Friend of Overlawyered Amber Taylor writes:
I have my suspicions that when the Republicans talk up “tort reform” to stop “nuisance lawsuits”, they’re not exactly talking about stuff like this. [Short version: scientist posts negative reviews of a book on his blog, criticizing its new theory of developmental biology as having no basis in reality; the word “crackpot” was used. The author, a critic of “Darwinian orthodoxy,” sues.]
Right. That would be why the tort reform proponents at Overlawyered covered the story days before Marcotte got around to it. That coverage was even noted at the website Marcotte quoted. But why acknowledge facts when inaccurate smears are available?
Just so. Earlier Marcotte: Feb. 16, Feb. 2 and links therein.
4 Comments
Do only Republicans notice problems with lawless litigiousness? That wasn’t my impression…
Why let the truth get in the way of a good story?
It’s arguably a smear, I suppose, if the folks at Overlawyered are to be characterized as Republicans who talk up “tort reform” to stop “nuisance lawsuits.” Of course, there might be Republicans who: (a) do that; (b) do not have lawsuits like this one in mind; and (c) do not contribute to Overlawyered.
Beyond Marcotte’s obviously mixed signals at the intersection of partisanship and tort reform, there are amusing underlying mixed signals at the intersection of right/left ideology and Darwinism/creationism. Writer Steve Sailer hits them here:
http://www.isteve.com/Darwin-EnemiesonLeft.htm
It would be good sport to watch her squirm over this indelicate aspect of Darwin’s theories and writing, and evolution in general.