Hi Ron, as you were just saying about Re: Censorship....
RT>  >  I also feel that if
RT>   >Mickey Dees had a different attitude, the jury would have found for 
he
RT>   >defendant.
RT> 
RT> I've seen this sentiment expressed many times and it really sticks
RT> in my craw.  Why should any business be punished for standing up to
RT> frivolous and outrageous lawsuits?
The reality is that they are if they display what is considered to be
an arrogant-can-never-do-wrong attitude toward a plaintiff or an
complaint.  Rightly or wrongly.
 
RT> Were they being arrogant?  I don't see it.  Businesses are tired
RT> and frustrated by judges and juries that hand out absurd sums of
RT> _their_ money to individuals whose only case is to exploit the civil
RT> system. Why shouldn't McD's defend themselves. While they are at it,
RT> they are defending all the other businesses that are subject to
RT> similar actions. More power to them!  Its about time someone with
RT> the financial backing is finally standing up for right instead of
RT> merely paying off the accuser just because it is cheaper than
RT> fighting.
True, however they need to be careful what kind of attitude they
display.
RT> It has been speculated that in the end, McDonald's will probably
RT> have the entire judgement overturned.  I hope so!  The only thing
RT> they make that I enjoy is Egg McMuffins, but I will probably start
RT> patronizing them in support of their fight for justice in spite of
RT> the costs.
RT>
RT> BTW.... I don't even like their coffee.... tastes like chalk :)
I don't eat much fast anyway, since my heart problems a few years ago.
 
RD 
sandman@azstarnet.com - A newspaper ISP - Arizona Daily Star
sandman@brassroots.org - A no compromise gun rights organization.
http://www.azstarnet.com/~sandman
___
 X KWQ/2 1.2i X He with the fastest golf cart, always has a good lie.
--- Maximus/2 3.01
---------------