This kind of response makes me question the method and questions used for polling. These organizations don’t seem to be impartial. The results are often steered in the direction needed for whoever is paying for the poll. That is pretty easy.
When will the Insurance Journal realize that AIG is not an insurance company. Over 170 companies of AIG are financial products and less than 80 are insurance companies. To me that’s a 2-1 ratio showing that the insurance part is definitely the minority. My question to IJ is, does the banking industry pay your salary??
That article smelled like a dead rat after 2 sentances. All this slanted garbage just wastes my time. Can we be a little more selective in what the readers are subjected to?
State Farm’s memorandum in opposition to intevenors’ motion to intervene and motion to unseal is an astonishing -document. First, State Farm does not contend or even attempt to argue that the sealing of the record in this case was legal. Instead, it attempts to justify the secrecy in this case on the sole basis it bought and paid for the secrecy. This argument is invalid under the law. Moreover, defendant attempts to further bolster this argument by pointing out that there are other cases in this Court and other courts that were similarly settled in secret and also apparently expunged from the public record. There may be other cases where similar questions should be raised.
This is foolish.
This kind of response makes me question the method and questions used for polling. These organizations don’t seem to be impartial. The results are often steered in the direction needed for whoever is paying for the poll. That is pretty easy.
All poll results are wrong. Some poll results are useful.
When will the Insurance Journal realize that AIG is not an insurance company. Over 170 companies of AIG are financial products and less than 80 are insurance companies. To me that’s a 2-1 ratio showing that the insurance part is definitely the minority. My question to IJ is, does the banking industry pay your salary??
That article smelled like a dead rat after 2 sentances. All this slanted garbage just wastes my time. Can we be a little more selective in what the readers are subjected to?
State Farm’s memorandum in opposition to intevenors’ motion to intervene and motion to unseal is an astonishing -document. First, State Farm does not contend or even attempt to argue that the sealing of the record in this case was legal. Instead, it attempts to justify the secrecy in this case on the sole basis it bought and paid for the secrecy. This argument is invalid under the law. Moreover, defendant attempts to further bolster this argument by pointing out that there are other cases in this Court and other courts that were similarly settled in secret and also apparently expunged from the public record. There may be other cases where similar questions should be raised.
The truth sometimes hurts. Corporate American management style is crap these days. All greed based.