Friday, April 01, 2005

The passions of motorists will not conform to the dicates of reason and justice without constraint.

After responding as nicely as possible at the scene of the accident (vide infra) I went on my merry way. That, apparently, was a BIG MISTAKE. I found out later that the female who had struck my car (from behind, while I was parked, and hit my back quarter panel BEFORE she knocked my door off to boot) had filed a claim with my insurance company. I am completely shocked. How could she POSSIBLY think that I could have been at fault? I have no idea but the fact that a claim was filed against me, even though it is completely frivolous, will undoubtedly raise my insurance rates. I am absolutely livid but not surprised.

The far-left is continually fretting about how insurance rates are so high and how the “ultra-mega-super corporations” are making millions on the backs of the poor (Let me say here, I have no love for insurance companies) but given the chance to make a fraudulent claim they are right there! Gosh, how could insurance be so high? It’s a freaking’ mystery to me. The claims/deductibles must be set by some pale, white, protestant male in a dark backroom someplace where he makes sure they are just high enough to be out of reach of all those po’ folk. It couldn’t possibly be the fact that it’s a business and they have to attract public capital which requires a little something called profit. And by the way, profit is hard to come by when people are filing claims, going to chiropractors, and claiming soft-tissue injury for absolutely no reason.

How about a little common sense legislation here? Is there no middle ground? Can’t a Republican say “Teflon coated bullets really aren’t necessary” or a Democrat state “Perhaps caps on judgments in certain civil cases really aren’t a bad idea”. Of course not, because every politician, every bien pensant party member, just knows that giving in an inch will cause the whole mountain to crumble. It’s unfortunate that they have become so entrenched in their ideology that there is no room for reasonable compromise. Unfortunately the somewhat simplistic “slippery slope” argument has become overused in politics today. If the democrats would allow, for example, a suspect to be charged with two felony murders when a women is killed along with her unborn child would it truly undermine abortion rights legislation? I am sure the republicans would point a finger and say “Look, they’re saying it’s a human then, but not earlier!”. Of course by that same slippery slope argument the very fact that the 26th amendment reduced the voting age to 18 in 1971 would have us rolling in 3 year olds in strollers to punch the ballot today. There are nuances folks, there are mediums but they are apparently invisible to most people and all politicians.

Oh, and just in case you are wondering where I got the title check here. I’m a big fan of Alexander Hamilton.


Post a Comment

<< Home

Blogwise - blog directory The Tangled Bank