When the DLC was founded in 1985, Edwards was a long way away fighting for girl with CP.

[IndyOp]

The DLC was founded in 1985. The past chairs include former President Bill Clinton, former Governor Tom Vilsack of Iowa, Sen. Evan Bayh of Indiana, Sen. Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut, former Rep. Dave McCurdy of Oklahoma, former Sen. John Breaux of Louisiana, former Sen. Sam Nunn of Georgia, former Sen. Charles Robb of Virginia, and former House Democratic Leader Richard Gephardt of Missouri. Link -> About the DLC

In 1985, Edwards represented a five-year-old child born with cerebral palsy whose doctor did not choose to perform an immediate Caesarian delivery when a fetal monitor showed she was in distress. Edwards won a $6.5 million verdict for his client, but five weeks later, the presiding judge sustained the verdict but overturned the award on grounds that it was "excessive" and that it appeared "to have been given under the influence of passion and prejudice," adding that in his opinion "the evidence was insufficient to support the verdict." He offered the plaintiffs half of the jury's award, but the child's family appealed the case and settled for $4.25 million. Winning this case established the North Carolina precedent of physician and hospital liability for failing to determine if the patient understood risks of a particular procedure. Link -> Wikipedia on John Edwards

I read "Four Trials" a few weeks ago and I can vouch for the accuracy of the Wikipedia article.

Updated with links to DLC website and Wiki.

[itsrobert]

1. Take that you brain dead Edwards bashers and STFU!

STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!
STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!
STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!
STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!
STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!
STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!
STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!
STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!
STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!
STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!
STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!
STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!
STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!
STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!
STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!
STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!
STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!
STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!
STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!
STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!
STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!
STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!STFU!

[IndyOp]

4. Hatred never ceases by hatred, but by love alone it is healed.

This is an ancient and eternal law.

IMO, everyone is welcome to continue talking and we all need to work to be accurate in what we say and to speak with respect about all of our candidates.

[ProSense]

2. Then he went to the Senate and

voted against this bill.

[IndyOp]

3. The truth about Edwards' very honorable and progressive Senate record

The truth about Edwards' very honorable and progressive Senate record.

I am not going to judge anyone -- not Edwards or Obama or Clinton or Kucinich -- based on one vote, one issue, or one mistake. They've all made numerous mistakes. I will do my best to judge based on their overall record.

[ProSense]

5. That post is inaccurate and includes false accusations. It's not one vote or position

more

I'm not convinced about Edward's authenticity.

[IndyOp]

11. I think that Hillary and Barack and John all have

a history of pandering to corporations. I think John Edwards is the man who is most likely to really confront the corporations -- the one who is most likely to respond to public demands that he do so.

[Pastiche423]

6. johnnyboy was a DLCer the whole time he was in the senate

So, I don't know what the hell you're trying to say. He is a Bildeberger, as well.

[IndyOp]

10. I am trying to say, I suppose, that Hillary, Barack, and John Edwards all have

a history of pandering to corporations. I think John Edwards is the man who is most likely to really confront the corporations -- the one who is most likely to respond to public demands that he do so.

Pastiche - I love your loyalty to Gore and I've enjoyed reading your posts in the past. If I read another post in which you refer to John Edwards as "johnnyboy" I will put you on ignore - you probably won't mind. I am opposed to the disrespectful references to any of the candidates.

[Pastiche423]

12. Maybe what you don't know about your candidate

is, that was his name in HS when I knew him. He also had other nick names, most of which dealt w/his arrogance.

It will be just fine w/me if you put me on ignore. Actually, I'd rather that you do.

I do not like poseurs, nor do I want one in our White House. So I will keep on telling it like it is, here in reality.

And that reality is that johnnyboy only got "liberal" when he decided to run for president again. His senate voting record sucked. His ADA rating was 60%.

But the one I find the most heinous, is his co-sponsorship of the genocide in Iraq. I believe the invasion/occupation was and is horrible and deadly wrong. I have to suppose you feel differently since you ignore what he did.

Buh bye.

[frazzled]

7. No, but in 2000 he was a founder of the Senate arm of the DLC (New Democrat Coalition)

The New Democrat Coalition is an organization within the United States Congress. It is made up of 20 Democratic Senate members and 44 Democratic members of the House of Representatives who claim moderate and pro-business stances.
The group was founded in 1997 by Representatives Cal Dooley (California), Jim Moran (Virginia) and Tim Roemer (Indiana) as a congressional affiliate of the avowedly centrist Democratic Leadership Council, ...

The Senate New Democrats were founded in 2000 by Senators Evan Bayh (Indiana), John Breaux (Louisiana), John Edwards (North Carolina), Bob Graham (Florida), Bob Kerrey (Nebraska), Mary Landrieu (Louisiana), Joe Lieberman (Connecticut), Blanche Lincoln (Arkansas), and Chuck Robb (Virginia).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Democrat_Coalition

In 2004, he was still a member of this group. Funny how Elizabeth said he was never a member of the DLC.

[Individualist]

13. ...and in 2002 co-sponsored fellow DLCer, Liebershit's S.J.RES.46, the Iraq War Resolution

[loyalsister]

8. It's lawsuits like those

that make some people with disabilities cringe.
The implication is that some apology is owed for "how we are" as opposed to accepting us as we are without trying to make a big deal out of our differences.

Only "normal" people think that it is a tragedy to exist.

[IndyOp]

9. I think I understand what you are saying. The case sets an important precedent for everyone.

Doctors in North Carolina were essentially above the law prior to that case - doctors, hospitals that had been sued before had paid very small damages or none at all. This means that if someone in North Carolina went in for surgery or chemotherapy for cancer or any other condition and the doctor willfully disregarded standard, professional medical practice as a result of his personal preference to avoid a certain procedure then that person is just out of luck if they are badly hurt.

In this girl's case, her parents had been told in advance by a young doctor at the hospital that she would have to be delivered by c-section well before labor started because she was going to be born feet first. The older doctor who was on duty when the baby was delivered didn't believe in c-sections - ever. The heart monitor on the mother was showing mild distress and then extreme distress for a long, long time (over an hour) before the mother was eventually wheeled into the OR for a c-section. The nurse kept calling the doctor's attention to the problem and the doctor kept saying it was fine, just fine - he didn't see a problem. It took nearly an hour to get the baby to breathe after she was born. At trial, a doctor said that 99% of ob-gyn's would have delivered that baby by c-section about an hour before it was actually delivered. The baby nearly died. This wasn't a case in which everything seemed fine and everyone did the best they could and the baby had CP. This was a case in which the doctor was very, very clearly negligent.

Again, the case makes a difference for all patients --

[loyalsister]

14. I see your point

I believe that they should be held accountable. But the people who were wronged were the parents not the person who has CP. Unless they have been taught to crave the experience of normality that is.
I see a lack of an understanding of how people with disabilities have developed a sense of pride in who we are. We are constantly fighting the bigotry that assumes our existance must be a horror.
It's a smack in the face it is to say it is an accomplishment to have made someone apologize for making us the way we are.

It's not so much the fact of it. It is noting it as a grand accomplishment that is troublesome.

[IndyOp]

15. We are constantly fighting the bigotry that assumes our existance must be a horror.

Yep. I have a friend who is blind. She leads an active life and is involved in local politics and travels to peace rallies and other social justice events around the country. Sadly, her mother and siblings don't see her for who she is -- they seem to think she sits alone all day in silence. She is mostly online all day talking politics and sending emails and making phone calls and, as a good progressive, I am glad she is on our side. :D

I suppose that I think that people who assume that someone with a disability must lead a life filled with horror must look at the disability and lack the confidence that they themselves could adapt and thrive if they became disabled. Also, being different in any way is seen by many people as terror and I think that is a self-confidence issue, too.

Thanks for your replies. :hi:

[midlife_mo_Jo]

16. My son deserves an apology from his birth mother

for all the damn alcohol she drank while pregnant, but I don't plan on tracking her down to extract one.

This child should not have to endure the problems he endures.