Reply With Quote
I question your veracity here, bouties.
If you were to here that the feds were taking over the assets of Exxon, Mobil, etc, would you speak against it?
CC is the voice of his generation. He knows that they behave poorly but excuses it using the 'he did it too' rationale.
I question your veracity here, bouties.
If you were to here that the feds were taking over the assets of Exxon, Mobil, etc, would you speak against it?
FWIW, there's a guy I think you'll love in the Spurs section, in the Clinton thread
at this point I think boutons would break the pompons if subsidies stopped flowing to the oilcos...
I will too if you can find and stop some actual subsidies.
What subsidies are you speaking of?
Are you using the actual definition, or the liberal definition?
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/subsidy
sub·si·dy
noun \ˈsəb-sə-dē, -zə-\
: money that is paid usually by a government to keep the price of a product or service low or to help a business or organization to continue to function
Last edited by Wild Cobra; 02-27-2014 at 10:24 PM.
America's Most Obvious Tax Reform Idea: Kill the Oil and Gas Subsidies
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/...sidies/274121/
That doesn't matter. No jury would award this guy damages for a nuisance when he's CEO of a company that promotes, develops, and encourages the same nuisance activity. Lawsuits are less about the viability of claims than they are how jurors feel about the parties. This guy looks like a huge hypocrite. You honestly cannot be this ing stupid.
I don't think that part matters so much as stopping the eyesores and traffic noise. Do you? You know as much as anyone, that lawyers will put as much stuff in a lawsuit as they can.
Quite often that is true, hence the story after all this time. Someone it trying to taint the jury pool.
Your opinion. Once you are in the jury and presented with the facts, that at ude can change.
Please, stop looking in a mirror.
None of us know all the facts, we only see what is presented in the media. I will lay odds that Armey and Tillerson, because of their experience of such matters already, have their "facts" do ents. If they actually have the water company and city council on written record, it will be hard for a jury to not do the right thing.
Now you can sit there and pretend all you want that you know how such a trial will end. Statistics do not make facts, and every now and then, you have people like me who are well paid that get on juries, that don't try to get out of it. Too many times, you end up with juries that don't know how to get out of jury duty, or aren't working and have no excuse. This is the type of jury you are relying on, isn't it?
My God... two juries ago, we had a really messed up case, and we had jurors who wanted to award a women money just because "the company could afford it." Not for any other reason, and it was clear she had no real case and no proof of damages.
You are right.
Lib s in juries often rule the wrong way.
vy65. I just have to ask.
You effectively admitted the justice system is corrupted by sentiment.
Do you like being part of such a system?
May it rest in peace.
killer thread. thanks again.
He just said that no jury would award the er anything. You are a moron.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions