Bledsoe strikes again (Joe's take here).
Lorraine Ahearn and Ethan Feinsilver are peas in a rotten pod.
I remember, not too long ago, being perhaps the first in the GSO blogosphere to be called a "wack-job" for penning this piece on the peculiar brand of journalism practiced by the Greensboro News & Record.
Allow me my due. I told you so. Time wounds all heels (Hi Ed!) and heals most wounds. The truth about the sad/sorry state of journalism in Greesnboro and Asheboro makes the local "news"papers easy to trash.
Dr. Mary's not wacky after all.
And OBTW. I've made my decision. That little health scare earlier this month made things crystal clear for me. The state of North Carolina (specifically the NC Medical Board and NCDHHS) and I are going to do the legal tango over what Bob Morrison and his "team" did to this former public servant in Asheboro. I've never wanted to do this. But what Randolph Hospital did to me was purely and simply wrong. And what adds insult to repetitive injury is that I was abandoned to swing in the wind by the governments I served. It never should have happened, and the state/Federal governments - with all of their regulatory arms - had many, many opportunities to stop what was going on.
It make take a little while to get off the ground . . .
. . . but woe be unto anyone who gave/continues to give this way overpaid, way over-rated, lying, sexist dirtbag of a hospital CEO . . . this unconvicted felon . . . aid, cover and shelter.
Friday, February 27, 2009
Thursday, February 26, 2009
My Liege
I met Fec "The Terrible" today at "the wife's" store. Having gotten good news after a bit of a (health) scare earlier in the week, I had decided to decompress by doing my small part to stimulate the GSO economy. The VISA card is smokin'.
As is appropriate to my station, I bowed before and after hugging milord's neck.
We briefly chatted about the pottery wars. He was then shooed away by his Queen - as there was NO WAY I was going to try on a bathing suit while he was in the store.
I could not appreciate a stench. Of course my sense of smell is fried from inhaling paint fumes (the subject of another post to come) all week.
I like his smile. And there is a big-fat-world of mischief behind those impish eyes;)
As is appropriate to my station, I bowed before and after hugging milord's neck.
We briefly chatted about the pottery wars. He was then shooed away by his Queen - as there was NO WAY I was going to try on a bathing suit while he was in the store.
I could not appreciate a stench. Of course my sense of smell is fried from inhaling paint fumes (the subject of another post to come) all week.
I like his smile. And there is a big-fat-world of mischief behind those impish eyes;)
Friday, February 20, 2009
Scott Sanders: NOT GUILTY. Well, DUH.
A jury has spoken. GSO Police Detective Scott Sanders has been found NOT GUILTY. It's about damned time somebody had some sense. When I think about the ABJECT HELL this man and his family have been put through by a corrupt system, I seethe.
And OBTW, I hope the Greensboro News & Record ROTS. WHAT A SAD, SORRY, PATHETIC JOKE THAT "NEWSPAPER" IS.
As another public servant thrown to the wolves a very long time ago, I know something of hell. Maybe, just maybe, Cooper, Coman & company could now go after people who are actually guilty of a crime . . . of hurting someone . . . of plundering public resources to their own selfish ends and depriving a community of not just one, but many doctors.
One was driven out. Probably more. And others just gave up.
And I'm going to be working on making just that happen. Back to the break.
Update: Sam (boo-hoo, Lorraine Ahearn) and Joe have commentary.
Very Late Evening/After the Drive Home Update: Trouble will be Trouble.
2/21 Update: The N&R remains true to form: Way to focus on the prosecution . . . and the opinion of the one juror holdout. I have some ideas for "healing" Greesnboro. I'm not sure Rakestraw or John Robinson & company would like them.
And if I were Scott Sanders, I'd tell Councilwoman Rakestraw to SCREW coming back to work on Monday. I'd tell her I was taking my family to Disney World . . . ON HER.
2/21 Evening Update: Trouble was troubled by what he said and took his post down. He says he has put himself on "suspension" until the next GSO city council meeting. We are not certain if he suspended himself with or without pay;)
And OBTW, I hope the Greensboro News & Record ROTS. WHAT A SAD, SORRY, PATHETIC JOKE THAT "NEWSPAPER" IS.
As another public servant thrown to the wolves a very long time ago, I know something of hell. Maybe, just maybe, Cooper, Coman & company could now go after people who are actually guilty of a crime . . . of hurting someone . . . of plundering public resources to their own selfish ends and depriving a community of not just one, but many doctors.
One was driven out. Probably more. And others just gave up.
And I'm going to be working on making just that happen. Back to the break.
Update: Sam (boo-hoo, Lorraine Ahearn) and Joe have commentary.
Very Late Evening/After the Drive Home Update: Trouble will be Trouble.
2/21 Update: The N&R remains true to form: Way to focus on the prosecution . . . and the opinion of the one juror holdout. I have some ideas for "healing" Greesnboro. I'm not sure Rakestraw or John Robinson & company would like them.
And if I were Scott Sanders, I'd tell Councilwoman Rakestraw to SCREW coming back to work on Monday. I'd tell her I was taking my family to Disney World . . . ON HER.
2/21 Evening Update: Trouble was troubled by what he said and took his post down. He says he has put himself on "suspension" until the next GSO city council meeting. We are not certain if he suspended himself with or without pay;)
Thursday, February 19, 2009
Feedback, I Get Feedback
I've gotten a lot of very positive feedback on the "Icepicks" post . . . both in terms of making a point, AND telling Edward Cone of the Cones, "King" of the GSO Blogosphere (who has treated me like scum for so long) to KISS OFF. Therefore, it's going to stand for a little while . . . I'm taking some time off.
There are two recurring themes in that feedback:
(1) People are worried for my safety & professional well-being. They are worried about the Medical Board (or even the government) retaliating in some fashion (much like what the N.C. State Bar is doing to Rachel Hunter). I'm not so much. You see, I believe my blogging is actually protective in that regard. And there are some cans-of-worms than need to remain very tightly capped.
(2) If these people (in Asheboro/at Randolph/on the blogs) were smart they would not have treated you the way they have, and they would have figured out long ago how to turn you into a friend rather than an enemy.
Knock me down seven times. I get up eight. And look out when I get up.
There are two recurring themes in that feedback:
(1) People are worried for my safety & professional well-being. They are worried about the Medical Board (or even the government) retaliating in some fashion (much like what the N.C. State Bar is doing to Rachel Hunter). I'm not so much. You see, I believe my blogging is actually protective in that regard. And there are some cans-of-worms than need to remain very tightly capped.
(2) If these people (in Asheboro/at Randolph/on the blogs) were smart they would not have treated you the way they have, and they would have figured out long ago how to turn you into a friend rather than an enemy.
Knock me down seven times. I get up eight. And look out when I get up.
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
Icepicks In The Eyes
Last night, watching PBS, I could not believe my eyes.
The program chronicled the story of Walter Freeman, a neurologist and psychiatrist, who trolled state-run mental hospitals (primarily in the 1930's to 1950's), and lobotomized just about anyone who crossed his path that he deemed "soul-sick", obsessed, psychotic or just ill-tempered.
Freeman is the doctor who medically-mutilated Rosemary Kennedy, the slow but spirited sister of JFK, in 1941 (when she was just 23).
For a very long time, he was "right people". But 3500 lobotomies later, his medical license was revoked.
Only 3500 lobotomies later.
As my eyeballs literally ached (you'll shortly see why), it got me to thinking. A lot of people have asked me why I think my own situation in Asheboro was handled in the way it was . . . and to this day, has not been addressed/rectified by the local medical establishment, the N.C. Medical Board, US/NCDHHS or state & federal law enforcement.
Well, let's look at the Freeman case.
The PBS documentary relates that how, way back then, a doctor criticizing another doctor - for any reason - was considered "unethical".
The origins of the "White Wall" lie in excerpts from the Hippocratic Oath: To consider dear to me, as my parents, him who taught me this art; to live in common with him and, if necessary, to share my goods with him; To look upon his children as my own brothers, to teach them this art . . . all that may come to my knowledge in the exercise of my profession or in daily commerce with men, which ought not to be spread abroad, I will keep secret and will never reveal.
Of course, the tenets of the original Oath have been otherwise stomped all over in the modern age.
This "cover your medical brother's ass" sentiment echos and wafts into our medical culture even today. The North Carolina Medical Board still counsels compassion and discretion in dealing with the mistakes or inappropriate behavior of other doctors . . . a doctor has a "duty" to report bad care/unethical conduct, but the duty can be discharged in a variety of namby-pamby ways.
Way back in 1998, on the wrong end of a fateful phone call in the middle of the night, I discretely offered "personal assistance" to Mick Irwin. It did not work. And, in a matter of minutes I had to make a choice . . . knowing full well that choice was going to go badly for me.
I was not "right people".
Although I relied upon their position statements for protection, the Medical Board did not have my back when I got crap-canned for (1) intervening to STOP Dr. Irwin from doing what he was about to do (and instead, taking appropriate action based on the correct diagnosis), and (2) reporting Irwin to hospital peer review (and six months later, when I could talk without loosing everything, the Medical Board itself).
Dr. Irwin got a slap on the hand behind the scenes (by both the hospital . . . and a YEAR later, the Medical Board), and, as far as I know, never missed a day of work over what he did. He was actually PROMOTED to Chief of Staff.
Meanwhile, as the doctor who did not screw up . . . the physician who did right by the patient (I know I keep harping on that, but it NEEDS to be harped on) . . . my life & practice in Asheboro was destroyed.
And when I would not cut and run, even after I was sued (unsuccessfully) for "libel", the hospital had to cheat to win.
What I like to call the "medical monkey" (I don't think the monkey are "wise", I think they're wusses) mindset was also vividly demonstrated in a recent blog exchange at Ed Cone's Word Up . . . in which an anonymous Asheboro resident (and employee-of-one-of-Randolph-Hospital's-much-revered-Board-members) actually suggested that I should be reported to the Medical Board for being critical of other doctors in town.
Bring on the thought police!
Cone himself (the son of a physician) stated (with the great all-knowing authority of a Cone) that a doctor* (see update) he knows with "knowledge" of my case (translation: he/she reads the paper - but does not, in fact, have any special knowledge about the case) disapproves of the way I am relentlessly publicly pursuing Randolph Hospital and its senior executives for what they did to me.
You see, it just isn't done.
Of course, I sincerely doubt our all-knowing Blogger King's anonymous doctor-friend has endured the fiscal & professional hardship I have . . . specifically eking out a less-than-happy existence on the road . . . on the wrong end of a local black-ball for doing the right thing by a patient being mis-managed by another doctor.
And (of course) our Edward would not identify his doctor-friend. So there's no way to vet him/her as he/she makes anonymous judgements about me.
Back to the PBS story, the pre-frontal lobotomy was initially developed by a Portuguese neurologist named Antonio Egas Moniz to treat select types of psychoses. Moniz actually won the Nobel Prize in 1949.
[I knew Yasir Arafat (1994) and Al Gore (2007) were not the only reasons I had to hold the Nobel in contempt.]
A "disciple" of Moniz, "Dr." Freeman originally partnered up with a neurosurgeon, James Watts. The "problem" with Dr. Watts was that he believed lobotomies should only be carried out under sterile & controlled conditions in an operating room. But Freeman wanted to "perfect" a technique that made it faster and easier to employ . . . with less (or even no) medical training . . . and in less pristine conditions.
Pretty much behind Watts' back (although I find that part of the story a bit hard to believe) Freeman developed a "transorbital" method that essentially involved hammering an icepick into the eye socket (above the eye) . . . directly into the frontal lobe of the brain.
With a good swirl of the pick, you could "cure" a whole lot of ill.
The documentary goes on to relate how Watts walked into his partner's office one day and found a patient lying on an exam table with an icepick in both eyes. Freeman wanted Watts to take a picture. Watts blinked, said nothing, and turned around/walked out. Their partnership was dissolved within a day.
But Watts did not do anything else.
And Freeman continued to roam the country in his "lobotomobile" . . . until his license was revoked after a patient (probably not the first) died in his care.
It's 2009 I am not Dr. Watts. I did the right thing in 1998 . . . medically, morally, ethically . . . and I will NOT apologize to anyone. I could no more have rolled over and gone back to sleep . . . or walked out on that baby . . . than I could have a member of my own family. And I remain as furious about what was done to me . . . and why it was done . . . as I was on the Monday morning Michael Bridges tried to get me to sign a bogus "money-for-silence" deal . . . as my "partner" Kathy Riley snickered in her office and counted her future bonus money (from the better "payer-mix" she would inherit).
I do not owe Dr. Mick Irwin . . . or Bob Morrison . . . or Steven Eblin . . . or ANY of the other notable doctors on Randolph Hosptial's medical staff who knew better and kept their silence and let this happen . . . or ANY of the "honorable" hospital Board & Corporate members who ALL looked the other way . . . ANYTHING.
This monster they created with their apathy and their sad/sorry silence is NOT going to blink, say nothing and "just go away". I am going to be LOUD AND OBNOXIOUS AND IN THEIR FACES until this is made right.
(OBTW, to anyone like "TruBlu" who is unfortunate enough to have any of these fine, upstanding people sign your paycheck, the VERY SAME THING could happen to you tomorrow. Good luck with that when it happens.)
And as of today, my 47th birthday (and 11th birthday in professional exile from my own hometown), I've got news for them . . . and especially the North Carolina Medical Board (if Mr. Mansfield is reading).
Change is NOT going to take 20 or 50 or 100 years. The (North Carolina Medical Practice) act is going to be cleaned up.
Of course, if Dr. Freeman were around he'd put an icepick in my eye.
*Update: King Edwina Cone has climbed down from his high fence/horse and admonished me that his "source" was not a doctor. That's not how I read it. But okay.
Please see my comments. I am so not in the mood tonight.
2/19 OBTW: This has come up in correspondence with readers/friends - and is a good point to make: Part of the settlement of the lawsuits in 2001 included a letter of recommendation (attesting to my abilities & competence as a physician . . . as well as my very positive contributions to the community during my tenure at RMA) signed by Steven Eblin.
The slimy, lying, sexist jerk had REFUSED to provide one when he fired me "without cause" in 1998 . . . after I refused to sign to his initial "we'll-pay-you-the-salary-we-owe-you-anyway for silence" deal. All I got was a "neutral" reference. It was petty, vindictive and MALICIOUS.
It kinda puts a damper on your ability to find a good job - or move on to fellowship.
So Ed Cone, in his tepid "defense" of my honor & medical competence, was merely attesting to something that has NEVER, EVER been in question . . . . even by the people who did me harm.
The program chronicled the story of Walter Freeman, a neurologist and psychiatrist, who trolled state-run mental hospitals (primarily in the 1930's to 1950's), and lobotomized just about anyone who crossed his path that he deemed "soul-sick", obsessed, psychotic or just ill-tempered.
Freeman is the doctor who medically-mutilated Rosemary Kennedy, the slow but spirited sister of JFK, in 1941 (when she was just 23).
For a very long time, he was "right people". But 3500 lobotomies later, his medical license was revoked.
Only 3500 lobotomies later.
As my eyeballs literally ached (you'll shortly see why), it got me to thinking. A lot of people have asked me why I think my own situation in Asheboro was handled in the way it was . . . and to this day, has not been addressed/rectified by the local medical establishment, the N.C. Medical Board, US/NCDHHS or state & federal law enforcement.
Well, let's look at the Freeman case.
The PBS documentary relates that how, way back then, a doctor criticizing another doctor - for any reason - was considered "unethical".
The origins of the "White Wall" lie in excerpts from the Hippocratic Oath: To consider dear to me, as my parents, him who taught me this art; to live in common with him and, if necessary, to share my goods with him; To look upon his children as my own brothers, to teach them this art . . . all that may come to my knowledge in the exercise of my profession or in daily commerce with men, which ought not to be spread abroad, I will keep secret and will never reveal.
Of course, the tenets of the original Oath have been otherwise stomped all over in the modern age.
This "cover your medical brother's ass" sentiment echos and wafts into our medical culture even today. The North Carolina Medical Board still counsels compassion and discretion in dealing with the mistakes or inappropriate behavior of other doctors . . . a doctor has a "duty" to report bad care/unethical conduct, but the duty can be discharged in a variety of namby-pamby ways.
Way back in 1998, on the wrong end of a fateful phone call in the middle of the night, I discretely offered "personal assistance" to Mick Irwin. It did not work. And, in a matter of minutes I had to make a choice . . . knowing full well that choice was going to go badly for me.
I was not "right people".
Although I relied upon their position statements for protection, the Medical Board did not have my back when I got crap-canned for (1) intervening to STOP Dr. Irwin from doing what he was about to do (and instead, taking appropriate action based on the correct diagnosis), and (2) reporting Irwin to hospital peer review (and six months later, when I could talk without loosing everything, the Medical Board itself).
Dr. Irwin got a slap on the hand behind the scenes (by both the hospital . . . and a YEAR later, the Medical Board), and, as far as I know, never missed a day of work over what he did. He was actually PROMOTED to Chief of Staff.
Meanwhile, as the doctor who did not screw up . . . the physician who did right by the patient (I know I keep harping on that, but it NEEDS to be harped on) . . . my life & practice in Asheboro was destroyed.
And when I would not cut and run, even after I was sued (unsuccessfully) for "libel", the hospital had to cheat to win.
What I like to call the "medical monkey" (I don't think the monkey are "wise", I think they're wusses) mindset was also vividly demonstrated in a recent blog exchange at Ed Cone's Word Up . . . in which an anonymous Asheboro resident (and employee-of-one-of-Randolph-Hospital's-much-revered-Board-members) actually suggested that I should be reported to the Medical Board for being critical of other doctors in town.
Bring on the thought police!
Cone himself (the son of a physician) stated (with the great all-knowing authority of a Cone) that a doctor* (see update) he knows with "knowledge" of my case (translation: he/she reads the paper - but does not, in fact, have any special knowledge about the case) disapproves of the way I am relentlessly publicly pursuing Randolph Hospital and its senior executives for what they did to me.
You see, it just isn't done.
Of course, I sincerely doubt our all-knowing Blogger King's anonymous doctor-friend has endured the fiscal & professional hardship I have . . . specifically eking out a less-than-happy existence on the road . . . on the wrong end of a local black-ball for doing the right thing by a patient being mis-managed by another doctor.
And (of course) our Edward would not identify his doctor-friend. So there's no way to vet him/her as he/she makes anonymous judgements about me.
Back to the PBS story, the pre-frontal lobotomy was initially developed by a Portuguese neurologist named Antonio Egas Moniz to treat select types of psychoses. Moniz actually won the Nobel Prize in 1949.
[I knew Yasir Arafat (1994) and Al Gore (2007) were not the only reasons I had to hold the Nobel in contempt.]
A "disciple" of Moniz, "Dr." Freeman originally partnered up with a neurosurgeon, James Watts. The "problem" with Dr. Watts was that he believed lobotomies should only be carried out under sterile & controlled conditions in an operating room. But Freeman wanted to "perfect" a technique that made it faster and easier to employ . . . with less (or even no) medical training . . . and in less pristine conditions.
Pretty much behind Watts' back (although I find that part of the story a bit hard to believe) Freeman developed a "transorbital" method that essentially involved hammering an icepick into the eye socket (above the eye) . . . directly into the frontal lobe of the brain.
With a good swirl of the pick, you could "cure" a whole lot of ill.
The documentary goes on to relate how Watts walked into his partner's office one day and found a patient lying on an exam table with an icepick in both eyes. Freeman wanted Watts to take a picture. Watts blinked, said nothing, and turned around/walked out. Their partnership was dissolved within a day.
But Watts did not do anything else.
And Freeman continued to roam the country in his "lobotomobile" . . . until his license was revoked after a patient (probably not the first) died in his care.
It's 2009 I am not Dr. Watts. I did the right thing in 1998 . . . medically, morally, ethically . . . and I will NOT apologize to anyone. I could no more have rolled over and gone back to sleep . . . or walked out on that baby . . . than I could have a member of my own family. And I remain as furious about what was done to me . . . and why it was done . . . as I was on the Monday morning Michael Bridges tried to get me to sign a bogus "money-for-silence" deal . . . as my "partner" Kathy Riley snickered in her office and counted her future bonus money (from the better "payer-mix" she would inherit).
I do not owe Dr. Mick Irwin . . . or Bob Morrison . . . or Steven Eblin . . . or ANY of the other notable doctors on Randolph Hosptial's medical staff who knew better and kept their silence and let this happen . . . or ANY of the "honorable" hospital Board & Corporate members who ALL looked the other way . . . ANYTHING.
This monster they created with their apathy and their sad/sorry silence is NOT going to blink, say nothing and "just go away". I am going to be LOUD AND OBNOXIOUS AND IN THEIR FACES until this is made right.
(OBTW, to anyone like "TruBlu" who is unfortunate enough to have any of these fine, upstanding people sign your paycheck, the VERY SAME THING could happen to you tomorrow. Good luck with that when it happens.)
And as of today, my 47th birthday (and 11th birthday in professional exile from my own hometown), I've got news for them . . . and especially the North Carolina Medical Board (if Mr. Mansfield is reading).
Change is NOT going to take 20 or 50 or 100 years. The (North Carolina Medical Practice) act is going to be cleaned up.
Of course, if Dr. Freeman were around he'd put an icepick in my eye.
*Update: King Edwina Cone has climbed down from his high fence/horse and admonished me that his "source" was not a doctor. That's not how I read it. But okay.
Please see my comments. I am so not in the mood tonight.
2/19 OBTW: This has come up in correspondence with readers/friends - and is a good point to make: Part of the settlement of the lawsuits in 2001 included a letter of recommendation (attesting to my abilities & competence as a physician . . . as well as my very positive contributions to the community during my tenure at RMA) signed by Steven Eblin.
The slimy, lying, sexist jerk had REFUSED to provide one when he fired me "without cause" in 1998 . . . after I refused to sign to his initial "we'll-pay-you-the-salary-we-owe-you-anyway for silence" deal. All I got was a "neutral" reference. It was petty, vindictive and MALICIOUS.
It kinda puts a damper on your ability to find a good job - or move on to fellowship.
So Ed Cone, in his tepid "defense" of my honor & medical competence, was merely attesting to something that has NEVER, EVER been in question . . . . even by the people who did me harm.
"Treble Damages"
I gotta say, as I sift through my options, this is certainly interesting.
How many lawyers lied - both to me and to the Court - during the course of my case?
How many lawyers lied - both to me and to the Court - during the course of my case?
Where Are The Prosecutors?
As I alluded yesterday, the news coverage (specifically by the N&R and WFMY 2) of the Sanders trial in Greensboro is deeply troubling . . . a seemingly deliberate attempt to bias the jury pool.
I apparently have good company. To quote Bledsoe, "I’ve never before witnessed such a reprehensible attempt to (convict) by media . . .". Even the Deputy Attorney General prosecuting Sanders called the N&R's "coverage" of the trial "inaccurate and prejudicial" in Court.
As the world goes to hell all around us - apparently because a lot of the "right people" didn't think they needed to play by any rules, I'm still shaking my head in disgust. Special prosecutors will go after a police detective who allegedly "hacked" into federal computers. And even if Saunders did "hack" into computers, I'm still not clear on who, if anyone, actually got hurt.
Shouldn't that predicate how far disciplinary actions goes? This trial smells and feels like total, grandstanding over-kill.
Meanwhile, the state/Feds will not even investigate "non-profit" hospital executives who violated federal agreements, plundered confidential documents, and blatantly/repeatedly perjured themselves to finish driving the nails on the coffin containing a doctor's dream to resume practice in her hometown . . . a doctor recruited home with Federal and state money.
They hurt a whole lot of people.
I just don't get it. Where are the prosecutors?
I apparently have good company. To quote Bledsoe, "I’ve never before witnessed such a reprehensible attempt to (convict) by media . . .". Even the Deputy Attorney General prosecuting Sanders called the N&R's "coverage" of the trial "inaccurate and prejudicial" in Court.
As the world goes to hell all around us - apparently because a lot of the "right people" didn't think they needed to play by any rules, I'm still shaking my head in disgust. Special prosecutors will go after a police detective who allegedly "hacked" into federal computers. And even if Saunders did "hack" into computers, I'm still not clear on who, if anyone, actually got hurt.
Shouldn't that predicate how far disciplinary actions goes? This trial smells and feels like total, grandstanding over-kill.
Meanwhile, the state/Feds will not even investigate "non-profit" hospital executives who violated federal agreements, plundered confidential documents, and blatantly/repeatedly perjured themselves to finish driving the nails on the coffin containing a doctor's dream to resume practice in her hometown . . . a doctor recruited home with Federal and state money.
They hurt a whole lot of people.
I just don't get it. Where are the prosecutors?
Monday, February 16, 2009
Born Again American
On the eve of my birthday, my Mama sent me this: Born Again American. Something I can link. She's really getting with her daughter's blogging program;)
When I came home to Asheboro, "I thought I knew the rules of the game."
I was not the one who was/still is wrong.
I wish to God I were home with you tonight, Mama. I love you.
When I came home to Asheboro, "I thought I knew the rules of the game."
I was not the one who was/still is wrong.
I wish to God I were home with you tonight, Mama. I love you.
Demoted
In the land of Ya, I am Queen.
In Fec-The-Terrible's world, I am merely Surgeon General.
I'll take it;)
In Fec-The-Terrible's world, I am merely Surgeon General.
I'll take it;)
Working On The Railroad
This morning, a friend in law enforcement (from out-of-town) e-mailed me the link to the N&R's story on the Scott Sanders trial in Greensboro. She wanted to know what I thought. I told her.
Again, Jerry Bledsoe has been all over the "Wray Fray" and I strongly recommend the last installment in his series at the Rhino. There's a reason Greensboro is emptying.
The characterizations of the case made by the N&R's current headlines make me scratch my head. I cannot shake the feeling that the man is being rail-roaded/scape-goated for all of the wrong reasons. I think he is collateral damage in a much larger war. And, no matter what happens, I fear justice will, in no way, be served.
And I'm still not understanding why, if the truth is on them, the public cannot be privy to these mysterious tapes.
Again, Jerry Bledsoe has been all over the "Wray Fray" and I strongly recommend the last installment in his series at the Rhino. There's a reason Greensboro is emptying.
The characterizations of the case made by the N&R's current headlines make me scratch my head. I cannot shake the feeling that the man is being rail-roaded/scape-goated for all of the wrong reasons. I think he is collateral damage in a much larger war. And, no matter what happens, I fear justice will, in no way, be served.
And I'm still not understanding why, if the truth is on them, the public cannot be privy to these mysterious tapes.
Oo-rah!
North Carolina made another list today.
Greensboro made one too (I love the absolutely LOADED headline;)
Greensboro made one too (I love the absolutely LOADED headline;)
On "Non-Profits" In Asheboro, North Carolina
The Bradshaw lawsuit against the City of Asheboro has peaked my interest (regardless of whether or not Mr. Bradshaw likes it or not . . . let's see him get any favorable print out from the newshounds at the link-wacking, economic-development-at-all-costs-loving Courier Tribune).
People are laughing at the water-cooler because the Bradshaws are sticking it to the City of Asheboro . . . the crowd that thinks "because we can" is a reason for everything.
I'm venting. I don't like the tongue-lashing my friend got yesterday as he tried to extend a hand. I understand fear, but you can stuff the rude.
Moving on along, in hard economic times, I think the business practices of "non-profits" (*Authors note: I'm still trying to clarify what exactly the Farmer's Market is) are going to come under closer scrutiny . . . even in Asheboro, with David & Bonnie Renfro trying to keep the lid clamped down hard.
I certainly plan to continue to do my part;)
Of course, this blog focuses on the monopolistic and illegal tactics of Randolph Hospital, a "non-profit", and one of Asheboro's largest employers. Because the hospital is so "important" in the great scheme of the town's economic well-being, no one can question anything that its executives do. Moreover, the state & Federal governments have yet to hold the hospital accountable for its actions . . . which essentially served to drive a home-grown doctor recruited home with tax dollars from said home . . . all because she would not play on a "team" that would have had her look the other way while a newborn baby was dying.
Using a popular culture reference, the nimrods running the hospital - and Asheboro - are still operating under the notion that got Spock killed in Star Trek II: "The Good of the Many Outweighs the Good of the Few . . . or the One."
Tell that to the parents of the baby.
Of course, the theory was blown all to hell in Star Trek III;)
Yeah, I watched a lot of TV growing up in Asheboro. What else was there to do?
The problem I've found in dealing with "non-profits" is that most "non-profits" fly under the radar of regulation and law enforcement. Everyone just assumes that they operate for the public good, and no one asks any hard questions. Their "missions" are often nebulous and shrouded in secrecy. Their Boards of Directors are (ironically) more-often-than-not fundamentally useless in terms of offering ethical or moral guidance . . . and Board members are well-practiced in the elbow-action of the rubber stamp (as long as they get to go on an expensive albeit "free" retreat once or twice a year).
The problem with the Randolph Hospital Board also appears to be sameness. It draws from the same narrow, fairly-inbred crop of business owners (its "corporate membership") year after year. There is relatively little new blood or real turnover. People can sit on the Board like rotting logs for years.
I had one Randolph Hospital Board member (a doctor) tell me a very long time ago that his position on the Board was "honorary" . . . in other words, he sat there in name only and had no involvement in the day-to-day operation or even general oversight of the hospital. He was not responsible.
And he seemed to (1) believe it, and (2) be okay with it. The supreme irony was that the Board of Directors, in its dance of the wink & nod, was not behaving honorably at all.
Needless to say, he's so off the pedestal.
Here's the thing: I came to town understanding that Randolph Hospital owned Randolph Medical Associates. Indeed, RMA was formed - at least in theory - to provide services to the "under-served" populations of the community that had fallen through the holes of private practice (most of that family practice). The Boards of Directors of both entities were petty much interchangeable.
I was told I was a "valued employee" of the hospital . . . recruited back home to "clean up" Pediatrics.
Of course, I can personally testify that it needed some cleaning.
The problem was that, as I dove into the job, the hospital brass increasingly did not have my back. Now, I can understand why they did not want some things floating around the community (the story of a certain randy OB immediately comes to mind). But you deal with problems by dealing with them . . . not by pretending they do not exist . . . or covering them up.
I apparently was supposed to keep cleaning up (or ignoring) messes . . . and keep absorbing the potential hits to my malpractice policy (as I cleaned up) . . . and taking the knives to the back . . . with a great big "collegial" smile on my face. But after a while, that just does not fly anymore.
When I was fired, angry parents and colleagues, not knowing where else to turn, began writing Randolph Hospital and RMA Board members.
But hospital Board members denied having anything to do with the action . . . and indeed, hospital lawyers went through all kinds of contortions trying to deny that Randolph Hospital actually "owned" RMA (in terms of the lawsuit I would ultimately file, it was all about cutting access to the deeper pocket). According to the lawyers, RMA was merely a "controlled affiliate" (whatever that means). When identified and singled out, RMA Board members also denied having anything to do with the decisions their executives made . . . they did not stoop to the "day-to-day" management of the practice . . . never mind that physician recruitment & retention was the primary mission of RMA (as it was explained to the community - and to me during recruitment), and that it would seem getting rid of a physician might require Board input (and perhaps a little due process for the doctor) prior to taking action.
To add insult to injury, Randolph Hospital & RMA Board members actually lied to patients about the circumstances of my departure and what I was able to do in the community during RMA's six-month "notice" period.
Meanwhile, the Boards of Directors never afforded me the opportunity to meet with them or plead my case. Everything they did was on the word of Bob Morrison and Steven Eblin. No one ever apparently thought to themselves, "There is more to this story than our executives are telling us . . . this is not good for the community . . . we need to hear Dr. Johnson out."
That's why these days, I don't give a rat's tail who squirms. The "honorables" are not so "honorable" in my book. And it's also why, very shortly, I am hoping to go all legal on several North Carolina "oversight" agencies.
What I have been put through is just bovine excrement.
And, of course, our local newspaper maintained radio silence. The hospital firing a beloved (I think it's fair to say that) Pediatrician under questionable circumstances was merely an internal employee matter. It was not news.
"Non-profit" administrators using the law to intimidate and retaliate . . . not to mention lying under Oath to get their way . . . isn't news either.
So the Bradshaw lawsuit brings a lot back. I did some Googling last night . . . trying to find a simple summary of what "non-profits" can and cannot do (it's not as easy as you might think). I wound up on the FAQ's page at the website of the NC Center for Non-profits (you have to register to pull up any links).
It's a "non-profit" that helps "non-profits";)
I found a decent synopsis and thought I would post it here (giving credit again to the Center):
From "A Primer on Nonprofits (And Why Working Together is Good for Government and Communities)" (Popular Government)
A nonprofit organization is a private corporation that works for the public's benefit but is separate and independent from government. Nonprofits are so entwined in communities that it is easy to miss the impact they have on daily life. Consider the organizations with which people come into regular contact-churches, day-care centers, arts programs, human services, youth centers, and the many groups that work to improve the quality of life in communities. Many of these are nonprofit organizations.
Nonprofits may earn revenues like private businesses or government agencies, but they must use any funds in excess of their operating expenses to further the public purposes stated in their charters. Nonprofits may not distribute profits for private gain by individuals. The boards of directors that govern most nonprofits are composed of volunteers who oversee the work of the nonprofits without compensation.
Since nonprofits are guided by a specific mission, staff and volunteers focus their work on providing a public benefit related to that mission. A nonprofit may serve the entire community, or it may serve a particular group, such as children, older people, or victims of crime. A nonprofit's work may complement or supplement existing government services or may provide services that government does not offer. Governments may choose to contract with nonprofits to provide community services as a way of meeting their own public responsibilities.
The designation "501(c)(3)" identifies the sections of the Internal Revenue Code (IRC) for one type of nonprofit. The IRC defines twenty-one categories of nonprofits. Each category- 501(c) (1), (2), (3), and so on-contains specific restrictions and regulations with which the organization must comply to maintain its tax-exempt status. The largest and most common category of nonprofits, and the only kind to which contributions are tax-deductible, is 501(c)(3).
Nonprofits that fall under Section 501(c)(3) include religious, educational, charitable, scientific, and literary organizations, as well as private foundations. For example, this section includes organizations that monitor streams for pollution, provide literacy training, run after-school care, deliver meals to older people who are homebound, and advocate for low-income citizens.
Members of the Masons, country clubs, or professional associations are part of a different type of nonprofit, one that falls under IRC Sections 501(c)(6) or (7). These sections specify restrictions and privileges unlike those of 501(c)(3). For example, contributions to these organizations may not be taken as charitable tax deductions, nor may membership dues.
Government is most likely to contract with 501(c)(3) nonprofits. These organizations are regulated closely by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and must follow a long list of IRS regulations, which include demonstrating accountability for using their money for charitable or public purposes.
The vast majority of 501(c)(3) nonprofits work hard to maintain the public trust, are careful stewards of scarce resources, and monitor their tax-exempt activities carefully.
A nonprofit corporation is a private corporation that works for the public's benefit. It is separate and independent from government. Churches, day care centers, arts programs, human services, and youth centers are examples of the many nonprofits with which we come into regular contact. Nonprofits receive tax-exempt status in exchange for providing a public benefit. Nonprofits may earn revenues, but they cannot distribute profits for private gain by individuals. Since nonprofits are guided by a specific mission, staff and volunteers focus their work on providing a specific public benefit.
From "A Primer on Nonprofits (And Why Working Together is Good for Government and Communities)" by Gita Gulati-Partee, with contributions from Kate McGuire and Emily Crowder, which appeared in the Summer 2001 issue of Popular Government.
People are laughing at the water-cooler because the Bradshaws are sticking it to the City of Asheboro . . . the crowd that thinks "because we can" is a reason for everything.
I'm venting. I don't like the tongue-lashing my friend got yesterday as he tried to extend a hand. I understand fear, but you can stuff the rude.
Moving on along, in hard economic times, I think the business practices of "non-profits" (*Authors note: I'm still trying to clarify what exactly the Farmer's Market is) are going to come under closer scrutiny . . . even in Asheboro, with David & Bonnie Renfro trying to keep the lid clamped down hard.
I certainly plan to continue to do my part;)
Of course, this blog focuses on the monopolistic and illegal tactics of Randolph Hospital, a "non-profit", and one of Asheboro's largest employers. Because the hospital is so "important" in the great scheme of the town's economic well-being, no one can question anything that its executives do. Moreover, the state & Federal governments have yet to hold the hospital accountable for its actions . . . which essentially served to drive a home-grown doctor recruited home with tax dollars from said home . . . all because she would not play on a "team" that would have had her look the other way while a newborn baby was dying.
Using a popular culture reference, the nimrods running the hospital - and Asheboro - are still operating under the notion that got Spock killed in Star Trek II: "The Good of the Many Outweighs the Good of the Few . . . or the One."
Tell that to the parents of the baby.
Of course, the theory was blown all to hell in Star Trek III;)
Yeah, I watched a lot of TV growing up in Asheboro. What else was there to do?
The problem I've found in dealing with "non-profits" is that most "non-profits" fly under the radar of regulation and law enforcement. Everyone just assumes that they operate for the public good, and no one asks any hard questions. Their "missions" are often nebulous and shrouded in secrecy. Their Boards of Directors are (ironically) more-often-than-not fundamentally useless in terms of offering ethical or moral guidance . . . and Board members are well-practiced in the elbow-action of the rubber stamp (as long as they get to go on an expensive albeit "free" retreat once or twice a year).
The problem with the Randolph Hospital Board also appears to be sameness. It draws from the same narrow, fairly-inbred crop of business owners (its "corporate membership") year after year. There is relatively little new blood or real turnover. People can sit on the Board like rotting logs for years.
I had one Randolph Hospital Board member (a doctor) tell me a very long time ago that his position on the Board was "honorary" . . . in other words, he sat there in name only and had no involvement in the day-to-day operation or even general oversight of the hospital. He was not responsible.
And he seemed to (1) believe it, and (2) be okay with it. The supreme irony was that the Board of Directors, in its dance of the wink & nod, was not behaving honorably at all.
Needless to say, he's so off the pedestal.
Here's the thing: I came to town understanding that Randolph Hospital owned Randolph Medical Associates. Indeed, RMA was formed - at least in theory - to provide services to the "under-served" populations of the community that had fallen through the holes of private practice (most of that family practice). The Boards of Directors of both entities were petty much interchangeable.
I was told I was a "valued employee" of the hospital . . . recruited back home to "clean up" Pediatrics.
Of course, I can personally testify that it needed some cleaning.
The problem was that, as I dove into the job, the hospital brass increasingly did not have my back. Now, I can understand why they did not want some things floating around the community (the story of a certain randy OB immediately comes to mind). But you deal with problems by dealing with them . . . not by pretending they do not exist . . . or covering them up.
I apparently was supposed to keep cleaning up (or ignoring) messes . . . and keep absorbing the potential hits to my malpractice policy (as I cleaned up) . . . and taking the knives to the back . . . with a great big "collegial" smile on my face. But after a while, that just does not fly anymore.
When I was fired, angry parents and colleagues, not knowing where else to turn, began writing Randolph Hospital and RMA Board members.
But hospital Board members denied having anything to do with the action . . . and indeed, hospital lawyers went through all kinds of contortions trying to deny that Randolph Hospital actually "owned" RMA (in terms of the lawsuit I would ultimately file, it was all about cutting access to the deeper pocket). According to the lawyers, RMA was merely a "controlled affiliate" (whatever that means). When identified and singled out, RMA Board members also denied having anything to do with the decisions their executives made . . . they did not stoop to the "day-to-day" management of the practice . . . never mind that physician recruitment & retention was the primary mission of RMA (as it was explained to the community - and to me during recruitment), and that it would seem getting rid of a physician might require Board input (and perhaps a little due process for the doctor) prior to taking action.
To add insult to injury, Randolph Hospital & RMA Board members actually lied to patients about the circumstances of my departure and what I was able to do in the community during RMA's six-month "notice" period.
Meanwhile, the Boards of Directors never afforded me the opportunity to meet with them or plead my case. Everything they did was on the word of Bob Morrison and Steven Eblin. No one ever apparently thought to themselves, "There is more to this story than our executives are telling us . . . this is not good for the community . . . we need to hear Dr. Johnson out."
That's why these days, I don't give a rat's tail who squirms. The "honorables" are not so "honorable" in my book. And it's also why, very shortly, I am hoping to go all legal on several North Carolina "oversight" agencies.
What I have been put through is just bovine excrement.
And, of course, our local newspaper maintained radio silence. The hospital firing a beloved (I think it's fair to say that) Pediatrician under questionable circumstances was merely an internal employee matter. It was not news.
"Non-profit" administrators using the law to intimidate and retaliate . . . not to mention lying under Oath to get their way . . . isn't news either.
So the Bradshaw lawsuit brings a lot back. I did some Googling last night . . . trying to find a simple summary of what "non-profits" can and cannot do (it's not as easy as you might think). I wound up on the FAQ's page at the website of the NC Center for Non-profits (you have to register to pull up any links).
It's a "non-profit" that helps "non-profits";)
I found a decent synopsis and thought I would post it here (giving credit again to the Center):
From "A Primer on Nonprofits (And Why Working Together is Good for Government and Communities)" (Popular Government)
A nonprofit organization is a private corporation that works for the public's benefit but is separate and independent from government. Nonprofits are so entwined in communities that it is easy to miss the impact they have on daily life. Consider the organizations with which people come into regular contact-churches, day-care centers, arts programs, human services, youth centers, and the many groups that work to improve the quality of life in communities. Many of these are nonprofit organizations.
Nonprofits may earn revenues like private businesses or government agencies, but they must use any funds in excess of their operating expenses to further the public purposes stated in their charters. Nonprofits may not distribute profits for private gain by individuals. The boards of directors that govern most nonprofits are composed of volunteers who oversee the work of the nonprofits without compensation.
Since nonprofits are guided by a specific mission, staff and volunteers focus their work on providing a public benefit related to that mission. A nonprofit may serve the entire community, or it may serve a particular group, such as children, older people, or victims of crime. A nonprofit's work may complement or supplement existing government services or may provide services that government does not offer. Governments may choose to contract with nonprofits to provide community services as a way of meeting their own public responsibilities.
The designation "501(c)(3)" identifies the sections of the Internal Revenue Code (IRC) for one type of nonprofit. The IRC defines twenty-one categories of nonprofits. Each category- 501(c) (1), (2), (3), and so on-contains specific restrictions and regulations with which the organization must comply to maintain its tax-exempt status. The largest and most common category of nonprofits, and the only kind to which contributions are tax-deductible, is 501(c)(3).
Nonprofits that fall under Section 501(c)(3) include religious, educational, charitable, scientific, and literary organizations, as well as private foundations. For example, this section includes organizations that monitor streams for pollution, provide literacy training, run after-school care, deliver meals to older people who are homebound, and advocate for low-income citizens.
Members of the Masons, country clubs, or professional associations are part of a different type of nonprofit, one that falls under IRC Sections 501(c)(6) or (7). These sections specify restrictions and privileges unlike those of 501(c)(3). For example, contributions to these organizations may not be taken as charitable tax deductions, nor may membership dues.
Government is most likely to contract with 501(c)(3) nonprofits. These organizations are regulated closely by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and must follow a long list of IRS regulations, which include demonstrating accountability for using their money for charitable or public purposes.
The vast majority of 501(c)(3) nonprofits work hard to maintain the public trust, are careful stewards of scarce resources, and monitor their tax-exempt activities carefully.
A nonprofit corporation is a private corporation that works for the public's benefit. It is separate and independent from government. Churches, day care centers, arts programs, human services, and youth centers are examples of the many nonprofits with which we come into regular contact. Nonprofits receive tax-exempt status in exchange for providing a public benefit. Nonprofits may earn revenues, but they cannot distribute profits for private gain by individuals. Since nonprofits are guided by a specific mission, staff and volunteers focus their work on providing a specific public benefit.
From "A Primer on Nonprofits (And Why Working Together is Good for Government and Communities)" by Gita Gulati-Partee, with contributions from Kate McGuire and Emily Crowder, which appeared in the Summer 2001 issue of Popular Government.
I am going to work on getting a copy of the Bradshaw lawsuit (from the Clerk of Court) later today.
Afternoon Update: I called the Randolph County Clerk's office at the number provided online. I was directed to a new number (336-328-3100, Extension #4). Spent quite a while on hold (due to increased call volumes). Finally got a clerk who told me (1) there's no online data base (of course, it's Randolph County), (2) They don't FAX, (3) You must present in person to get a copy of anything, (4) There is a $2.00 copy fee for the first page and 0.25 cents for every additional page.
I've also got an e-mail in to the City of Asheboro asking the following questions:
(1) Is the Farmer's Market organized as a "non-profit", and if it is, who sits on its Board of Directors?
(2) If it is not organized in that fashion, how does the city administrate it?
Update: Got a prompt response on the e-mail (refreshing). The city sent me copy of the Market's rules and regulations (see the link on the Market's website).
I've sent some more follow-up questions in . . . still trying to clarify the "quasi public/private-for-profit" thing . . . who runs the Market . . . and does it get any state/federal money?
2/18/09 Update: Got this from the city yesterday (lately everybody at City Hall is being so nice and cooperative when you ask for information that is supposed to be public record - it's a refreshing change from dealing with the criminals, Bob Morrison & Steven Eblin).
Dr. Johnson,
My name is Jonathan Sermon and I am the Assistant Director of the Asheboro Parks & Recreation Department. Jennifer Staley referred your email to me to see if I could better answer your questions regarding the Farmers Market.
Asheboro Parks & Recreation which is a part of Asheboro City Government is responsible for the operation of the Downtown Farmers Market. As a city department the Parks & Recreation Director reports to the City Manager. Currently the position of Parks & Recreation Director is vacant. At this time, Olivia Luce the Special Facilities Coordinator, has been delegated the responsibility for the facility. Information about the facility can be found on the Asheboro Parks & Recreation website at www.asheboroparksandrecreation.com
Initially some grant money was used in the construction of the facility but as for exact amounts you may want to contact the City Finance Office. If you would like to view budgetary information about the Asheboro Parks & Recreation Department you can utilize either the City’s website or contact the City Finance Director at 626-1201 ext. 247. For your convenience the City’s web address is www.ci.asheboro.nc.us
If you have any questions as to the lawsuit as referenced in your email you will need to contact the City’s Legal Department at 626-1201 ext. 288.
If you have any other requests for public record information regarding the Asheboro Parks & Recreation Department please let me know.
Sincerely,
Jonathan Sermon
Jonathan Sermon
Assistant Parks & Recreation Director
Asheboro Parks & Recreation
123-B Davis Street
Asheboro, NC 27203
Phone: (336) 626-1240 x 8
Fax: (336) 626-1295
Given the nasty tongue-lashing my friend got the other day, I think I'm gonna leave the leg work to the Bradshaw's attorney and the glorious process of discovery. I don't fancy myself another Roach. I have not seen anything on any of the local TV websites.
If interesting updates arise, we'll look at them.
Glass Empty
A couple of folks have asked me why I'm not ripping up the ether over the upcoming Randleman alcohol referendum.
The answer is simple. I just don't care. The earth is already scorched. Both Asheboro and Randleman had great potential just a decade ago . . . in terms of working with one another and defining a unique & different niche in the scheme, fabric and lore of North Carolina towns.
But the carpetbaggers won, the towns blew it and there's no going back. The glass is all but empty. As someone who loved the place, perhaps too much, it is physically painful to contemplate. So why dwell?
I'm turning into someone who can look away from a train wreck.
Some of you should be proud.
The answer is simple. I just don't care. The earth is already scorched. Both Asheboro and Randleman had great potential just a decade ago . . . in terms of working with one another and defining a unique & different niche in the scheme, fabric and lore of North Carolina towns.
But the carpetbaggers won, the towns blew it and there's no going back. The glass is all but empty. As someone who loved the place, perhaps too much, it is physically painful to contemplate. So why dwell?
I'm turning into someone who can look away from a train wreck.
Some of you should be proud.
Sunday, February 15, 2009
Saturday, February 14, 2009
Suing The City Of Asheboro: Now Why Didn't I Think Of That?
All the water-cooler talk in Asheboro this weekend (actually, a lot of it is not talk - it's just laughter - people are just tickled pink) is about Patricia Bradshaw's lawsuit against the City of Asheboro.
Bradshaw, owner of Peachtree Street Grocery, alleges that the Asheboro Downtown Farmer's Market has “directly and adversely impacted” the profitability of her business.
Directly from the Courier (I cannot make this stuff up): The suit states that the Downtown Farmers Market is a taxpayer-funded, “quasi public/private for profit entity” specializing in fresh produce and general merchandise which has operated for three years “on a retail basis in direct competition with the business of the plaintiff and competes for the same retail customer ...”
The complaint alleges that the city and parks and recreation department have “failed and refused” to enforce regulations “one aim of which was to avoid direct competition with its private citizens operating the same or similar businesses” — even though the plaintiff advised the city more than once of that failure and the adverse impact on her business.
The suit also contends that the city, “without having first compensated the plaintiff or without having initiated any condemnation process at all took measures that effectively eroded the value of the plaintiff’s property rights and business profitability.”
The city and parks and recreation department, the suit says, violated its “fiduciary duty” and caused “irreparable harm to the business of its citizens, plaintiff and is causing a loss greater than Ten Thousand Dollars per year.”
The article (written by Chip Womick) in the Courier then proceeds to rattle off the history of the Farmer's Market. It started as a "non-profit" kind of "co-op" arrangement - fostered along by the state department of agriculture - which was eventually taken over by the city last year.
Womick's narrative slowly builds to a full-blow advertisement for the project . . . and ends with an invite to a quasi-public-hearing at Sunset Theatre on Monday at 4 pm to discuss the future of the market.
I just love the word, "quasi";)
By jingo, there's nothing impartial or slanted about the Courier's presentation of the facts. God bless economic development.
Of course, none of the lawyers involved are commenting.
Allow me.
First, Bradshaw's attorney, Kenneth Johnson (no relation) of Greensboro, must not have much to do.
Second, isn't it lovely how, when Ms. Bradshaw files a lawsuit against the City of Asheboro it's instantly news . . . but a number of years back, when Dr. Mary Johnson filed a lawsuit against Randolph Hospital (another quasi-private, "non-profit" whose under-handed/illegal tactics drove her out of town), it wasn't news until the hospital sued her a year later (ultimately unsuccessfully) for "libel"?
The headlines were that Dr. Johnson was a liar. Not that Randolph Hospital executives would just as soon let innocent newborn babies die. You see, what Dr. Johnson was saying was NOT the issue . . . it was how she was saying it.
Yeah, sure, whatever.
Third, as someone who has dropped in on several occasions at the Farmer's Market, I can state unequivocally, as a customer, that I don't equate a co-op (that features the wares and arts of many locals & pseudo-locals) with a private "Mom & Pop" grocery store. It's just not "direct" competition.
Of course, Wal-Mart might be (just this past week, a down-East buddy and I were talking about the Wal-Martization of America - and how the discount giant had helped kill the Mom & Pop businesses in so many small towns). Alas, Wal-Mart is not propped up by tax dollars.
Only local incentives;)
Back to Ms. Bradshaw's premise, I could be wrong, but I don't think I would have found the exquisite hand-crafted coral necklace I gifted upon YaYa KA this past Christmas at Peachtree Street Grocery.
So. While I certainly have no love for the "right people" running Asheboro, on the surface (and on first read) it just feels like Ms. Bradshaw, in bad economic times, is making the City of Asheboro a scapegoat for a flailing business.
On the other hand/playing devil's advocate . . .
I'd like to know the specific city regulation or ordinance Ms. Bradshaw and her lawyer are basing their lawsuit upon (it's not identified in Womick's article). Is there something actually on the books that says the city of Asheboro has a fiduciary obligation to its residents that their businesses and livelihoods cannot be adversely impacted by an entity supported by tax dollars?
Because if there is such a regulation or ordinance, that puts a new and very interesting spin on the City of Asheboro's failure to act when Dr. Mary Johnson appeared before the City Council - first in 2004 and later in 2008 - and begged them for help in fighting the unethical & illegal actions of the one of the town's largest employers, Randolph Hospital . . . (again) another quasi-private-albeit-"non-profit" entity that destroyed and absorbed the Pediatric practice she had spent several years building . . . in order to serve the "best interests" of its own "controlled affiliate" (Randolph Medical Associates).
Sunday morning afterthought: Instead of fixing what was CLEARLY wrong internally, and allowing Pediatrics to transition (as it was supposed to do) and develop normally in Asheboro's private sector, Bob Morrison and Steven Eblin wanted Dr. Johnson to shut up and "just go away". After all, Pediatricians were "a dime a dozen" - they could just find another pliable medical zombie to do their bidding. And they thought that a professional hatchet job on Dr. Johnson would solve all of their problems.
When the plan began to unravel, they knew they would be able to cover their tails with a few "little" lies. You see, they had friends in important places. It's called "networking".
Eleven years later, with the city making lists no one wants to make - and Pediatrics a shadow of what it could have been with a little time and TLC (the kids seeing PA's at the Merce Clinic having taken a back seat to the razzle-dazzle of a cancer center we didn't really need), it amazes me that no one in a position of oversight in our fair mill town . . . particularly no one in a position to fire these overpaid nimrods for sub-standard performance and/or their illegal behavior (now splattered all over the Internet) . . . has had the cahoones to ask, "How'd that strategy work out for you guys?"
Randolph Hospital's actions against me were just a little more direct and malicious than I think the City of Asheboro's were against Patricia Bradshaw. But I am feeling her pain.
It's called a knife in the back.
It would seem to me that if this kind of regulation or ordinance existed, then the Asheboro City Council was duty-bound to ask the local District Attorney and/or NC Attorney General to investigate my allegations of perjury (no statute of limitations), contempt and fraud against a local "non-profit" . . . and to prosecute the hospital to the fullest extent of the law if those allegations were found to be true
As Bob Morrison prepares his retirement lair, inding those allegations to be true would not be very hard. Again, I have the signed/sworn original documents proving said perjury, contempt, & fraud. Randolph Hospital executives lied under Oath about the "confidentiality" of information that was IN NO WAY confidential. All even a pseudo-competent SBI/FBI agent would have to do is compare my income over the last decade to the "most-favored" doctors at RMA . . . or (better yet) to Bob Morrison & Steven Eblin . . . in order to see how deep the wound to my heart, soul and pocketbook really was.
I wonder if I should call up Keith Crisco, ex-Asheboro City Councilman and Beverly Perdue's new Commerce Secretary and ask him what he thinks?
Mr. Crisco, should businesses propped up and supported by tax dollars be allowed to crush the enterprise of private citizens?
It could add yet another layer (and defendant) to the action I am currently pondering against the state of North Carolina and several of its oversight agencies.
Maybe Patricia Bradshaw . . . and Mr. Johnson . . . are on to something.
Maybe we should chat.
Update (Sunday Morning):
(1) First, I must apologize to my readers. The Courier Tribune has apparently killed the link to the story I reference in this post (it's a good thing I used quotes). It's par for the course with this crowd.
(2) Now PISSED OFF and smelling a rat at the Courthouse (dare I liken it to "habitual intemperance"?), I'm wondering when this lawsuit was actually filed - and were there any delays in reporting on it? When did the City Attorney first find out about this lawsuit - and how did Mr. Suggs find out?
I'm sure our local newshounds will be all over it.
Update (Sunday Afternoon): Someone I am working with in my own situation had the following assessment:
"The Asheboro's Farmer's market could be dead meat if the case can get to a much higher court in the State . . . it's an interesting point of view . . . has the City's Department of Recreation taken ANY Federal funds (pages 24-27) in it's operation? For that means one could make the leap to federal court and dodge the good-ole-boy judical system in Asheboro altogether."
My take? Bradshaw's "point-of-view" is also, to a large degree, mine. In fact, I was there first . . . well over a decade ago . . . making apparently naive/misguided assumptions about how "non-profits" were supposed to work. Entities subsidzed by public money should not be allowed to monopolize local resources or break the law to their own ends (or the fiscal benefit of their employees), and to the detriment of private citizens & business-owners.
Where Asheboro is concerned, these local big-fish-in-their-small-stinking-pond have played dirty, and/or winked and nodded and gotten away with it for so long that they think they can continue to get away with it.
Change is here. They are about to get an education on several fronts.
As for the Bradshaws, I fear they are about to get the same ugly education I got - about the way the good people of Asheboro treat their "neighbors".
And I will tell them that I wish I had ignored all the legal eagles and COMMENTED when the lawsuits were going down.
I wish I had had this blog back then.
Update (Sunday Evening): I asked a mutual aquaintance to try and contact the Bradshaws this afternoon. They were rebuffed. Mr. Bradshaw is very unhappy with this blog post (I suppose the first part would put him off) . . . apparently not understanding that, when it comes to the lawsuit's basic premise, I'm kind of on his side (at least based on was reported by the "newshounds" at the Courier . . . in an article now de-linked online).
This lawsuit has cracked open a hornet's nest. A lot of people have a vested interest in seeing the Farmer's Market succeed (and, as a big fan of the GSO Market, I'd like to see something like that develop and grow here). Moreover (based on experience), the local "rag" is not going to be sympathetic to Bradshaw's lawsuit - as was proven by Womick's article.
Moreover again, if/when this case gets to court, some of the points I've raised are going to have to be countered. What makes Peachtree Street Grocery any different than any other local business that has struggled or gone under due to state-supported competition (either directly, ala the grants and funding afforded the Farmer's Market . . . or indirectly, ala the incentives and considerations offered to a corporate monster like Wal-Mart)? Explain it to me like I'm a six-year-old . . . or a jury member.
Burned by another "non-profit", I don't know what I'm talking about. So be it.
I will be calling the Randolph County Clerk of Court's office tomorrow morning to see if I can get a copy of the complaint (which is, of course, public record). I would like to know what city or state regulation/ordinance/statute supports the allegations made in the complaint.
Evening Update #2: Here is a link to the Downtown Market's website. You can pull up the market's rules and regulations there.
Evening Update #3: Here is the NC Non-profit Corporation Act. And here is the IRS page on Charities and Non-profits. Here are Asheboro's City Ordinances. Still looking.
Bradshaw, owner of Peachtree Street Grocery, alleges that the Asheboro Downtown Farmer's Market has “directly and adversely impacted” the profitability of her business.
Directly from the Courier (I cannot make this stuff up): The suit states that the Downtown Farmers Market is a taxpayer-funded, “quasi public/private for profit entity” specializing in fresh produce and general merchandise which has operated for three years “on a retail basis in direct competition with the business of the plaintiff and competes for the same retail customer ...”
The complaint alleges that the city and parks and recreation department have “failed and refused” to enforce regulations “one aim of which was to avoid direct competition with its private citizens operating the same or similar businesses” — even though the plaintiff advised the city more than once of that failure and the adverse impact on her business.
The suit also contends that the city, “without having first compensated the plaintiff or without having initiated any condemnation process at all took measures that effectively eroded the value of the plaintiff’s property rights and business profitability.”
The city and parks and recreation department, the suit says, violated its “fiduciary duty” and caused “irreparable harm to the business of its citizens, plaintiff and is causing a loss greater than Ten Thousand Dollars per year.”
The article (written by Chip Womick) in the Courier then proceeds to rattle off the history of the Farmer's Market. It started as a "non-profit" kind of "co-op" arrangement - fostered along by the state department of agriculture - which was eventually taken over by the city last year.
Womick's narrative slowly builds to a full-blow advertisement for the project . . . and ends with an invite to a quasi-public-hearing at Sunset Theatre on Monday at 4 pm to discuss the future of the market.
I just love the word, "quasi";)
By jingo, there's nothing impartial or slanted about the Courier's presentation of the facts. God bless economic development.
Of course, none of the lawyers involved are commenting.
Allow me.
First, Bradshaw's attorney, Kenneth Johnson (no relation) of Greensboro, must not have much to do.
Second, isn't it lovely how, when Ms. Bradshaw files a lawsuit against the City of Asheboro it's instantly news . . . but a number of years back, when Dr. Mary Johnson filed a lawsuit against Randolph Hospital (another quasi-private, "non-profit" whose under-handed/illegal tactics drove her out of town), it wasn't news until the hospital sued her a year later (ultimately unsuccessfully) for "libel"?
The headlines were that Dr. Johnson was a liar. Not that Randolph Hospital executives would just as soon let innocent newborn babies die. You see, what Dr. Johnson was saying was NOT the issue . . . it was how she was saying it.
Yeah, sure, whatever.
Third, as someone who has dropped in on several occasions at the Farmer's Market, I can state unequivocally, as a customer, that I don't equate a co-op (that features the wares and arts of many locals & pseudo-locals) with a private "Mom & Pop" grocery store. It's just not "direct" competition.
Of course, Wal-Mart might be (just this past week, a down-East buddy and I were talking about the Wal-Martization of America - and how the discount giant had helped kill the Mom & Pop businesses in so many small towns). Alas, Wal-Mart is not propped up by tax dollars.
Only local incentives;)
Back to Ms. Bradshaw's premise, I could be wrong, but I don't think I would have found the exquisite hand-crafted coral necklace I gifted upon YaYa KA this past Christmas at Peachtree Street Grocery.
So. While I certainly have no love for the "right people" running Asheboro, on the surface (and on first read) it just feels like Ms. Bradshaw, in bad economic times, is making the City of Asheboro a scapegoat for a flailing business.
On the other hand/playing devil's advocate . . .
I'd like to know the specific city regulation or ordinance Ms. Bradshaw and her lawyer are basing their lawsuit upon (it's not identified in Womick's article). Is there something actually on the books that says the city of Asheboro has a fiduciary obligation to its residents that their businesses and livelihoods cannot be adversely impacted by an entity supported by tax dollars?
Because if there is such a regulation or ordinance, that puts a new and very interesting spin on the City of Asheboro's failure to act when Dr. Mary Johnson appeared before the City Council - first in 2004 and later in 2008 - and begged them for help in fighting the unethical & illegal actions of the one of the town's largest employers, Randolph Hospital . . . (again) another quasi-private-albeit-"non-profit" entity that destroyed and absorbed the Pediatric practice she had spent several years building . . . in order to serve the "best interests" of its own "controlled affiliate" (Randolph Medical Associates).
Sunday morning afterthought: Instead of fixing what was CLEARLY wrong internally, and allowing Pediatrics to transition (as it was supposed to do) and develop normally in Asheboro's private sector, Bob Morrison and Steven Eblin wanted Dr. Johnson to shut up and "just go away". After all, Pediatricians were "a dime a dozen" - they could just find another pliable medical zombie to do their bidding. And they thought that a professional hatchet job on Dr. Johnson would solve all of their problems.
When the plan began to unravel, they knew they would be able to cover their tails with a few "little" lies. You see, they had friends in important places. It's called "networking".
Eleven years later, with the city making lists no one wants to make - and Pediatrics a shadow of what it could have been with a little time and TLC (the kids seeing PA's at the Merce Clinic having taken a back seat to the razzle-dazzle of a cancer center we didn't really need), it amazes me that no one in a position of oversight in our fair mill town . . . particularly no one in a position to fire these overpaid nimrods for sub-standard performance and/or their illegal behavior (now splattered all over the Internet) . . . has had the cahoones to ask, "How'd that strategy work out for you guys?"
Randolph Hospital's actions against me were just a little more direct and malicious than I think the City of Asheboro's were against Patricia Bradshaw. But I am feeling her pain.
It's called a knife in the back.
It would seem to me that if this kind of regulation or ordinance existed, then the Asheboro City Council was duty-bound to ask the local District Attorney and/or NC Attorney General to investigate my allegations of perjury (no statute of limitations), contempt and fraud against a local "non-profit" . . . and to prosecute the hospital to the fullest extent of the law if those allegations were found to be true
As Bob Morrison prepares his retirement lair, inding those allegations to be true would not be very hard. Again, I have the signed/sworn original documents proving said perjury, contempt, & fraud. Randolph Hospital executives lied under Oath about the "confidentiality" of information that was IN NO WAY confidential. All even a pseudo-competent SBI/FBI agent would have to do is compare my income over the last decade to the "most-favored" doctors at RMA . . . or (better yet) to Bob Morrison & Steven Eblin . . . in order to see how deep the wound to my heart, soul and pocketbook really was.
I wonder if I should call up Keith Crisco, ex-Asheboro City Councilman and Beverly Perdue's new Commerce Secretary and ask him what he thinks?
Mr. Crisco, should businesses propped up and supported by tax dollars be allowed to crush the enterprise of private citizens?
It could add yet another layer (and defendant) to the action I am currently pondering against the state of North Carolina and several of its oversight agencies.
Maybe Patricia Bradshaw . . . and Mr. Johnson . . . are on to something.
Maybe we should chat.
Update (Sunday Morning):
(1) First, I must apologize to my readers. The Courier Tribune has apparently killed the link to the story I reference in this post (it's a good thing I used quotes). It's par for the course with this crowd.
(2) Now PISSED OFF and smelling a rat at the Courthouse (dare I liken it to "habitual intemperance"?), I'm wondering when this lawsuit was actually filed - and were there any delays in reporting on it? When did the City Attorney first find out about this lawsuit - and how did Mr. Suggs find out?
I'm sure our local newshounds will be all over it.
Update (Sunday Afternoon): Someone I am working with in my own situation had the following assessment:
"The Asheboro's Farmer's market could be dead meat if the case can get to a much higher court in the State . . . it's an interesting point of view . . . has the City's Department of Recreation taken ANY Federal funds (pages 24-27) in it's operation? For that means one could make the leap to federal court and dodge the good-ole-boy judical system in Asheboro altogether."
My take? Bradshaw's "point-of-view" is also, to a large degree, mine. In fact, I was there first . . . well over a decade ago . . . making apparently naive/misguided assumptions about how "non-profits" were supposed to work. Entities subsidzed by public money should not be allowed to monopolize local resources or break the law to their own ends (or the fiscal benefit of their employees), and to the detriment of private citizens & business-owners.
Where Asheboro is concerned, these local big-fish-in-their-small-stinking-pond have played dirty, and/or winked and nodded and gotten away with it for so long that they think they can continue to get away with it.
Change is here. They are about to get an education on several fronts.
As for the Bradshaws, I fear they are about to get the same ugly education I got - about the way the good people of Asheboro treat their "neighbors".
And I will tell them that I wish I had ignored all the legal eagles and COMMENTED when the lawsuits were going down.
I wish I had had this blog back then.
Update (Sunday Evening): I asked a mutual aquaintance to try and contact the Bradshaws this afternoon. They were rebuffed. Mr. Bradshaw is very unhappy with this blog post (I suppose the first part would put him off) . . . apparently not understanding that, when it comes to the lawsuit's basic premise, I'm kind of on his side (at least based on was reported by the "newshounds" at the Courier . . . in an article now de-linked online).
This lawsuit has cracked open a hornet's nest. A lot of people have a vested interest in seeing the Farmer's Market succeed (and, as a big fan of the GSO Market, I'd like to see something like that develop and grow here). Moreover (based on experience), the local "rag" is not going to be sympathetic to Bradshaw's lawsuit - as was proven by Womick's article.
Moreover again, if/when this case gets to court, some of the points I've raised are going to have to be countered. What makes Peachtree Street Grocery any different than any other local business that has struggled or gone under due to state-supported competition (either directly, ala the grants and funding afforded the Farmer's Market . . . or indirectly, ala the incentives and considerations offered to a corporate monster like Wal-Mart)? Explain it to me like I'm a six-year-old . . . or a jury member.
Burned by another "non-profit", I don't know what I'm talking about. So be it.
I will be calling the Randolph County Clerk of Court's office tomorrow morning to see if I can get a copy of the complaint (which is, of course, public record). I would like to know what city or state regulation/ordinance/statute supports the allegations made in the complaint.
Evening Update #2: Here is a link to the Downtown Market's website. You can pull up the market's rules and regulations there.
Evening Update #3: Here is the NC Non-profit Corporation Act. And here is the IRS page on Charities and Non-profits. Here are Asheboro's City Ordinances. Still looking.
Friday, February 13, 2009
I Want A Red Ford Truck
And before you say it, I know full well that FORD stands for, "Fix Or Repair Daily".
You see, my Daddy had a Ford truck . . . actually it was my GrandDaddy Cecil's truck and Pops bought it when GrandDad died. It was a 1986 (or 87) red 2WD F-150 XLT regular cab with a long bed and red interior. It drank gas like a sieve, and was beat all to hell from going everywhere (the truck had nearly 500,000 miles on the odometer when it met its untimely end).
The truck totally rocked.
Alas, Dad wrecked "Big Red" a month before he died. And there was no repairing the poor twisted beast. I really do think a little piece of Pops died that day. It was like a spark went out.
I bought another Camry instead of a Benz or Beamer a few years back because I figured I could ultimately get two good/durable/sensibly-priced/reliable vehicles (a car and a used or small truck) for the price of one "doctor" car. I had actually planned the truck purchase last year, but when the financial and housing markets did their Titanic sink, I decided to wait. My money went into much-needed home repairs.
I am not looking to purchase until later in the year. But I am starting to look.
And I am torn.
On the one hand, I could go all nostalgic and try to find an old truck like Dad's - and fix it up. I love the red interiors in the old F150's (not available anymore - I think they stopped doing that some time after '91 or '92). I've been following auctions on E-Bay. And old Ford trucks are very easy to find in Eastern North Carolina. Indeed, I found an old red & white beast on a lot this morning . . . in reasonably good condition (on the surface) . . . for next-to-nothing (of course, it would be a money-pit to get into the pristine condition I want it in). But re-habbing an old Ford in Daddy's memory - and giving it a new & loving home - is very tempting.
On the other more modern/practical hand, I am drawn to the smaller, more compact Ford Rangers. My brother sneers at the model (indeed the entire Ford brand) and calls it a "girly truck", but hey, I am a girl. And I could design/order a brand new one - with all the bells and whistles - and a five-speed manual transmission - and four wheel drive - and an extended cab - and rear jump seats - and all the other snazzy extras exactly as I want them. There is a really cool "redfire metallic" color that rocks. The "Sport" model does seem to be calling my name.
I want a red Ford truck.
Any suggestions (either as comments or e-mail) would be appreciated.
You see, my Daddy had a Ford truck . . . actually it was my GrandDaddy Cecil's truck and Pops bought it when GrandDad died. It was a 1986 (or 87) red 2WD F-150 XLT regular cab with a long bed and red interior. It drank gas like a sieve, and was beat all to hell from going everywhere (the truck had nearly 500,000 miles on the odometer when it met its untimely end).
The truck totally rocked.
Alas, Dad wrecked "Big Red" a month before he died. And there was no repairing the poor twisted beast. I really do think a little piece of Pops died that day. It was like a spark went out.
I bought another Camry instead of a Benz or Beamer a few years back because I figured I could ultimately get two good/durable/sensibly-priced/reliable vehicles (a car and a used or small truck) for the price of one "doctor" car. I had actually planned the truck purchase last year, but when the financial and housing markets did their Titanic sink, I decided to wait. My money went into much-needed home repairs.
I am not looking to purchase until later in the year. But I am starting to look.
And I am torn.
On the one hand, I could go all nostalgic and try to find an old truck like Dad's - and fix it up. I love the red interiors in the old F150's (not available anymore - I think they stopped doing that some time after '91 or '92). I've been following auctions on E-Bay. And old Ford trucks are very easy to find in Eastern North Carolina. Indeed, I found an old red & white beast on a lot this morning . . . in reasonably good condition (on the surface) . . . for next-to-nothing (of course, it would be a money-pit to get into the pristine condition I want it in). But re-habbing an old Ford in Daddy's memory - and giving it a new & loving home - is very tempting.
On the other more modern/practical hand, I am drawn to the smaller, more compact Ford Rangers. My brother sneers at the model (indeed the entire Ford brand) and calls it a "girly truck", but hey, I am a girl. And I could design/order a brand new one - with all the bells and whistles - and a five-speed manual transmission - and four wheel drive - and an extended cab - and rear jump seats - and all the other snazzy extras exactly as I want them. There is a really cool "redfire metallic" color that rocks. The "Sport" model does seem to be calling my name.
I want a red Ford truck.
Any suggestions (either as comments or e-mail) would be appreciated.
Thursday, February 12, 2009
Cut The Crap Lex: An "Expert Voice" On Burned Citizen Journalism
Poor Lex. A couple of years ago, he had what might have been the coolest newspaper job on the planet.
Now he's writing (in his "expert voice" . . . like a victim no less) about how/why the citizen journalism experiment at the N&R crashed and burned. It was all someone else's fault . . . those nebulous powers-that-be . . . all those damned "right people".
But never fear, Roch is going to hire him within the year.
Like I said, poor Lex.
If you can't tell, as someone burned for standing up to her employers on principle - someone who subsequently could not get the time of day from earnest/well-meaning/innovative/world-changing Lex or his evil Editors, I'm not feeling as charitable towards the, "Pity me the poor pitiful reporter" act that Lex's journalist friends in the blogosphere appear to be eating up.
When I left the paper earlier this month, we still had not completed some of the ambitious goals we set for ourselves four years ago. But our Web site was a different and much better place, and the work continues today.
My comment on the story at "CIO Insight" (whatever the hell that is):
I knew there was a reason to keep checking in at Cone's.
Heavy sigh. You don't have to "re-invent the news". You just have to report it.
"Find a way to say yes and to meet people where they are. You want to tell your community's stories. Your community wants its stories told. You're on the same side."
Lex, speaking as someone who came to the blogosphere hanging on John Robinson's every empty promise ("underpromise" is now a good way to characterize it), allow me to tell you that you did not say, "yes", you did not meet me where I was (you did not meet me at all), and you did not tell anyone's story unless it suited the paper's race-baiting/progressive-liberal (whatever) agenda.
You were not on my side.
Reality at the N&R never came close to the rhetoric. And it lost all credibility.
And that is the reason the N&R's little experiment in "citizen journalism" failed so miserably.
Journalists have the power to tell the truth and change lives for the better. There is perhaps no higher calling. What the hell has happened in Greensboro? How did it get so twisted, warped and sick?
Good luck working for Roch.
Now he's writing (in his "expert voice" . . . like a victim no less) about how/why the citizen journalism experiment at the N&R crashed and burned. It was all someone else's fault . . . those nebulous powers-that-be . . . all those damned "right people".
But never fear, Roch is going to hire him within the year.
Like I said, poor Lex.
If you can't tell, as someone burned for standing up to her employers on principle - someone who subsequently could not get the time of day from earnest/well-meaning/innovative/world-changing Lex or his evil Editors, I'm not feeling as charitable towards the, "Pity me the poor pitiful reporter" act that Lex's journalist friends in the blogosphere appear to be eating up.
When I left the paper earlier this month, we still had not completed some of the ambitious goals we set for ourselves four years ago. But our Web site was a different and much better place, and the work continues today.
My comment on the story at "CIO Insight" (whatever the hell that is):
I knew there was a reason to keep checking in at Cone's.
Heavy sigh. You don't have to "re-invent the news". You just have to report it.
"Find a way to say yes and to meet people where they are. You want to tell your community's stories. Your community wants its stories told. You're on the same side."
Lex, speaking as someone who came to the blogosphere hanging on John Robinson's every empty promise ("underpromise" is now a good way to characterize it), allow me to tell you that you did not say, "yes", you did not meet me where I was (you did not meet me at all), and you did not tell anyone's story unless it suited the paper's race-baiting/progressive-liberal (whatever) agenda.
You were not on my side.
Reality at the N&R never came close to the rhetoric. And it lost all credibility.
And that is the reason the N&R's little experiment in "citizen journalism" failed so miserably.
Journalists have the power to tell the truth and change lives for the better. There is perhaps no higher calling. What the hell has happened in Greensboro? How did it get so twisted, warped and sick?
Good luck working for Roch.
WOO On Your Bad Science
A special court has ruled in a "test case" involving claims filed by parents alleging their childrens' autism was caused by early childhood vaccines.
The verdict: Vaccines do not cause autism.
I can only imagine the wailing, moaning and gnashing of teeth in Jenny McCarthy's Hollywood compound as this news breaks.
And I cannot wait for the mighty Orac to cut loose.
The verdict: Vaccines do not cause autism.
I can only imagine the wailing, moaning and gnashing of teeth in Jenny McCarthy's Hollywood compound as this news breaks.
And I cannot wait for the mighty Orac to cut loose.
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
The Chain E-Mail
I don't do "chains". But I got a really good one from one of my YaYa's today.
God doesn ' t give you the people you want, He gives you the people you NEED - To help you, to hurt you, to leave you, to love you and to make you into the person you were meant to be.
Dear God: The lady reading this is beautiful, classy and strong, and I love her. Help her live her life to the fullest. Please promote her and cause her to excel above her expectations. Help her shine in the darkest places where it is impossible to love. Protect her at all times, lift her up when she needs you the most, and let her know when she walks with you, She will always be safe. Love you.
Thanks, "Ka". I REALLY needed that. I broke my own rule and blind-copied this one on along . . . to many more than nine . . . including some "brothers".
God doesn ' t give you the people you want, He gives you the people you NEED - To help you, to hurt you, to leave you, to love you and to make you into the person you were meant to be.
Dear God: The lady reading this is beautiful, classy and strong, and I love her. Help her live her life to the fullest. Please promote her and cause her to excel above her expectations. Help her shine in the darkest places where it is impossible to love. Protect her at all times, lift her up when she needs you the most, and let her know when she walks with you, She will always be safe. Love you.
Thanks, "Ka". I REALLY needed that. I broke my own rule and blind-copied this one on along . . . to many more than nine . . . including some "brothers".
One Good Reason
Overlawyered has an update on the sad/sorry case of Dr. John King and Putnam County (West Virginia) Hospital. It's just been a mess.
I blogged on the case here and here.
In my first post, I tried to give the subject a little bit more than the Ed Cone "outraged soundbite" treatment. The point kind of is that HCQIA (the federal law governing medical peer review) is a way-imperfect instrument . . . one that allows bad doctors like John King in West Virginia (my humble opinion - and I back that opinion up with the over 100 million dollars in malpractice claims that have been paid out against him) . . . or this one in North Carolina . . . to legally terrorize hospitals and colleagues and communities . . .
. . . while those who try to stop them are crushed like bugs. The Medical Boards do not care. The Federal & state governments do not care. And the press (especially the local press) does not think stories like mine are "relevant".
Or maybe they're just trying to cover VIP ass.
John King is now suing a lawyer he hired to sue other lawyers. He's doing it "pro se". And I have to ask, at what point (after generating 124 malpractice claims) does a doctor's actions become criminal? If he's not in jail, it seems to me that his lawyers (all of them) did a good job.
It really burns my ass that King is trying to ride the "bad faith peer review" train.
He's a troll.
You see, on the flip side of the coin, as a doctor whose hometown practice was destroyed because she intervened to STOP malpractice, I am contemplating a lawsuit too.
And doctors like King make my job harder.
I still have not made a decision - mostly because I recognize that the North Carolina legal system is beyond corrupt, and, after the first ride on the "right people" train, I am not certain I want to subject myself to that again. I'll probably need an out-of-state law firm (currently looking into it), people who cannot be bought or intimidated - people who could care less about "pay-to-play". It will be a major financial and emotional commitment.
But I can guarandamnedtee you that I have a great case for negligence on the part of our state & Federal "oversight" agencies. They do not defend or protect the duties they require of doctors.
With the public screaming for transparency and accountability, and with the Federal government apparently prepared to write more bad laws and create more bad programs (instead of fixing the problems with the ones they've already got), there might not be a better time.
And there is precedent of sorts.
There is one compelling reason that can be made for returning to Court. It is one I cannot shake: Four years in blogosphere on the citizen journalism train has more than proven that nothing is going to change until someone stands up to these jerk-offs in Court.
And things MUST change.
I blogged on the case here and here.
In my first post, I tried to give the subject a little bit more than the Ed Cone "outraged soundbite" treatment. The point kind of is that HCQIA (the federal law governing medical peer review) is a way-imperfect instrument . . . one that allows bad doctors like John King in West Virginia (my humble opinion - and I back that opinion up with the over 100 million dollars in malpractice claims that have been paid out against him) . . . or this one in North Carolina . . . to legally terrorize hospitals and colleagues and communities . . .
. . . while those who try to stop them are crushed like bugs. The Medical Boards do not care. The Federal & state governments do not care. And the press (especially the local press) does not think stories like mine are "relevant".
Or maybe they're just trying to cover VIP ass.
John King is now suing a lawyer he hired to sue other lawyers. He's doing it "pro se". And I have to ask, at what point (after generating 124 malpractice claims) does a doctor's actions become criminal? If he's not in jail, it seems to me that his lawyers (all of them) did a good job.
It really burns my ass that King is trying to ride the "bad faith peer review" train.
He's a troll.
You see, on the flip side of the coin, as a doctor whose hometown practice was destroyed because she intervened to STOP malpractice, I am contemplating a lawsuit too.
And doctors like King make my job harder.
I still have not made a decision - mostly because I recognize that the North Carolina legal system is beyond corrupt, and, after the first ride on the "right people" train, I am not certain I want to subject myself to that again. I'll probably need an out-of-state law firm (currently looking into it), people who cannot be bought or intimidated - people who could care less about "pay-to-play". It will be a major financial and emotional commitment.
But I can guarandamnedtee you that I have a great case for negligence on the part of our state & Federal "oversight" agencies. They do not defend or protect the duties they require of doctors.
With the public screaming for transparency and accountability, and with the Federal government apparently prepared to write more bad laws and create more bad programs (instead of fixing the problems with the ones they've already got), there might not be a better time.
And there is precedent of sorts.
There is one compelling reason that can be made for returning to Court. It is one I cannot shake: Four years in blogosphere on the citizen journalism train has more than proven that nothing is going to change until someone stands up to these jerk-offs in Court.
And things MUST change.
Monster Cat Turds
Perhaps this is not an appropriate subject for a physician to be blogging on, but hey, what the hay.
I travel with my cats, TJ (a grey tabby longhair/male) and Sabine (a black domestic shorthair/female). Both are "fixed" . . . although TJ still sometimes tries to do strange things to Sabine (who rebuffs him) that I would approximate to a sad, sorry mating dance.
He's actually doing it right now as I blog. It's funny.
When I am on the road, the cats sleep with me in my room . . . with the door locked, and a carrier and a litter box nearby. Sabine takes the pillow beside my head - and TJ curls up in the small of my back. Chalk it up to previous traumatic experiences . . . tornado warnings and baby hurricanes and the like. I like to be ready to jump and run - with my "children".
Lately, Sabine (who has a mild form of hemophilia - we joke that she's "French" and royal) has been exhibiting symptoms of either allergies or stress - specifically hair loss, itching and excessive licking. One of the things we're doing between the two animal hospitals I'm working with . . . one in Asheboro and one in the Eastern N.C. burg where I'm on assignment . . . is changing food. And if I change Sabine's, I must change TJ's.
It's been a bit dicey . . . routines are much harder to re-establish on the road. Cats are nothing if not creatures of habit. They like routine and sameness. Mine have both been on Fancy Feast since they came to "Mary-land", and, as a vet told me yesterday (shaking his head), "Fancy Feast is like CRACK for cats". It's hard to get them to eat anything else. But we have finally found a combo that seems to be working.
These days, unless there's a C-Section scheduled for 7 AM, I generally set my alarm for 6:30 AM (I can usually be ready for work in less than thirty minutes). But lately, I've been rudely awakened . . . not by my trusty cell-phone alarm . . . but a smell . . . in the wee hours of the morning (around 5 AM).
It's not a good smell.
You see, both cats have taken to dropping MONSTER TURDS at approximately that time . . . one right after the other. They then make a grand/loud production of pretending to bury them . . . but actually wind up leaving the turds still exposed to air. I think it's a dominance thing.
In a closed bedroom, with no fan running or window open, it is difficult to describe the smell. Exquisite, foul, acrid/fetid, not quite GI-bleedish (any doctor/nurse can tell you, the WORST smell in the world) but very close . . . a smell that permeates and infiltrates everything in the room . . . and is not stopped by pillows over one's nose or bedcovers.
It can make your nose stuff and eyes water.
So I wind up getting up and scooping (whoever invented scoopable litter is a fricking genius - if they made millions on the patent, they deserve it). And then I'm up. And I can't to back to sleep with the smell still lingering in the crevices of my scarred-down sinuses, so I let the pussies go downstairs and I get up/take a shower/turn on the fan.
Sometimes I do have to crack a window.
I think the furballs are plotting with my Mother to turn me into a morning person.
It's working.
I travel with my cats, TJ (a grey tabby longhair/male) and Sabine (a black domestic shorthair/female). Both are "fixed" . . . although TJ still sometimes tries to do strange things to Sabine (who rebuffs him) that I would approximate to a sad, sorry mating dance.
He's actually doing it right now as I blog. It's funny.
When I am on the road, the cats sleep with me in my room . . . with the door locked, and a carrier and a litter box nearby. Sabine takes the pillow beside my head - and TJ curls up in the small of my back. Chalk it up to previous traumatic experiences . . . tornado warnings and baby hurricanes and the like. I like to be ready to jump and run - with my "children".
Lately, Sabine (who has a mild form of hemophilia - we joke that she's "French" and royal) has been exhibiting symptoms of either allergies or stress - specifically hair loss, itching and excessive licking. One of the things we're doing between the two animal hospitals I'm working with . . . one in Asheboro and one in the Eastern N.C. burg where I'm on assignment . . . is changing food. And if I change Sabine's, I must change TJ's.
It's been a bit dicey . . . routines are much harder to re-establish on the road. Cats are nothing if not creatures of habit. They like routine and sameness. Mine have both been on Fancy Feast since they came to "Mary-land", and, as a vet told me yesterday (shaking his head), "Fancy Feast is like CRACK for cats". It's hard to get them to eat anything else. But we have finally found a combo that seems to be working.
These days, unless there's a C-Section scheduled for 7 AM, I generally set my alarm for 6:30 AM (I can usually be ready for work in less than thirty minutes). But lately, I've been rudely awakened . . . not by my trusty cell-phone alarm . . . but a smell . . . in the wee hours of the morning (around 5 AM).
It's not a good smell.
You see, both cats have taken to dropping MONSTER TURDS at approximately that time . . . one right after the other. They then make a grand/loud production of pretending to bury them . . . but actually wind up leaving the turds still exposed to air. I think it's a dominance thing.
In a closed bedroom, with no fan running or window open, it is difficult to describe the smell. Exquisite, foul, acrid/fetid, not quite GI-bleedish (any doctor/nurse can tell you, the WORST smell in the world) but very close . . . a smell that permeates and infiltrates everything in the room . . . and is not stopped by pillows over one's nose or bedcovers.
It can make your nose stuff and eyes water.
So I wind up getting up and scooping (whoever invented scoopable litter is a fricking genius - if they made millions on the patent, they deserve it). And then I'm up. And I can't to back to sleep with the smell still lingering in the crevices of my scarred-down sinuses, so I let the pussies go downstairs and I get up/take a shower/turn on the fan.
Sometimes I do have to crack a window.
I think the furballs are plotting with my Mother to turn me into a morning person.
It's working.
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
On Caylee
I am very, very sorry that little Caylee Marie Anthony was murdered and thrown away like garbage . . . allegedly by her own Mother. We live in a sick, warped world.
But I am sorry. How many other children were murdered or went missing last year? Where is the concern and wailing & gnashing of teeth/renting of garments for them? This case needs to STOP being a headline on CNN every morning . . . and the "entertaining" subject of endless, fundamentally meaningless/useless speculation on "Nancy Grace" (does anyone else have to suppress the urge to vomit whenever they see her sneering mug on screen?).
"Justice", such as it is, needs to be left to the courts. The era of OJ needs to be OVER.
But I am sorry. How many other children were murdered or went missing last year? Where is the concern and wailing & gnashing of teeth/renting of garments for them? This case needs to STOP being a headline on CNN every morning . . . and the "entertaining" subject of endless, fundamentally meaningless/useless speculation on "Nancy Grace" (does anyone else have to suppress the urge to vomit whenever they see her sneering mug on screen?).
"Justice", such as it is, needs to be left to the courts. The era of OJ needs to be OVER.
Daschle Still Lives
I can think of nothing that will drive more good/gifted/ethical people away from the practice of medicine than what is buried deep within the new stimulus bill that President Obama wants to pass so quickly and with so little real scrutiny. The kind of "uniformity" described is ominous and unrealistic in any practical sense. One must consider resources. The doctor-patient relationship is a human one. And New York City is not rural North Carolina.
Doctors and hospitals as (currently undefined) "meaningful users" of the new (electronic) system will be evaluated by some nebulous, (again, undefined) mechanism in USDHHS (the same USDHHS whose people could not come out from under their desks and wipe their own butts in my case?) I am really not believing my eyes.
And I've got news for you people. This is NOT going to decrease costs (quite the opposite) or stimulate anything but a mass exodus from medicine by the brightest and best.
Daschle still lives/lurks. May God help us!
Doctors and hospitals as (currently undefined) "meaningful users" of the new (electronic) system will be evaluated by some nebulous, (again, undefined) mechanism in USDHHS (the same USDHHS whose people could not come out from under their desks and wipe their own butts in my case?) I am really not believing my eyes.
And I've got news for you people. This is NOT going to decrease costs (quite the opposite) or stimulate anything but a mass exodus from medicine by the brightest and best.
Daschle still lives/lurks. May God help us!
It's Official . . .
. . . octuplet mom, Nadya Suleman, is a nut. Even the baby's Grandmother thinks so. Of course, ala Anna Nicole, that should make for good reality TV.
I liked the "money is paper" line . . . with a NICU bill looming that could run as high as 3 million dollars. Back in the day, before electronic medical records, you used to be able to sit comfortably on some of these medical charts.
I liked the "money is paper" line . . . with a NICU bill looming that could run as high as 3 million dollars. Back in the day, before electronic medical records, you used to be able to sit comfortably on some of these medical charts.
Enemy Combatants With Benefits?
I saw this on DRUDGE yesterday. Overlawyered has commentary. I left something there.
There are just too many damned lawyers in this world with nothing productive to do.
There are just too many damned lawyers in this world with nothing productive to do.
Sunday, February 08, 2009
As I Contemplate The Lawsuit: What The State & Federal Governments Should Do In My Case
In the wake of my posts on the N.C. State Bar's shameless, star-chamberish hatchet-job on Rachel Lea Hunter, as well as the encouraging news that Eric Gluck is seeing some small forward momentum (in terms of press coverage) in his case, I've had an increase in traffic/readers/e-mails.
Over the last few days, I've engaged (against my better judgement) in some back & forth e-mails with members & ex-members of the "Semmelweis Society" (I'm firmly in the "ex" category). I'm fed up and disgusted with the current leadership . . . and all of the infighting/litigating/counter-litigating . . . which serves no useful purpose . . . and helps no one.
In one of my e-mails to a relatively new acquaintance, I explained why/how Semmelweis had fundamentally failed a number of it's original members (I call them "the Federal contingent) . . . especially in terms of its preoccupation with Qui Tam (i.e. get rich not-so-quick) litigation:
The thing is I don't have a civil case (against Randolph Hospital). I have a criminal one - and the beauty of it is that the crime (perjury) has NO statute of limitations. And I could still be restored & completely vindicated through its prosecution. What I need help getting the national press to put the pressure on "the right people" to investigate and prosecute it.
Today, a new reader left a comment on this post, and I think my response is worth putting front and center . . . for those who have short attention spans . . . or still have no clue as to what I want to happen . . . without filing a civil (gross negligence) lawsuit against the state & federal governments (and it's not for society to feed and clothe and care for octuplets).
I want justice. And it actually would be a fairly easy thing to accomplish if our governments truly gave a damn about the letter of the law. Here's the reply (with minor edits) to the new reader:
(1) I do not "support" the IRS - except to dutifully pay my taxes every quarter. I do it because I want to live in peace - without being audited/jailed/my meager assets seized. But I grumble mightily about the money I fork out (that could go to better things - like my own retirement & healthcare) because over the last decade, I've gotten CRAP for that money.
(2) When I did my interview with the IRS agent in October 2006 (an interview that the IRS would deny happened - part of the reason I blogged on it while the memory/wound was still fresh), I took a friend as a witness. There was only one agent.
Here's the link: http://drjshousecalls.blogspot.com/2006/10/lovely-october-morning-with-irs.html
As I've said, our hero pretty much told me that as a "non-profit", Randolph Hospital could lie to me/other ordinary citizens all day long in any venue and the IRS/US Attorney WOULD NOT CARE. But the hospital could not lie to the IRS.
I'm sorry, as Jane Q. Citizen dutifully paying the taxes that shore up Randolph Hospital, I have a BIG PROBLEM with that.
It is a fact, that both the US & NC Attorneys General could have, with relatively little effort, long ago told Randolph Hospital and its oh-so-"honorable (not)" Board-of-Directors that its executives BROKE THE LAW/COMMITTED FELONIES and WOULD FACE PROSECUTION if the hospital did not sit down and make things right with the Pediatrician in public service that the hospital screwed over.
I was a third-party beneficiary to both state and Federal service agreements which were not completely enforced (and would not have even been partially enforced had I not gone to war with USDHHS through Howard Coble's office). In short, the government(s) had responsibilities to me (not-to-mention the taxpayers who fronted the bill for this way-bad party) that were IN NO WAY fulfilled. In fact, everybody in all of the agencies I served under pretty much dived under their desks - I was on my own.
Right now, TODAY, the US & NC Attorneys General could say to this hospital, "Dr. Johnson has provided us with IRREFUTABLE PROOF that your executives REPEATEDLY lied under Oath in order to get out of a civil suit on the cheap (a civil suit filed because Randolph & its "controlled affiliate" violated every public agreement it signed and made a mockery of the mission/purpose Dr. Johnson was recruited home to serve) . . .
. . . in short, Randolph Hospital CRAPPED ON ONE OF OUR PEOPLE, AND YOU JUST DON'T GET TO DO THAT. So, if you-all don't get your heads out of your smug/"right people" asses and sit down and make it right with this girl (OUR GIRL) that you did wrong, your little hospital is going to be STRIPPED of its "non-profit" status and BE DEAD to the state & Federal governments in terms of grants and funding and certificates of need."
NOTHING . . . ZERO . . . ZIP . . . NADDA . . . will be coming your way. You play by the rules or you don't play at all.
And OBTW, keep jerking us/Dr. Johnson around, and those over-paid/ignorant/arrogant cretins you circled the wagons around . . . without giving Dr. Johnson ANY CHANCE at all to defend herself . . . are going to be prosecuted aggressively for multiple felonies instead of pleading guilty to misdemeanors.
And you're right. I do not support universal healthcare - in large part because I've seen how poorly government oversees & polices the programs it already has in place . . . and because it sets no limits.
I expect if I sue the state/Feds, this is going to happen anyway. Because I will not be just going away until it does.
Whew. I feel better now. The introspection continues . . . it's a pretty day for it;)
Over the last few days, I've engaged (against my better judgement) in some back & forth e-mails with members & ex-members of the "Semmelweis Society" (I'm firmly in the "ex" category). I'm fed up and disgusted with the current leadership . . . and all of the infighting/litigating/counter-litigating . . . which serves no useful purpose . . . and helps no one.
In one of my e-mails to a relatively new acquaintance, I explained why/how Semmelweis had fundamentally failed a number of it's original members (I call them "the Federal contingent) . . . especially in terms of its preoccupation with Qui Tam (i.e. get rich not-so-quick) litigation:
The thing is I don't have a civil case (against Randolph Hospital). I have a criminal one - and the beauty of it is that the crime (perjury) has NO statute of limitations. And I could still be restored & completely vindicated through its prosecution. What I need help getting the national press to put the pressure on "the right people" to investigate and prosecute it.
Today, a new reader left a comment on this post, and I think my response is worth putting front and center . . . for those who have short attention spans . . . or still have no clue as to what I want to happen . . . without filing a civil (gross negligence) lawsuit against the state & federal governments (and it's not for society to feed and clothe and care for octuplets).
I want justice. And it actually would be a fairly easy thing to accomplish if our governments truly gave a damn about the letter of the law. Here's the reply (with minor edits) to the new reader:
(1) I do not "support" the IRS - except to dutifully pay my taxes every quarter. I do it because I want to live in peace - without being audited/jailed/my meager assets seized. But I grumble mightily about the money I fork out (that could go to better things - like my own retirement & healthcare) because over the last decade, I've gotten CRAP for that money.
(2) When I did my interview with the IRS agent in October 2006 (an interview that the IRS would deny happened - part of the reason I blogged on it while the memory/wound was still fresh), I took a friend as a witness. There was only one agent.
Here's the link: http://drjshousecalls.blogspot.com/2006/10/lovely-october-morning-with-irs.html
As I've said, our hero pretty much told me that as a "non-profit", Randolph Hospital could lie to me/other ordinary citizens all day long in any venue and the IRS/US Attorney WOULD NOT CARE. But the hospital could not lie to the IRS.
I'm sorry, as Jane Q. Citizen dutifully paying the taxes that shore up Randolph Hospital, I have a BIG PROBLEM with that.
It is a fact, that both the US & NC Attorneys General could have, with relatively little effort, long ago told Randolph Hospital and its oh-so-"honorable (not)" Board-of-Directors that its executives BROKE THE LAW/COMMITTED FELONIES and WOULD FACE PROSECUTION if the hospital did not sit down and make things right with the Pediatrician in public service that the hospital screwed over.
I was a third-party beneficiary to both state and Federal service agreements which were not completely enforced (and would not have even been partially enforced had I not gone to war with USDHHS through Howard Coble's office). In short, the government(s) had responsibilities to me (not-to-mention the taxpayers who fronted the bill for this way-bad party) that were IN NO WAY fulfilled. In fact, everybody in all of the agencies I served under pretty much dived under their desks - I was on my own.
Right now, TODAY, the US & NC Attorneys General could say to this hospital, "Dr. Johnson has provided us with IRREFUTABLE PROOF that your executives REPEATEDLY lied under Oath in order to get out of a civil suit on the cheap (a civil suit filed because Randolph & its "controlled affiliate" violated every public agreement it signed and made a mockery of the mission/purpose Dr. Johnson was recruited home to serve) . . .
. . . in short, Randolph Hospital CRAPPED ON ONE OF OUR PEOPLE, AND YOU JUST DON'T GET TO DO THAT. So, if you-all don't get your heads out of your smug/"right people" asses and sit down and make it right with this girl (OUR GIRL) that you did wrong, your little hospital is going to be STRIPPED of its "non-profit" status and BE DEAD to the state & Federal governments in terms of grants and funding and certificates of need."
NOTHING . . . ZERO . . . ZIP . . . NADDA . . . will be coming your way. You play by the rules or you don't play at all.
And OBTW, keep jerking us/Dr. Johnson around, and those over-paid/ignorant/arrogant cretins you circled the wagons around . . . without giving Dr. Johnson ANY CHANCE at all to defend herself . . . are going to be prosecuted aggressively for multiple felonies instead of pleading guilty to misdemeanors.
YOU DO NOT MESS WITH OUR PEOPLE. WE DO NOT LEAVE OUR OWN BEHIND!
If the state & federal governments really cared about "accountability" and "transparency" this could/would happen TOMORROW.And you're right. I do not support universal healthcare - in large part because I've seen how poorly government oversees & polices the programs it already has in place . . . and because it sets no limits.
I expect if I sue the state/Feds, this is going to happen anyway. Because I will not be just going away until it does.
Whew. I feel better now. The introspection continues . . . it's a pretty day for it;)
In The Arms Of The Angel
There's a reason I am not a veterinarian (actually it takes better grades to get into vet school).
This just breaks my heart. If the way we regard & treat our unborn says the absolute worst about us as a society & species, the way we treat animals is certainly a bold punctuation mark.
This just breaks my heart. If the way we regard & treat our unborn says the absolute worst about us as a society & species, the way we treat animals is certainly a bold punctuation mark.
Saturday, February 07, 2009
Gems In The Rough
Eastern North Carolina, land of my Mama's people, really is a remarkable place. And it has always been amazing to me how that . . . even in the most remote/rural/desolate place . . . in the middle of fricking nowhere . . . where even the invading space aliens don't go . . . you can find a diamond in the blackest black mud.
I found three diamonds today.
It was a good day:)
I found three diamonds today.
It was a good day:)
Friday, February 06, 2009
Feeding The Monster
Still online, doing bills. Before I sign off for the weekend . . .
There is so much about this story that is just fundamentally wrong . . . from the deluded, irresponsible & selfish single woman with very evident emotional problems (serious, serious pathology) having children she can in no way support . . . to the clinic & doctors who provided the fertility treatments (I'm still not wrapping my head around how she made it through any kind of legitimate screening process) . . . to a national press & gawking society that will (no doubt) ultimately reward all of the "unconventional choices" made by "most sought after Mom in the world".
She already has publicists . . . and is playing all the right cards (i.e. she is being unfairly scrutinized because she's a single Mother . . . she won't accept welfare . . . etc.). Never fear, there will be a reality TV show.
It's America. And our theme of late seems to be, "All I wanted . . .".
Consequences be damned.
Afternoon Update: Worthy of a Mtn Dew sinus wash, the California Medical Board is going to "investigate" this case to see if the doctors involved violated any ethical standards.
Can you say dog and pony show? I'll give you two guesses as to how that will turn out.
There is so much about this story that is just fundamentally wrong . . . from the deluded, irresponsible & selfish single woman with very evident emotional problems (serious, serious pathology) having children she can in no way support . . . to the clinic & doctors who provided the fertility treatments (I'm still not wrapping my head around how she made it through any kind of legitimate screening process) . . . to a national press & gawking society that will (no doubt) ultimately reward all of the "unconventional choices" made by "most sought after Mom in the world".
She already has publicists . . . and is playing all the right cards (i.e. she is being unfairly scrutinized because she's a single Mother . . . she won't accept welfare . . . etc.). Never fear, there will be a reality TV show.
It's America. And our theme of late seems to be, "All I wanted . . .".
Consequences be damned.
Afternoon Update: Worthy of a Mtn Dew sinus wash, the California Medical Board is going to "investigate" this case to see if the doctors involved violated any ethical standards.
Can you say dog and pony show? I'll give you two guesses as to how that will turn out.
A Bump In The Road
This past Monday, in my post on the two-faced professional hatchet job the North Carolina State Bar is doing on Rachel Lea Hunter (it's actually very simple boys & girls . . . if you don't want to be likened to crooks & "Nazi's", then don't act like crooks & Nazi's), I promised a post today:
With that in mind, I am going to be re-telling my story on this blog on Friday. It's going to be the whole story of what happened over an approximately three week period in January & February 1998. And this time, in honor of our anonymous "TruBlu", I will naming the names of the people who libeled me and walked away unscathed.
Alas, the post won't go up today. And I feel bad enough about that to offer an explanation.
You see, I'm still working on the draft . . . going through some files . . . really re-living (in full PTSD fashion) some fairly unpleasant memories. And even though I had wanted to honor an anniversary of sorts, I honestly feel no real sense of urgency. For after spoon-feeding Ed Cone & John Robinson for four years (now the N&R wants to shoot blogger videos to prove citizen journalism is still alive), it's nothing I haven't said before . . . and really no one I have not already identified.
But for those new to this blog (apparently there are a few of you), the names Freeman and Irwin and Riley play prominently in the libel (please notice it's not in quotes) aspect of the story (just punch 'em in the Housecall's search engine and see what you pull up).
Since I've always told the truth about what these people did (not that anyone in a position of hospital oversight . . . like Kinlaw and Stout . . . or any of those fine-upstanding BOD & corporate members . . . ever gave a royal damn about the truth), I'm not too worried about common laws or even new laws.
Figuratively speaking, I'm not the kind of person who puts knives in people's backs. I put them in their sternums. What you see is what you get. Apparently, in Asheboro, it was a tactical error.
I'm actually feeling a little emotionally washed-out & numb this week . . . what with all the deaths and anniversaries of deaths. And I feel like I've been doing nothing but pounding on this keyboard for days. Moreover, yesterday's post brought back a very vivid Randolph Hospital memory . . . one that really should be included in the telling of the tale I promised (although the time-frame extends beyond the scope of my original plan).
A very good friend actually commented that I would be better off re-focusing my energy and turning the draft of the promised post into the draft of the lawsuit I have done everything in my power to avoid having to file . . . against the N.C. Medical Board (Mr. Mansfield my "problems" - the ones you cannot solve - exist because your &^%$#@ Board does not protect or defend the duties it requires) . . . against US & NCDHHS (I labored under your site agreements, fellas - and perjury is forever) . . . and possibly the N.C. State Bar (with nimrods like "Sonny Crockett" chasing "Madame Justice" around the Internet - instead of prosecuting attorneys who lied to clients and suborned perjury, how hard could it be?).
Yesterday, my Blogfather sent a link to this quote from the mighty O's inaugural address:
"To those who cling to power through corruption and deceit and the silencing of dissent, know that you are on the wrong side of history."
Yeah, yeah, yeah. Blah, blah, blah. I've heard it all before.
A big, fat, nasty lawsuit is making more and more sense to me. For, in our great nation, if a "Mother" who aborted her baby can sue her doctor for "malpractice" because the baby was killed when it was born alive . . .
. . . why can't a doctor sue the state for failing to protect & defend her from greedy cretins when she intervened to save a dying baby's life?
So why not turn back to the courts (as sorry and fundamentally pathetic as they are)? After all (Allen), print journalism, of late is not all it's cracked up to be.
Translation (you clever, clever wordsmith): Dr. Mary Johnson, local blogger, should not have to call you for a video (if I want to do a video, I'll go on YouTube and forego your edits) . . . you should be calling Dr. Mary Johnson, physician & public servant wronged by a corrupt medicolegal system, for a story.
But far be it for me to tell you why your newspaper is circling the drain.
So folks, it's a bump in the road. Sorry I cannot entertain the Coneheads today, but I'm going to take a few days, soak it all up and shake it all off, then decide what to do.
You-all have a nice weekend.
With that in mind, I am going to be re-telling my story on this blog on Friday. It's going to be the whole story of what happened over an approximately three week period in January & February 1998. And this time, in honor of our anonymous "TruBlu", I will naming the names of the people who libeled me and walked away unscathed.
Alas, the post won't go up today. And I feel bad enough about that to offer an explanation.
You see, I'm still working on the draft . . . going through some files . . . really re-living (in full PTSD fashion) some fairly unpleasant memories. And even though I had wanted to honor an anniversary of sorts, I honestly feel no real sense of urgency. For after spoon-feeding Ed Cone & John Robinson for four years (now the N&R wants to shoot blogger videos to prove citizen journalism is still alive), it's nothing I haven't said before . . . and really no one I have not already identified.
But for those new to this blog (apparently there are a few of you), the names Freeman and Irwin and Riley play prominently in the libel (please notice it's not in quotes) aspect of the story (just punch 'em in the Housecall's search engine and see what you pull up).
Since I've always told the truth about what these people did (not that anyone in a position of hospital oversight . . . like Kinlaw and Stout . . . or any of those fine-upstanding BOD & corporate members . . . ever gave a royal damn about the truth), I'm not too worried about common laws or even new laws.
Figuratively speaking, I'm not the kind of person who puts knives in people's backs. I put them in their sternums. What you see is what you get. Apparently, in Asheboro, it was a tactical error.
I'm actually feeling a little emotionally washed-out & numb this week . . . what with all the deaths and anniversaries of deaths. And I feel like I've been doing nothing but pounding on this keyboard for days. Moreover, yesterday's post brought back a very vivid Randolph Hospital memory . . . one that really should be included in the telling of the tale I promised (although the time-frame extends beyond the scope of my original plan).
A very good friend actually commented that I would be better off re-focusing my energy and turning the draft of the promised post into the draft of the lawsuit I have done everything in my power to avoid having to file . . . against the N.C. Medical Board (Mr. Mansfield my "problems" - the ones you cannot solve - exist because your &^%$#@ Board does not protect or defend the duties it requires) . . . against US & NCDHHS (I labored under your site agreements, fellas - and perjury is forever) . . . and possibly the N.C. State Bar (with nimrods like "Sonny Crockett" chasing "Madame Justice" around the Internet - instead of prosecuting attorneys who lied to clients and suborned perjury, how hard could it be?).
Yesterday, my Blogfather sent a link to this quote from the mighty O's inaugural address:
"To those who cling to power through corruption and deceit and the silencing of dissent, know that you are on the wrong side of history."
Yeah, yeah, yeah. Blah, blah, blah. I've heard it all before.
A big, fat, nasty lawsuit is making more and more sense to me. For, in our great nation, if a "Mother" who aborted her baby can sue her doctor for "malpractice" because the baby was killed when it was born alive . . .
. . . why can't a doctor sue the state for failing to protect & defend her from greedy cretins when she intervened to save a dying baby's life?
So why not turn back to the courts (as sorry and fundamentally pathetic as they are)? After all (Allen), print journalism, of late is not all it's cracked up to be.
Translation (you clever, clever wordsmith): Dr. Mary Johnson, local blogger, should not have to call you for a video (if I want to do a video, I'll go on YouTube and forego your edits) . . . you should be calling Dr. Mary Johnson, physician & public servant wronged by a corrupt medicolegal system, for a story.
But far be it for me to tell you why your newspaper is circling the drain.
So folks, it's a bump in the road. Sorry I cannot entertain the Coneheads today, but I'm going to take a few days, soak it all up and shake it all off, then decide what to do.
You-all have a nice weekend.
Thursday, February 05, 2009
The Abortion Paradox
(Author's note: Someone was joking with me this morning about my strong opinions. Well, hold on tight . . .)
I never had children. I wanted them. Alas, I cannot have them now.
And I don't get it. I simply don't get it.
How, in the same supposedly enlightened, civilized country, can I sit around on pins and needles waiting on a 23 or 24-weeker to be born (whose Mom is too dilated/effaced/ruptured/whatever to ship out - and who wants "everything" done) . . . with all of the resources & advanced technology of two hospitals poised to meet that baby's every need . . . and keep it alive . . .
. . . while a CHILD of the same gestational age be put into a biohazard bag ALIVE and thrown away like garbage?
Of course, this child was doomed regardless . . . the product of a "badly-botched" abortion.
Reading the account of what happened to this baby makes me seethe.
Moreover, the "Mother" of this child, who wanted this child DEAD, has the unmitgated gall to sue the abortion clinic for killing her child?
In my humble opinion, aborting an infant at 23 weeks gestation (i.e. a potentially viable infant), the "Mother" (I use the term loosely) should be charged as an accomplice.
Sayeth Mom's lawyer, "She came face to face with a human being . . . and that changed everything."
What? She was suddenly filled with love and concern for the child she knowingly prematurely evicted from her uterus? Hello? She LET the staff put that baby (who apparently bled out from an unclamped umbilical cord) in the biohazard bag and throw it out. She did not stop them There apparently was no 911 call.
So allow me to tell Mom's lawyer: Spare me the melodrama, you despicable, gutter-trolling ambulance chaser. This "Mother" decided she did not have "resources or maturity" to raise her child (or, apparently, the intelligence & intuition to understand that her daughter was a human being before she aborted her).
But now she'll give the child a name and pay a lawyer his contingency fee (there will, no doubt, be a massive settlement) . . . all the while basking in the publicity afforded her by our liberal media as a poor, pitiful "victim".
Oh puhlease. This woman knows she hit the jackpot. She'll no doubt wind up whining on Oprah's couch.
And I still just don't get it. It's "murder" and "malpractice" because the baby was born alive . . . even though the plan was to KILL the "fetus" before it took that first feeble breath?
After all, the abortion was successful. The baby is dead.
What the hell have we, as a society, come to?
[Author's note: Someone asked me this question, so I thought it best to insert this addendum. There are differing opinions as to what constitutes "viability" in extremely premature infants that are born alive. The general rule of thumb used in the rural & level I-II nurseries where I've worked within the last few years is 24 weeks or 500 grams. Many hospitals (very reasonably) require both criteria to be met in order to initiate a resuscitation or transport . . . some tertiary centers will resuscitate if one of the criteria is met (meaning a 23 weeker weighing greater than 500 grams could be resuscitated).
Since "dating" a pregnancy exactly is often problematic (especially in women who present with no prenatal care), viability often comes down to a judgement call (based on physical exam and weight) on the part of the attending physicians (the OB and/or Pediatrician) after the baby is born . . . sometimes in consult with outlying Neonatologists . . . and considering the informed wishes of the parent(s).
Babies deemed too small/young to survive (i.e. where any intervention would be glorified torture) are dressed and wrapped in blankets and allowed to pass away - either in the nursery or in their Mother's arms. It's always gut-wrenching. On more than one occasion, I've gone home and cried myself to sleep.
If they do survive, extremely premature infants can suffer a multitude of horrific complications in the NICU . . . "miracle" babies that survive without serious sequelae are the exception rather than the rule.
I've taken care of a few "exceptions" over the years. And they really are little miracles:)
While I reluctantly support a woman's right to choose, it is my personal opinion that abortions should not be performed after 20 weeks gestation - unless the Mother's life is in extreme danger. This eliminates any question about viability.
It is also my opinion that abortions should not be funded by the state or federal governments.]
Update: Thanks for the link, Joe. I sense (get it?) that folks like "Osama" are afraid to bring their act onto my turf.
I never had children. I wanted them. Alas, I cannot have them now.
And I don't get it. I simply don't get it.
How, in the same supposedly enlightened, civilized country, can I sit around on pins and needles waiting on a 23 or 24-weeker to be born (whose Mom is too dilated/effaced/ruptured/whatever to ship out - and who wants "everything" done) . . . with all of the resources & advanced technology of two hospitals poised to meet that baby's every need . . . and keep it alive . . .
. . . while a CHILD of the same gestational age be put into a biohazard bag ALIVE and thrown away like garbage?
Of course, this child was doomed regardless . . . the product of a "badly-botched" abortion.
Reading the account of what happened to this baby makes me seethe.
Moreover, the "Mother" of this child, who wanted this child DEAD, has the unmitgated gall to sue the abortion clinic for killing her child?
In my humble opinion, aborting an infant at 23 weeks gestation (i.e. a potentially viable infant), the "Mother" (I use the term loosely) should be charged as an accomplice.
Sayeth Mom's lawyer, "She came face to face with a human being . . . and that changed everything."
What? She was suddenly filled with love and concern for the child she knowingly prematurely evicted from her uterus? Hello? She LET the staff put that baby (who apparently bled out from an unclamped umbilical cord) in the biohazard bag and throw it out. She did not stop them There apparently was no 911 call.
So allow me to tell Mom's lawyer: Spare me the melodrama, you despicable, gutter-trolling ambulance chaser. This "Mother" decided she did not have "resources or maturity" to raise her child (or, apparently, the intelligence & intuition to understand that her daughter was a human being before she aborted her).
But now she'll give the child a name and pay a lawyer his contingency fee (there will, no doubt, be a massive settlement) . . . all the while basking in the publicity afforded her by our liberal media as a poor, pitiful "victim".
Oh puhlease. This woman knows she hit the jackpot. She'll no doubt wind up whining on Oprah's couch.
And I still just don't get it. It's "murder" and "malpractice" because the baby was born alive . . . even though the plan was to KILL the "fetus" before it took that first feeble breath?
After all, the abortion was successful. The baby is dead.
What the hell have we, as a society, come to?
[Author's note: Someone asked me this question, so I thought it best to insert this addendum. There are differing opinions as to what constitutes "viability" in extremely premature infants that are born alive. The general rule of thumb used in the rural & level I-II nurseries where I've worked within the last few years is 24 weeks or 500 grams. Many hospitals (very reasonably) require both criteria to be met in order to initiate a resuscitation or transport . . . some tertiary centers will resuscitate if one of the criteria is met (meaning a 23 weeker weighing greater than 500 grams could be resuscitated).
Since "dating" a pregnancy exactly is often problematic (especially in women who present with no prenatal care), viability often comes down to a judgement call (based on physical exam and weight) on the part of the attending physicians (the OB and/or Pediatrician) after the baby is born . . . sometimes in consult with outlying Neonatologists . . . and considering the informed wishes of the parent(s).
Babies deemed too small/young to survive (i.e. where any intervention would be glorified torture) are dressed and wrapped in blankets and allowed to pass away - either in the nursery or in their Mother's arms. It's always gut-wrenching. On more than one occasion, I've gone home and cried myself to sleep.
If they do survive, extremely premature infants can suffer a multitude of horrific complications in the NICU . . . "miracle" babies that survive without serious sequelae are the exception rather than the rule.
I've taken care of a few "exceptions" over the years. And they really are little miracles:)
While I reluctantly support a woman's right to choose, it is my personal opinion that abortions should not be performed after 20 weeks gestation - unless the Mother's life is in extreme danger. This eliminates any question about viability.
It is also my opinion that abortions should not be funded by the state or federal governments.]
Update: Thanks for the link, Joe. I sense (get it?) that folks like "Osama" are afraid to bring their act onto my turf.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
