That's not exactly true.
Thompson's complete view is NOT against tort reform, but against Federally-driven tort reform. Incredible as it may seem that a Republican candidate actually shares our Founders' view, Fred would rather that the States deal with the issue individually. This is real Federalism, and I, for one, am happy to hear it being promoted by one of Thompson's stature.
IMAGINE, a Republican who really DOESN'T want the FedGov to control everything! That's GOTTA make for some serious butt pucker over at RNC HQ.
I was not trying to give a presentation of what Thompson believes. I was trying to point out how biased toward Giuliani that report was at 6:20 on Fox yesterday morning.
In it they highlighted this attack of Giuliani against Thompson.
Thompson is one of my 2 favorites, so I wouldn't go out of my way to disagree with him. A federalist approach on that issue is fine.
I'm one of those rare conservatives who isn't particularly incensed over lawsuits. There's a place for them as long as they involve an assessment of actual, total damages inflicted on someone. If you injure Payton Manning in a drunk driving accident, and he can never throw again, then you should pay more than just the cost of setting a broken arm.
And if someone's kid becomes sick from chewing lead paint smeared on their Dora the Explora dolly, then there's a case to be made that either the manufacturer or distributer knowingly endangered an entire age group, and they should be penalized....and financial penalties are one way to do that....and they should have to pay full, actual costs.
Now, I'm not sure why they should pay the "fed." But, then again, traffic fines go to the community that's been impacted by the speeding.
I'm also not sure of an equitable formula for determining the penalty, but it should be enough to make that company never want to do it again.