Greg Abbott and the $10 million lawsuit (2007, interest, starting)

[BigDGeek]

Originally Posted by TexasHorseLady

Not pro-choice, perhaps. But they will realize, sooner or later, if the Republicans don't get their act together and call a cease fire, that abortion is NOT the only weapon in the war on women (and many of them have realized that in the last few weeks who didn't realize it before). I used to deny there was a war on women, but there comes a point when even the most deliberately self-blinded person has to see the light of the train bearing down on them.

Nothing I would love more than to see the Republicans, heck, to see BOTH parties, give us sane, intelligent, non-extremist candidates to choose between. (BOY, would it be great to vote for the greater of two goods rather than for the lesser of two evils, for a change!) Greg Abbott absolutely does not fall into that category.

Great post...couldn't have said it better.

[Cathy4017]

Originally Posted by TexasHorseLady

..........

Nothing I would love more than to see the Republicans, heck, to see BOTH parties, give us sane, intelligent, non-extremist candidates to choose between. (BOY, would it be great to vote for the greater of two goods rather than for the lesser of two evils, for a change!) Greg Abbott absolutely does not fall into that category.

Yep. It would be nice, but probably won't happen. We've (IMO) had the extremists for so long on all levels that we're used to having to vote for the lesser of the evils.

I've been a registered Republican (or occasional Independent) all of my voting life, but I have really had to hold my voting nose big time at all levels since Reagan left office.

[TexasHorseLady]

My longtime desire is to see "None of the Above" as a choice in ALL ballots, city, county, state, national. If None of the Above won, everyone would have to go away and come back with better choices for us. My theory is that None of the Above would only have to win once or twice for the message to be received and for better candidates to start showing up first time around. And if None of the Above didn't win, but had a substantial part of the vote, coming in second or third, the winner would have to know that that many people voted not for the other guy, but against them, and might learn a little humility. (Naaah, that last would never happen, but it's a nice idea!)

Hmmm, how about None of the Above's votes are subtracted from the total of every candidate and what's left is what they got?

[Bily Lovec]

so you're saying he introduced tort reform BEFORE his accident or decades later ?

you're coming across as one of the many pro-obama shills that flooded this forum before the presidental elections and disappeared minutes after the election.

[TexasHorseLady]

He introduced it after he got his $10,000,000.

[Catscradle]

Abbott's spokesman has finally come forward to give some details (see the Austin American-Statesman) on the $10 million lawsuit Abbott filed against the owner of a tree that fell on him when he was out jogging.

Abbott's spokesman has admitted that Abbott has already cashed in $5 million from the tree owner/tree trimmer he sued, with $5 million still left to be paid over Abbott's lifetime.

Abbott's spokesman claimed that Abbott is not a hypocrite because if other people are out jogging and trees fall on them, they too can sue the property owner for that falling tree. But Abbott was instrumental in getting damage awards capped at $750K.

As Abbott's salary is currently $150K + a vast array of financial perks of office + he claims to have well over $25 million to run for office, why should he continue to be bleeding the tree owner/tree trimmer dry? Shouldn't he be more self-reliant and financially independent and, if he wants to be governor, tell the tree owner they can leave it at $5 million (which is still $4,250,000 more than a Texas jogger today would get if a tree fell on him/her - due to Abbott's capping awards?).

[lonestar2007]

Originally Posted by Catscradle

Abbott's spokesman has finally come forward to give some details (see the Austin American-Statesman) on the $10 million lawsuit Abbott filed against the owner of a tree that fell on him when he was out jogging.

Abbott's spokesman has admitted that Abbott has already cashed in $5 million from the tree owner/tree trimmer he sued, with $5 million still left to be paid over Abbott's lifetime.

Abbott's spokesman claimed that Abbott is not a hypocrite because if other people are out jogging and trees fall on them, they too can sue the property owner for that falling tree. But Abbott was instrumental in getting damage awards capped at $750K.

As Abbott's salary is currently $150K + a vast array of financial perks of office + he claims to have well over $25 million to run for office, why should he continue to be bleeding the tree owner/tree trimmer dry? Shouldn't he be more self-reliant and financially independent and, if he wants to be governor, tell the tree owner they can leave it at $5 million (which is still $4,250,000 more than a Texas jogger today would get if a tree fell on him/her - due to Abbott's capping awards?).

Refresh my memory, but didn't you start a thread regarding this very same subject only a couple of weeks ago? How many threads do you think is necessary for this same topic?

[RonnieinDallas]

If he had any integrity at all, he would not only halt payments, but also return the $5 million he's already received from suing the tree and the tree inspector. Of course he doesn't have integrity, so I'm sure he'll keep enjoying the money. Complete hypocrisy!

[Catscradle]

Originally Posted by lonestar2007

Refresh my memory, but didn't you start a thread regarding this very same subject only a couple of weeks ago? How many threads do you think is necessary for this same topic?

I do believe that, as this man wants to be governor, and apparently is sure he will be, Texans on city-data should be examining in some detail all issues connected with this man's personal ethics and history.

This is a man who is disabled, who has taken advantage of that fact financially (lawsuits he denies to others) and through the ADA and affirmative action (thank you, Bush family) to gain a cushy position, who has flaunted the 'pity card' when announcing his candidacy and sued the federal government to prevent others from having the access he has been granted. He claimed in the Austin American-Statesman interview that, in his way, he DOES help the disabled because when a big VIP like himself needs something, he gets doors opened for him (literally and figuratively) so other wheelchair users can get through those doors.. if he leaves them ajar!

[lonestar2007]

Your stance on this issue is understood by all. My question is, why not keep it in the original thread since it is a continuation of such? Starting numerous threads on the same topic is distracting and serves no purpose. It would be more suitable being contained within one thread and easier for anyone on C-D who is interested in this particular issue.