R-67 Update: Washington State Trial Lawyers Threaten To Sue Campaign, Drop ACORN From Friends List
Wow where to start on this one. The news is a few weeks old however I thought it would be helpfull to continue to chronicle the undemocratic antics of the Democrat left.
First it seems like the Democrat trial lawyers in Washington state have an extremely thin skin. Because the "NO on R-67" folks have been running ads here in Washington showing a mock lawfirm called "Sooth Settle and Kashin." GREAT ads by the way.
Well the trial lawyers sent a letter to the state bar with copies to the Supreme Court. Saying:
These ads are an affront to all lawyers. They are causing irreparable damage to the efforts of the WSBA to instill public confidence in the bar. They are slanderous, uncivil, and reckless.
Ooops, yah that's right, some campaign ads are doing irreparable damage to the state bar assoc and to trial lawyers. Heck, the public might even start making lawyer jokes. Ugh... some things just write themselves.
It also seems like the "Yes on R-67" crowd is getting a little afraid of more of their friends. The hyper-liberal felonious group ACORN had been an endorser of the measure. Well it seems that ACORN was just a little too icky for the Washington State Democrat Trial Lawyers.
According to a Seattle Times editorial writer:
The group was among endorsers in a July 11 press release from the campaign and added to the campaign's list of
backers.
About two weeks later, ACORN workers were charged in what is said to be the largest voter fraud case in state history. Approve 67 spokeswoman Sue Evans said:We did remove them from the list after we learned about the investigation.
It is also important to note that we have more than 35-plus organizations (not including individuals and local Democratic leg districts,
and others etc.) that are on board with the Approve 67 campaign.
Wow, first you have the icky trial lawyers forcing the Washington Democrats to place a measure on the ballot that will drive up insurance rates for all Washingtonians. Then you have the Democrat trial lawyers threatening to sue because some TV ads are quite funny and more truthful than they would like to admit. THEN you have the Democrat trial lawyers trying to distance themselves from the felonious group ACORN.
Oh and they all want US to vote in favor of R-67. Oh yah, like that is a coalition I can trust.
Posts
19 comments:
The ads are great. I believe they pulled the soothe, settle, and kashen ad and replaced it with some dad and his kids going to school.
Its too bad really, the only more entertaining thing on "free TV" is old re-runs of Who's the Boss, and MAMA'S FAMILY.
Coyote, you are a WA boy, yes?
Show me ONE fraudulent ACORN voter.
Yes I am from WA.
Anon2:22,
You need to read and comprehend. OK? Although your moronic attempt at rebuttal does provide some comic relief.
Here is a tip. Click on some of the links I provided in the story. You know those links about the felonious organization ACORN.
Yip Yip
Ah, you mean that link where it says that ACORN had a couple bad temps who tried to defraud the organization and get paid for work they didn't do? Yep. That's all ACORN's fault. It appears to me that ACORN is taking full responsibility for the actions of their temps which, in my opinion, is very good for them.
Now, how about some of YOU read what the Washington State Insurance Commissioner has to say: R67 won't provide for frivolous lawsuits (lining the pockets of the evil evil EVIL trial lawyers!), it won't raise insurance rates and, in fact, will REDUCE the insurance rates of companies that treat their insurees fairly.
The Reject R-67 people are trying to play upon the fears and ignorance of its voters. Read R-67, not what some spiffy commercial tells you to think.
Anon,
Uh, no I mean the link that says that ACORN had problems also in: Wisconsin, Texas,Florida, New Mexico and Colorado.
Oh and I had just stopped at those states because I did not want to post to get to long.
Secondly, every source is saying that insurance prices will go up. Even the state's Office of Fiscal Management says that the state will end up paying higher insurance rates.
Don't tell me that any legislation pushed by the trial lawyers will result in lower prices for anything. That is an impossibility.
And yet, you can't name one single vote that was the result of the "felony" (as you put it) of the voter registration issue.
Oh, and the "every source" you mentioned? Interesting. Then why does the Washington State Insurance Commissioner say otherwise? Or is he not a part of your "every source"? Secondly, you said "the state will pay"? I thought the Reject R-67 folks say that they're trying to help families, not "the state". Perhaps you can get your argument in order before you attempt this further.
R-67 will ONLY help those that have had their *VALID* insurance claims denied. Invalid insurance claims (read: "frivolous lawsuits") will not be affected by this referendum.
If insurance claims go up, it's because it's being artificially lowered on the backs of innocent victims of the insurance industry.
But, then again, I guess who cares about those folks, right? The poor, innocent, fragile insurance companies are going to be harmed... *cry*
Honestly...
Isn't the Washington State Insurance Commissioner a political appointee?
Isn't R-67 a political issue?
The voter fraud issues (particularly in King County) are well documented. Your governor's unwillingness to deal with these issues is as well. The number of illegally voting felons in King County was found to be in the hundreds after the Gregoire-Rossi multiple recount.
You obviously know this your just counting on the undecided voters in this race not to learn it.
No a Democrat politician would not be part of my "every source." Neither would the Democrat legislature who put this measure on the ballot at the behest of the trial lawyers.
Nor would I trust the trial lawyers.
Any more questions?
Honestly.
yip yip
How about the law offices of Dewey, Cheatem & Howe?
If it means paying higher rates to force the corrupt Insurance companies to honor their obligations and payoff the legitmate insurance claims they said they would when you bought their insurance instead of immediately denying as a matter of policy, stonewalling and dragging you thru the courts for years to get your medical bills paid they THATS WHAT WE HAVE TO DO!!!
If your lawyer makes some money representing you then SO WHAT???
We need to make these crooked insurance companies PAY UP and HONOR the contract they made with you when you purchased their insurance.. Thats WHY they have poured MILLIONS of $$ into a DISINFORMATION campaign to defeat prop 67. Obviously you have been sucked right into it!!!
Funny these reblidiots keep droning on and on about ACORN but whenever you hit 'em over the head about R67 they just keep bringing up ACORN. There's a connection?
Danny Westneat, a columnist for the Seattle Times, reminded me of an incident that happened a few years ago.
A woman driving her car was hit by a seriously demented man trying to run his girlfriend down. She was severely injured.
Farmers Insurance said that it wasn't an accident because the man was intentionally trying to do his girlfriend harm. They denied her claim.
Of course, everyone went nuts, and Farmers came close to having their license pulled by the commissioner.
Under withering media attention and client outrage, they finally had to pay the claim.
It's on a commercial now featuring the Insurance Commissioner. The response from the No 67 side?
(This from Danny Westneat's column)
"Then the spin started. And insurance-backed group put out a new release saying the ad was a lie-that a well-meaning Farmers always intended to pay and was only held up by a "technical glitch with the law." Ambiguities in the law complicated delivery of her policy coverage, but once the facts were revealed, coverage was promptly provided".
Of course, an out an out lie.
The No on 67 group is counting on the gullibility of the general populace by using fear of increased rates and the image of slobbering lawyers ready to pounce on the Holy Insurance Companies.
Look, rates are going to go up no matter what happens. It's the nature of the beast. And don't forget, insurance companies get a lot of their business because of those slobbering lawyers.
Vote yes if you want to reign in a voracious corporate monster that doesn't give a damn about their
clients.
Well you just made my point.
The point is that the insurance company ended up paying up.
We have one of the strongest insurance commissioner positions in the nation.
Oh and who is putting a lot of money into the insurance commissioner's reelection campaign?
Trial lawyers.
Farmers most certainly did not pay promptly and fairly like all insurance companies claim they do. It took ten months, hiring attorneys, threats to pull Farmers license in the State of Washington. During that entire time, she was horrifically injured, incurring medical bills, unable to work and therefore unable to earn income.
The "Techincal glitch" in the law was only there because Farmer's made it up in an effort to avoid providing coverage. She had 2 million in coverage available, so it's no wonder they wanted to avoid paying since they probably knew they would end up paying the entire 2 million because she is severely disabled for life now.
Danny Westneat is right, they don't even think what they did is wrong and they would do it again.
You may not like trial lawyers, but it's all you have to protect you against the insurance industry when they pull stunts like this.
Currently, if they pull a stunt like this and you have to sue, in the end all you get, often after years of litigation, is what they should have paid in the first place. Having them actually pay your attorney fees or court costs is a rare occurrence, most of the time, you foot that bill yourself. That's hardly fair, and it provides no incentive for them to pay promptly.
The Point is not that they "ended up paying" the point is that they should have done it in the first damn place.
How much are the Insurance Companies paying Coyote to LIE about prop 67 which does everything to prevent consumers from being abused by Allstate and other crooked insurance companies??
This LAW was PASSED already by the WA state legislature .. It was the INSURANCE companies that put it on the ballot as a referendum NOT the trial lawyers as lying coyote claims!! Yip Yip your tail between your legs you mangy mutt because the voters of WA State are not as stupid as you want them to be!!
Heck,
Wow, apparently you are about as stupid as I would want you to be.
First of all, nice try on the whole "how much are the insurance campanies paying me" bit. However only a knumbskull asks a loaded question without knowing the answer.
So here is the deal knumbskull. They are (were) not paying me anything. I don't know if you noticed it or not but there are over two years worth of political opinions on this blog.
In the words of the immortal Bugs Bunny: What a maroon.
Secondly, Heckster, it was the trial lawyers who pushed the Democrat legislature to pass this legislation.
The trial lawyers wrote it, found a sycophant Democrat lawmaker to sponsor it and passed it with full support of the Democrats.
I mean are you really that dense?
How do you tell when someone is irrational over a subject? Well just read Hecksters comments.
Yip Yip
Coyote lies to cover his lies and I QUOTE:
"Wow, first you have the icky trial lawyers forcing the Washington Democrats to place a measure on the ballot that will drive up insurance rates for all Washingtonians."
THATS WHAT YOU SAID.
Its a LIE!
Anyway its water under the bridge there weren't enough naive voters in WA that swallowed your spew so Prop 67 Passed..
Hurrah for DEMOCRACY!
You continue your idiocy.
Ok, so I mischaracterized the way the trial lawyers worked with the Democrats to force that law on the people of Washington state.
I guess I should have said: The trial lawyers did not even want the people of Washington to VOTE on the measure.
Perhaps I was, in my head, giving them too much credit.
However that is far from being a lie (maroon). A lie is when you purposely attempt to mischaracterize a situation.
Kinda like what you are trying to pull of now.
Yip Yip
PS. you are driving your own blood pressure up. might want to back off the cereal of hate in the mornings.
Without R-67 in the U.K. it is a paradise for insurance companies. Washing machines fell from 30ft at Costco's U.K. injuring my wife she had a mild brain injury and fractured 3 of her vertebras, 4 and a half years later we are still fighting the case they are trying to kill us off through poverty.
Post a Comment