Judges Throw Cases Out?
What could be more populist than giving over absolute gatekeeper power to an elitist judge?
Throw Juries Out, Too!
If you're going to be a populist elitist, why mess around?
Health Courts
In which case, this:
is simply the next logical step!
And a good thing, too, given that people still have funny traditional values when it comes to:
Jury Discretion
No juries? No problem!
Done Quick! Done Right!
Gosh, I wonder how they would have answered if the question asked was this:
DO YOU AGREE OR DISAGREE WITH THIS STATEMENT: As part of any health care reform plan, Congress needs to change the medical malpractice system so that cases are resolved quicker, and more reliably, on behalf of those who are in the wrong.
Questionable question design, much? Ya think???
And finally, the whole point of this long exercise:
Defensive Medicine--That's The Evil!
But This One Just Doesn't Fit!
Hole-y Hegemony! What's that you say? By better than 2-1 people think that legitimate lawsuits are not being heard, because the court system just makes it too difficult?
That certainly doesn't sound like it belongs in the same universe as all those other answers. In fact, it sounds like this question just happened to ask about how people really feel on a fundamental aspect of civil justice that hasn't been the focus of intense conservative "attitude adjustment". After all, in our collective state of cognitive dissociation how people answer this very revealing question doesn't seem to affect much of anything that conservatives are trying to accomplish. So why waste time trying to brainwash people over this?
Once again, a friendly little reminder that movement conservatism is the enemy of rational thought. Not to mention, their health care plan really is "Die quickly." Followed by, "Don't sue." |
STATE BLOGS
