Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Dell sued for "bait and switch" and false promises

Last response: in Computer Brands
Share
Anonymous
February 26, 2005 11:50:40 PM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

Dell is involved in a class action suit for
"bait and switch", where a nurse claims Dell
switched parts and charged her for the more
expensive items, and for promising "easy credit"
for which no one qualifies and then charges
ridiculously high interest rates.

http://money.cnn.com/2005/02/22/technology/dell_lawsuit...

http://www.lerachlaw.com/lcsr-cgi-bin/mil?templ=feature...

*TimDaniels*
Anonymous
February 27, 2005 3:14:24 PM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

It seems someone did not read the credit terms, before purchasing item,
"buyers' remorse". And lawyers trying to make a buck from it. Hope federal
tort reform gets passed by the congress, so we can get rid of these
charlatans.

--

Rich/rerat

(RRR News) <message rule>
<<Previous Text Snipped to Save Bandwidth When Appropriate>>



"Timothy Daniels" <TDaniels@NoSpamDot.com> wrote in message
news:gK6dndSLI7EFzLzfRVn-rQ@comcast.com...
Dell is involved in a class action suit for
"bait and switch", where a nurse claims Dell
switched parts and charged her for the more
expensive items, and for promising "easy credit"
for which no one qualifies and then charges
ridiculously high interest rates.

http://money.cnn.com/2005/02/22/technology/dell_lawsuit...

http://www.lerachlaw.com/lcsr-cgi-bin/mil?templ=feature...

*TimDaniels*
Anonymous
February 28, 2005 1:45:13 AM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

Believe it or not there are companies that go over the line and need to be
hit with a stick called a law suit. It seems the fear of law suits is the
only thing that keeps some of these crooked companies in line. The
government sure doesn't have the resources or desire to pursue them so it's
left to the private sector to protect themselves. Lawyers are bounty
hunters of sorts. BTW, I hate lawyers but there are times that they are
useful. Some are sleazebags but that can be said of most professions.
There has to be at least a little threat of "let the company beware" to
maintain a balance otherwise it'll be open season on consumers.

"RRR_News" <nospam@isp.com> wrote in message
news:HPadnZZM5u_6nb_fRVn-ow@comcast.com...
> It seems someone did not read the credit terms, before purchasing item,
> "buyers' remorse". And lawyers trying to make a buck from it. Hope federal
> tort reform gets passed by the congress, so we can get rid of these
> charlatans.
>
> --
>
> Rich/rerat
>
> (RRR News) <message rule>
> <<Previous Text Snipped to Save Bandwidth When Appropriate>>
>
>
>
> "Timothy Daniels" <TDaniels@NoSpamDot.com> wrote in message
> news:gK6dndSLI7EFzLzfRVn-rQ@comcast.com...
> Dell is involved in a class action suit for
> "bait and switch", where a nurse claims Dell
> switched parts and charged her for the more
> expensive items, and for promising "easy credit"
> for which no one qualifies and then charges
> ridiculously high interest rates.
>
> http://money.cnn.com/2005/02/22/technology/dell_lawsuit...
>
> http://www.lerachlaw.com/lcsr-cgi-bin/mil?templ=feature...
>
> *TimDaniels*
>
>
Related resources
Can't find your answer ? Ask !
Anonymous
February 28, 2005 1:45:14 AM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

"Nascar12" wrote:
> There has to be at least a little threat of "let the company beware" to
> maintain a balance otherwise it'll be open season on consumers.


I agree.

*TimDaniels*
Anonymous
February 28, 2005 1:50:32 AM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

i agree that the buyer probably didn't read the credit terms to find
themselves with an unexpected rate... i always see that "for qualified
customers" in all of their advertisements that probably releases them of any
wrong doing... but i also believe in the court systems so let it take its
course and see what happens. the only tort reform that i think should be
done is to cap fees that lawyers are allowed to extract for class action
suits. i feel that there is a valuable public service that comes from class
actions suits which is to keep companies on the straight and narrow so that
they avoid such actions... but from a monetary perspective the only real
winners from class actions are the lawyers. i remember once receiving a
fifty cent check in an envelope with postage of at least half that amount
for the great 17" monitor class action suit.

"RRR_News" <nospam@isp.com> wrote in message
news:HPadnZZM5u_6nb_fRVn-ow@comcast.com...
> It seems someone did not read the credit terms, before purchasing item,
> "buyers' remorse". And lawyers trying to make a buck from it. Hope federal
> tort reform gets passed by the congress, so we can get rid of these
> charlatans.
>
> --
>
> Rich/rerat
>
> (RRR News) <message rule>
> <<Previous Text Snipped to Save Bandwidth When Appropriate>>
>
>
>
> "Timothy Daniels" <TDaniels@NoSpamDot.com> wrote in message
> news:gK6dndSLI7EFzLzfRVn-rQ@comcast.com...
> Dell is involved in a class action suit for
> "bait and switch", where a nurse claims Dell
> switched parts and charged her for the more
> expensive items, and for promising "easy credit"
> for which no one qualifies and then charges
> ridiculously high interest rates.
>
> http://money.cnn.com/2005/02/22/technology/dell_lawsuit...
>
> http://www.lerachlaw.com/lcsr-cgi-bin/mil?templ=feature...
>
> *TimDaniels*
>
>
Anonymous
February 28, 2005 4:58:35 AM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

Then there was the class action suit against Gateway brought by some
Philadelphia lawyers a number of years ago. Gateway advertised and stickered
many of its 486 computers as "Pentium Ready", meaning that a special Type 3 ZIF
socket Pentium OverDrive could be installed and run.

Micronics designed the motherboards used by Gateway, and the basis of the design
was a prototype Pentium OverDrive with an internal write-through cache, a more
conservative cache design. Then Intel changed the Pentium OverDrive, and the
final version had a write-BACK cache. When installed in a Gateway system, the
chip ran slower than slow, maybe about as fast as an IBM AT, and bus-mastering
devices like NICs and SCSI cards refused to work.

So the lawyers sued Gateway, and the settlement approved by the judge consisted
of megabucks for the lawyers and coupons to owners of Gateway 486 computers.
The coupon was good for $50 off on the purchase of a Pentium OverDrive processor
from Gateway, at its usual inflated prices !!! So, let's see. What does a
discount coupon for a processor I can't use in my system do for me? I wonder
how many people gleefully cashed in their coupons and bought Pentium OverDrives
from Gateway.

Intel eventually compensated by making available an "interposer", a little
socketed thingie installed between the Pentium OverDrive and the ZIF socket.
The sole purpose of the interposer was to raise a signal on the CPU to force its
cache to operate in the write-thru mode which was compatible with most ZIF
Socket 3 486 motherboards.

Needless to say, this was the least successful "OverDrive" CPU ever done by
Intel. The 486-DX4 OverDrive was OK, as were several Socket 5 Pentium
OverDrives and the Socket 8 Pentium Pro OverDrive. Finally Intel gave up on
OverDrives... Ben Myers

On Sun, 27 Feb 2005 22:50:32 GMT, "Christopher Muto" <muto@worldnet.att.net>
wrote:

>i agree that the buyer probably didn't read the credit terms to find
>themselves with an unexpected rate... i always see that "for qualified
>customers" in all of their advertisements that probably releases them of any
>wrong doing... but i also believe in the court systems so let it take its
>course and see what happens. the only tort reform that i think should be
>done is to cap fees that lawyers are allowed to extract for class action
>suits. i feel that there is a valuable public service that comes from class
>actions suits which is to keep companies on the straight and narrow so that
>they avoid such actions... but from a monetary perspective the only real
>winners from class actions are the lawyers. i remember once receiving a
>fifty cent check in an envelope with postage of at least half that amount
>for the great 17" monitor class action suit.
>
>"RRR_News" <nospam@isp.com> wrote in message
>news:HPadnZZM5u_6nb_fRVn-ow@comcast.com...
>> It seems someone did not read the credit terms, before purchasing item,
>> "buyers' remorse". And lawyers trying to make a buck from it. Hope federal
>> tort reform gets passed by the congress, so we can get rid of these
>> charlatans.
>>
>> --
>>
>> Rich/rerat
>>
>> (RRR News) <message rule>
>> <<Previous Text Snipped to Save Bandwidth When Appropriate>>
>>
>>
>>
>> "Timothy Daniels" <TDaniels@NoSpamDot.com> wrote in message
>> news:gK6dndSLI7EFzLzfRVn-rQ@comcast.com...
>> Dell is involved in a class action suit for
>> "bait and switch", where a nurse claims Dell
>> switched parts and charged her for the more
>> expensive items, and for promising "easy credit"
>> for which no one qualifies and then charges
>> ridiculously high interest rates.
>>
>> http://money.cnn.com/2005/02/22/technology/dell_lawsuit...
>>
>> http://www.lerachlaw.com/lcsr-cgi-bin/mil?templ=feature...
>>
>> *TimDaniels*
>>
>>
>
>
Anonymous
February 28, 2005 4:12:59 PM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

Timothy Daniels wrote:

> "Nascar12" wrote:
>
>> There has to be at least a little threat of "let the company beware" to
>> maintain a balance otherwise it'll be open season on consumers.
>
>
>
> I agree.
>
> *TimDaniels*

The only people who profit from class actions are the lawyers.

Since companies are going to be sued in class action, regardless of the
merits of the case, the threat of a class action is not a detriment.

If you don't believe that, witness the Vioxx lawsuits. The company
making Vioxx determined it might increase mortality and pulled it from
the market. Because of that, it is being sued. The companies making
similar drugs (Celebrex and Bextra) did not pull their product from the
market. They are not being sued. Doing the right thing provides no
protection from class action.

All class actions do is enrich lawyers and raise costs to everyone. The
cost of class actions is factored into the cost of everything you buy.
Anonymous
February 28, 2005 5:30:04 PM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

"Jerry Park" wrote:
> Timothy Daniels wrote:
>
>> "Nascar12" wrote:
>>
>>> There has to be at least a little threat of "let the company beware" to
>>> maintain a balance otherwise it'll be open season on consumers.
>>
>>
>>
>> I agree.
>>
>> *TimDaniels*
>
> The only people who profit from class actions are the lawyers.
>
> Since companies are going to be sued in class action, regardless of the
> merits of the case, the threat of a class action is not a detriment.
>
> If you don't believe that, witness the Vioxx lawsuits. The company
> making Vioxx determined it might increase mortality and pulled it from
> the market. Because of that, it is being sued. The companies making
> similar drugs (Celebrex and Bextra) did not pull their product from the
> market. They are not being sued. Doing the right thing provides no
> protection from class action.
>
> All class actions do is enrich lawyers and raise costs to everyone. The
> cost of class actions is factored into the cost of everything you buy.


Perhaps it is factored into every drug that you buy, but there is
still *some* incentive to keep the cost of drugs down so that doctors
don't prescribe alternative drugs. On the other hand, how else would
consumers be protected from being cheated by large corporations
if there could be no class action suits? Do *you* have the resources
to sue, say, Microsoft? GE? Toyota? Merril Lynch? Dell?

*TimDaniels*
Anonymous
February 28, 2005 9:21:23 PM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 13:12:59 -0600, Jerry Park <NoReply@No.Spam>
wrote:

>Timothy Daniels wrote:
>
>> "Nascar12" wrote:
>>
>>> There has to be at least a little threat of "let the company beware" to
>>> maintain a balance otherwise it'll be open season on consumers.
>>
>>
>>
>> I agree.
>>
>> *TimDaniels*
>
>The only people who profit from class actions are the lawyers.

Depends how you look at it. Perhaps the payout from the suite is low,
however, the threat of future lawsuits can keep companies honest; so
in this sense the public can profit from the action. I think you would
agree that it is not enough to trust big business to do the right
thing, they are in business to make money and this means push the
legal envelope. The Justice Department doesn't have the time to keep
every company in line, so we rely on the trial lawyers.
Anonymous
February 28, 2005 10:02:49 PM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

Timothy Daniels wrote:

> "Jerry Park" wrote:
>
>> Timothy Daniels wrote:
>>
>>> "Nascar12" wrote:
>>>
>>>> There has to be at least a little threat of "let the company
>>>> beware" to
>>>> maintain a balance otherwise it'll be open season on consumers.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I agree.
>>>
>>> *TimDaniels*
>>
>>
>> The only people who profit from class actions are the lawyers.
>>
>> Since companies are going to be sued in class action, regardless of
>> the merits of the case, the threat of a class action is not a detriment.
>>
>> If you don't believe that, witness the Vioxx lawsuits. The company
>> making Vioxx determined it might increase mortality and pulled it
>> from the market. Because of that, it is being sued. The companies
>> making similar drugs (Celebrex and Bextra) did not pull their product
>> from the market. They are not being sued. Doing the right thing
>> provides no protection from class action.
>>
>> All class actions do is enrich lawyers and raise costs to everyone.
>> The cost of class actions is factored into the cost of everything you
>> buy.
>
>
>
> Perhaps it is factored into every drug that you buy, but there is
> still *some* incentive to keep the cost of drugs down so that doctors
> don't prescribe alternative drugs. On the other hand, how else would
> consumers be protected from being cheated by large corporations
> if there could be no class action suits? Do *you* have the resources
> to sue, say, Microsoft? GE? Toyota? Merril Lynch? Dell?
>
> *TimDaniels*
>
No, I don't have the resources to sue someone. If I received a bad
product from one of the above listed companies, and the company did not
deal appropriately with me, I'd just lose the cost of the product.

If, however, someone filed a class action suit against the company that
sold me a bad product, I'd still lose the cost of the product and I
would pay more for the replacement product. You don't really think
anyone BUT lawyers receive anything of real value from class action suits?
February 28, 2005 10:31:20 PM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

"Jerry Park" <NoReply@No.Spam> wrote in message
news:x1KUd.37516$Rl5.8794@bignews4.bellsouth.net...
>
> All class actions do is enrich lawyers and raise costs to everyone. The
> cost of class actions is factored into the cost of everything you buy.

The last time I looked, the USA had more lawyers per head of poulation than
any other country. That was quite a long time ago, so it might have changed.

Clearly, if you have that many lawyers sitting around, they'll find a way of
making work for themselves.
Anonymous
March 1, 2005 12:01:22 AM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

Code4u wrote:

>On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 13:12:59 -0600, Jerry Park <NoReply@No.Spam>
>wrote:
>
>
>
>>Timothy Daniels wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>"Nascar12" wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>There has to be at least a little threat of "let the company beware" to
>>>>maintain a balance otherwise it'll be open season on consumers.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> I agree.
>>>
>>>*TimDaniels*
>>>
>>>
>>The only people who profit from class actions are the lawyers.
>>
>>
>
>Depends how you look at it. Perhaps the payout from the suite is low,
>however, the threat of future lawsuits can keep companies honest; so
>in this sense the public can profit from the action. I think you would
>agree that it is not enough to trust big business to do the right
>thing, they are in business to make money and this means push the
>legal envelope. The Justice Department doesn't have the time to keep
>every company in line, so we rely on the trial lawyers.
>
>
I agree that there are 'bad' companies. But most successful companies
want to provide a good product at a good price. They do that because it
is good for business.

A company that has to be 'kept in line' with the threat of a lawsuit,
won't be 'kept in line'. They will just see the lawsuit as the cost of
doing business.

Where the 'keep them in line' attitude is does have an effect is on good
companies who do want to do a good job at a reasonable cost. The lawsuit
mentality forces them to charge more for their product than they
otherwise would, just to pay for frivolous lawsuits.

It hardly matters (in terms of cost) if a company wins or loses such a
lawsuit. The cost of winning is extremely high. And everyone doing
business with that company pays the increased cost of their product.

Class action lawsuits do no good to the complaintants and harm everyone
else.
Anonymous
March 1, 2005 12:16:47 AM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 13:12:59 -0600, Jerry Park <NoReply@No.Spam>
wrote:

>The only people who profit from class actions are the lawyers.
>
>Since companies are going to be sued in class action, regardless of the
>merits of the case, the threat of a class action is not a detriment.

Oh, I think the threat of big lawsuits keeps a lot of companies honest
that wouldn't be otherwise. So, indirectly, we all do benefit.

Some awards may have gotten out of hand, though. But some are
deserved, like the girl in North Carolina who got a transplant of the
wrong blood type. I mean, I'd double-check and triple-check something
like that, wouldn't you?
--
Top 10 Conservative Idiots:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/top10/
Anonymous
March 1, 2005 1:12:10 AM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

"Jerry Park" wrote:
> Where the 'keep them in line' attitude is does have
> an effect is on good companies who do want to do
> a good job at a reasonable cost. The lawsuit
> mentality forces them to charge more for their product
> than they otherwise would, just to pay for frivolous lawsuits.


And who is to decide for us which lawsuits are "frivolous"
and which are "non-frivolous"? You base your argument on
the implied assumption that all class action law suits are
"frivolous" and not with the effect of curbing unfair corporate
practices.

*TimDaniels*
Anonymous
March 1, 2005 4:30:28 AM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

Paul Knudsen wrote:

>On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 13:12:59 -0600, Jerry Park <NoReply@No.Spam>
>wrote:
>
>
>
>>The only people who profit from class actions are the lawyers.
>>
>>Since companies are going to be sued in class action, regardless of the
>>merits of the case, the threat of a class action is not a detriment.
>>
>>
>
>Oh, I think the threat of big lawsuits keeps a lot of companies honest
>that wouldn't be otherwise. So, indirectly, we all do benefit.
>
>Some awards may have gotten out of hand, though. But some are
>deserved, like the girl in North Carolina who got a transplant of the
>wrong blood type. I mean, I'd double-check and triple-check something
>like that, wouldn't you?
>
>
Certainly. But then, that wasn't a class action ...
Anonymous
March 1, 2005 4:35:30 AM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

Timothy Daniels wrote:

> "Jerry Park" wrote:
>
>> Where the 'keep them in line' attitude is does have
>> an effect is on good companies who do want to do
>> a good job at a reasonable cost. The lawsuit mentality forces them to
>> charge more for their product
>> than they otherwise would, just to pay for frivolous lawsuits.
>
>
>
> And who is to decide for us which lawsuits are "frivolous"
> and which are "non-frivolous"? You base your argument on
> the implied assumption that all class action law suits are
> "frivolous" and not with the effect of curbing unfair corporate
> practices.
>
> *TimDaniels*

No. I know many do have merit. My point is that no one benefits from
class action law suits except the lawyers. This is the case when the
lawsuit is frivolous and when it has merit. It is still the case when
the complaintant wins and when the complaintant loses.

To be fair, there is some benefit when a bad company is forced out of
business with a class action lawsuit. Unfortunately, that small benefit
is well offset by the good companies which are forced out of business by
class action.
Anonymous
March 1, 2005 4:39:05 AM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

right, and that is why i suggested (above) that the reform should be on how
much in fees the lawyers are allowed to collect and not how much a
complainant is allowed to receive. it is disgusting how little is paid out
to the complainant. fees can still be attractive to the lawyers at one
quarter of what they currently collect in such matters. fees as a ratio to
the settlement amount can be legislated. limiting the right to sue or
limiting the possible reward to the complainant goes against the fundamental
principal of a free market economy.

"Jerry Park" <NoReply@No.Spam> wrote in message
news:Q5PUd.25461$hd6.3896@bignews1.bellsouth.net...
> Timothy Daniels wrote:
>
>> "Jerry Park" wrote:
>>
>>> Timothy Daniels wrote:
>>>
>>>> "Nascar12" wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> There has to be at least a little threat of "let the company beware"
>>>>> to
>>>>> maintain a balance otherwise it'll be open season on consumers.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I agree.
>>>>
>>>> *TimDaniels*
>>>
>>>
>>> The only people who profit from class actions are the lawyers.
>>>
>>> Since companies are going to be sued in class action, regardless of the
>>> merits of the case, the threat of a class action is not a detriment.
>>>
>>> If you don't believe that, witness the Vioxx lawsuits. The company
>>> making Vioxx determined it might increase mortality and pulled it from
>>> the market. Because of that, it is being sued. The companies making
>>> similar drugs (Celebrex and Bextra) did not pull their product from the
>>> market. They are not being sued. Doing the right thing provides no
>>> protection from class action.
>>>
>>> All class actions do is enrich lawyers and raise costs to everyone. The
>>> cost of class actions is factored into the cost of everything you buy.
>>
>>
>>
>> Perhaps it is factored into every drug that you buy, but there is
>> still *some* incentive to keep the cost of drugs down so that doctors
>> don't prescribe alternative drugs. On the other hand, how else would
>> consumers be protected from being cheated by large corporations
>> if there could be no class action suits? Do *you* have the resources
>> to sue, say, Microsoft? GE? Toyota? Merril Lynch? Dell?
>>
>> *TimDaniels*
>>
> No, I don't have the resources to sue someone. If I received a bad product
> from one of the above listed companies, and the company did not deal
> appropriately with me, I'd just lose the cost of the product.
>
> If, however, someone filed a class action suit against the company that
> sold me a bad product, I'd still lose the cost of the product and I would
> pay more for the replacement product. You don't really think anyone BUT
> lawyers receive anything of real value from class action suits?
Anonymous
March 1, 2005 6:03:41 AM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 21:01:22 -0600, Jerry Park wrote:
>
> A company that has to be 'kept in line' with the threat of a lawsuit,
> won't be 'kept in line'. They will just see the lawsuit as the cost of
> doing business.

Enron, Arthur Anderson, etc....

--
spam999free@rrohio.com
remove 999 in order to email me
March 1, 2005 2:22:57 PM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

"Jerry Park" <NoReply@No.Spam> wrote in message
news:WNUUd.18769$Q47.16520@bignews5.bellsouth.net...
> Paul Knudsen wrote:
>
>>
>>Some awards may have gotten out of hand, though. But some are
>>deserved, like the girl in North Carolina who got a transplant of the
>>wrong blood type. I mean, I'd double-check and triple-check something
>>like that, wouldn't you?
>>
> Certainly. But then, that wasn't a class action ...

Some of it is daft. Like the girl who was so pleased at her pay raise that
she hopped, skipped and jumped back to her desk. She snapped her Achilles
Tendon on the way, so sued her employers for not protecting her properly.
She won!
Anonymous
March 1, 2005 2:31:42 PM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

"Jerry Park" wrote:
> Timothy Daniels wrote:
>
>> "Jerry Park" wrote:
>>
>>> Where the 'keep them in line' attitude is does have
>>> an effect is on good companies who do want to do
>>> a good job at a reasonable cost. The lawsuit mentality forces them to
>>> charge more for their product
>>> than they otherwise would, just to pay for frivolous lawsuits.
>>
>>
>>
>> And who is to decide for us which lawsuits are "frivolous"
>> and which are "non-frivolous"? You base your argument on
>> the implied assumption that all class action law suits are
>> "frivolous" and not with the effect of curbing unfair corporate
>> practices.
>>
>> *TimDaniels*
>
> No. I know many do have merit. My point is that no one benefits from
> class action law suits except the lawyers. This is the case when the
> lawsuit is frivolous and when it has merit. It is still the case when
> the complaintant wins and when the complaintant loses.
>
> To be fair, there is some benefit when a bad company is forced out of
> business with a class action lawsuit. Unfortunately, that small benefit
> is well offset by the good companies which are forced out of business by
> class action.


While it's mostly attorneys who benefit *directly* from class action suits,
we all benefit indirectly as consumers because the threat of law suit is
one of the few things that keep corporations in check. The government
is *supposed* to do that for us, but, well... you know how that goes.
Whenever a class action suit is slapped on a publicly-owned company,
its stock price goes down because every analyst knows what a drain they
frequently are on the corporate officers' time and attention. They can drag
on for years and sap a company's strength and vitality. That is why they are
frequently settled out of court. The attorneys reap a wad of fees, and the
company goes on, but a bit chastised. Corporations may set aside funds
for unforeseen law suits, but those funds come out of company profits, and
companies try to avoid law suits to keep their profit margins up. I agree that
class action suits are an inefficient way to police corporations, but in the
absence of effective government agencies, what other mechanism is there?

*TimDaniels*
Anonymous
March 1, 2005 4:20:03 PM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

Gosh! Let's turn this thread into a debate about the Bush administration's tort
reform proposal, which would reduce the number of class action lawsuits. Based
on 4 years and 2 months in office, one must conclude that ANY initiative by the
Bush administration would benefit the oligarchs who bought and paid for this
presidency, and works to the detriment of the large and growing underclass in
the United States... Ben Myers

On Tue, 1 Mar 2005 11:22:57 -0000, "GB" <NOTsomeone@microsoft.com> wrote:

>
>"Jerry Park" <NoReply@No.Spam> wrote in message
>news:WNUUd.18769$Q47.16520@bignews5.bellsouth.net...
>> Paul Knudsen wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>Some awards may have gotten out of hand, though. But some are
>>>deserved, like the girl in North Carolina who got a transplant of the
>>>wrong blood type. I mean, I'd double-check and triple-check something
>>>like that, wouldn't you?
>>>
>> Certainly. But then, that wasn't a class action ...
>
>Some of it is daft. Like the girl who was so pleased at her pay raise that
>she hopped, skipped and jumped back to her desk. She snapped her Achilles
>Tendon on the way, so sued her employers for not protecting her properly.
>She won!
>
>
Anonymous
March 1, 2005 4:42:19 PM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

Timothy Daniels wrote:

> "Jerry Park" wrote:
>
>> Timothy Daniels wrote:
>>
>>> "Jerry Park" wrote:
>>>
>>>> Where the 'keep them in line' attitude is does have
>>>> an effect is on good companies who do want to do
>>>> a good job at a reasonable cost. The lawsuit mentality forces them
>>>> to charge more for their product
>>>> than they otherwise would, just to pay for frivolous lawsuits.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> And who is to decide for us which lawsuits are "frivolous"
>>> and which are "non-frivolous"? You base your argument on
>>> the implied assumption that all class action law suits are
>>> "frivolous" and not with the effect of curbing unfair corporate
>>> practices.
>>>
>>> *TimDaniels*
>>
>>
>> No. I know many do have merit. My point is that no one benefits from
>> class action law suits except the lawyers. This is the case when the
>> lawsuit is frivolous and when it has merit. It is still the case when
>> the complaintant wins and when the complaintant loses.
>>
>> To be fair, there is some benefit when a bad company is forced out of
>> business with a class action lawsuit. Unfortunately, that small
>> benefit is well offset by the good companies which are forced out of
>> business by class action.
>
>
>
> While it's mostly attorneys who benefit *directly* from class
> action suits,
> we all benefit indirectly as consumers because the threat of law suit is
> one of the few things that keep corporations in check. The government
> is *supposed* to do that for us, but, well... you know how that goes.
> Whenever a class action suit is slapped on a publicly-owned company,
> its stock price goes down because every analyst knows what a drain they
> frequently are on the corporate officers' time and attention. They
> can drag
> on for years and sap a company's strength and vitality. That is why
> they are
> frequently settled out of court. The attorneys reap a wad of fees,
> and the
> company goes on, but a bit chastised. Corporations may set aside funds
> for unforeseen law suits, but those funds come out of company profits,
> and
> companies try to avoid law suits to keep their profit margins up. I
> agree that
> class action suits are an inefficient way to police corporations, but
> in the
> absence of effective government agencies, what other mechanism is there?
>
> *TimDaniels*

Free market forces?
Anonymous
March 1, 2005 5:15:57 PM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 13:20:03 +0000, Ben Myers wrote:
>
> one must conclude that ANY initiative by the
> Bush administration would benefit the oligarchs who bought and paid for this
> presidency, and works to the detriment of the large and growing underclass in
> the United States... Ben Myers

Got news for you - the people voted and BUSH WON - now face that fact or
stop whining.

--
spam999free@rrohio.com
remove 999 in order to email me
March 1, 2005 5:50:09 PM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

GB wrote:

> "Jerry Park" <NoReply@No.Spam> wrote in message
> news:x1KUd.37516$Rl5.8794@bignews4.bellsouth.net...
>
>>All class actions do is enrich lawyers and raise costs to everyone. The
>>cost of class actions is factored into the cost of everything you buy.
>
>
> The last time I looked, the USA had more lawyers per head of poulation than
> any other country.

True

> That was quite a long time ago, so it might have changed.

Only in that the US has even more lawyers now.

> Clearly, if you have that many lawyers sitting around, they'll find a way of
> making work for themselves.

Obviously.

;) 
Anonymous
March 1, 2005 6:05:52 PM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

And, of course, the people voted based on all the facts presented objectively to
the public by the Bush regime. Getting back on topic, talk about your bait and
switch! ... Ben Myers

On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 14:15:57 GMT, Leythos <void@nowhere.lan> wrote:

>On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 13:20:03 +0000, Ben Myers wrote:
>>
>> one must conclude that ANY initiative by the
>> Bush administration would benefit the oligarchs who bought and paid for this
>> presidency, and works to the detriment of the large and growing underclass in
>> the United States... Ben Myers
>
>Got news for you - the people voted and BUSH WON - now face that fact or
>stop whining.
>
>--
>spam999free@rrohio.com
>remove 999 in order to email me
>
Anonymous
March 1, 2005 6:13:51 PM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 15:05:52 +0000, Ben Myers wrote:

> And, of course, the people voted based on all the facts presented objectively to
> the public by the Bush regime. Getting back on topic, talk about your bait and
> switch! ... Ben Myers

Sheesh, and I suppose that you believe the Kerry camp just presented facts
and other information that was completely honest and correct all the time?

The only bait and switch was Kerry, he would bait people into attending
his SHOWS and then change his position for the next SHOW, at least Bush
always had the same stance on his positions.

So, instead of whining about it until Hillaryious becomes president, just
get over it, accept it, and be happy that you don't have a two faced,
dishonorable, gumby looking, double talker, idiot in the office now.

Dell is about as guilty of Bait-Switch as this thread is - they present
you with options and if you want something else it's not B&S by Dell. I'm
sure that if they only offered two products someone would still complain
about it.

--
spam999free@rrohio.com
remove 999 in order to email me
March 1, 2005 7:25:48 PM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

Timothy Daniels wrote:

> "Jerry Park" wrote:
>
>> Where the 'keep them in line' attitude is does have
>> an effect is on good companies who do want to do
>> a good job at a reasonable cost. The lawsuit mentality forces them to
>> charge more for their product
>> than they otherwise would, just to pay for frivolous lawsuits.
>
> And who is to decide for us which lawsuits are "frivolous"
> and which are "non-frivolous"?

Judges should have leeway in making this decision.
March 1, 2005 7:28:04 PM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

Leythos wrote:

> On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 15:05:52 +0000, Ben Myers wrote:
>
>>And, of course, the people voted based on all the facts presented objectively to
>>the public by the Bush regime. Getting back on topic, talk about your bait and
>>switch! ... Ben Myers
>
> Sheesh, and I suppose that you believe the Kerry camp just presented facts
> and other information that was completely honest and correct all the time?
>
> The only bait and switch was Kerry, he would bait people into attending
> his SHOWS and then change his position for the next SHOW, at least Bush
> always had the same stance on his positions.
>
> So, instead of whining about it until Hillaryious becomes president

You've just established yourself as a Rush lapdog & have lost all
credibility whatsoever.

Social Security ain't broke, don't fix it!!!
Anonymous
March 1, 2005 7:53:08 PM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

Honesty and complete presentation of the facts were not part of the last
presidential campaign. BOTH candidates were full of fog and obfuscation. I
don't hate Bush, but because I am not in the top 1% of wage earners, the Bush
regimes policies have hit me in the pocketbook, time and again and again. When
well over half of the people in this country take an economic hit, even those
who voted for Bushie, can we call this government of the people, by the people
and for the people? Heck no!!!

You and I and all our children will pay and pay dearly for what can only be
characterized as the reckless economic policy of the last four years. We've
gone from a healthy budgetary surplus to horrific budget deficits and equally
horrific balance of payment issues in just over four years. Yes, 9/11 and the
dot-com implosion helped. So did Enron, Arthur Anderson, Health South, AIG and
all the other corporate thieves. But the bottom line is that cutting taxes and
increasing spending results in deficits. Duh! Doesn't anyone in Washington do
the math? ... Ben Myers

On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 15:13:51 GMT, Leythos <void@nowhere.lan> wrote:

>On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 15:05:52 +0000, Ben Myers wrote:
>
>> And, of course, the people voted based on all the facts presented objectively to
>> the public by the Bush regime. Getting back on topic, talk about your bait and
>> switch! ... Ben Myers
>
>Sheesh, and I suppose that you believe the Kerry camp just presented facts
>and other information that was completely honest and correct all the time?
>
>The only bait and switch was Kerry, he would bait people into attending
>his SHOWS and then change his position for the next SHOW, at least Bush
>always had the same stance on his positions.
>
>So, instead of whining about it until Hillaryious becomes president, just
>get over it, accept it, and be happy that you don't have a two faced,
>dishonorable, gumby looking, double talker, idiot in the office now.
>
>Dell is about as guilty of Bait-Switch as this thread is - they present
>you with options and if you want something else it's not B&S by Dell. I'm
>sure that if they only offered two products someone would still complain
>about it.
>
>--
>spam999free@rrohio.com
>remove 999 in order to email me
>
Anonymous
March 1, 2005 8:44:30 PM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

"Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote in message
news:p an.2005.03.01.14.25.08.739595@nowhere.lan...
> On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 13:20:03 +0000, Ben Myers wrote:
>>
>> one must conclude that ANY initiative by the
>> Bush administration would benefit the oligarchs who bought and paid for
>> this
>> presidency, and works to the detriment of the large and growing
>> underclass in
>> the United States... Ben Myers
>
> Got news for you - the people voted and BUSH WON - now face that fact or
> stop whining.
>
> --
> spam999free@rrohio.com
> remove 999 in order to email me
>


Don't bait the RDDB's......

;-)


Stew
Anonymous
March 1, 2005 9:48:28 PM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

well said. and least we forget the defective thinking that got us into the
iraq mess where another 122 innocent people died earlier today. i also can
not help wondering why new york city, the place that suffered (and still
suffers from) the greatest loss from the 9/11 attacks, and a place that
remains to be the most likely target for future attacks, voted
overwhelmingly against bush. bush won, but the country lost.

11/2004 presidential election results for nyc were 16% for bush, 78% for
kerry
http://www.miata.net/faq/wheel_weights.html

<ben_myers_spam_me_not @ charter.net (Ben Myers)> wrote in message
news:42249c68.13612464@nntp.charter.net...
> Honesty and complete presentation of the facts were not part of the last
> presidential campaign. BOTH candidates were full of fog and obfuscation.
> I
> don't hate Bush, but because I am not in the top 1% of wage earners, the
> Bush
> regimes policies have hit me in the pocketbook, time and again and again.
> When
> well over half of the people in this country take an economic hit, even
> those
> who voted for Bushie, can we call this government of the people, by the
> people
> and for the people? Heck no!!!
>
> You and I and all our children will pay and pay dearly for what can only
> be
> characterized as the reckless economic policy of the last four years.
> We've
> gone from a healthy budgetary surplus to horrific budget deficits and
> equally
> horrific balance of payment issues in just over four years. Yes, 9/11 and
> the
> dot-com implosion helped. So did Enron, Arthur Anderson, Health South,
> AIG and
> all the other corporate thieves. But the bottom line is that cutting
> taxes and
> increasing spending results in deficits. Duh! Doesn't anyone in
> Washington do
> the math? ... Ben Myers
>
> On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 15:13:51 GMT, Leythos <void@nowhere.lan> wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 15:05:52 +0000, Ben Myers wrote:
>>
>>> And, of course, the people voted based on all the facts presented
>>> objectively to
>>> the public by the Bush regime. Getting back on topic, talk about your
>>> bait and
>>> switch! ... Ben Myers
>>
>>Sheesh, and I suppose that you believe the Kerry camp just presented facts
>>and other information that was completely honest and correct all the time?
>>
>>The only bait and switch was Kerry, he would bait people into attending
>>his SHOWS and then change his position for the next SHOW, at least Bush
>>always had the same stance on his positions.
>>
>>So, instead of whining about it until Hillaryious becomes president, just
>>get over it, accept it, and be happy that you don't have a two faced,
>>dishonorable, gumby looking, double talker, idiot in the office now.
>>
>>Dell is about as guilty of Bait-Switch as this thread is - they present
>>you with options and if you want something else it's not B&S by Dell. I'm
>>sure that if they only offered two products someone would still complain
>>about it.
>>
>>--
>>spam999free@rrohio.com
>>remove 999 in order to email me
>>
>
Anonymous
March 1, 2005 9:48:29 PM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

"Christopher Muto" <muto@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:0O2Vd.38197$ya6.36610@trndny01...
> well said. and least we forget the defective thinking that got us into
> the iraq mess where another 122 innocent people died earlier today. i
> also can not help wondering why new york city, the place that suffered
> (and still suffers from) the greatest loss from the 9/11 attacks, and a
> place that remains to be the most likely target for future attacks, voted
> overwhelmingly against bush. bush won, but the country lost.
>
> 11/2004 presidential election results for nyc were 16% for bush, 78% for
> kerry
> http://www.miata.net/faq/wheel_weights.html
>


Lest we forget that well over 100,000 Americans died in the U.S. Civil War.
I suppose we could've avoided all of that abolition stuff and simply
negotiated with the confederacy. We'd all be better off today, no? <sarcasm>

I really do hate it when this group rails of topic into politics. I find
myself at odds with many in here whose opinions I otherwise hold in high
regard.


Stew
Anonymous
March 1, 2005 9:50:39 PM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

wrong link... should be
http://vote.nyc.ny.us/pdf/results/2004/general/G2004Rec...

"Christopher Muto" <muto@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:0O2Vd.38197$ya6.36610@trndny01...
> well said. and least we forget the defective thinking that got us into
> the iraq mess where another 122 innocent people died earlier today. i
> also can not help wondering why new york city, the place that suffered
> (and still suffers from) the greatest loss from the 9/11 attacks, and a
> place that remains to be the most likely target for future attacks, voted
> overwhelmingly against bush. bush won, but the country lost.
>
> 11/2004 presidential election results for nyc were 16% for bush, 78% for
> kerry
> http://www.miata.net/faq/wheel_weights.html
>
> <ben_myers_spam_me_not @ charter.net (Ben Myers)> wrote in message
> news:42249c68.13612464@nntp.charter.net...
>> Honesty and complete presentation of the facts were not part of the last
>> presidential campaign. BOTH candidates were full of fog and obfuscation.
>> I
>> don't hate Bush, but because I am not in the top 1% of wage earners, the
>> Bush
>> regimes policies have hit me in the pocketbook, time and again and again.
>> When
>> well over half of the people in this country take an economic hit, even
>> those
>> who voted for Bushie, can we call this government of the people, by the
>> people
>> and for the people? Heck no!!!
>>
>> You and I and all our children will pay and pay dearly for what can only
>> be
>> characterized as the reckless economic policy of the last four years.
>> We've
>> gone from a healthy budgetary surplus to horrific budget deficits and
>> equally
>> horrific balance of payment issues in just over four years. Yes, 9/11
>> and the
>> dot-com implosion helped. So did Enron, Arthur Anderson, Health South,
>> AIG and
>> all the other corporate thieves. But the bottom line is that cutting
>> taxes and
>> increasing spending results in deficits. Duh! Doesn't anyone in
>> Washington do
>> the math? ... Ben Myers
>>
>> On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 15:13:51 GMT, Leythos <void@nowhere.lan> wrote:
>>
>>>On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 15:05:52 +0000, Ben Myers wrote:
>>>
>>>> And, of course, the people voted based on all the facts presented
>>>> objectively to
>>>> the public by the Bush regime. Getting back on topic, talk about your
>>>> bait and
>>>> switch! ... Ben Myers
>>>
>>>Sheesh, and I suppose that you believe the Kerry camp just presented
>>>facts
>>>and other information that was completely honest and correct all the
>>>time?
>>>
>>>The only bait and switch was Kerry, he would bait people into attending
>>>his SHOWS and then change his position for the next SHOW, at least Bush
>>>always had the same stance on his positions.
>>>
>>>So, instead of whining about it until Hillaryious becomes president, just
>>>get over it, accept it, and be happy that you don't have a two faced,
>>>dishonorable, gumby looking, double talker, idiot in the office now.
>>>
>>>Dell is about as guilty of Bait-Switch as this thread is - they present
>>>you with options and if you want something else it's not B&S by Dell. I'm
>>>sure that if they only offered two products someone would still complain
>>>about it.
>>>
>>>--
>>>spam999free@rrohio.com
>>>remove 999 in order to email me
>>>
>>
>
>
Anonymous
March 2, 2005 5:05:49 AM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 16:28:04 -0500, Sparky wrote:

> Leythos wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 15:05:52 +0000, Ben Myers wrote:
>>
>>>And, of course, the people voted based on all the facts presented objectively to
>>>the public by the Bush regime. Getting back on topic, talk about your bait and
>>>switch! ... Ben Myers
>>
>> Sheesh, and I suppose that you believe the Kerry camp just presented facts
>> and other information that was completely honest and correct all the time?
>>
>> The only bait and switch was Kerry, he would bait people into attending
>> his SHOWS and then change his position for the next SHOW, at least Bush
>> always had the same stance on his positions.
>>
>> So, instead of whining about it until Hillaryious becomes president
>
> You've just established yourself as a Rush lapdog & have lost all
> credibility whatsoever.
>
> Social Security ain't broke, don't fix it!!!

That's funny - some one I don't know telling me I'm not credible to them.
If you have a problem with my opinion on the economy or the leadership
then I suspect that you have no credibility and no business experience in
the world.

--
spam999free@rrohio.com
remove 999 in order to email me
March 2, 2005 10:08:00 AM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

Leythos wrote:

> On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 13:20:03 +0000, Ben Myers wrote:
>
>>one must conclude that ANY initiative by the
>>Bush administration would benefit the oligarchs who bought and paid for this
>>presidency, and works to the detriment of the large and growing underclass in
>>the United States... Ben Myers
>
> Got news for you - the people voted and BUSH WON - now face that fact or
> stop whining.

Don't you mean "face that fact AND stop whining"? ;) 


Yes, Bush won the election; but that's no reason to roll over & play
dead while he completes the rape of the US. Remember the Republicons &
President Clinton in the 90's? Don't expect people to treat you any
better than you've been treating them (so bend over & grab your argyles).
Anonymous
March 2, 2005 4:43:31 PM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

On Wed, 02 Mar 2005 13:21:21 +0000, Christopher Muto wrote:
>
> http://www.johnkerry.com/about/john_kerry/military_reco...
> or more specifically
> http://www.johnkerry.com/pdf/jkmilservice/DD214.pdf
> and the replacement certificate dd215 where the "vietnam service metal" was
> deleted and "vietnam service metal with 4 bronze stars" was added...
> http://www.johnkerry.com/pdf/jkmilservice/DD-215_Correc...
> you may find this site interesting.
> http://www.awolbush.com/kerry-vs-bush.asp

I see you've fallen for the Kerry lies too - Kerry was discharged in 72 if
I remember correctly. The one he shows on the site above shows 78, it's
not the same discharge as he would have got the first time.

It's kind of funny too - the DD215 shows that it's correcting a DD214
(Item 24) that was dated 3-01-70, but the DD214 he shows in the links
provided is not dated in 1970!

I'm telling you, as a X-Navy service member, with a long history of
service to our country, if you don't look at any of the political or
swiftboat sites (as I don't follow either sides BS), and just look at his
refusal to present his DD214, then you can see what he really did/stands
for.

I just looked at my DD214 and all the dates on it are correct and match my
separation date, my awards dates, etc...

Don't forget, Carter granted Amnesty to a lot of Vets that were given
OTH's, and some of the paperwork that Kerry has shown has official dates
of the Carter era - which is another reason I fully believe that Kerry was
OTH discharged.

As I said before, I don't care about the politics, I'm an independent, but
I'll take Bush's ways/methods/beliefs over anyone halfway like Kerry
appears to be.

Go back and look at their speeches when they talked with opposing groups
that supported them - Kerry is on file (video) of telling one group of
supporters that he supports their position and the next group at another
rally that he directly opposes the position he supported with the first
group - I didn't see anything like that from Bush.

Oh, one last thing - During the campaign's I got numerous calls from
President Bush and Laura and several others inviting me to Dinner with
them, but none on the Kerry team called to invite me to dinner :) 

--
spam999free@rrohio.com
remove 999 in order to email me
Anonymous
March 2, 2005 4:53:49 PM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

On Wed, 02 Mar 2005 13:39:38 +0000, Ben Myers wrote:
>
> Denial? Heck no! l deny being in denial. So I guess I am in some sort of
> philosophic meta-denial, having denied being in denial.
>
> I read the pinko subversive NY Times and the Financial Times (non-US
> perspective) cover to cover every day to get a reality check on my own
> observations and experience, plus on-line news sources. If the dollar continues
> to lose significant value against major currencies or China finally decides to
> do a significant revaluation of the RMB against $US, you have the makings for
> world-wide economic chaos. I don't need to be Greenspan to make that sort of
> prediction, either. Of course, I don't wear Greenspan's blinders, either.

The problem is that technology has made it very easy to be a global
community of businesses. While some still struggle with it, many are
getting it right, and that ease of communication then levels the field.
When it use to require local workers and local parts a local wage was the
norm, now I can move almost my entire business outside any country and
take advantage of the remote countries wage structure - which directly
impacts (negatively) my home country's economy, but many companies don't
care about that effect.

It's interesting to see that IT workers in India that use to earn $3/day
(USD) are now making the equivalent (USD) of $30K/$40K per year due to the
leveling of the workforce resources. As it turns out, the economy is like
water, it will spread until it's level across the paying region. Wages
will drop in the US, increase in remote countries, and things will level
out, it's never going to be the same, and it's going to continue to
change. Your only option is to see it and learn how to survive with the
changes or you will be lost in the sea.

--
spam999free@rrohio.com
remove 999 in order to email me
Anonymous
March 2, 2005 8:22:01 PM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

i don't follow what you are trying to say about the dates on the documents
or what it means to have discharge papers issued at time of separation or
not... but to discredit kerry's service record without a clear and
researched argument is absurd. given bush's spotty service record the
attack on kerry's record seems to stink of being another weapon of mass
distraction. i would love to know the truth about both of them and i am
open to listen to your argument about the problems with kerry's service
record if you would put it into laymen's terms. but i also understand if
you don't want to spend the time doing that...

"Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote in message
news:p an.2005.03.02.13.47.56.924352@nowhere.lan...
> On Wed, 02 Mar 2005 13:21:21 +0000, Christopher Muto wrote:
>>
>> http://www.johnkerry.com/about/john_kerry/military_reco...
>> or more specifically
>> http://www.johnkerry.com/pdf/jkmilservice/DD214.pdf
>> and the replacement certificate dd215 where the "vietnam service metal"
>> was
>> deleted and "vietnam service metal with 4 bronze stars" was added...
>> http://www.johnkerry.com/pdf/jkmilservice/DD-215_Correc...
>> you may find this site interesting.
>> http://www.awolbush.com/kerry-vs-bush.asp
>
> I see you've fallen for the Kerry lies too - Kerry was discharged in 72 if
> I remember correctly. The one he shows on the site above shows 78, it's
> not the same discharge as he would have got the first time.
>
> It's kind of funny too - the DD215 shows that it's correcting a DD214
> (Item 24) that was dated 3-01-70, but the DD214 he shows in the links
> provided is not dated in 1970!
>
> I'm telling you, as a X-Navy service member, with a long history of
> service to our country, if you don't look at any of the political or
> swiftboat sites (as I don't follow either sides BS), and just look at his
> refusal to present his DD214, then you can see what he really did/stands
> for.
>
> I just looked at my DD214 and all the dates on it are correct and match my
> separation date, my awards dates, etc...
>
> Don't forget, Carter granted Amnesty to a lot of Vets that were given
> OTH's, and some of the paperwork that Kerry has shown has official dates
> of the Carter era - which is another reason I fully believe that Kerry was
> OTH discharged.
>
> As I said before, I don't care about the politics, I'm an independent, but
> I'll take Bush's ways/methods/beliefs over anyone halfway like Kerry
> appears to be.
>
> Go back and look at their speeches when they talked with opposing groups
> that supported them - Kerry is on file (video) of telling one group of
> supporters that he supports their position and the next group at another
> rally that he directly opposes the position he supported with the first
> group - I didn't see anything like that from Bush.
>
> Oh, one last thing - During the campaign's I got numerous calls from
> President Bush and Laura and several others inviting me to Dinner with
> them, but none on the Kerry team called to invite me to dinner :) 
>
> --
> spam999free@rrohio.com
> remove 999 in order to email me
>
Anonymous
March 2, 2005 8:27:44 PM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

On Wed, 02 Mar 2005 17:22:01 +0000, Christopher Muto wrote:
>
> i don't follow what you are trying to say about the dates on the documents
> or what it means to have discharge papers issued at time of separation or
> not... but to discredit kerry's service record without a clear and
> researched argument is absurd.

it's quite simple - when you are discharged from a branch or move from
active duty to reserves you are given a discharge from that branch. If you
look at all the documents posted in the links you will be able to start
seeing things inconsistent with the dates and how dates on one document
that reference another documents date don't match.

Kerry was discharged after 6 years, that puts his discharge data in 72
(maybe 73, I can't remember) if I remember correctly. His paperwork,
revised, shows 78 in one palace, a DD215 says it's referencing a discharge
DD214 dated in 70, and other inconsistent dates on the forms that were
presented. What none of us has seen is his discharge paper DD214 from his
initial enlistment. The only thing you can come close to is the amended
discharge paperwork that was updated due to Carters amnesty program.

I my mind, a figure running for office that makes grand claims about his
service and HONORABLE service at that, and has questionable accounting of
his medals, and that supported the Enemy Political Engine during his early
years, has discredited himself. Kerry's only hope of salvation is to make
the truth public, show his initial separation DD214, admit the truth about
his Medals, admit and ask for forgiveness by the American people for his
giving comfort to the Enemy, and to do so without any conditional BS. If
he would have done that I would have voted for him. As a honorably
discharged member of the Navy, having seen/done things that were never
reported, or where the opposite was reported, having work with Intel, I
have what I consider my honest opinion of him based on what I consider to
be factual accounts and factual withholdings of information that should be
available from any honorable person.

If you were to talk with 10,000 Vets that were given Honorable discharges,
you would not find one that you be afraid to show you - that simple thing
is very telling of Kerry.

--
spam999free@rrohio.com
remove 999 in order to email me
March 2, 2005 11:43:54 PM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

Jerry Park wrote:
> Timothy Daniels wrote:
>
>> "Jerry Park" wrote:
>>
>>> Timothy Daniels wrote:
>>>
>>>> "Jerry Park" wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Where the 'keep them in line' attitude is does have
>>>>> an effect is on good companies who do want to do
>>>>> a good job at a reasonable cost. The lawsuit mentality forces them
>>>>> to charge more for their product
>>>>> than they otherwise would, just to pay for frivolous lawsuits.
>>>>
>>>> And who is to decide for us which lawsuits are "frivolous"
>>>> and which are "non-frivolous"? You base your argument on
>>>> the implied assumption that all class action law suits are
>>>> "frivolous" and not with the effect of curbing unfair corporate
>>>> practices.
>>>>
>>>> *TimDaniels*
>>>
>>> No. I know many do have merit. My point is that no one benefits from
>>> class action law suits except the lawyers. This is the case when the
>>> lawsuit is frivolous and when it has merit. It is still the case when
>>> the complaintant wins and when the complaintant loses.
>>>
>>> To be fair, there is some benefit when a bad company is forced out of
>>> business with a class action lawsuit. Unfortunately, that small
>>> benefit is well offset by the good companies which are forced out of
>>> business by class action.
>>
>> While it's mostly attorneys who benefit *directly* from class
>> action suits,
>> we all benefit indirectly as consumers because the threat of law suit is
>> one of the few things that keep corporations in check. The government
>> is *supposed* to do that for us, but, well... you know how that goes.
>> Whenever a class action suit is slapped on a publicly-owned company,
>> its stock price goes down because every analyst knows what a drain they
>> frequently are on the corporate officers' time and attention. They
>> can drag
>> on for years and sap a company's strength and vitality. That is why
>> they are
>> frequently settled out of court. The attorneys reap a wad of fees,
>> and the
>> company goes on, but a bit chastised. Corporations may set aside funds
>> for unforeseen law suits, but those funds come out of company profits,
>> and
>> companies try to avoid law suits to keep their profit margins up. I
>> agree that
>> class action suits are an inefficient way to police corporations, but
>> in the
>> absence of effective government agencies, what other mechanism is there?
>>
>> *TimDaniels*
>
> Free market forces?

What's that mean?
Anonymous
March 3, 2005 1:28:08 AM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

i get that you are passionate about this, but i still don't understand what
your objection is to the service records that are plainly listed on his web
site http://www.johnkerry.com/about/john_kerry/military_reco...
lets take this one step at a time... start with the dd214. box 13
(character of service) says "honorable". what in this document do you find
objectionable?

"Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote in message
news:p an.2005.03.02.17.36.47.816089@nowhere.lan...
> On Wed, 02 Mar 2005 17:22:01 +0000, Christopher Muto wrote:
>>
>> i don't follow what you are trying to say about the dates on the
>> documents
>> or what it means to have discharge papers issued at time of separation or
>> not... but to discredit kerry's service record without a clear and
>> researched argument is absurd.
>
> it's quite simple - when you are discharged from a branch or move from
> active duty to reserves you are given a discharge from that branch. If you
> look at all the documents posted in the links you will be able to start
> seeing things inconsistent with the dates and how dates on one document
> that reference another documents date don't match.
>
> Kerry was discharged after 6 years, that puts his discharge data in 72
> (maybe 73, I can't remember) if I remember correctly. His paperwork,
> revised, shows 78 in one palace, a DD215 says it's referencing a discharge
> DD214 dated in 70, and other inconsistent dates on the forms that were
> presented. What none of us has seen is his discharge paper DD214 from his
> initial enlistment. The only thing you can come close to is the amended
> discharge paperwork that was updated due to Carters amnesty program.
>
> I my mind, a figure running for office that makes grand claims about his
> service and HONORABLE service at that, and has questionable accounting of
> his medals, and that supported the Enemy Political Engine during his early
> years, has discredited himself. Kerry's only hope of salvation is to make
> the truth public, show his initial separation DD214, admit the truth about
> his Medals, admit and ask for forgiveness by the American people for his
> giving comfort to the Enemy, and to do so without any conditional BS. If
> he would have done that I would have voted for him. As a honorably
> discharged member of the Navy, having seen/done things that were never
> reported, or where the opposite was reported, having work with Intel, I
> have what I consider my honest opinion of him based on what I consider to
> be factual accounts and factual withholdings of information that should be
> available from any honorable person.
>
> If you were to talk with 10,000 Vets that were given Honorable discharges,
> you would not find one that you be afraid to show you - that simple thing
> is very telling of Kerry.
>
> --
> spam999free@rrohio.com
> remove 999 in order to email me
>
Anonymous
March 3, 2005 1:28:09 AM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

Chris,
Basically, if his original DD214 read anything but "Honorable", he could not
run for US Senate, and maybe even public office in Massachusetts. If he got
some type of amnesty during the Carter years, people would wonder why, and
how it was accomplished. If you look further through the DD214 form, you
would have seen that there were no separation papers issued to him, in the
Remarks section, referring to line "13b". Also, there was a change in his
original separation date, almost a two (2) year, discrepancy. Even if it was
a delay in processing DD214's during that time period. He should have been
able to provide discharge orders for termination of service. These would
have been issued so that he could travel back to his hometown. On the form
would show the type of discharge he received at the time.

My reenlistment orders when I was in the Army, shows that I received an
Honorable discharge from my first enlistment. I was not issued a DD214 for
the first enlistment, but I have a copy of the orders. And I got them after
10 years out of the service. So Kerry should just sign the form to release
his records. The funny thing is, he already has a copy of his records, that
is why he was able to release the docs that he thought could benefit
himself.
--

Click on Link to Add MS to your News Reader: news://msnews.microsoft.com
Rich/rerat

(RRR News) <message rule>
<<Previous Text Snipped to Save Bandwidth When Appropriate>>



"Christopher Muto" <muto@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:Y5rVd.67170$8a6.48088@trndny09...
i get that you are passionate about this, but i still don't understand what
your objection is to the service records that are plainly listed on his web
site http://www.johnkerry.com/about/john_kerry/military_reco...
lets take this one step at a time... start with the dd214. box 13
(character of service) says "honorable". what in this document do you find
objectionable?
Anonymous
March 3, 2005 2:57:52 AM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

On Wed, 02 Mar 2005 22:28:08 +0000, Christopher Muto wrote:

> i get that you are passionate about this, but i still don't understand what
> your objection is to the service records that are plainly listed on his web
> site http://www.johnkerry.com/about/john_kerry/military_reco...
> lets take this one step at a time... start with the dd214. box 13
> (character of service) says "honorable". what in this document do you find
> objectionable?

several things -

Page 1
3M/27D of Active Duty Service - he claimed more.
Discharge Date type is close but does not completely match rest of doc.
Line 26 - Only one Award - no medals
Line 27 - No wounds as a result of action with enemy forces

Page 2 - record shows Effective date of 1970
Shows more information that conflicts with other parts of other
documents on the same site.

Page 1 - Box 18 - shows terminal date of RESERVE as 72 with 3 months of
active service (no medals listed)
Page 2 - Box 18 - shows terminal date of RESERVE as 72 with 3 YEARS of
active service (and now has medals)

I will review these documents this week and reply with my "opinion" on
them and if I've changed my view.


--
spam999free@rrohio.com
remove 999 in order to email me
March 3, 2005 6:09:41 AM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

"Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote in message
news:p an.2005.03.02.14.02.58.721116@nowhere.lan...
> On Wed, 02 Mar 2005 13:39:38 +0000, Ben Myers wrote:
> >
> > Denial? Heck no! l deny being in denial. So I guess I am in some sort
of
> > philosophic meta-denial, having denied being in denial.
> >
> > I read the pinko subversive NY Times and the Financial Times (non-US
> > perspective) cover to cover every day to get a reality check on my own
> > observations and experience, plus on-line news sources. If the dollar
continues
> > to lose significant value against major currencies or China finally
decides to
> > do a significant revaluation of the RMB against $US, you have the
makings for
> > world-wide economic chaos. I don't need to be Greenspan to make that
sort of
> > prediction, either. Of course, I don't wear Greenspan's blinders,
either.
>
> The problem is that technology has made it very easy to be a global
> community of businesses. While some still struggle with it, many are
> getting it right, and that ease of communication then levels the field.
> When it use to require local workers and local parts a local wage was the
> norm, now I can move almost my entire business outside any country and
> take advantage of the remote countries wage structure - which directly
> impacts (negatively) my home country's economy, but many companies don't
> care about that effect.
>
> It's interesting to see that IT workers in India that use to earn $3/day
> (USD) are now making the equivalent (USD) of $30K/$40K per year due to the
> leveling of the workforce resources. As it turns out, the economy is like
> water, it will spread until it's level across the paying region. Wages
> will drop in the US, increase in remote countries, and things will level
> out, it's never going to be the same, and it's going to continue to
> change. Your only option is to see it and learn how to survive with the
> changes or you will be lost in the sea.


And it'll be interesting to see how all this plays out when China attempts
to take over Taiwan militarily, and then maybe North Korea decides to take
advantage of it with a move south since they are all starving up there and
decides to pre-empt with a nuke to Okinawa. Or maybe Pakistan gets taken
over by Islamic fundamentalists (Musharaf can't dodge those assassination
attempts forever) and decides it really does want to use those Islamic
nukes on India.

All this wonderful foreign outsourcing is dependent on stability. The
minute it disappears these companies are going get screwed! Then the U.S.
government will realize how it is also hog tied by its dependence. The last
page is yet to be written on all this "globalization". The reality is that
it is still a very nasty world out there. I have $20 that says one of the
above scenarios will play out within the next 10 years.
Anonymous
March 3, 2005 2:47:45 PM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

On Thu, 03 Mar 2005 03:09:41 -0500, Dogface wrote:
>
> And it'll be interesting to see how all this plays out when China attempts
> to take over Taiwan militarily, and then maybe North Korea decides to take
> advantage of it with a move south since they are all starving up there and
> decides to pre-empt with a nuke to Okinawa. Or maybe Pakistan gets taken
> over by Islamic fundamentalists (Musharaf can't dodge those assassination
> attempts forever) and decides it really does want to use those Islamic
> nukes on India.

Actually, China has stated that it will take over the US within 20 years -
they are very patient.

> All this wonderful foreign outsourcing is dependent on stability. The
> minute it disappears these companies are going get screwed! Then the U.S.
> government will realize how it is also hog tied by its dependence. The last
> page is yet to be written on all this "globalization". The reality is that
> it is still a very nasty world out there. I have $20 that says one of the
> above scenarios will play out within the next 10 years.

That's why IBM started pulling a lot of it back to the US.

--
spam999free@rrohio.com
remove 999 in order to email me
Anonymous
March 4, 2005 1:26:55 AM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

On Thu, 03 Mar 2005 11:12:34 -0500, Sparky wrote:
>
> I do not admire people who stand on their beliefs when their beliefs are
> wrong & detrimental to the strategic interests of the US. We're
> certainly no safer now from a terrorist attack than we were 3 1/2 half
> years ago, in spite of the billions spent on "homeland security".

I clipped the rest because this summarizes your beliefs enough for me. As
a former military service member, family man, been around the world, teach
shooting sports to kids groups, and business owner - I can only say that I
feel safer than when Clinton was in, and that my business has grown during
the Bush terms.

--
spam999free@rrohio.com
remove 999 in order to email me
Anonymous
March 4, 2005 1:26:56 AM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

Strange. You feel safer when Clinton was in, but the Quick Reaction Forces
had a chance to take out Bin Laden well before 9/11 and it was Clinton that
gave the order preventing the action.

I can only guess that this is one of those cases where what you do not know
makes you feel safer. >g<


"Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote in message
news:p an.2005.03.03.22.29.55.533173@nowhere.lan...
> On Thu, 03 Mar 2005 11:12:34 -0500, Sparky wrote:
>>
>> I do not admire people who stand on their beliefs when their beliefs are
>> wrong & detrimental to the strategic interests of the US. We're
>> certainly no safer now from a terrorist attack than we were 3 1/2 half
>> years ago, in spite of the billions spent on "homeland security".
>
> I clipped the rest because this summarizes your beliefs enough for me. As
> a former military service member, family man, been around the world, teach
> shooting sports to kids groups, and business owner - I can only say that I
> feel safer than when Clinton was in, and that my business has grown during
> the Bush terms.
>
> --
> spam999free@rrohio.com
> remove 999 in order to email me
>
Anonymous
March 4, 2005 2:07:00 AM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

Irene wrote:
> Strange. You feel safer when Clinton was in, but the Quick Reaction Forces
> had a chance to take out Bin Laden well before 9/11 and it was Clinton that
> gave the order preventing the action.
>
> I can only guess that this is one of those cases where what you do not know
> makes you feel safer. >g<
>
>
> "Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote in message
> news:p an.2005.03.03.22.29.55.533173@nowhere.lan...
>
>>On Thu, 03 Mar 2005 11:12:34 -0500, Sparky wrote:
>>
>>>I do not admire people who stand on their beliefs when their beliefs are
>>>wrong & detrimental to the strategic interests of the US. We're
>>>certainly no safer now from a terrorist attack than we were 3 1/2 half
>>>years ago, in spite of the billions spent on "homeland security".
>>
>>I clipped the rest because this summarizes your beliefs enough for me. As
>>a former military service member, family man, been around the world, teach
>>shooting sports to kids groups, and business owner - I can only say that I
>>feel safer than when Clinton was in, and that my business has grown during
>>the Bush terms.
>>
>>--
>>spam999free@rrohio.com
>>remove 999 in order to email me
>>
>
>
>

You missed a word Irene. <grin>. He said: "I feel safer than when
Clinton was in . . . ."

Dave
Anonymous
March 4, 2005 2:07:01 AM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

You are absolute correct and I apologize to Leythos.

Irene

"Dave Friedenberg" <davefr@iname.com> wrote in message
news:o MMVd.19077$VD5.17751@twister.socal.rr.com...
> Irene wrote:
>> Strange. You feel safer when Clinton was in, but the Quick Reaction
>> Forces had a chance to take out Bin Laden well before 9/11 and it was
>> Clinton that gave the order preventing the action.
>>
>> I can only guess that this is one of those cases where what you do not
>> know makes you feel safer. >g<
>>
>>
>> "Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote in message
>> news:p an.2005.03.03.22.29.55.533173@nowhere.lan...
>>
>>>On Thu, 03 Mar 2005 11:12:34 -0500, Sparky wrote:
>>>
>>>>I do not admire people who stand on their beliefs when their beliefs are
>>>>wrong & detrimental to the strategic interests of the US. We're
>>>>certainly no safer now from a terrorist attack than we were 3 1/2 half
>>>>years ago, in spite of the billions spent on "homeland security".
>>>
>>>I clipped the rest because this summarizes your beliefs enough for me. As
>>>a former military service member, family man, been around the world,
>>>teach
>>>shooting sports to kids groups, and business owner - I can only say that
>>>I
>>>feel safer than when Clinton was in, and that my business has grown
>>>during
>>>the Bush terms.
>>>
>>>--
>>>spam999free@rrohio.com
>>>remove 999 in order to email me
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> You missed a word Irene. <grin>. He said: "I feel safer than when Clinton
> was in . . . ."
>
> Dave
Anonymous
March 4, 2005 2:11:25 AM

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

On Thu, 03 Mar 2005 14:44:06 -0800, Irene wrote:
>
> Strange. You feel safer when Clinton was in, but the Quick Reaction
> Forces had a chance to take out Bin Laden well before 9/11 and it was
> Clinton that gave the order preventing the action.

I specifically said: I can only say that I feel safer than when Clinton
was in.... Which means I feel safer NOW than when Clinton WAS in office.

In case you miss the intent of the above - I feel safer with Bush in
office than I have with any other president during my lifetime.

> I can only guess that this is one of those cases where what you do not
> know makes you feel safer. >g<

I've been around the world, in places where they threw stuff at us for
being American, in places where they praised us for being American. I've
been in places I felt safe and places I felt unsafe in groups.

I left my post below so you could reference it for the part you misread.



> "Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote in message
> news:p an.2005.03.03.22.29.55.533173@nowhere.lan...
>> On Thu, 03 Mar 2005 11:12:34 -0500, Sparky wrote:
>>>
>>> I do not admire people who stand on their beliefs when their beliefs
>>> are wrong & detrimental to the strategic interests of the US. We're
>>> certainly no safer now from a terrorist attack than we were 3 1/2 half
>>> years ago, in spite of the billions spent on "homeland security".
>>
>> I clipped the rest because this summarizes your beliefs enough for me.
>> As a former military service member, family man, been around the world,
>> teach shooting sports to kids groups, and business owner - I can only
>> say that I feel safer than when Clinton was in, and that my business
>> has grown during the Bush terms.
>>
>> --
>> spam999free@rrohio.com
>> remove 999 in order to email me
>>
>>

--
spam999free@rrohio.com
remove 999 in order to email me
!