Wake PA-S Posted December 9, 2016 Share Posted December 9, 2016 1. Ben Carson was already scheduled to be the keynote speaker. He was canceled after his controversial remarks. Racists don't invite someone of a different race to be a keynote speaker. 2. Look at the race of the AAPA president at the time. Racism? Common, do better. "Be the change you want to see in the world". So you want a bunch of drastic changes to come to the profession but don't want to contribute to the organization that could make those changes, and aren't doing anything to make the changes yourself. Sounds like you're going to be complaining for a longgggg time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boatswain2PA Posted December 9, 2016 Share Posted December 9, 2016 I agree it wasn't racism that led to his cancellation. It was political correctness run wild. And, here in the midwest, I know about many PAs who have dropped, or haven't joined AAPA strictly because of this issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrator rev ronin Posted December 10, 2016 Administrator Share Posted December 10, 2016 1. Ben Carson was already scheduled to be the keynote speaker. He was canceled after his controversial remarks. Racists don't invite someone of a different race to be a keynote speaker. 2. Look at the race of the AAPA president at the time. Racism? Common, do better. Do you understand the etymology of the term "uncle Tom", especially as applied to African-Americans who hold conservative political views? Or how about the other, even more offensive one that starts with "house..."? If you don't think a lack of tolerance for dark-skinned people holding conservative viewpoints constitutes racism, then I would say your definition is unfortunately and unrealistically narrow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boatswain2PA Posted December 10, 2016 Share Posted December 10, 2016 But Rev....one can only be racist if you hold conservative views! At least, that's what they teach in academia! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wake PA-S Posted December 10, 2016 Share Posted December 10, 2016 Days after making the statement Carson apologized for his comments and withdrew from being the speaker at John Hopkins graduation ceremony. It's not like the AAPA was out to get him, this was national news that would have distracted from the purpose of the AAPA conference with the people threatening to protest it. The AAPA was faced with a difficult decision which they did not jump to. To blame it on racism is a cop out. The guy made a dumb comment and it had consequences due to his national status. Save your money, don't donate to the AAPA for whatever reason you desire, but don't stoop to that level. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GetMeOuttaThisMess Posted December 10, 2016 Share Posted December 10, 2016 1. Ben Carson was already scheduled to be the keynote speaker. He was canceled after his controversial remarks. Racists don't invite someone of a different race to be a keynote speaker. 2. Look at the race of the AAPA president at the time. Racism? Common, do better. "Be the change you want to see in the world". So you want a bunch of drastic changes to come to the profession but don't want to contribute to the organization that could make those changes, and aren't doing anything to make the changes yourself. Sounds like you're going to be complaining for a longgggg time. Check back after thirty plus years and your personal attempt at making changes and let us know how it's going. I probably won't be around (alive) to know at that time. "Contribution" you'll find is harder than you might think. I'm not suggesting that folks not try, I'm just saying per history that it's a pretty tight knit bunch that hasn't been looking for "outsiders", regardless of what they might say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wake PA-S Posted December 10, 2016 Share Posted December 10, 2016 I don't have a strong desire to lead in an organization such as AAPA so I support them through membership and interaction on their website. I'm sure it's difficult to make legislative changes. That requires money. If no one supports them through membership, then they can't accomplish anything. It's frustrating to hear people say the changes they want to see, but they aren't doing anything about it and aren't supporting the people who can. Someone in this thread listed a few very specific changes they wanted to see made. My question would be what have the done about it? All the excuses in the world can come up, but at the end of the day if the answer is "nothing" then they can't complain. If they have written legislators and lobbied for their changes then good on them! And yes I'm a student - please don't treat me as naïve. I was an SOIDC for 7 years with a NPI #. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boatswain2PA Posted December 10, 2016 Share Posted December 10, 2016 Days after making the statement Carson apologized for his comments and withdrew from being the speaker at John Hopkins graduation ceremony. It's not like the AAPA was out to get him, this was national news that would have distracted from the purpose of the AAPA conference with the people threatening to protest it. The AAPA was faced with a difficult decision which they did not jump to. To blame it on racism is a cop out. The guy made a dumb comment and it had consequences due to his national status. Save your money, don't donate to the AAPA for whatever reason you desire, but don't stoop to that level. My issue with the AAPA isn't Dr. Carson's withdrawal from Johns Hopkin graduation ceremony...that's up to those who donate to JH. My issue with the AAPA is when Dr. Carson (and his PA partner, who I can't recall her name) was slated to be awarded the AAPA Paragon award at the AAPA national meeting....but the AAPA bent to the leftist bullies and rescinded his invitation to receive the award, and give a speech, at the annual meeting. The AAPA lost the opportunity to have a world renown surgeon talk about the benefits of a physician-PA medical team, but instead they coward down to the PC bullies. Apparently one of the "consequences" of his "not-so-dumb" comment is will get a cabinet-level position in a NON-POLITICALLY CORRECT administration. People have had enough of the bullies of the left. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UGoLong Posted December 10, 2016 Share Posted December 10, 2016 Ah yes: let's all wait for the perfect organization that represents ALL of our individual professional and political interests and NEVER makes a serious mistake in the eyes of ALL of its members! THAT'S going to be a while! In the meantime though, let's all vote with our feet and stand on the sidelines with absolutely no power or national voice and just kinda hope for change. And, while we wait for the distant salvation of our profession, let's while away some of that time by embarrassing ourselves to our colleagues (and current and future PA students) a bit by calling each other nasty names and recycling political slogans. I admire other PAs, even the ones I disagree with. I would ask that we show a little kindness to each other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
overthehorizen Posted December 10, 2016 Share Posted December 10, 2016 If no one supports them through membership, then they can't accomplish anything. There is a wonderful fallacious argument put forth here from Wake PA-S. This post is not going to get a lot attention because most people will doze off. If you have studied the Philosophy of Logic in Liberal Arts or Discrete Mathematics (or Theory of Proof) in the hard sciences, you will have encountered conditional statements. That is, the statement, its inverse, converse and contrapositive. See links below for details. The conditional statement simply stated, p is financial support and q is accomplishment. Wake PA-S puts the conditional in its inverse form: if not p then not q. What he hopes the weak minded reader will conclude is that the inverse is always equivalent to the original statement. That is: he wants us to conclude that because he believes the inverse to be true, the statement p then q will be true (if financial support then accomplishment). This is not necessarily true. What is true (always) is that an inverse is logically equivalent to its converse. What is also true is that a statement and its contrapositive are always equivalent. However, neither the converse nor the inverse is logically equivalent to original conditional statement. http://www.csm.ornl.gov/~sheldon/ds/sec1.2.html http://www.varsitytutors.com/hotmath/hotmath_help/topics/converse-inverse-contrapositive Time to wake up from your nap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderator LT_Oneal_PAC Posted December 10, 2016 Moderator Share Posted December 10, 2016 This whole thread is full of so much face palm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderator EMEDPA Posted December 10, 2016 Moderator Share Posted December 10, 2016 Looks like Carson came out ok with his recent nomination to direct HUD. I don't get it. HHS, sure. But HUD? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.