Defeated Dem Politician sues for "loss of livelihood"

[earlycuyler]

Well I think I have my first nominee for "whining lib politician of the week award". Obama can't enter because he's already got a "lifetime achievement whining award".

Grab this.

Failed Democrat Pol Sues Critics Over Election Loss

There's nothing quite like a politician scorned.

When voters in Ohio's 1st Congressional District threw Democrat Steve Driehaus out of office after only one term, he did not bow out gracefully. No, he decided to get even. So he did what anyone does in today's culture: he sued somebody.


Charging that its activities contributed to his defeat and thus to his "loss of livelihood," Driehaus is suing the Susan B. Anthony List, a group that supports pro-life candidates for Congress and which has been one of the leading and most effective organizations involved in the fight to cut off federal funding to Planned Parenthood.

What a freaking nancy boy! And the Judge who is going to allow the case to go forward is of course an Obama appointee and low and behold also a former President and Director of Planned Parenthood.

Talk about a conflict of interest.

Here's the link to the article.

Failed Democrat Pol Sues Critics Over Election Loss - Peter Roff (usnews.com)

Ya, that's

 

[Conservative]

Sounds more like he's suing them for defamation.

"I have chosen to proceed against the SBA List in federal court because the issue at stake goes beyond the purview of the Ohio Elections Commission," Driehaus said in a statement. "As more and more interests are able to anonymously spend unlimited sums of money in attempts to defame public servants and influence our elections, it is imperative that groups such as the SBA List be held to account for their behavior. Lies have consequences."

Steve Driehaus files new suit against SBA List - Alex Isenstadt - POLITICO.com

Had the guy won, there would likely have been no lawsuit. He's a whiny bitch.

 

[Amelia]

Funny thing about this is that he may actually have a case if he was libeled or slandered. If what the Susan B Anthony List did was knowingly distribute false information on this person, then it could well be considered libel. If the information was true, then the plaintiff has no case.

Libel and Slander legal definition of Libel and Slander. Libel and Slander synonyms by the Free Online Law Dictionary.

I think that's a large part of the point. Not the entire point - but a large part. If the article is accurate the plaintiff doesn't come close to having a case on the grounds of SBAL saying something false about him.

Now there are lots of things said by outside interest groups during the heat of political campaigns that turn out to be untrue. What the Susan B. Anthony List said about the so-called pro-life Democrats who gave Obama the votes he needed to pass healthcare just doesn't happen to be one of them.

 

[teapartysamurai]

Funny thing about this is that he may actually have a case if he was libeled or slandered. If what the Susan B Anthony List did was knowingly distribute false information on this person, then it could well be considered libel. If the information was true, then the plaintiff has no case.

Libel and Slander legal definition of Libel and Slander. Libel and Slander synonyms by the Free Online Law Dictionary.

I think that's a large part of the point. Not the entire point - but a large part. If the article is accurate the plaintiff doesn't come close to having a case on the grounds of SBAL saying something false about him.

Now there are lots of things said by outside interest groups during the heat of political campaigns that turn out to be untrue. What the Susan B. Anthony List said about the so-called pro-life Democrats who gave Obama the votes he needed to pass healthcare just doesn't happen to be one of them.

Who decides what is a lie in the political arena????

Once you do that you might as well chuck out the whole first amendment.

If Susan B. Anthony were lying he most certainly could have put out an ad letting people know they were lying.

The fact he didn't and just wants to sue now tells me they weren't lying, he's just a sore loser, and he wants his to limit the first amendment should he run in the future.

This is what Democrats have sunk to, because the American people have turned against them.

He must lose for the 1st amendment to survive.

 

[Amelia]

Funny thing about this is that he may actually have a case if he was libeled or slandered. If what the Susan B Anthony List did was knowingly distribute false information on this person, then it could well be considered libel. If the information was true, then the plaintiff has no case.

Libel and Slander legal definition of Libel and Slander. Libel and Slander synonyms by the Free Online Law Dictionary.

I think that's a large part of the point. Not the entire point - but a large part. If the article is accurate the plaintiff doesn't come close to having a case on the grounds of SBAL saying something false about him.

Now there are lots of things said by outside interest groups during the heat of political campaigns that turn out to be untrue. What the Susan B. Anthony List said about the so-called pro-life Democrats who gave Obama the votes he needed to pass healthcare just doesn't happen to be one of them.

Who decides what is a lie in the political arena????

Once you do that you might as well chuck out the whole first amendment.

If Susan B. Anthony were lying he most certainly could have put out an ad letting people know they were lying.

The fact he didn't and just wants to sue now tells me they weren't lying, he's just a sore loser, and he wants his to limit the first amendment should he run in the future.

This is what Democrats have sunk to, because the American people have turned against them.

He must lose for the 1st amendment to survive.

Right.

That's the rest of the point -- we need wide latitude for first amendment to remain effective. Fear of some politically oriented judge disagreeing with you in a subjective manner could have a stifling effect.


It's just that the SBAL not even speaking falsely adds insult to injury.

 

[WillowTree]

I hope he sues. set a precedent. Then Mrs. Palin should sue. she'd sure as shit win.

 

[tinydancer]

I hope he sues. set a precedent. Then Mrs. Palin should sue. she'd sure as shit win.

No kidding. I remember Alcee Hastings telling an audience at a Town Hall that if Palin could field strip a moose, just think of what she'd do to blacks and Jews.

 

[tinydancer]

Always remember liberals, if you open Pandora's box you better be angelic and virginal and positive in all your campaign ads in the future.

I'm just remembering Alan Grayson and the Florida DNC releasing Col. West's and his wife's private information in a flyer....

This is just for fun.

Keeping It Classy: The Top Ten Most Disgraceful Democratic Attack Ads of 2010...So Far - Guy Benson



And one doesn't have to play tit for tat here; I'm just putting these up for fun.

But both sides run attack ads. But to sue for loss of livelihood really does earn this man
"Liberal Whiner of the Week".

 

[Ropey]

In a society that often favors the wealthy litigant, one litigates.

That's why there are so many jokes about lawyers and why the people say "follow the money", regardless of the party. This is the culture.