physasst Posted April 13, 2013 Share Posted April 13, 2013 Look the issue isn't whether or not he believes in same sex marriage or not. The issue is the way in which he expressed his opinion on the matter. He could have chosen to say, "Well, I'm sorry, but I don't support same sex marriage as it is not something that I believe in personally" or, "I don't mean to offend anyone, but it is not something that I support or believe in at this time." Same message, far more diplomatic. I mean, I think he's wrong, but everyone is entitled to their beliefs. He chose sensationalism.... He chose......poorly, and there should be consequences for those choices. As I said, I think he's an egotistical ahole, and I wouldn't have listened to his talk at AAPA REGARDLESS of this entire issue if he was speaking there. Nothing of any interest to me, but I do in fact feel badly for his PA missing out on the PARAgon award. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
discogenic Posted April 13, 2013 Share Posted April 13, 2013 Look the issue isn't whether or not he believes in same sex marriage or not. The issue is the way in which he expressed his opinion on the matter. He could have chosen to say, "Well, I'm sorry, but I don't support same sex marriage as it is not something that I believe in personally" or, "I don't mean to offend anyone, but it is not something that I support or believe in at this time." Same message, far more diplomatic. I mean, I think he's wrong, but everyone is entitled to their beliefs. He chose sensationalism.... He chose......poorly, and there should be consequences for those choices. As I said, I think he's an egotistical ahole, and I wouldn't have listened to his talk at AAPA REGARDLESS of this entire issue if he was speaking there. Nothing of any interest to me, but I do in fact feel badly for his PA missing out on the PARAgon award. Assuming for a moment what you say is correct. Should we then completely ignore his fuller, more thorough subsequent explanation of his position? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boatswain2PA Posted April 13, 2013 Share Posted April 13, 2013 Another dissenting voice silenced by intolerant liberals. America - where the only voices that shall be heard are those from the left. Any others will have their messages contorted and slandered until they are eventually silenced. I didn't know Dr. Carson was going to speak at AAPA conference until a week ago. I was just about to join AAPA and was moving my work schedule around to go to the conference. Not anymore. Just like the majority of Physicians will not belong to the AMA because they are led by a group of leftists (see their support for Obamacare), I will not belong to the AAPA. I put on this country's uniform every day for twenty years thinking that our nation's values of tolerance and free exchange of ideas were sacrosanct. I was wrong. The only ideas allowed to be exchanged today are liberal ones, and there is simply no tolerance for anything but liberal ideology. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrator rev ronin Posted April 13, 2013 Administrator Share Posted April 13, 2013 He gone... http://www.aapa.org/news_and_publications/news/item.aspx?id=5955 ... and there goes the last little hope of me renewing my AAPA membership. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THE.PA.PAC Posted April 13, 2013 Share Posted April 13, 2013 Another dissenting voice silenced by intolerant liberals. America - where the only voices that shall be heard are those from the left. Any others will have their messages contorted and slandered until they are eventually silenced. Let people do as they wish. Blue. Red. Whatever. Why do people want to interject themselves so much into someone else's life? I put on this country's uniform every day for twenty years thinking that our nation's values of tolerance and free exchange of ideas were sacrosanct. Unless you disagree with it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
physasst Posted April 13, 2013 Share Posted April 13, 2013 Assuming for a moment what you say is correct. Should we then completely ignore his fuller, more thorough subsequent explanation of his position? No, and that softened the blow, but the simple fact is words carry power. In fact, words are the most powerful weapon we have, both as individuals, as groups, as professions, and as nations. Think about it. Words can heal, love, nurture, and instruct among many other things...but words can also inflict pain, distress, inflammation, etc. Ask any diplomat about the power of words. Simply look at this week with North Korea. Words have power. If he gives this time, and appears to consistently retract his statements people will forgive, but it takes time. That's the power of words. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
discogenic Posted April 13, 2013 Share Posted April 13, 2013 No, and that softened the blow, but the simple fact is words carry power. In fact, words are the most powerful weapon we have, both as individuals, as groups, as professions, and as nations. Think about it. Words can heal, love, nurture, and instruct among many other things...but words can also inflict pain, distress, inflammation, etc. Ask any diplomat about the power of words. Simply look at this week with North Korea. Words have power. If he gives this time, and appears to consistently retract his statements people will forgive, but it takes time. That's the power of words. He shouldn't have to retract his statements. He clearly explained them away when given the opportunity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boatswain2PA Posted April 13, 2013 Share Posted April 13, 2013 Let people do as they wish. Blue. Red. Whatever. Why do people want to interject themselves so much into someone else's life? Having civil discussion is not interjecting into people's life. Silencing discussion, however, has a chilling effect on everyone's life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boatswain2PA Posted April 13, 2013 Share Posted April 13, 2013 He shouldn't have to retract his statements. He clearly explained them away when given the opportunity. But the left, who controls discussion in America (and most of the western world now), controls the message. They will not allow his clarification to spread, let alone stand. Instead they will silence him because his values are incongruent with liberalism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THE.PA.PAC Posted April 13, 2013 Share Posted April 13, 2013 Having civil discussion is not interjecting into people's life. Silencing discussion, however, has a chilling effect on everyone's life. Fair enough. But let consenting, responsible adults do as they wish. Why do so many people have a hard time with that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
discogenic Posted April 13, 2013 Share Posted April 13, 2013 I wonder when Ben Carson was asked to speak at the AAPA convention. Was it before or after he became a rising Conservative voice? Choosing him before would suggest he was selected for his medical accomplishments. Nixing him after would suggest politics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
physasst Posted April 13, 2013 Share Posted April 13, 2013 Just like the majority of Physicians will not belong to the AMA because they are led by a group of leftists (see their support for Obamacare) You are aware that the Affordable Care Act was a GOP idea right? Heritage Foundation...2003? Stuart Butler? Any of that ring a bell. Liberals simply passed it. Here's what happened... A "leftist" health plan would have been (and hopefully will be eventually) a single payor plan. Medicare for everyone. That's what Rahm Emanuel wanted. So did Obama to be honest. In fact, Zeke Emanuel was pushing his Guaranteed Healthcare Access Plan (with some help...smiles) but Obama wouldn't listen to it, he wanted Rahm's plan. But, it became apparent very quickly that while there was support in the House....the Blue Dogs in the Senate would NEVER go along with it. So the House developed their plan, which looked like it was going to pass although it was complicated. Then Scott Brown won, and everyone had to scramble....It was thought that by adapting the Heritage Plan (with some modifications) which was also the original plan that Grassley proposed in 1993 as an alternative to Hillary's plan, that it would garner some GOP support. It did get support from the Blue Dogs who thought it would help them keep their seats, but the WH underestimated the GOP opposition to it. They really thought they would get 10-12 GOP senators to go along with it.....but they didn't. But it wasn't really a "leftist" plan....It was fun though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
physasst Posted April 13, 2013 Share Posted April 13, 2013 I wonder when Ben Carson was asked to speak at the AAPA convention. Was it before or after he became a rising Conservative voice? Choosing him before would suggest he was selected for his medical accomplishments. Nixing him after would suggest politics. He was almost certainly chosen BEFORE his statements on Fox. It's not just the AAPA. He was supposed to speak at the Hopkins medical school commencement address after the students there were angered by his statements, and the medical school dean called Carson's comments "offensive"..... http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/04/11/ben-carson-steps-down-as-hopkins-commencement-speaker/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boatswain2PA Posted April 13, 2013 Share Posted April 13, 2013 Fair enough. But let consenting, responsible adults do as they wish. Why do so many people have a hard time with that? I don't know anybody who "has a hard time" with letting "consenting, responsible adults do as they wish". My problem is when liberals, who have the power of 99% of the media, do anything they can to shut down any and all conservative voices. That is what is happening with Dr. Carson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
discogenic Posted April 13, 2013 Share Posted April 13, 2013 He was almost certainly chosen BEFORE his statements on Fox. It's not just the AAPA. He was supposed to speak at the Hopkins medical school commencement address after the students there were angered by his statements, and the medical school dean called Carson's comments "offensive"..... http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/04/11/ben-carson-steps-down-as-hopkins-commencement-speaker/ I wasn't thinking about his recent comments on Hannity. I was thinking before or after the Prayer Breakfast, because once that went viral Carson was clearly a Conservative voice. If he had already been selected by that point, could it be politics took over and the quest was on to find a reason to dump him? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CornellSPA Posted April 13, 2013 Share Posted April 13, 2013 AAPA as a private group can hire anyone they wish who they think will be a draw, and Dr. Carson will be a draw. Its a great opportunity for PAs to share their views with him! We should focus on thins more concerning: Dr. Carson wants to restrict public assistance, reduce public (medicare-medicaid) insurance etc etc. I know many patients who need and depend on their state insurance, need their EBT/food stamps, and their monthly check to get by. Why would Dr. Carson want to restrict these vital funds!! This is what we should be asking!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THE.PA.PAC Posted April 13, 2013 Share Posted April 13, 2013 I don't know anybody who "has a hard time" with letting "consenting, responsible adults do as they wish". My problem is when liberals, who have the power of 99% of the media, do anything they can to shut down any and all conservative voices. That is what is happening with Dr. Carson. As an evidence-based clinician you're that sure? I think most people would be skeptical of anyone saying anything about "99 percent." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sartort Posted April 13, 2013 Share Posted April 13, 2013 "Today, Dr. Benjamin Carson and Carol James, PA-C, notified AAPA that they will not be participating in the 41st Annual PA Conference in May as award recipients, and Carson has withdrawn as a speaker at the conference. Carson’s recent remarks have caused significant anguish among a number of AAPA members, and Carson, James and AAPA believe that his presence would create a significant distraction from the educational purposes of the conference." '“Given all the national media surrounding my statements as to my belief in traditional marriage, I believe it would be in the best interests of the students for me to voluntarily withdraw as your commencement speaker this year,” Carson said in an e-mail to the dean of the Johns Hopkins medical school, Paul Rothman. “My presence is likely to distract from the true celebratory nature of the day. Commencement is about the students and their successes, and it is not about me.”' These are the statements that were made. Many of you are assuming a lot about what happened. The people running the AAPA and Dr. Carson state that they believe that he will be a distraction, whether that be because of people who support his position and what he said or disagree with it is not mentioned, although it would very likely be from both sides. Is it not equally distracting for someone who agrees with his position to bring it up in a completely unrelated event as it would be for someone who disagrees? To say one side is bullying the other into submission from these statements seems to be a little bit of a jump. Can't we all just try to get along? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boatswain2PA Posted April 13, 2013 Share Posted April 13, 2013 You are aware that the Affordable Care Act was a GOP idea right? Heritage Foundation...2003? Stuart Butler? Any of that ring a bell. Liberals simply passed it. Here's what happened... A "leftist" health plan would have been (and hopefully will be eventually) a single payor plan. Medicare for everyone. That's what Rahm Emanuel wanted. So did Obama to be honest. In fact, Zeke Emanuel was pushing his Guaranteed Healthcare Access Plan (with some help...smiles) but Obama wouldn't listen to it, he wanted Rahm's plan. But, it became apparent very quickly that while there was support in the House....the Blue Dogs in the Senate would NEVER go along with it. So the House developed their plan, which looked like it was going to pass although it was complicated. Then Scott Brown won, and everyone had to scramble....It was thought that by adapting the Heritage Plan (with some modifications) which was also the original plan that Grassley proposed in 1993 as an alternative to Hillary's plan, that it would garner some GOP support. It did get support from the Blue Dogs who thought it would help them keep their seats, but the WH underestimated the GOP opposition to it. They really thought they would get 10-12 GOP senators to go along with it.....but they didn't. But it wasn't really a "leftist" plan....It was fun though. So, you're saying the GOP had the idea, but then the GOP killed it? In reality, it is a horrible piece of leftist legislation. Maybe not as far left as single payer, but it is leftist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
physasst Posted April 13, 2013 Share Posted April 13, 2013 So, you're saying the GOP had the idea, but then the GOP killed it? In reality, it is a horrible piece of leftist legislation. Maybe not as far left as single payer, but it is leftist. Yes, I am....Here's the Heritage plan, read it yourself, mandates, insurance reform..it's all here. http://www.heritage.org/research/testimony/laying-the-groundwork-for-universal-health-care-coverage Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boatswain2PA Posted April 13, 2013 Share Posted April 13, 2013 AAPA as a private group can hire anyone they wish who they think will be a draw, and Dr. Carson will be a draw. Its a great opportunity for PAs to share their views with him! We should focus on thins more concerning: Dr. Carson wants to restrict public assistance, reduce public (medicare-medicaid) insurance etc etc. I know many patients who need and depend on their state insurance, need their EBT/food stamps, and their monthly check to get by. Why would Dr. Carson want to restrict these vital funds!! This is what we should be asking!!! With your logic, perhaps we should just give EVERYBODY additional public assistance. I know I would certainly like to have an extra grand a month! Oh, wait, where does that money come from? I know, from Obama's "stash!" Sarcasm aside, welfare assistance is a balancing act. We need to help those who NEED help, but not give so much to create a perverse incentive for people to choose to be on it. Dr. Carson, along with many other American's, think that welfare assistance is out of balance....that we are giving out a little too much, and to a little too many people. Of course, the liberals who control the media/message in this country paint people like Dr. Carson as mean old (insert "White" for anyone but Dr. Carson) men who want widows to starve and children to work 18 hour shifts in the coal mines. The typica liberal way of silencing dissenting opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boatswain2PA Posted April 13, 2013 Share Posted April 13, 2013 As an evidence-based clinician you're that sure? I think most people would be skeptical of anyone saying anything about "99 percent." Unless, of course you are an "occupy" liberal touting the "99%"....then nobody questions you. Nor the fact that the limousine liberals make up most of the 1% they were protesting. Spike Lee....yeah!! Perhaps I exaggerated the 99% a bit, but I'm not going to let you detract the argument. The vast, vast, vast majority of media in this country is uber-left. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boatswain2PA Posted April 13, 2013 Share Posted April 13, 2013 I'm sorry, I didn't finish that thought. It wouldn't surprise me that someone in the GOP supported parts of Obamacare, especially at the beginning of it. Just look at Romney-care. It doesn't change the fact that it is a horrible piece of leftist legislation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boatswain2PA Posted April 13, 2013 Share Posted April 13, 2013 These are the statements that were made. Many of you are assuming a lot about what happened. The people running the AAPA and Dr. Carson state that they believe that he will be a distraction' date=' whether that be because of people who support his position and what he said or disagree with it is not mentioned, although it would very likely be from both sides. Is it not equally distracting for someone who agrees with his position to bring it up in a completely unrelated event as it would be for someone who disagrees? To say one side is bullying the other into submission from these statements seems to be a little bit of a jump. Can't we all just try to get along? [/font'][/color] I doubt people who support Dr. Carson would be much of a distraction, other than a prolonged applause at the end of his speech. The leftists who have successfully silenced him would probably be much more disruptive. For examples of this, look at the disruptions that occur when conservative speakers get the rare opportunity to speak at college campuses, and then try to find any disruption by conservative's when another liberal speaker is on the podium. Yeah, believe it or not, the liberals have become the bullies. If you don't speak what they want you to speak, they will try to shut you down. Just another example off the top of my head....have you heard about the trial going on in Philly? It's got all the makings of a major news story. A professional man is accused of killing several babies. Decapitations. Eye-witnesses. A dead young woman who just immigrated to the United States. Furthermore it is a professional black man accused of these murders, and he is saying he is being racially selected. But why isn't this on every major news channel? Because the man is an abortionist, and the leftist media doesn't want to shed ANY negative light on the abortion industry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RetNavyPAC Posted April 13, 2013 Share Posted April 13, 2013 I'm impressed. Two days, 74 posts, everyone's wearing their political chips on their shoulders, and we have not yet fulfilled Godwin's Law. "As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.