobody knows about yet? Scary and sad.

Dang cold, you KNOW it’s those damn activist judges…. HAHAHAHAHA

Wís convoluted summation of asbestos law suits “And people need to understand, when they go into bankruptcy, that’s a legal term, but people are losing jobs, which is a real human tragedy. That’s what these lawsuits are causing.” Always lookin out for the little guy.

There are several issues with “frivolous asbestos” suits. One is the effort of some plaintiffs to collect damages before they suffer any symptoms of asbestos-related disease, on the basis of their claimed exposure to asbestos. Such claims divert resources from those who are dying from asbestosis, as the only funds available are the assets of now-bankrupt companies — and all of those assets, less the companies’ debts, have been dedicated to asbestos claims.

Another is the effort of plaintiffs to bring into court anyone who had any participation in the distribution of asbestos. If you owned a truck that carried sealed asbestos insulation, it isn’t immediately obvious that you won’t have to defend yourself.

And note that the case cited here was brought by the Department of Justice, which is ultimately governed by — George Bush.

Blurb, you’re a computer guy, so you know some logic. How does the proposition “some asbestos suits are non-frivolous” become “all asbestos suits are non-frivolous”?

Time to short Grace.

So this is where Saddam was hiding those weapons of mass destruction.

Speaking of Travolta, (who I can’t stand, but this isn’t about me) on Saturday while we were stomping around Manhattan there were these signs hanging up that read something about “Being Cool.” I think it’s an advertisement for a new movie (or something). Anyway, there was this couple standing there just staring at the posters. There were four posters, the last one was of Travolta. And I couldn’t figure out why they were standing there. They looked fairly normal. Anyway, after a bit, the guy takes his entire cup of hot Starbucks coffee and POURS it down the front of Travolta’s face.

It was brilliant.

And I’m trying hard to bring this back to the topic at hand and can not.

Sorry.

That is so insane, I feel so terrible for those people. I hope that the “trial lawyers who have ruined this country” stick it where it hurts to those responsible.

Nobody,

You’ve made some good points and a compelling argument overall. I’m, at least, relieved that you have acknowledged that legitimate asbestos claims do exist and have yet to be dealt with in a fair and equitable manner. I hope there are more that think that way. However, regarding the legislation that has been tabled, have adequate safe guards been put in place to ensure that legitimate claims don’t get dismissed with the so called “frivolous” ones? If so, what are they? How do they work? Will it fall under the jurisdiction of state judges or federal judges and how will the criteria in making rulings work? Who cooked it up and who’s interests are they representing? Will this speed up the claims process AND KEEP IT FAIR or slow it down to the point where sick people have to wait years for what they deserve and perhaps die in the process? This legislation is going to have to be complex in order to be fair and just and, if I’m not mistaken they’ve been working on it for years with limited success. No one likes bogus lawsuits, including myself but I think the administration needs to be more selective on what they set their cross hairs on. These aren’t people faking whiplash after a fender bender. Is it possible that he’s over simplified this matter and doesn’t fully understand the gravity of asbestos poisoning and that people have died? Coining the term “frivolous asbestos claims” and linking it with “holding back the american economy” isn’t going to go over without a response. It certainly doesn’t resemble the “kinder gentler america” that his father espoused. I’m a computer guy too. Hows that for logic? Any legislation that causes even ONE legitimate claim to be non-chalantly dismissed will be doomed as a failed exercise. He had better tread carefully on this one although his track record to date doesn’t give me optimism.

Oh wow, I hadn’t even heard of this until you posted it, and I have an aunt and uncle that live in Libby, Montana. Eeesh.

Nobody,

W and the GOP talked up EVIL trial lawyers plenty in the campaign. John Edwards was grouped into the EVIL. I’m just pointing out that not all asbestos cases are frivolous, and W is a nutjob for bringing that up in his state of the union address.

The impact of lawsuits on the GNP is miniscule. To suggest that frivolous lawsuits are the cause of pain and suffering in the face of Libby, makes you look, well, silly.

2.2% my ass. Prove that number. Searching yields a bunch of righty sites. Corporate welfare costs us WAY more than lawsuits.

I like this site and an open political forum, but the extreme hatred you have for Bush really discredits your arguments. If you would give GWB some credit for something sometime (because he does deserve it) that would show you to be a more thoughtful political mind. Case in point, watching the SOTU Address… you could barely even listen to him. Every thought was an attack on him, warranted or not. Blind rage is not a point of view. It’s just blind.