As IF Times

Source: People suing Coca-Cola, PepsiCo, Dr Pepper Snapple, claim diet sodas making them fat | Fox News

No one is safe from the expanding web of litigation that the legal industry voraciously spins to sustain their racket.  In fact, litigation should be added as the third item that people can’t avoid in life, the original ones being death and taxes.  It seems that at some point in everyone’s life, they will be drawn into a legal skirmish of some kind.

The industry has moved long ago from being a tool for reparation of damages between aggrieved parties.  That’s quaint and so 1600’s.  The scope of tort battles now includes the mandate to save people from their own stupidity and despite of the fact that any harm claimed may be purely imaginary.  Not everyone agrees with this view of course and opinions contrary to mine are expressed by various legal publications…by lawyers, but our own experiences and observations seems to indicate otherwise.

The linked story should resonate with everyone since we all know of someone we’ve dined with who orders a diet coke with their meal.  They may be obviously overweight but somehow the extra calorie in a diet coke will assuage their minds of drinking something which may be fattening.  Even worse, they may proceed to order a number of diet cokes as the meal of two double cheese burgers with gravy fries and ice cream ensues.  So now, soda drink manufacturers are potentially liable.

A quick search of famously frivolous lawsuits in American history shows that there is no shortage of legally enabled stupidity over the years.  From the site, Businessinsurance.org we find these classic gems:

1.  Richard Overton sued Anheuser-Busch for false advertising when drinking a six-pack of Bud Light failed to produce visions of beautiful women on a balmy beach. He sought damages for $10,000, claiming that this deceptive marketing caused him emotional and psychological distress. In other words, Overton was mad that drinking beer didn’t equal hot beach babes. The case was dropped, of course. Hopefully Overton learned a lesson or two about the difference between fantasy and reality. In reality, drinking excessive amounts of Bud Light will only give you a sizable beer gut and a noticeable repellent towards bikini-clad women.

2. The parents of Karen Norman sued Honda when their daughter died from not being able to escape from her Civic after backing into Galveston Bay. At first, the case sounds somewhat legitimate, until you learn the rest of the facts. For example, the Normans sued Honda because their daughter was unable to hit the emergency release button on the seatbelt. However, she failed to hit the button most likely because she had a blood-alcohol level of 0.17 and shouldn’t have been driving in the first place. The incident happened at 2 a.m. with passenger Josel Woods in the passenger seat. Woods was able to swim to safety. Here’s the kicker: the jury actually awarded the parents with just 25% of the damages considered contributorily negligent. Thus, the Normans basically sued and won against Honda in spite of their daughter’s obvious irresponsibility for driving under the influence.

3. Austin Aitken sued NBC for $2.5 million after a particularly grotesque challenge on Fear Factor allegedly made him vomit and run into a wall. According to Aitken, he was a regular watcher of the show and nothing had previously caused such a reaction until he witnessed contestants competing in a rat-eating challenge. In the show, the rats had been processed in a blender and then served to the contestants, which Aitken claimed caused his blood pressure to rise so much he became disoriented and was unable to see the door on his way to the other room. Aitken claimed that the $2.5 million was an arbitrary amount and that he simply wanted to send networks a message that shows have become too graphic. The judge ultimately threw the suit out, which makes sense. If you don’t want to watch something specific on TV, changing the channel is an effective means of escape.

4.  A man by the name of Dalton Chiscolm is suing Bank of America for “1,784 BILLION, TRILLION Dollars”, which, coincidentally, is a larger amount than the planet’s gross domestic product. Apparently, his reason for suing the corporation arose from several frustrating phone calls he made to settle some incorrectly deposited checks. The case was thrown out, mainly because there was no federal cause of action for the lawsuit. Along with the absurd amount, Chiscolm asked that the money be deposited into his account the following day with an additional $200,164,000 for his troubles

5. Lauren Rosenberg decided to sue Google for an excess of $100,000 in 2009 when Google Maps advised her to walk on the freeway to get to her destination, causing her to get hit by a car. She also sued the driver of the car. Apparently, the directions took Rosenberg onto Utah State Route 224, a busy freeway without sidewalks. Nonetheless, she meandered along the edge of the road, trusting an electronic device over her apparently missing common sense. Google maps does its best to give users an estimation on directions, but sometimes it gets them wrong, as most computerized programs are bound to do from time to time. Without accurate information of routes in a specific area, Google can only do so much to ensure you get to your destination without being pummeled down by a car. Rosenberg claims that Google should have used its Street View feature to deduce the lack of safety in walking in the area. Perhaps she should have used her own eyeballs, too.

For those wishing to see more of such tragic amusement, head to their site.

These examples of legalized stupidity have led to the increasing dumbing down of everyone in western culture since the results of frivolous lawsuits have consequences well beyond the final verdict in a particular case.  The entire warning label industry was founded on the premise that low IQ operators will come back to sue manufacturers for any mishap that occurs.  Thus to this day, we see the warning label on car mirrors warning that objects may be closer than they appear; that we need to be told how to affix a seatbelt on an airplane,  to have no smoking signs at petrol stations and of course that smoking may be hazardous to your health.

Enabling personal stupidity is not the service to society that lawyers may believe they’re providing, quite the opposite.  Enabling people to benefit from low IQ events is a push back against Darwinism.  It allows those with lower social skills to operate in a society for which they are clearly incapable.  They are protecting against the natural selection of species and therefore against the very laws of nature, like saving a Wildebeest wandering from the herd.  The individual is now able to transfer off his individual risk to the risk of the collective and personal responsibility becomes as oxymoronic as diet coke.

Instead of moving society forward, enablement of frivolous lawsuits will allow people to live among us with no need to develop common sense as a requirement to navigate life.  Eventually these wards of the state become a larger and larger part of society.  Entitlements become more important than enablements.  A cynical person would point out that this may explain the popularity of the Democratic party, but I’ll demur on that.

Source: Psychologists march through NY to call for Trumps removal | TheHill

After an eventful week of distraction by the revelations of the activities of Harvey Weinstein, the media is moving back to regular programming, which means identifying Donald Trump as the font of all that ails society.  In the months to come, more individuals will come out to accuse Weinstein of bad behavior and you can imagine the panic of those in top positions in Hollywood scrambling to keep their heads low as the wave of sanctimonious recriminations washes through their industry.

But all of this will pass as the real enemy still occupies the White House.  Trump derangement is a real thing as the endless wails from the usual disgruntled groups have proven over the past 10 months of his tenure.  It’s as if a massive infantile tantrum has taken hold of segments of the country.  That segment is demonstrating increasing detachment from reality as it appears that a mass psychosis has taken hold aided in large part by a complicit media.  Even psychologists are joining the chorus of wailing, well at least 100 of them…in New York.  Essentially, they feel that his rudeness and thin skin are qualities that aren’t becoming of a President.  But as most know, Psychologists are like hammers; to them, everything looks like a nail.  I’d trust a psychologist as much as I’d trust a skinny chef.

It’s clear that the majority whom are vociferously protesting whatever Trump does, are not for anything per se; they are just anti anything Trump.  It’s largely irrelevant what policies the Trump administration advances, they just cannot reconcile that he’s President.  Reducing tax burdens on the middle class are seen as oppressive; attempting to create American jobs is racist as is protecting national sovereignty.  Pushing back against disrespect for the flag is divisive;  having numerous women and minorities in his cabinet, likewise.  Then there is the scantly reported success story of the imminent demise of ISIS in the middle east, which most would consider a substantial achievement, but Trump haters will frame as denial of career options for terrorists.  There’s some rich psychological fodder there for someone.

The expected crowd of Trump haters include those with differing partisan political outlooks, so of course, they can be discounted.  Actors and entertainers  have also recently exposed their suspect judgment and credibility, so they too can be discounted and ignored.  Black Lives Matter/Occupy Wall Street are paid shills, so they’re another marginal interest group.  They’ve managed to add that champion of women’s rights, Larry Flynt to their cause, whom has graciously offered 10 million dollars to anyone bringing forth impeachable evidence against Trump.  He’s essentially Maxine Waters with money. It’ll be amusing to see what kind of ooze comes out as a result of this offer.

Ironically, the louder the cacophony of bleating from the Trump deranged, the more the regular folk fall into the Trump fold.  When normal people observe the irrational foaming at the mouth invective spewed by the Trump haters, they are forced to make a rational assessment.  Am I them?