• Announcements

    • Zapata

      Abbreviated rules   07/28/2017

      Underdawg did an excellent job of explaining the rules.  Here's the simplified version: Don't insinuate Pedo.  Warning and or timeout for a first offense.  PermaFlick for any subsequent offenses Don't out members.  See above for penalties.  Caveat:  if you have ever used your own real name or personal information here on the forums since, like, ever - it doesn't count and you are fair game. If you see spam posts, report it to the mods.  We do not hang out in every thread 24/7 If you see any of the above, report it to the mods by hitting the Report button in the offending post.   We do not take action for foul language, off-subject content, or abusive behavior unless it escalates to persistent stalking.  There may be times that we might warn someone or flick someone for something particularly egregious.  There is no standard, we will know it when we see it.  If you continually report things that do not fall into rules #1 or 2 above, you may very well get a timeout yourself for annoying the Mods with repeated whining.  Use your best judgement. Warnings, timeouts, suspensions and flicks are arbitrary and capricious.  Deal with it.  Welcome to anarchy.   If you are a newbie, there are unwritten rules to adhere to.  They will be explained to you soon enough.  
Sign in to follow this  
Dog

DOJ gone rogue.

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, Sol Rosenberg said:

Awesome. Time to Doggy Style the DOJ. You’re the life of The Party.

Gonna leave this thread up?

In which Sol attempts to change the subject to me.

BTW...This is not about Russia, dossiers or the election.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Dog said:

In which Sol attempts to change the subject to me.

BTW...This is not about Russia, dossiers or the election.

No Trump? I don't think liberals can process such a thing right now.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Dog said:

In which Sol attempts to change the subject to me.

BTW...This is not about Russia, dossiers or the election.

In which I identify which tactic you are using. 

You mean going rogue like Sarah Palin?  That’s a real insult!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sol Rosenberg said:

In which I identify which tactic you are using. 

You mean going rogue like Sarah Palin?  That’s a real insult!

Any thoughts on the subject?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dog said:

Any thoughts on the subject?

I'm pretty glad to have a Department of Justice that operates with some independence from the chief executive, lest we become a banana republic in more than just the economic sense.  I understand that need to discredit the Department that a growing faction of the GOP feels, but I conclude that the country is more important than any political party, particularly one that doesn't even pretend to represent the masses anymore.  

The Department, particularly the FBI is staffed by people whose education, background checks, training, etc. make them infinitely more trustworthy than the people trying to raise doubts about them, including but not limited to the chief executive and his non-supportive defenders.  Knowing that the DOJ went into action when informed by the Aussies that Papadop was talking about the DNC hack before the DNC was, only reinforces my gratitude for the work that the Department does.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Sol Rosenberg said:

I'm pretty glad to have a Department of Justice that operates with some independence from the chief executive, lest we become a banana republic in more than just the economic sense.  I understand that need to discredit the Department that a growing faction of the GOP feels, but I conclude that the country is more important than any political party, particularly one that doesn't even pretend to represent the masses anymore.  

The Department, particularly the FBI is staffed by people whose education, background checks, training, etc. make them infinitely more trustworthy than the people trying to raise doubts about them, including but not limited to the chief executive and his non-supportive defenders.  Knowing that the DOJ went into action when informed by the Aussies that Papadop was talking about the DNC hack before the DNC was, only reinforces my gratitude for the work that the Department does.  

Any thoughts on the prosecution of Howard Root?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Dog said:

Any thoughts on the prosecution of Howard Root?  

Obviously, the case was misguided, mean-spirited and deeply troubling, but was it wrong? Howard Root hired an attorney to harass a writer who called him wrong, he also settled a false claim civil case for $520,000 identical to the case being prosecuted. If he was wrong in the Civil case, why did the criminal case fail?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Dog said:

Any thoughts on the prosecution of Howard Root?  

Not without hearing from the other side.  That is a really good marketing video for a book though. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, badlatitude said:

Obviously, the case was misguided, mean-spirited and deeply troubling, but was it wrong? Howard Root hired an attorney to harass a writer who called him wrong, he also settled a false claim civil case for $520,000 identical to the case being prosecuted. If he was wrong in the Civil case, why did the criminal case fail?

No two cases are identical and just because he settled a civil case doesn't mean he was in the wrong...That I can tell you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why would I need to watch a video where republican snowflakes melt?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Raz'r said:

Why would I need to watch a video where republican snowflakes melt?

How else can we discredit the DOJ enough to get people to look the other way when the whip comes down in the Russia investigation? There are already two plea deals and two more indictments.  We can't wait forever.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Raz'r said:

Why would I need to watch a video where republican snowflakes melt?

There's no point in you watching it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Dog said:

No two cases are identical and just because he settled a civil case doesn't mean he was in the wrong...That I can tell you.

It was the same product which was brought up on criminal charges. You know of course, that the DOJ allows language that rewrites the charges to give the impression there was no fraud involved as part of any settlement. Howard Root settled those charges, it does not mean he is completely innocent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, badlatitude said:

It was the same product which was brought up on criminal charges. You know of course, that the DOJ allows language that rewrites the charges to give the impression there was no fraud involved as part of any settlement. Howard Root settled those charges, it does not mean he is completely innocent.

The case that the DOJ was involved in was not settled it went to trial and he was acquitted without even calling a single defense witness.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Dog said:

The case that the DOJ was involved in was not settled it went to trial and he was acquitted without even calling a single defense witness.

No sir, there was a separate case that involved the same product. Root settled it for $520,000.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, badlatitude said:

No sir, there was a separate case that involved the same product. Root settled it for $520,000.

So you say. Not a DOJ criminal charge but a civil case. Got a cite for it? Not that a settlement indicates guilt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Dog said:

So, A civil case was settled and the criminal case fell apart and Root was acquitted, what's your point?

What's your point?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Dog said:

Any thoughts on the prosecution of Howard Root?  

Yeah. I watched it and then did a little digging because it didn't ring true. It was the FDA that came after him for mislabeling medical devices. It was labeled and marketed as something to clear out the heart. They also sold it for clearing out other veins that had not been approved by the FDA. Got off by saying their sales could tell the truth to doctors about the capabilities of the tech (which I'd think they are correct about). Spent $25 million on the defense. That's 'Thou Doth Protest' money but hey, it's America.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, Dog, if I’ve got this right, you got your Fautrage up over a persecution that didn’t end in a conviction. Do you think ALL persecutions end in convictions? What rate of conviction would be ok?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Raz'r said:

So, Dog, if I’ve got this right, you got your Fautrage up over a persecution that didn’t end in a conviction. Do you think ALL persecutions end in convictions? What rate of conviction would be ok?

No, you don't have it right, but why would you. It's about a baseless prosecution that never should have been brought in which an innocent defendant didn't even need to offer a defense to be acquitted.   The larger point however is about a corrupt culture at the Department of Justice. A culture which destroys lives in the pursuit of convictions or settlements as opposed to pursuing justice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Dog said:

No, you don't have it right, but why would you. It's about a baseless prosecution that never should have been brought in which an innocent defendant didn't even need to offer a defense to be acquitted.   The larger point however is about a corrupt culture at the Department of Justice. A culture which destroys lives in the pursuit of convictions or settlements as opposed to pursuing justice.

One questionable instance does not a corrupt culture make. You're stretching.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Bent Sailor said:

One questionable instance does not a corrupt culture make. You're stretching.

I didn't say the Root prosecution made a corrupt culture.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, austin1972 said:

Yeah. I watched it and then did a little digging because it didn't ring true. It was the FDA that came after him for mislabeling medical devices. It was labeled and marketed as something to clear out the heart. They also sold it for clearing out other veins that had not been approved by the FDA. Got off by saying their sales could tell the truth to doctors about the capabilities of the tech (which I'd think they are correct about). Spent $25 million on the defense. That's 'Thou Doth Protest' money but hey, it's America.

Nothing sells books like Fauxtrage. The timing is perfect for him, with current events demanding that Real Americans do their part to discredit the DOJ. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Sol Rosenberg said:

Nothing sells books like Fauxtrage. The timing is perfect for him, with current events demanding that Real Americans do their part to discredit the DOJ. 

In which case "Fire and Fury" should be a best seller.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Dog said:

I didn't say the Root prosecution made a corrupt culture.

Umm, yeah, you did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lets Dog this out:

The FAA once told me to land on a runway occupied by another airplane. FAA is bad, get rid of them.

The EPA hassled me over a "wetland" once. Get rid of them.

The FDA approved Thalidomide. Get rid of them.

The Army killed their own men with artillery fire. Idiots can't aim a gun, get rid of them.

The Navy was too busy spanking their monkeys to notice Japan sneaking up on Pearl Harbor. Get rid of them.

The CIA didn't notice the 9-11 plot and neither did the FBI. Get rid of them both.

Congress are a bunch of cynical fuckwits who line their own pockets and do a crap job running the country on a good day. Get rid of them.

All we need is Trump. All things are Trump. Trump will save us. Help us be reborn in the perfect light of Trump.

Clearly government should be one emperor and some lackeys.

Dog - Do you REALLY think a criminal president gutting the DOJ to keep himself in power and out of jail will work *just once* and then we will be back to normal? Suggest you read the Bernie Gunther detective series and see what happens when the course of justice is perverted in that manner.

Here is a hint: It didn't fix itself, we had to do it with high explosives.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, kent_island_sailor said:

Lets Dog this out:

The FAA once told me to land on a runway occupied by another airplane. FAA is bad, get rid of them.

The EPA hassled me over a "wetland" once. Get rid of them.

The FDA approved Thalidomide. Get rid of them.

The Army killed their own men with artillery fire. Idiots can't aim a gun, get rid of them.

The Navy was too busy spanking their monkeys to notice Japan sneaking up on Pearl Harbor. Get rid of them.

The CIA didn't notice the 9-11 plot and neither did the FBI. Get rid of them both.

Congress are a bunch of cynical fuckwits who line their own pockets and do a crap job running the country on a good day. Get rid of them.

All we need is Trump. All things are Trump. Trump will save us. Help us be reborn in the perfect light of Trump.

Clearly government should be one emperor and some lackeys.

 

Let's dog this out....Are you opposed to turning the light on the DOJ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lets give Dog a chance - In some alternative universe where he has no access to news, he just *might have* randomly hit on DOJ reform when they are investigating his best buddies. Through some quantum entanglement across the multiverse our version of Dog could have this idea totally independent of his canine Trump defending instincts in this universe.

Could happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, austin1972 said:

Yeah. I watched it and then did a little digging because it didn't ring true. It was the FDA that came after him for mislabeling medical devices. It was labeled and marketed as something to clear out the heart. They also sold it for clearing out other veins that had not been approved by the FDA. Got off by saying their sales could tell the truth to doctors about the capabilities of the tech (which I'd think they are correct about). Spent $25 million on the defense. That's 'Thou Doth Protest' money but hey, it's America.

https://www.whistleblowersinternational.com/types-of-fraud/pharmaceutical/off-label-marketing/   I believe a medical device and a medication, if regulated by the FDA, face similar rules.

“Pharmaceutical sales representatives are prohibited from discussing off-label usage unless a physician asks explicitly. However, many companies have ignored this rule outright by teaching their salesmen to tout the benefits of prescribing a drug for other patient populations.  In the most blatant cases, manufacturers have even hosted sponsored dinners and vacations where they gave presentations to doctors and healthcare providers about the benefits of different unapproved uses of a medication.”

Quoted in full but I’m not sure how common abuse is.  In my world it seemed to almost stop under Obama.  I think the usual course is arranging a peer to peer discussion with a technical services doctor who can provide any off label research and antidotes.    Some off label use is a very good thing.   Games are played as well.   I saw a  company broaden the label on an older drug about to go generic, gaining indications the competing generics lacked.   This can affect which can be legally prescribed in some instances.   I’m In a fringe field, others may have different observations.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, kent_island_sailor said:

Lets give Dog a chance - In some alternative universe where he has no access to news, he just *might have* randomly hit on DOJ reform when they are investigating his best buddies. Through some quantum entanglement across the multiverse our version of Dog could have this idea totally independent of his canine Trump defending instincts in this universe.

Could happen.

I get it... You can't objectively assess Root's expose of the DOJ's behavior because Trump.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Dog said:

I get it... You can't objectively assess Root's expose of the DOJ's behavior because Trump.

Nobody can, without a telling of the full story. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

44 minutes ago, Lark said:

https://www.whistleblowersinternational.com/types-of-fraud/pharmaceutical/off-label-marketing/   I believe a medical device and a medication, if regulated by the FDA, face similar rules.

“Pharmaceutical sales representatives are prohibited from discussing off-label usage unless a physician asks explicitly. However, many companies have ignored this rule outright by teaching their salesmen to tout the benefits of prescribing a drug for other patient populations.  In the most blatant cases, manufacturers have even hosted sponsored dinners and vacations where they gave presentations to doctors and healthcare providers about the benefits of different unapproved uses of a medication.”

Quoted in full but I’m not sure how common abuse is.  In my world it seemed to almost stop under Obama.  I think the usual course is arranging a peer to peer discussion with a technical services doctor who can provide any off label research and antidotes.    Some off label use is a very good thing.   Games are played as well.   I saw a  company broaden the label on an older drug about to go generic, gaining indications the competing generics lacked.   This can affect which can be legally prescribed in some instances.   I’m In a fringe field, others may have different observations.

 

Bolded part? Spot on. 

Big hijack - I have some dated experience w/FDA labeling - when I was in-between Medicaid projects back in 1998-Y2K I did some stuff for the Orthopedic Manufacturing division of J&J (they made knees, hips, rods, etc) .  They had an antiquated labeling system in which every component was at least 5 years beyond end of life - they couldn't update it, because doing so nullified the FDA approval for the orthopedic devices for which the system generated labels - if some component had died, they would be unable to ship product until some new-old-stock replacement was scrounged.   

The point?  A regulatory agency's intentions may be good - but if the implementation is too rigid?  It's an impediment, and needs to be addressed.  As it pertains to this story?  I'd want to understand more about the mislabeling before I decided where culpability should be assigned.  They guy might indeed be a shyster trying to push unapproved devices/procedures - and it might be an instance of an overly restrictive regulation - understanding which this is closer to would impact my opinion. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i watched, and on the face his presentation seemed to spell out 'enormous fuckery' wrt the doj. however, i don't have access to the full other side of the story so therefore i cannot say for certain 'doj good/bad'. my question for dog is this, if i am to presume root's side of the story is the 100% correct side, are you using this to cast doubt towards the current doj investigation into the cic and his people?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

 

Bolded part? Spot on. 

Big hijack - I have some dated experience w/FDA labeling - when I was in-between Medicaid projects back in 1998-Y2K I did some stuff for the Orthopedic Manufacturing division of J&J (they made knees, hips, rods, etc) .  They had an antiquated labeling system in which every component was at least 5 years beyond end of life - they couldn't update it, because doing so nullified the FDA approval for the orthopedic devices for which the system generated labels - if some component had died, they would be unable to ship product until some new-old-stock replacement was scrounged.   

The point?  A regulatory agency's intentions may be good - but if the implementation is too rigid?  It's an impediment, and needs to be addressed.  As it pertains to this story?  I'd want to understand more about the mislabeling before I decided where culpability should be assigned.  They guy might indeed be a shyster trying to push unapproved devices/procedures - and it might be an instance of an overly restrictive regulation - understanding which this is closer to would impact my opinion. 

Between building one of those medical carts with a computer and various sensors for the DOD and good friends working for a company that makes medical devices, I can sympathize. The FDA is like the FAA on meth when it comes to paperwork and compliance. OTOH our products work and don't kill people for the most part.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dog said:

I get it... You can't objectively assess Root's expose of the DOJ's behavior because Trump.

I really don't give enough of a shit to go dig into it.

Kind of like after the Titanic hit the iceberg, you decide to go up to the radio shack and take the radio apart because you think the radio operator has been hiding booze in it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, aA said:

i watched, and on the face his presentation seemed to spell out 'enormous fuckery' wrt the doj. however, i don't have access to the full other side of the story so therefore i cannot say for certain 'doj good/bad'. my question for dog is this, if i am to presume root's side of the story is the 100% correct side, are you using this to cast doubt towards the current doj investigation into the cic and his people?

Dog wouldn't do that.

Not without checking out todays talking points first.

180px-Bandera_Federaci%C3%B3n_Rusia,_201

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In other news, no reason to watch "The Americans" anymore. The 80s era KGB sneaks around doing relatively trivial stuff and the 2017 version has their sleeper agent in the freaking White House busy dismantling the FBI and State Department. YCMTSU and it beats the fictional agents all to hell!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, kent_island_sailor said:

Between building one of those medical carts with a computer and various sensors for the DOD and good friends working for a company that makes medical devices, I can sympathize. The FDA is like the FAA on meth when it comes to paperwork and compliance. OTOH our products work and don't kill people for the most part.

You're absolutely right - and my point wasn't to suggest that we should have NO regulation, rather, that well meaning people in regulatory authorities have unintentionally created problems and expense - and that those who point this out aren't always evil bastards trying to get over on the system. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, aA said:

i watched, and on the face his presentation seemed to spell out 'enormous fuckery' wrt the doj. however, i don't have access to the full other side of the story so therefore i cannot say for certain 'doj good/bad'. my question for dog is this, if i am to presume root's side of the story is the 100% correct side, are you using this to cast doubt towards the current doj investigation into the cic and his people?

That was not my intention however I understand that an indictment of the DOJ culture would naturally cast doubt on all its activities. I suspect this is why my critics (for political reasons of their own) would much rather change the subject to me and my motives than to consider the Root prosecution on its own merits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

You're absolutely right - and my point wasn't to suggest that we should have NO regulation, rather, that well meaning people in regulatory authorities have unintentionally created problems and expense - and that those who point this out aren't always evil bastards trying to get over on the system. 

For sure. I bought Navy surplus excellent safe 4 point seatbelts, put them in a Cessna using the factory installed mounting points, and had the FAA require me to get rid of them and use the approved but absolutely shitty Cessna 3 point belts :angry:

The FCC/USCG was basically forced into allowing cheap Class B AIS because the units were available from foreign sources and were going to get used anyway.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Dog said:

That was not my intention however I understand that an indictment of the DOJ culture would naturally cast doubt on all its activities. I suspect this is why my critics (for political reasons of their own) would much rather change the subject to me and my motives than to consider the Root prosecution on its own merits.

i'm not sure i understand you...if we are to consider the root prosecution on its own merits, how exactly does this cast a doubt on ALL doj activities? the doj is failry large last time i checked. could the doj as a whole not fall under the same defense as root? i.e. i can't control what all my salesmen say and do?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, aA said:

i'm not sure i understand you...if we are to consider the root prosecution on its own merits, how exactly does this cast a doubt on ALL doj activities? the doj is failry large last time i checked. could the doj as a whole not fall under the same defense as root? i.e. i can't control what all my salesmen say and do?

Point taken, clearly there are both good and bad civil servants in the DOJ.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Dog said:

That was not my intention however I understand that an indictment of the DOJ culture would naturally cast doubt on all its activities. I suspect this is why my critics (for political reasons of their own) would much rather change the subject to me and my motives than to consider the Root prosecution on its own merits.

If this were a slow news month and the DOJ was just doing nothing important, I might maybe give a shit. If you actually care about DOJ and FDA regulations and this has nothing at all to do with fucking up the Trump investigations I will put sauce on the computer I am typing on and eat it :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, kent_island_sailor said:

If this were a slow news month and the DOJ was just doing nothing important, I might maybe give a shit. If you actually care about DOJ and FDA regulations and this has nothing at all to do with fucking up the Trump investigations I will put sauce on the computer I am typing on and eat it :rolleyes:

Bon appetite

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Dog said:

Point taken, clearly there are both good and bad civil servants in the DOJ.

is there? i don't even know if that is 100% true.

in root's case, he presents quite a compelling case for his prosecutorial team as bad civil servants, but without the their side of the story i cannot say with any certainty one way or the other...neither can i completely support the assumption that both good and bad exist as a whole in the entire department.

 

per the thread title, i'm of the notion that you don't agree with that, thus my questions and confusion

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So glad Dog has made public his stance on how the DOJ has a “culture which destroys lives in the pursuit of convictions or settlements as opposed to pursuing justice”. 

I look forward to him being consistent on this point now that the Trump Administration has pressured the DOJ into investigating Hillary.

Again. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Dog said:

I didn't say the Root prosecution made a corrupt culture.

 Nor did I say you did. If you don't want people reading something into your posts you did not explicitly say - might help to stop doing that yourself. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Bent Sailor said:

 Nor did I say you did. If you don't want people reading something into your posts you did not explicitly say - might help to stop doing that yourself. 

Dogs just Doggy stylin. Posts a thread, makes a reference to an issue, but doesn’t actually take a position. Then whines when called on it. He’s jut a troll.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

 

Bolded part? Spot on. 

Big hijack - I have some dated experience w/FDA labeling - when I was in-between Medicaid projects back in 1998-Y2K I did some stuff for the Orthopedic Manufacturing division of J&J (they made knees, hips, rods, etc) .  They had an antiquated labeling system in which every component was at least 5 years beyond end of life - they couldn't update it, because doing so nullified the FDA approval for the orthopedic devices for which the system generated labels - if some component had died, they would be unable to ship product until some new-old-stock replacement was scrounged.   

The point?  A regulatory agency's intentions may be good - but if the implementation is too rigid?  It's an impediment, and needs to be addressed.  As it pertains to this story?  I'd want to understand more about the mislabeling before I decided where culpability should be assigned.  They guy might indeed be a shyster trying to push unapproved devices/procedures - and it might be an instance of an overly restrictive regulation - understanding which this is closer to would impact my opinion. 

A friend was a machinist for an artificial joint manufacturer during the great recession.   He had good contacts with machinists in the auto-parts field.   There was a flurry of activity as the various parts manufacturers faced a world without Daimler Chrysler (Kokomo, Detroit) and GM (Fort Wayne, Detroit, etc).    Most of them would not have survived on Honda and Ford alone.   As they kicked into survival mode several began trying to switch to the bionic biz.   They quickly realized how complicated the documentation and paper trail was.   The bailouts came before anybody got very far, or went bankrupt.      The same regulations that protected the orthopedic industry in Warsaw IN from nearby auto parts companies also protects it (and us) from Chinese competition.   That doesn't bother me.   Sending an inspector to China every few months somehow doesn't inspire the confidence I would need to have a Kawei part inserted in my body.   I want it made right every time.    As you said, regulations can be vital or overly rigid, sometimes at the same time.   

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/oct/17/dentists-warn-counterfeit-equipment-seized-haul      "The seized items include 24 dental X-ray machines that emit high levels of radiation, 384 hand-piece drills that could malfunction and disintegrate inside patients’ mouths and 3,242 poor quality root canal files that could break." 

About a decade ago there was a warning in Indiana that Chinese x ray equipment bought online was showing up in medical offices.   None of it was passing inspection.  Fortunately even Indiana does some inspections (much less rigorous than Ohio, which likely goes too far).   If a libertarian doctor didn't report the equipment to the state they could have used it until the technicians succumbed.    

Sorry for the hijack of your hijack.

Were the 'system generated labels' you referred to the manufacturer's FDA approved statements on indications and use, or something else?   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Raz'r said:

Dogs just Doggy stylin. Posts a thread, makes a reference to an issue, but doesn’t actually take a position. Then whines when called on it. He’s jut a troll.

Yeah. A bit of that going around at the moment. The "posted without comment so I can criticise whatever the left wingers say" trope is wearing a little thin. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Raz'r said:

Dogs just Doggy stylin. Posts a thread, makes a reference to an issue, but doesn’t actually take a position. Then whines when called on it. He’s jut a troll.

Holding that the DOJ went rogue with it's Root prosecution is not taking a position?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Dog said:

Holding that the DOJ went rogue with it's Root prosecution is not taking a position?

And then denying exactly that? You really need to figure out a consistent message. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Raz'r said:

And then denying exactly that? You really need to figure out a consistent message. 

No, I didn't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Lark said:

<SNIP> (and thanks for the hijack!) 

Were the 'system generated labels' you referred to the manufacturer's FDA approved statements on indications and use, or something else?   

yes - printed in 5 languages.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Dog said:

No, I didn't.

Glad to see you consistently have no position that can last the life of a short thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Raz'r said:

Glad to see you consistently have no position that can last the life of a short thread.

And Mad thinks conservatives avoid discussing issues.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Dog said:

And Mad thinks conservatives avoid discussing issues.

Sure, but what does his view on conservatives have to do with you? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Dog said:

And Mad thinks conservatives avoid discussing issues.

Op: DOJ gone Rogue

post author: Dog

evidence: 1 case

now, Dog says one case doesn’t mean the whole place has gone Rogue. Which is it @Dog

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Raz'r said:

Op: DOJ gone Rogue

post author: Dog

evidence: 1 case

now, Dog says one case doesn’t mean the whole place has gone Rogue. Which is it @Dog

The title, "DOJ gone rogue" obviously refers to the case cited. You do understand that going rogue in one instance does not impute going rogue in every instance don't you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/7/2018 at 4:39 AM, Dog said:

The title, "DOJ gone rogue" obviously refers to the case cited. You do understand that going rogue in one instance does not impute going rogue in every instance don't you?

Backpeddle baby! Backpeddle!  Whoop!whoop!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So one case does not indicate a culture of corruption... but it does mean the department has gone rogue. YCMTSU

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Bent Sailor said:

So one case does not indicate a culture of corruption... but it does mean the department has gone rogue. YCMTSU

In which BS again resorts to the pedantic to feed his ego.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Dog said:

In which BS again resorts to the pedantic to feed his ego.

Yeah... because people pulling you up on your constant bullshit is all about my ego. :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this