Obama's HORRIBLE State of the Union

>because I wanted to complain to SE about the abuse by one person. (I think it was Hones; I forget exactly.)

Absolutely. This is all a good samaritan act. Me and columbiacounty get it.

> I am guessing that is why you are in grey.

Sounds very innocent and naive of you, our little flower child.

The same Columbia County who says you are a troll? That's a strange person to invoke as an ally. I'm confident that your torrent of abuse will get you banned from SE and not just greyed out. Sayonara.

We aren't allies.

But intelligence isn't limited to one side of any debate.

Look it up Wbottom.

Yes, when you are posting, intelligence is limited to one side and it ain't yours. Adios, troll.

So you are saying that the intelligence is on columbiacounty's side of the debate? Where he thinks you are me?

MidtownerEast, what happens if aboutready's litigation partner husband walks into the word processing department of his firm tomorrow. Will you do a quick alt+tab off of streeteasy back onto WordPerfect so he doesn't see you?

huntersburg, since my husband and midtownereast don't know each other it really wouldn't matter.

your efforts to prove my existence unethical are remarkable. and driven. and wrong.

keep it up. you only make your own accusations seem kind of nasty, like an old angry man sitting alone in a room without any loved ones.

You existence isn't unethical. That's a philosophical matter.

Your behavior is unethical.

As for accusations, does a nasty accusation reflect on the accuser or the accused? Interesting question for a litigator.

Is your husband sitting next to you now?

Sorry, can we get a complete tally of posters and their alter-egos? This has all gotten very confusing - I could only keep track of one.

No problem, I am aboutready. I'm trying to extort money from developers to advertise on my site brickunderground.

bjw, please, you can do more than one. but hb is starting to boil, given his or her greyed out status.

no, my behavior is not unethical, and hb your's is. you lie and distort constantly. i do not.

clearly you do not like litigators, but that has nothing to do with whether or not they are ethical.

ar, ok I can do more than one. At the risk of sounding like the utterly paranoid cc, huntersburg is pretty clearly the same troll that has traditionally hounded you. Hopefully it disappears soon.

excuse me. an outright accusation of extortion? dipshit, i can sue you for that. and maybe i should.

"No problem, I am aboutready. I'm trying to extort money from developers to advertise on my site brickunderground."

that also is a total mess of a lie.

A lie? How can it be a lie? I can only comment on the way things appear.

But you know the facts.

>excuse me. an outright accusation of extortion? dipshit, i can sue you for that. and maybe i should.

What if I accused you of arson? Could you sue for that?

Aboutready committed arson last night.

Tort reform is a joke. You'd have a better chance at getting your head blown off in mid air while jumping off the empire state building than getting a big settlement from a case. Hardly any cases go to jury, they all pretty much settle beforehand. The only reason republicans carry about it is because layers tend to donate to democrats more than republicans. That's why they hate unions too, they hate them because they don't vote for them. All these "reforms" have nothing to do with reducing costs. They're just trying to stick it to the other party. People here should stop pretending that they're anything but that.

fryers, broilers and roasters tend to donate to republicans more than democrats. Otherwise, I agree completely.

>The only reason republicans carry about it is because layers tend to donate to democrats more than republicans.

John Edwards, ambulance chaser in chief, was even more delusional about his presidential prospects than Sarah Palin is today.

> Hardly any cases go to jury, they all pretty much settle beforehand.

Bag logic... they'd settle for less if there wasn't the chance of huge payouts and prolonged rounds (paid for by potential huge payouts). There would be fewer cases in the first place if you curb the ambulance chasers at the source....

> All these "reforms" have nothing to do with reducing costs. They're just trying to stick it to the
> other party.

Well, of course, Dems and Republicans alike care most about staying in office.

But it doesn't mean tort reform isn't needed.