|
|
Forums: Chiroweb: Why won't Smith let chiropractors be chiropractors
View Actual Web Exchange
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Like Dr. Evil in the Austin Power movie who had his own designs to rule the world, Rondberg has built his WCA house of cards on the unknown but supposed membership of only 240, yet he has been able to push his way onto governmental committees and even to assume the implied voice for chiropractic at the White House and the UN. As a publisher with his TCJ, he has confused, confounded, and corrupted this profession’s attempt to build a united profession as he has molded the mindset of his readership to serve his own financial and political designs. He has used his power of the press to prop up his role as prez-for-life of the WCA while preaching from a bully pulpit his radical fundamentalist chirovangelism, aka, demonizing the ACA, WFC, CCE, FCER, and "anything medical" with his incessant chiropracTIC demagoguery used to arouse the emotions of followers. If not ethical or politically correct, nonetheless Rondberg is definitely shrewd in his business dealings as he exploits this profession.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why won't Smith let chiropractors be chiropractors and MDs be MDs? In an exemplary moment of intellectual dishonesty, Smith would have the corner DC doing medincine...while he chastizes Dr Rondberg for staying within his scope of practice. In other words, Smith attacks Dr Rondberg when the latter's views are actually more medically responsible. DCs are not qualified to do medicine and that is the gist of Dr Rondberg's position. They are, however, qualified to do chiropractic in which Dr Rondberg finds favor. Hence the above amounts to nothing more than another mindless attack by Smith.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Great Departure of Guy Riekeman from Palmer U may also be seen as another nail in the coffin for the chiropracTIC sect when combined with the many other unforeseen events that have happened to the “Palmer Philosophers.” This unexpected "Universal calls" includes the forced retirements of “straight” college presidents (Parker, Gelardi, Williams, Riekeman), the passing of notable chirovangelists (Barge, Strange, Grassam), the impairment of chiropracTIC icons (Gold, Felisa), and changes in ICA officials (Humber, Mertz). If not completely lifeless yet, the straight movement is certainly reeling with a lack of notable and ethical leadership at this moment. Like the Democratic Party, the chirovangelists are awash in mediocrity with questionable leaders and a tainted image. Finally, their Lasting Purpose has come home to roost as their own lasting problem.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
When I decried Riekeman's appointment to the CCE, no other than Stephen Perle told me it was no big deal. And Riekeman's philosophical point of view is no different than others represented here, are mainstream chiropractic, and even celebrated. For example, Prescott even places Riekeman in the same league as Kant:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
www.chiroweb.com/archives/16/17/07.html or Wardwell, Fn. 1, p. 67). We should all be reminded that state and federal laws prohibit discrimination: For example: Section 16 of the California Chiropractic Act forbids discrimination "against any particular school of chiropractic, or any other treatment."
Figure 1: Various disciplines, from Kant to Reikeman
D.D. Palmer, DC
Smith quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The original lawsuit was filed on July 16, 1993 in Maricopa County (Arizona) Superior Court against James Badge, DC, chairman of the Arizona Chiropractic Licensing Board, Donald M. Petersen Jr., editor/publisher of Dynamic Chiropractic, and the Motion Palpation Institute (MPI). In his complaint, Dr. Terry Rondberg claimed violation of his civil rights, interference of contractual/business relations, defamation, fraud and intentional infliction of emotional distress. A claim of invasion of privacy was later tacked on.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Does Smith have any complaints about MPI? The answer to this question points to his unbridled bias.
To be continued.....
|
|