Coordinators

Other Contributors

About Us

www.clpblog.org

The contributors to the Consumer Law & Policy blog are lawyers and law professors who practice, teach, or write about consumer law and policy. The blog is hosted by Public Citizen Litigation Group, but the views expressed here are solely those of the individual contributors (and don't necessarily reflect the views of institutions with which they are affiliated). To view the blog's policies, please click here.

« Fed to Curb Credit Card Abuse | Main | Industry and Republican Allies Gear up to Fight Moderate Consumer Health and Safety Bill »

Thursday, February 28, 2008

Comments

Dawn Renee

I am looking on line. Im over 50 and was trying to find where I could buy Zima in New Hampshire for a gathering of adults I was having.

Sparks Tongue

I might have to sue Sparks over the loss of some memories. Could you help me with that?

Marc J. Randazza

Oh, forgot my main point:

The vast majority of the work that Public Citizen does is noble, worthwhile, and we are all better off for it.

Therefore, while I do abhor this project... I look at organizations and people like stock. You can have a down day... and an up day... but I judge on the long-term trend. Public Citizen is still a strong "buy."

But please, this kind of thing is best left to the marketplace. If you want to protest, then protest. Please don't file this foolish lawsuit.

Marc J. Randazza

The vast majority of the work that Public Citizen does is noble, worthwhile, and we are all better off for it.

However, this one I have to disagree with.

First off, what if I want alcohol with caffeine? I'd like to have that choice.

Of course, I wouldn't elect to make that choice. Anheuser-Busch and Miller make shit beer. Anyone who drinks Anheuser-Busch or Miller products pretty much deserves to get ass-cancer from having no freakin' taste or class. You may as well piss in a can and hand it to me rather than open me up a can of Miller.

Adding a fruity sweet taste to it?

Trust me, the market will kill this. It killed Tequiza, it killed Zima, and it will kill this liquid shit.

ginsocal

Sorry about the double post, though maybe it will help get the message through...

ginsocal

Liberal fascism rears its ugly head yet again! I'm no longer amazed by the idiocy that these leeches put out. CSPI doesn't have anything to do with "science," nor does it have the public interest in mind. They exist to implement nanny-state regulations that would never pass legislative muster, and line their own bottomless pockets. We need to make these people go away.

ginsocal

Liberal fascism rears its ugly head yet again! I'm no longer amazed by the idiocy that these leeches put out. CSPI doesn't have anything to do with "science," nor does it have the public interest in mind. They exist to implement nanny-state regulations that would never pass legislative muster, and line their own bottomless pockets. We need to make these people go away.

Les

Here's a news flash, adults like fruity-flavored drinks to. If they didn't we'd never have things like fuzzy navels or daiquiris.

Also, I assume your comparison to tobacco companies refers to Joe Camel? How are ads depicting humanoid camels (not cartoon camels, there is a difference.) engaging in adult behavior in adult contexts supposed to be 'marketing to children'? Just because you are (presumably) an adult and don't like such art dosn't make it exclusively kid's material.

Supremacy Claus

Tort Reform: The lawyers are out of control, and lawless. They legislate from the bench in violation of Articles granting that power to the legislatures.

The judges have no competence to set industrial policy by granting immunities to themselves, and holding productive sectors liable. Nor do they have any constitutional permission to do so. Their sole legitimacy comes from Army Airborne. Try to disobey a judge, and the armed Federal marshal thugs he sends to help you comply. They have lawlessly granted themselves immunity. There is no recourse inside the airtight, rigged lawyer system.

I would like to see national databases of these internal lawyer traitors and their enforcers. Appellate judges must be removed by a courageous Executive. Then all product and service providers refuse to serve them. Boycott these traitors into the Stone Age. Pass lawyer control laws that exclude all law school trained people from all benches, all legislative seats, and all responsible Executive policy positions. Do so as laws now exclude felons.

Bartleby

Why is it when "it's for protection of the children" do many sane people lose their minds. What we don't need are more inane laws intended to protect the children at the loss of rights of adults. Good grief, CSPI is one of the largest nanny-do-gooder organizations (non-priofit in name only) on the planet whose only merit is to try and stop people from enjoying life.

Ever hear of Boones Farm COuntry Quencher, man that was some good stuff when was in high-school back in the late 70's and early 80's. My what have we become, I surprised we all survived this long without the lawyers and groups such as CSPI protecting us from ourselves.

God I wish you people would just go away and leave me alone. I neither want, nor need your help and would prefer you keep your nose out of the things I do. And in return I promise to leave you alone to your vices, whatever that may be.

Tort Reform

The English language has a noun that is typically used for those that seek to destroy the freedom and freedom of choice of others. That word is Tyrant. History is awash with the words of these high and mighty sounding hypocrites, "for the common good," and nowadays, "for the children".

The fact is that the greedy, sleazy lawyers that bring these types of nanny-state lawsuits have manipulated the system. There is no justice in our courts anymore, civil or criminal. You can bet that these lawsuits contain the terms that "reasonable" attorney fees will be compensated to the plaintiffs. "Reasonable" to them is hundreds or thousands of dollars an hour. See the tobacco settlement for more info.

The only way to deal with tyrants is to overthrow them. Fight, pass tort reform on the state level usually by citizen initiative. Write op eds calling attention to their evil ways. If that doesn't work, outright defy them.

Lobby for a loser pays (including attorneys) civil court system. Write nasty letters to the organizations of greedy, sleazy, tort lawyers, but be careful to avoid calling anyone by name so that libel and slander cases cannot be brought against you. Find out who funds these organizations like Public Citizen and CSPI and boycott their products and let them know why. This is an all out war and our freedom and freedom of choice is at stake.

Remember, these people, like all tyrants, have nothing but contempt for the average person and their freedom. They are not out there to help you and I. It is time to go on the offensive and show what contempt that we have for them.

Supremacy Claus

Rural: What you propose is impossible. The criminal cult enterprise that is the lawyer profession has dealt itself immunities from the legal malpractice of their weak claims.

They may sue anyone, generating massive defense costs, and pressures to settle. A small island of accountability was removed when Rule 11 got gutted, because it worked too well.

The victims of lawyer malpractice and carelessness have no recourse, whatsoever. This unjust lawyer privilege violates all state constitution articles granting access to the court, and the Fourteenth Amendment procedural due process right to a fair hearing. The lawyer self-dealt immunity is totally lawless, and maintained only by out of control pro-lawyer rent seeking biased judges. No lawyer should sit on any bench, because only the interest of the criminal cult has any chance in court.

In fairness to Steve, he has not yet banned such loving lawyer criticism. The right wing, corporatist stooge hypocrites cult indoctrinated cult members have zero tolerance for such loving criticism of the profession, and advocacy of making all lawyers subject to legal malpractice claims by adverse third parties. They have banned me. Steve has not, and has taken the time to provide a thoughtful reply, that furthers the legal debate, rather than shuts it down. I hope we all appreciate the grace and fairness of our host here.

Nked

"In fact, short of decorating these cans with Hannah Montana or Spiderman, it’s hard to see how you could do a better job of marketing alcospeed to young people than Anheuser-Busch and Miller are doing."

What? You mean short of directing advertising to kids, they are advertising to kids? I also like how you brought up Spuds Mckenzie and alluded to Joe Camel, though neither of these companies have ad campaigns that are remotely similar. Oh right, it tastes sweet . . .therefore it MUST be for kids. What adult in their right mind would choose a drink that tastes like Orange Kool-aid rather than a single malt scotch? We all know how delicious that is. I also love this comment to DngrMse:

"Sigh....it's bad enough that it's a full-time job to persuade the government to do its job to protect underage drinkers . . ."

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you meant "prevent underage drinking" not "protect underage drinkers." Even so, it's not the governments job to force companies to make certain products and ban them from making others. The act of selling alcohol to minors is illegal, not producing an alcoholic drink minors may or may not want. Similarly, the responsibility of keeping a minor from drinking lies with the parents, not everybody else.

I enjoyed reading the comments; they did an excellent job of ripping your argument to threads. I hope you get laughed out of court.


DngrMse

Stephen Gardner:

Sigh....it's bad enough that it's a full-time job to persuade the government to do its job to protect underage drinkers....but also having to contend with people who post comments without having done their homework is just sad. The Center for Science in the Public Interest is a non-profit outfit--and we have several lawyers in addition to myself who were lured away from the promise of money in order to protect the public. Also, unless DngrMse is under 21, we are not trying to protect him from himself--that too would appear to be a full-time job.

What an absolute bunch of horse hockey. CPSI may bill itself as 'non profit', but I doubt it's many volunteer lawyers are working their litigious fingers to the bone without some 'compensation'...in addition to the pure pleasure that forcing President Nanny-Pants to wipe the bottoms of this nation's "underage drinkers" might give. There's money, and there's lawyers. That's all anyone needs to connect the dots in this story.

Matthew

It's typical that when someone claiming to be speaking in "the public interest" says that their efforts are "for the children", we can accurately assume that they're using those phrases in place of a rational, cohesive argument, and that their real goals are power, control, the abolition of a specific freedom, and often personal profit. This is no exception. Thank you for proving the rule.

Your tactics, attitude and approach to what you perceive to be societal ills are offensive, intrusive and shameful. There are a great many things that make me proud to be an American, but ridiculous nanny state lawsuits are the thing that make me most ashamed. And that includes our current president's ridculous war.

I hope you learn the meaning of the word "shame" at some point in your life, Mr. Gardner. You clearly don't get the concept at this time.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Subscribe to CL&P

RSS/Atom Feed

To receive a daily email of Consumer Law & Policy content, enter your email address here:

Search CL&P Blog

Recent Posts

April 2019

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30