FeedThe Pundit Folds
January 7, 2007 in Overset
My main concerns are OSF’s abandonment of Haitian Hearts children that need heart surgery and the EMS monopoly in Peoria that allows AMT to be the only transport and Paramedic agency in the city. I have tried to approach both of these issues in an objective fashion on the Peoria Pundit web log.
After I have submitted posts to the Pundit, many of the comments from a handful of individuals have been very abusive and angry. Apparently, these two topics make these people become quite emotional. Their comments have been personal and have attempted to divert attention from my message. Also, a number of commenters and bloggers have written to Bill Dennis that I had “hijacked his blog”.
Bill never deleted any spiteful comments directed at me and neither did I.
I had a funny feeling this morning and commented on www.dyinginhaiti.blogpot.com and www.pmmdaily.blogspot.com that I wondered what was going to happen regarding my ability to continue posting on the Pundit site.
Bill recently had a post called “Where the Money Goes”. It referred to a site which states how much money OSF brings in. For example, the site states that in 2005, according to OSF’s 990 federal tax form, OSF made a profit of $74,410,905. The site also states Jim Moore, Vice Chairperson of OSF, had a total compensation of $1,125,442 in 2005.
At the end of his post Bill jokingly stated that he still had his job.
There were many comments to that post and as usual many comments attacked me as well. I have been critical of the lucrative health care industry in Peoria at OSF that still finds a way to refuse care to Haitian Hearts patients that were operated at OSF and are sick in Haiti—even after I have offered OSF full and partial charges for the care of these kids.
Eyebrows McGee, a lawyer in Peoria, is married to an attorney who works for Hinshaw & Culbertson, the firm that represents OSF. (Interestingly, Eyebrows has stated on the Peoria Pundit that she has no connection to OSF’s law team.)
Today Eyebrows came out swinging again, attacking me in a comment regarding Haitian Hearts. However I consider many of her posts on her web log vulgar and obscene and I feel that as a Catholic she should represent her faith in a more complementary fashion. Today, I copied one of her posts (”Happy Easter”, April 15, 2006) which I feel is extremely noxious and blasphemous and told her that I will send it to Bishop Jenky for his review.
True to form, Eyebrows McGee responded to me that she knew Bishop Jenky when he was at Notre Dame as a priest and he was well aware of her writing style, or something to that extent. She seemed happy that I had alerted the the Bishop of her “Happy Easter” article and seemed quite proud of it. (I did tell her that I did not believe that Bishop Jenky would slap her wrists too hard because she is quite well connected.)
The next thing I know, I received this e mail from Bill this afternoon:
Dr. Carroll:
“I encourage full-throated debate on Peoria Pundit. Generally, I let posters and commenters fight it out among themselves.
I had to step in when you posted a comment that included the complete post Eyebrows McGee made on April 15, 2006.
By all means, link to other’s posts.
But repeating entire posts is a copyright violation.
Feel free to replicate a paragraph or two from her posts or anyone else’s posts. That’s allowable under “fair use” doctrine.”
So I checked the Peoria Pundit site, and Bill had deleted his entire post “Where the Money Goes” with all twenty-some comments. (I guess having a password will allow you to see the post.)
Why did Bill do this? Is he really worried about a “copyright violation”? He could have just deleted my comment, which contained Eyebrows McGee ’s x-rated “Happy Easter” post, and kept the rest of his post including OSF’s earnings and Jim Moore’s massive salary and all the nasty comments directed at me.
Bill deleted one of his best posts ever.
Why did Bill do this?
John A. Carroll, M.D.
www.peoriasmedicalmafia.com
January 7th, 2007 at 10:20 pm
Wow. I can’t believe what I just read. I’m estatic and honored when Billy just links to my blogsite. But you really have guts or lack of “smarts” to call out the the owner of the largest, most read blog in Central Illinois who lets you post your Haitian Hearts concerns at will because you question his motives? Remember, it is HIS blog and he doesn’t really have to justify anything to anyone. And to attack Eyebrows the way you did…are you still in junior high? Unbelievable.
January 7th, 2007 at 10:23 pm
Doctor Carroll:
Since you made my private letter to you public, I’ll feel free to do the same.
I put the post under password protection because of the general nasty tones of the comments. It was a better option than deleting it.
Before I decided to do that, I edited your comment that included Eyebrow’s complete post from April 15, 2006. I replaced it with a link to that post.
I did so at her request because she has the right to not see her complete works used without her permission. This is something I would do for you as well. I’ve had people use my stuff after I’ve told them not do. It’s a sore subject with me.
And frankly, I’ve written better posts. This one was little more than a link.
I have NO intention to stop letting you post. Peoria Pundit is a group blog and ANYONE can submit a draft post for consideration for publication. I would hope, however, that your belief that I will eventually be forced to remove you will lead you into trying to make that happen through an increasingly hostile relationship with commenters.
My advice: If you are going to blog about serious stuff, you have to understand that many people will NOT agree with you. Some people will attack you personally.
If you really want to make your point and secure more people to your side — and I think you have the potential to do that, considering that there are some facts to back up your positions — then I suggest that it is your interests and the interests of the childen you want to help that YOU develop a thick skin.
You read some fo the comments directed at me? Do you think that I do not sometimes want trade barbs one on one? That doesn’t work.
If your opponents want to make an ass out of themselves, let them.
And you know something — sometimes the critics have a point. Realizing the very real possibility my POV might be wrong helps keeps me on my toes.
And if you have any questions about my role here at Peoria Pundit, let me know.
January 7th, 2007 at 10:49 pm
Am I the only one who feels like sticking hot pokers into his eyes every time I try to read one of Dr. Carroll’s posts?
Yep… I didn’t think so.
January 7th, 2007 at 10:51 pm
ROFL…. Eyebrows vulgar and obscene? X-rated Happy Easter? Um, yes I have read her posts before.
What is vulgar is the way you prostitute these poor folk. The more you write the more you rail on others, the more plain it is that the whole Haitian Hearts thing and your crusade against OSF, isn’t about the kids, it is about YOU. Your conceit, your self righteous ego, your pride. Write away to Bishop Jenky, you have a lot to talk about.
January 8th, 2007 at 8:15 am
I think it’s about time for Black Helicopter to return to posting…
January 8th, 2007 at 8:26 am
not yet…..
January 8th, 2007 at 10:42 am
I’m all for your posts bringing attention to the plight of everyone in Haiti. Their living conditions are atrocious and helping them, especially children, find some relief from the suffering is a noble and beautiful thing.
But Mahkno has a good point. Isn’t there some way to post about this without so much contentiousness? It really distracts from the work you claim you are trying to do. Let folks say what they want. Call you names. We tell our kids to ignore it, the same goes at blogs.
January 8th, 2007 at 10:43 am
This will be my last response to Dr. Carroll that is not through a court of law.
I’m not really entire sure why he has chosen me as the target of his ire. Trying to ruin my career, destroy my reputation, get me expelled from my church, and make me cry is WELL beyond the pale.
“Interestingly, Eyebrows has stated on the Peoria Pundit that she has no connection to OSF’s law team.”
I do not. Yes, my husband is employed at Hinshaw & Culbertson. That’s not a secret. He is a defense attorney. When I do court work, I am a plaintiff’s attorney. We are on opposite sides of many different issues. We are careful not to discuss confidential client material because a) we are ethical lawyers and b) neither of us wants to get conflicted out of cases. (And c) when we get home at night, the LAST thing we want to talk about is the law.) I am only tangentially aware of the work that Hinshaw does for OSF. I don’t even bother to read the public filings of cases my husband works on.
It’s too bad, Dr. Carroll, because I was generally on your side until you turned your crusade against OSF into a crusade against me personally. (I agree with your goals. I disagree with your METHODS.) I was knitting a scarf for your Haitian children as you (or your wife, I forget) suggested for those arriving in the cold midwest. I thought that was a worthy and kind suggestion and I wanted to help in a tangible way, and I thought something hand-knit would express more love and care and kindness than something store-bought. I think I’ll be donating that to Family House, now, however, since Family House isn’t out to destroy my life and my career.
So here’s my final question to you: Are you SATISFIED now that you’ve attempted to publicly drag my good name through the mud, have me expelled from my church, ruin my career, make me cry, and destroy my life? Is this your general strategy? At what point will you be satisfied enough to stop harassing me?
And if you behave this way to people who AGREE with your goals, what on earth do you do to people who DISAGREE?
January 8th, 2007 at 11:02 am
Alright, I’d say Dr. Carroll is getting completely out of hand. Bill you need to make some kind of stand with this. If the guest commenter policy is causing this kind of problem, than I think it might be time to either revoke Dr. Carroll’s posting (not commenting) priveleges or forget the guest posting policy all together. If he is carrying out personal attacks against the readership of this blog, than he needs to go. This has gone BEYOND his personal crusade against OSF and spread to bloggers and commentors who disagree with him.
Anyone else up for stopping Dr. Carroll??
January 8th, 2007 at 11:19 am
I think I should explain one thing more clearly. When a lawyer is “connected” to something, that means they are conflicted out from taking any cases that are related to that entity. (There’s a lot of fairly complex law about being conflicted out which doesn’t really matter here; clients can sign waivers and lawyers can raise points about material connection and whatnot.) When I said I am not “connected” to OSF, I mean that I do not have a “connection” under ethical rules that would require I be conflicted out of any litigation involving OSF.
If I were so connected, I wouldn’t be able to, say, take on a car accident case where one of the parties was treated by OSF is OSF objected or if OSF was a named defendant. Because my husband does defense work and I do plaintiff’s work (when I do court work), we are darned careful about that because Peoria is a small enough town that we could quickly conflict ourselves out of everything. (Well, really, I’m more in danger of being conflicted out, since I work for individuals.)
I can see how that could have been misinterpreted by Dr. Carroll and others now that I reflect on it; I suppose one could interpret my husband’s clients as a “connection” to OSF, but not in the legal sense. Apparently I was thinking too much like a lawyer and not enough like a normal user of the English language. Anyway, as I said, I have only the vaguest idea of my husband’s cases anyway because after 8 hour of dealing with MY clients all day (and usually more like 10 or 12 hours for him), the LAST thing we want to talk about at home is the law. That’s the kind of thing that destroys marriages.
Regardless, clients my husband’s firm may have (and it’s a big firm out of Chicago — they have a lot of them all over the country) has absolutely no bearing on my ideas or opinions of those clients. I don’t even know who 90% of them are. And on theoretical points regarding the balance between plaintiff and defendant, we always come down vehemently on totally opposite sides of the issue.
I hope that helps clarify. Here’s an article about a 2002 California case specifically ruling that married lawyers are not conflicted out of spousal cases: http://www.law.com/regionals/c.....130c.shtml for those who are interested.
January 8th, 2007 at 11:24 am
Eyebrows: The problem is the word “connected.” It’s one of those weasel words that can be used to imply something nefarious. I, for example, am connected to the drug trade because a relative used to sell pot? You see it all time in the media.
January 8th, 2007 at 11:26 am
“She served under him in a variety of positions”?
(That’s my favorite sneaky media phrase.) But yes, I do see the confusion and unclarity the word could cause, and I do want to be open and aboveboard, so I felt clarifying would be the best option.
January 8th, 2007 at 11:39 am
Billy, I see that if I just want to see your posts, I can use this URL:
http://peoriapundit.com/blogpe.....ly-dennis/
And if I just want to see Anon E. Mouse’s posts, I can use this URL:
http://peoriapundit.com/blogpe.....n-e-mouse/
Is there a way you could set up a URL that shows all posts except Dr. Carroll’s? I’m sure about 99.9% of your readers would appreciate that choice.
January 8th, 2007 at 11:42 am
So … you want a blog that has posts that you agree with 90 percent of the time?
January 8th, 2007 at 11:56 am
I’m glad to see that Anon E. Mouse and Billy Dennis are equals on the “good blogging” list.
I have a feeling they are becoming friends….
January 8th, 2007 at 12:03 pm
One of these days, Anon and I are going to have a drink together …
this is after I punch him in the nose, of course.
January 8th, 2007 at 12:12 pm
CJ: I am susceptible to flattery.
Tony: No need to be insulting.
Bill:
A. I don’t drink.
B. You wanna go? Better make sure your fight-strap is tied down if you do!
January 8th, 2007 at 12:13 pm
Anon and I have often tossed around the idea of coming to a Blogger Bash, but just be two guys at the bar having a drink… Incognito, if you will…
He’s a big dumb animal though. THAT would give us away.
BTW, it’s a frickin HUGE nose, so don’t worry if your aim is off.
January 8th, 2007 at 12:45 pm
Anon: You realize my sister is my bodyguard?
January 8th, 2007 at 12:58 pm
Dear Bill,
You wrote: “I put the post under password protection because of the general nasty tones of the comments.”
My comment: With password protection, the majority of your 800 plus readers per day can’t see the post you deleted yesterday. And if you are really worried about “general nasty tones” you would have deleted many comments directed at me during the last couple of months. Just look back at your readers comments directed at me. Look at the comments today. They have “nasty tones”. Are you going to delete these comments? I am not asking you to delete anything, Bill.
You advise me to have thick skin. One has to have thick skin to write about the issues that I do in Peoria. A lot of money is made in the monopolized ambulance business and our health care industry at OSF. And when Haitian kids are allowed to suffer and die, that will cause people to become angry, defensive, and aggressive. I refuse to write about Michael Jackson, Al Sharpton, and Jesse Jackson. They are not local, are easy to attack, and not one of your old guard commenters is going to attack you for doing so.
You wrote: “…I edited your comment that included Eyebrow’s complete post from April 15, 2006. I replaced it with a link to that post. I did so at her request because she has the right to not see her complete works used without her permission.”
My comment: I am completely flabbergasted that Eyebrows McGee wanted her post “Happy Easter” deleted by you. I thought she was proud of it.
Here is what she commented to me yesterday regarding her obscene, vulgar, and blasphemous post: “Thanks for sending it over (to Bishop Jenky)…I look forward to having a chat with him about it. He is familiar with my writing style; he used to read my columns when I was in college.”
Eyebrows stated that she knew Bishop Jenky when he was Father Jenky at Notre Dame. She obviously seemed quite eager to talk it over with her old friend. She must have changed her mind. Or maybe someone helped her change her mind.
Why didn’t you just delete my comment if her post offended her so much to see it yesterday in all of its glory? There were many comments about OSF’s billing practices, building projects, collection agencies hired by OSF, and the site you linked to regarding OSF’s obscene profits and what they pay their big guy.
Even Eyebrows wrote about OSF’s behavior as either “un-Christian or contrary to its mission, some of which I feel is just down right dirty as a business practice.” And she even mentioned the word “monopoly”. Plus, there were many comments nailing me, so you could have left these as they were.
Bill, please put your post and comments back, and if you feel it necessary, leave out my comment that contains Eyebrows post that just “reflects her writing style”. Don’t let these people push you around.
Last thing. Please don’t blame this on me if you deny me the ability to post. You refer to an “increasingly hostile relationship with commenters”, implying, of course, that this is my problem. I think it is important for me to identify spin, twisting the truth, and conflict of interest when it exists. Go back and look at the comments by a handful of your readers if you want to see real hostility.
John
Dear Peoria Pundit Readers,
Since I wrote the above, I received an e mail from Bill stating that he is going to insist that, as a condition of posting on Peoria Pundit, I cannot refer to Eyebrows in my posts. Maybe her crying spell or her perceived impending excommunication from the Church is the reason Bill is all bent out of shape. Or maybe something else, who knows?
So, I will post this now, as a comment, and wait and see if Bill gets out the big red pen.
Eyebrows, a couple of months ago, and I didn’t look this up for attorney-precise wording, I asked you if you had a connection with OSF’s law team. (I don’t think Bill deleted my question or your answer, so you should be able to find it.)
I was using the word “connection” as a ‘layperson’. Even though you are MARRIED to an attorney for Hinshaw @ Culbertson, which represents OSF, you answered that you were not connected. I just wanted to see how you would respond.
Your husbands clients, your clients, and anything else you rambled on about, don’t interest me in any fashion and had nothing to do with why I asked the question. That is where you are confused and confusing others.
A more complete answer on your part to my question would have been to say, “I am married to an attorney for Hinshaw @ Culbertson, the law firm which represents OSF.”
Don’t you agree?
John
January 8th, 2007 at 1:19 pm
Still beating a dead horse, I see.
As I see it, you are picking a fight with her for all the wrong reasons. She’s not the one keeping OSF from treating Haitian kids. Her husband isn’t doing it either.
At this point, it seems you are more interesting in bullying folks into admitting that YOU — John Carroll — is right, rather then DOING what is right by those kids.
And you comment on my letters, but you never see the common sense advice they contain.
January 8th, 2007 at 1:38 pm
Bill,
Your e mail does contain some common sense. But threatening to bar me from posting if I mention Eyebrows McGee, seems a little over the top.
I had never heard of her before you gave me the opportunity to post on your site. Her comments at the beginning (look them up) caught me off guard and made me wonder if she had connections to OSF.
Bill, if you could hang out with me for one day down here, you would see the difficulty in doing “what is right” for these kids. And when people in Peoria try to stop doing “what is right” for these kids, I believe you would really take offense.
John
January 8th, 2007 at 1:49 pm
i can see why nobody wants to treat the haitian kids as long as dr. seuss is involved. i no longer have any respect or will no longer make any donations to his cause. maybe his ole buddy phil l. can pony up the loss. attacking a person on the issues that he is wrong. i will donate my money to eyebrows legal fund to bury him in court for slander.
January 8th, 2007 at 2:01 pm
Dear Black,
I think slander is spoken word and libel is written. The way I remember it, slander and spoken both start with an “s”.
Hope this helps.
John
January 8th, 2007 at 2:09 pm
John: Please understand this: This conflict between you and Eyebrows isn’t REALLY about the situation in Haiti. It’s about what is and isn’t kosher in terms of debate on the issues.
Trust me on this. I am a veteran of many, many flame wars. This is the point where it’s wise to sit back, back a deep breath and agree to disagree.
PP is supposed to be a forum for ideas. It’s not a combat zone where the weapons are insults and innuendo.
Now is the time to MAKE NICE and agree to agree on the items on which you agree.
January 8th, 2007 at 2:24 pm
Dr. Carroll
I have never me anyone with as little perspective on the world as you. Of all the causes in the world to fight for your’s is a noble one, but not the only one. The people of Peoria have more causes that need help than just yours, the same is true of OSF. The more you post the more I realize why you were probably let go from the hospital. It’s really disgusting that you would go to the extent you have to discredit someone just because they don’t believe in every word you have posted in this site. You call one of your blogs “Peoria’s Medical Mafia” well we might as well name you the “Haitian Hearts Gestapo” since you seem intent on discrediting, defaming, and just plain destroying the people who don’t agree with your agenda.
Obviously your efforts here on this blog have turned almost everyone against you and aren’t going to do your cause any good. So why don’t you take the time you have in Haiti and tend to the children and stop tarnishing the name of your cause with your tactless posts.
January 8th, 2007 at 2:42 pm
“So … you want a blog that has posts that you agree with 90 percent of the time?”
That percentage seems rather high….
Seriously, though, I don’t want to exclude his posts because of something as petty as a disagreement. What fun would blogging be if we agreed on everything? My only objection is the personal attacks — very personal attacks — on other bloggers. It’s one thing to verbally spar with someone on-line, and quite another to libel someone, or to take that person’s posts and “turn them in” to their priest or bishop. That crosses the line in my book. What’s next? Is he going to egg her house, too? Thank you for telling him to stop posting about Eyebrows; he clearly has no self-control.
January 8th, 2007 at 2:49 pm
C.J.: I agree with you in regards to personal attacks. I am trying to communicate to Dr. Carroll that this is how his posts and comments are being seen.
That being said: I must tempter my own comments on the matter with the knowledge that I am not pure in this regard. I’ve been known to go for the jugular at times myself. And there are some public figures who — in my book — have engaged in behavior that put them on a list of those I consider it impossible to libel or slander.
All I’m saying is that its easy to spot flaws in others that we cannot see in ourselves.
January 8th, 2007 at 3:13 pm
Good response Bill.
January 8th, 2007 at 3:19 pm
Well, God knows I am not perfect. I’d hate to be judged by the posts and comments I made in anger and frustration.
January 8th, 2007 at 3:21 pm
Point taken, Billy. We’re only human. Nevertheless, I say in self-justification, I don’t believe you or I would have persisted in this behavior after being called on it as many times as Dr. Carroll has.
January 8th, 2007 at 3:48 pm
I seem to recall a couple cases, including one in which I was being a bit of a prick with the Journal Star in regards to the coverage of the YWCA project in the Old Town North neighborhood and I wouldn’t get off of it.
January 8th, 2007 at 4:14 pm
Billy Dennis: Dr. Carroll apologist. Appearing daily.
Yes, you’re right, Billy. We’re exactly like him. Virtually identical. I can’t believe I didn’t see it before. I’ll be turning in your last vulgar comment to Bishop Jenky.
Where do you work?
January 8th, 2007 at 4:23 pm
And better yet:
Who ARE you really?
January 8th, 2007 at 4:45 pm
Point taken, CJ. I’m not apologising for him. I am pointing that SOME of the negative comments directed at him have been personal attacks as well. I’m trying to get things calmed down here by point out that not ALL the blame is his. I guess it’s a case of it taking two to tango, to reduce my argument to a cliche.
January 8th, 2007 at 4:46 pm
CJ: Basically, I’ve got the guy on final warning about playing nice, and folks are still piling on.
January 8th, 2007 at 4:53 pm
Trust Bill - he’s pre-law.
Bill sez: “I guess it’s a case of it taking two to tango, to reduce my argument to a cliche.”
I sez: Heh-he-heheh. He said, “Cliche”?
I thought you said this was a family blog.
January 8th, 2007 at 5:15 pm
From Wikipedia:
January 8th, 2007 at 6:52 pm
Billy, is your relative holding? Just Kidding, but really I have the cash. Regarding OSF, AMT, other three letter abreviations. Basically, If I fall off a ladder and break my leg and nose, will SOMEONE pick my ass up? That is the question, they can argue over paychecks after my leg is fixed.
January 8th, 2007 at 7:10 pm
*munches popcorn*
January 8th, 2007 at 9:15 pm
Yowzers! I hardly post but felt I had to join the party and be number 41 in the thread.
January 8th, 2007 at 9:22 pm
Welcome to the party. Mahkno has some popcorn. Perhaps he will share.
January 8th, 2007 at 9:39 pm
OK, I’m “piling on” late, here … but did Dr. Carroll SERIOUSLY just accuse E.M. of blasphemy?
What is this, the Spanish Inquisition?
What’s next … the comfy pillows???
January 8th, 2007 at 9:45 pm
Also From Wikipedia:
“The non sequitur can be understood as the converse of cliché”
January 8th, 2007 at 9:48 pm
Rarely can I say this, but I think I can speak for everyone when I say that nobody…
and I mean NOBODY
expects the Spanish Inquisition.
January 8th, 2007 at 9:56 pm
Knock knock
Who’s there?
The Spanish Inquisition.
You really should have called first.
January 8th, 2007 at 9:57 pm
Dear Dr. Knight,
It is NEVER too late to pile on. I wondered where you were….
By the way, the host family for Maxime, the Haitian Hearts patient not accepted at OSF, had a question or two for you. When you get the chance, I am sure they would like to see your answers.
John
January 8th, 2007 at 9:57 pm
NOBODY EXPECTS THE SPANISH INQUISITION!!
Amongst our weaponry are such diverse elements as fear, surprise, ruthless efficiency, an almost fanatical devotion to the Pope, and nice red uniforms, don’t you think?!?
Now, Cardinal Fang! Prepare to place the Blasphemor in the COMFY CHAIR!
January 8th, 2007 at 10:03 pm
Mahkno! Oh, Mahkno, dear boy….
hurry up with more of that popcorn…please?
January 8th, 2007 at 11:07 pm
Maxime’s host mom wants to be 42nd post then.
There are certainly no innocent parties on this blog, but the ratio of opinions between the two sides of the issues is unbalanced. Please folks, I don’t want to read any more about unbalanced individuals posting to this site. Everyone has been heard loud and clear. Enough already.
We got a young man here in Cleveland that is so very sick, I’m not sure he is going to make it out of this hospital. He certainly appears to be losing his will to live.
Dr. John, do you remember Becky, Maxime’s East Coast World Relief missionary friend who came to Peoria twice during Maxime’s stay?
Do you know the first thing she said to me when I shared it wasn’t looking too promising that OSF was going to allow Maxime to come back? (This conversation took place back in October and my comments were based on what happened to Jackson, who’s dead now).
Becky said no way, and then she shared, “Jeanette, don’t you remember the hospital doctors telling us that the procedure did not go as they would have liked, and they anticipated that Maxime would be back within five years. They gave the impression that they felt morally and ethically obligated to accept Maxime back in the future. How can this be?”
One thing I have to say about the Cleveland Clinic is that it certainly appears to invest for the long haul once they commit to helping a patient. What a blessing for Maxime if he plugs through. i have noticed this commitment to be evident in the lives of many who are staying at the Ronald McDonald House where I’ve been staying since News Years Eve.
It’s not about OSF, they sold their heart and soul years ago, at least as far as it goes for their former Haitian patients. It’s not about you either Dr. John.
How convienent for OSF that individuals on all sides are focused on the wrong individuals. Then OSF administrators can just sit back and let things explode hoping this will just all eventually go away. Because then, no one is going to be asking the real question –OSF if your former Haitian patients were to secure the services of another physcian, would you continue your commitment to these former patients?
I’m not a doctor, I’m not a lawyer. I don’t even have college degree. So please don’t rip my post to shreds pointing out logical fallacies or spelling errors, grammar or mechanics.
Just answer me one question, does anyone care about these kids? I read about people who are saying they care. Somebody even cares enough to take the time to hand knit a cap in the hopes that it might send a more personal message of compassion. Yet then in the next breath that person decides to give the hat to another worthy organization, because Dr. Carroll, the champion of these kids, has hurt their feeling and offended them.
This isn’t a personal attack, Eyebrows. If I’m not mistaken and I could be, you very generously supported my two oldest sons a few years back when the Peoria Area Home Educators started the B.A.D. Speech and Debate Club. We very much appreciated your generosity. Because if you had not stepped in my boys would not have been able to compete at the levels they did. (Sometime when my time is not so precious I’d love to tell you my boys prospective on Haiti, and what has all transpired as a result of our family’s involvement with one super, cool Haitian kid. my guys have conflicting feelings at the way they have benefited as a result of knowing Maxime. They have received breaks and opportunities directly related to this mutual relationship and I believe, by their ability to express the depth and responsibility they feel to humbly make the most of these opportunities to make a difference in this world. Eyebrows, if I am not mistaken and if you are the individual that helped sponsor my guys in speech and debate club, I want you to also know, I believe some of these breaks and opportunities came from a direct result of the skills they learned through your generosity a few years back. I’m praying that my guys hearts remain pure and that they continue on their mission with focus and vision. All I’m wondering, Eyebrows, is could you rethink the hat issue, and consider sending it to Maxime? He’s miserable and freezing here. He knows nothing about the personal issues between you and Dr. Carroll.
Please folks could we just end the rhetoric and get to what really counts? I can tell there are a lot of Type A, very strong-willed folks that post to this site. Imagine what could be done for these kids if we could all get on the kids page, and leave the rest for God to sort out?
I could have a great deal more respect for someone that says, I’m not feeling lead to help the former Haitian patients, if these same folks would just then bow out of further discussion concerning them or their doctor.
I struggle with folks on all sides lambasting each other because how can that be helping the former patients of Haiti?
This is respectfully submitted, and I will discuss anything and answer any question I choose. But if I don’t reply, then you will know that I am respectfully bowing out of discussion that seems unproductive.
However, give me a break if it takes some time get back to you. Yesterday, for example, I spent straight hours in a hospital room with a super cool Haitian kid who’s been displaying a great deal of integrity and unbelieveable character.
January 8th, 2007 at 11:22 pm
Sorry to keep you waiting, Dr. Carroll. I was taking care of my patients and spending time with my family. I feel that’s more important than endlessly ranting on a blog. Forgive me for the delay, your holiness.
I have given my reply to Ms. Johnson. I appreciate her civility even though I disagree with her viewpoint, and I wish you would take some lessons from her, Dr. Carroll.
Now, on to what I really want to say to you.
You are malicious and vindictive, Dr. Carroll. I think I speak for many members of the local blogosphere when I say … HOW DARE YOU??? How dare you accuse E.M. of blasphemy and report her to the Bishop of Peoria? I made a bit of joke about it with my Spanish Inquisition comment, but that’s simply to point out that your contentions are ABSOLUTELY LUDICROUS. E.M. is a devoted Catholic who has spent much of her adult life exploring her faith.
Who do you think you are, sir? Did you appoint yourself the arbiter of all that is good and holy??? Your EGO is now so vast that it can’t be contained by this mortal coil and so reaches to the heavens themselves.
I’ll end with this …
Luke 23:33-34
“And when they were come to the place, which is called Calvary, there they crucified him, and the malefactors, one on the right hand, and the other on the left.
Then said Jesus, Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do.”
Christ was CRUCIFIED, and he FORGAVE those who did it to him! OSF fired you. Why can’t you act more like Christ and show a little forgiveness yourself, Dr. Carroll?
January 9th, 2007 at 8:05 am
Bill,
Dr. Knight has slipped a cog. He has obviously gone past his angry and abusive comments. And he isn’t just “mad” as you said he was yesterday.
What are you going to do with Dr. Knight?
John
January 9th, 2007 at 8:22 am
Pass the popcorn, Mouse…
January 9th, 2007 at 9:18 am
And then to me next, Tony. This is better than spending my day watching soap operas!
January 9th, 2007 at 10:25 am
“Like Sands Through the Hourglass…”
January 9th, 2007 at 11:09 am
Jeanette:
“All I’m wondering, Eyebrows, is could you rethink the hat issue, and consider sending it to Maxime?”
Yes. E-mail me with the address to send it to, and about how big a head we’re talking, and I’ll knit as fast as my little fingers can go. Which isn’t all that fast because I’m not all that good a knitter, but fortunately hats are small.
January 9th, 2007 at 11:46 am
Comment deleted.
January 9th, 2007 at 12:06 pm
Ooops! I gotta go pop some more popcorn…
January 9th, 2007 at 12:07 pm
Dear Jeanette:
I am sorry to hear about Maxime’s situation in Cleveland. I know Cleveland Clinic is doing all they can for him.
I do remember Becky. Here in Haiti, Maxime carried her name on a crumpled up piece of paper with all of his medical records from OSF.
I understand why Becky could not believe that Maxime was not accepted at OSF. As you know, the doctors and nurses and housekeeping people at OSF (that use to do the kids’ hair in Peds-CVICU), would have liked to see Maxime return to Peoria, but the decision was out of their hands.
You have to feel quite lonely now in Cleveland with a very sick young man who deserved much more.
John
January 9th, 2007 at 12:12 pm
Scott: I deleted your comment. You are welcome to try again, and this time leave out the name calling. Thanks for the input.
January 9th, 2007 at 12:21 pm
*munch, munch, munch*
January 9th, 2007 at 12:27 pm
Enjoying this, Mouse?
January 9th, 2007 at 12:36 pm
Deleted again.
January 9th, 2007 at 12:43 pm
Scott: The point is that I’m working with Dr. Carroll and other posters on how to communicate with each other on this blog in a way that doesn’t revolve around name calling and accusations.
In fact, things have been fairly calm for the past 24 hours, and you’re not helping.
And I’m pretty sure your comment would have been deleted for language regardless.
Thanks for the input!
January 9th, 2007 at 12:56 pm
yeah I understand that name calling is not necessarily the best way to communicate or get a point across, but sometimes people deserve it. And to me, that is half the fun of this blogging stuff. And as far as the language goes, lets not be hypoctical here. Lets not act like I am the first poster to use a foul word. If people don’t like it, don’t read it. Its as simple as that. I feel that I should have the right to express my opinion. I thought that was the whole point of a blog. If you censor people, you are no better than the government who you repeatedly lambast for their censorship and the fleecing of our rights as a free American. I feel that I have the right to call ol’ Doc John whatever I want, after reading his propaganda.
January 9th, 2007 at 12:59 pm
This is a bit off-topic, but a while back I made a comment about the “impermanence” of the web versus the permanent record of the newspaper. This is a good example of what I was talking about. I doubt you will find Scott’s comment even in Google cache land.
I’m not arguing that Scott’s comment should have been permanent — I think Billy made the right decision by deleting it. That’s not my point. I’m simply saying that there’s a big difference between newspapers and blogs, and this is one of them.
January 9th, 2007 at 1:24 pm
A timely read:
http://www.foreignaffairs.org/.....ealth.html
January 9th, 2007 at 1:31 pm
I am enjoying this just like I enjoy NASCAR. It’s all about the wrecks.
To watch someone claim persecution while standing hip deep in a mud pit while flinging fecal matter is very much like a car wreck. Then that person screams “Look what they did to ME!” when there is in-kind retaliation.
Quite frankly, if it weren’t for the children, this would be MTV-type juvenile comedy material. I mean, the basis for this one person posting is a private employment matter that happened six years ago. This is sit-com gold.
There are children involved, though. That makes this a tragedy. The person who claims to be their biggest champion is more interested in personal attacks rather than doing what is best for them. As a foster parent, I know that sometimes doing what best for a child involves shouting from the rooftops. Other times it involves keeping your mouth shut. The difference between advocate and crank is knowing when to shut your mouth.
The market on charity is not cornered by any one group. The market on need is not cornered by any particular nation or ethnic subgroup. The market on being crewed by a former (or current) employer is by no mean limited to an unlucky few. It seems all but one participant in this discussion realizes this.
It isn’t a comedy, after all. It is a tragedy. I have never seen a person come so completely unglued as I have witnessed in the past 30 days or so. It is all so sad. I wish I had the cure - either to wake the person up or to make them stop. I don’t have the cure.
Quite frankly, I think that soon, very soon, the only choice will be to absolutely ignore the person entirely. That person will, most likely, still not get the message, but perhaps they will at least leave us alone, in peace.
January 9th, 2007 at 1:33 pm
Should read…
“The market on being screwed by a former (or current) employer is by no mean limited to an unlucky few.”
January 9th, 2007 at 2:13 pm
C.J.: In a newspaper … Scott’s comment wouldn’t have seen the light of day.
January 9th, 2007 at 2:17 pm
And that’s a bad thing?
January 9th, 2007 at 3:27 pm
I’ve slipped a cog? I’m not the one acting like a Church inquisitor here, Dr. Carroll. I’m not the one making accusations of blasphemy. You’re not the victim here, John … despite your delusions of universal persecution by “well connected commenters.”
You ran and told the teacher that Laura said a bad word. Grow up.
January 9th, 2007 at 3:33 pm
Listen people, this is not a newspaper. This is not a formal news source that people pay for every day. No one on here gets a salary for their contributions. If you don’t like my opinion, who cares because it is just that, an opinion. Lets not pretend that this is the Chicago tribune, this is an internet blog, for regular everyday Joes, like me, to express their views on politics and life in general. I was not aware that we had to be politically correct and appease everyone, with every comment.
Is that not the basic concept of this blog? To share and debate differing opinions. This guy, Dr. John, represents everything that is wrong with our society, and you think that I need to be censored? Mouse just said everything I did, just in a much nicer fashion. Nobody deleted his comment. You can’t even have a decent argument these days, without someone getting offended. Oh boo hoo, I used a swear word. You people need to get out of your bubble and visit the real world, where most of the common folk use swear words and are not politically correct.
January 9th, 2007 at 3:39 pm
F*ckin-A Right!
Sorry, I just couldn’t keep it in…
January 9th, 2007 at 3:44 pm
BTW … great comment, Anon. Dr. Carroll’s below the belt attacks against E.M. have got me spittin’ mad, I’ll admit. A knight get upset when someone makes a lady cry. Your comment is a calm, articulate and yet withering critique. I tip my hat … err … helm.
What odds do you give that Dr. Carroll will actually comment on the SUBSTANCE of the criticisms against him instead of either “flinging fecal matter” (hehehe) or claiming persecution? I’ll say nil.
January 10th, 2007 at 5:41 pm
Okay, just wanted to say my piece on the most popular post of all time. “Can’t we all just get along”
January 10th, 2007 at 5:57 pm
Scott: “Is that not the basic concept of this blog? To share and debate differing opinions. This guy, Dr. John, represents everything that is wrong with our society, and you think that I need to be censored? ”
Dr. Carroll is abrassive and combative and occasionally insulting toard those who disagree with him. But I decline to describe a guy who cares for sick children in one of the world’s poorest nations as one of the things that’s wrong with our society.
January 10th, 2007 at 8:24 pm
Everyone, has something that they believe in soo much and won’t back down from. And to Dr. Carroll, its Haiti children. You have to respect his drive and passion.
January 10th, 2007 at 8:39 pm
Of course, I agree with others about taking things a step too far, but everybody makes mistakes.