Open Thread: Syrian Troubles
Today's starter topic: Unrest in Syria has become so bad that the State Department has closed the American embassy in Damascus. Do you think there will be any U.S. intervention in Syria? Details below:
Robert Ford, the American ambassador, and 17 other U.S. officials left Syria and were expected to travel back to the United States. Ford informed Syrian authorities of the decision to leave earlier in the day, State Department officials said. Two diplomats left by air and the others went overland to Jordan.
Their departure comes two weeks after the State Department warned that it would close the embassy unless Assad's government better protected the mission, citing safety concerns about embassy personnel and a recent series of car bombs. And it coincides with a U.S. effort to build an international coalition in support of Syria's opposition.
State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland said in a statement that Ford remains the U.S. ambassador "to Syria and its people," and said he would continue his work on Syria, maintaining contacts with the Syrian opposition and supporting "the peaceful political transition which the Syrian people have so bravely sought."
The State Department also warned Americans against any travel to Syria. It recommended all U.S. citizens remaining in the country to depart immediately. The Polish embassy will provide emergency consular services for Americans remaining in Syria, the State Department said.
- NB Staff's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
How could they not know China & Russia would vote no?
Submitted by drsamherman on Mon, 02/06/2012 - 12:38pm.
Either our State Department's intelligence apparatus is so seriously flawed that it needs rebuilt from the ground up or the Obama administration stupidly thought it did not need a back-up plan in case they failed. Probably both.
Hildabeast looked stupefied and all the worse for wear as she was stumbling around for a response of what to do next. Tell us again how this administration has improved US foreign relations? They have done nothing but put us in a deeper hole with the Arab world, and managed to tick off the one real democracy in the region (Israel) that manages to keep the Arabs in check.
The Obama administration is just pulling foreign policy out of its butt.
Scrambling Reactionaries
Submitted by stratman on Mon, 02/06/2012 - 6:28pm.
I am not so sure that the Obama Administration didn't know China and Russia would vote no. From a financial and ideological counterbalance, it is almost a given that China and Russia would support Syria.
However, in the cult of personality that is the Obama Administration, it would not be surprising that Broomhilda and Obama believed by force of will could surmount established relations between Syria and the Communist malcontents' China and Russia.
More embarrassment for Obama and Clinton: Egypt is putting 43 NGO workers on trial, including 19 Americans, one of whom is US Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood's son.
Obama and Clinton's foreign policy has resulted in such weakness that foreign aholes put a Cabinet member's son on trial.
We still are making the same mistake.
Submitted by Newsbubba on Mon, 02/06/2012 - 12:57pm.
Obama isn't inept and clumsy. he is doing EXACTLY what he wants to do. He has started a firestorm in the Middle East, and he is throwing more fuel on it everyday that passes.
Bambi is just following Saul's game plan. Cause enough chaos to bring down the world order, so that you can then rebuild it to suit your own purposes. I won't even bother to speculate what his ultimate purpose is, because it doesn't matter. He just wants to "fundamentally transform this nation," and he needs to be stopped.
The stupid bastard is just overlooking one thing. These little firestorms always tend to get out of control and no one is able to control the events. That's when the entire world blows up into a very deadly war, and the only reason we survived the last time is because we had leaders who refused to lose, and refused to settle before victory was achieved. I don't think we can keep being that lucky.
The RBFSOB is the most dangerous thing to happen to the world since Adolph Hitler, and it doesn't matter what frigging color he happens to be. Black, white, blue, red, yellow, or pink polka dot on a lime green background, he is going to destroy us if we don't get his ass out!
Indeed
Submitted by jon_torlin on Mon, 02/06/2012 - 12:59pm.
that's why it's a bit uncertain as to how it would be if Romney were to become potus, but one thing's for sure, we KNOW what direction this country is going in with this dictator who needs to be tossed out. I'll take Romney any day of the week, even though he was hardly my first choice, or even my third choice.
But I seriously doubt Romney would become a dictator too.
-Jon
It is difficult for me to picture Obama,---
Submitted by matthewdean on Mon, 02/06/2012 - 1:24pm.
the SCOAMF, as a either a decision maker or policy maven of the highest order, because when off teleprompter he is a stumbling, bumbling fool.
As with ObamaCare, it seems most of the work to be done is accomplished by his minions; and while I realize that no one individual, especially the president, can have input into or be responsible for every single jot and tittle that affects his administration; Obama doesn't have the facade of a tremendous workload to hide behind - all the purple-lipped RBFSOBPOS ever does in the way of "work", is campaign.
It is my understanding that true power has always existed behind the scenes in the form of big money.
Soros?
MD
true power
Submitted by jon_torlin on Mon, 02/06/2012 - 1:42pm.
Sure, but one big problem that should be the elephant in the room is his statements, albeit through the teleprompter, about doing things without Congress. That's pretty much up there with Ginsburg saying what she said about not looking to the US regarding Constitutions for countries going through regime changes like Egypt.
Nixon said something similar and almost got impeached for it if he hadn't resigned.(Watergate was just the icing on the cake) Congress was about ready to do it, but once he resigned, it was a moot point.
We're not seeing anything of the sort here.
And I agree, Soros is behind a lot of what he's doing, but at the same time, Soetoro's the one at the wheel of this big bulldozer called Socialism/Communism.
As for his workload, yeah, he's the hard(liest) working potus ever. But then again, he thinks he's above all that mundane stuff of being a leader instead of a king/dictator without having to worry about rules.
-Jon
Agreed, jon, ---
Submitted by matthewdean on Mon, 02/06/2012 - 1:56pm.
BS (bullsh*t) Barry S. has many things to answer for, but it doesn't appear there are any politicians across the aisle who are going to ask any questions whatsoever, let alone the right ones.
MD
I'll go with Soros, too, MD.
Submitted by Newsbubba on Mon, 02/06/2012 - 1:56pm.
He is definitely driving it with his fortune, with the hope of accumulating even more money.
Obama is his sock puppet, but just like Bambi, this thing will eventually get away from Georgie's ability to control events. I'm sure tht e is smart enough to have a Plan B when that happens, but one can only hope that his greed devours him in the end.
As always happens, the Mooooooooslems, the commies, the Fascists, and other crazy factions (the Democrat party?, and liberals in general?) will get together for as long as it takes to make them think that victory is in sight, and them they will begin to go after each other. That's when the world will really come apart.
It always happens. For the last 10,000 years it has happened. It will not change now, just be much worse since our methods of destruction are so much better.
Sometimes it's not so bad to be old ad near the end of your existence. I just feel really bad for the poor dumb kids who have never read history, and who are going to learn from it the hard way.
'Zackly, bubba ---
Submitted by matthewdean on Mon, 02/06/2012 - 2:09pm.
"Those who do not remember history (or learn it in the first place), are doomed to repeat it".
So true it hurts - but as you say, it is the 'youts' who will suffer most.
MD
⇒ Fortunately, Matthew
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Mon, 02/06/2012 - 2:14pm.
Fortunately we have a President, renowned worldwide, as a straight-talking leader.
OK, I just had a flashback to 1981.
Cool ---
Submitted by matthewdean on Mon, 02/06/2012 - 2:19pm.
"renowned" ---
Spelled S-C-O-A-M-F. :o)
MD
Want a shining example ...
Submitted by Newsbubba on Mon, 02/06/2012 - 3:33pm.
... of what is the future of our country? Looks like the liberals are succeeding in raising the dumbest bunch of a$$holes on the planet right here in the USA!
We are sooooooo screwed.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=MHtDF-z77wk
They sound like future libs and ---
Submitted by matthewdean on Mon, 02/06/2012 - 4:11pm.
politicians.
Either party.
MD
post super bowl
Submitted by jon_torlin on Mon, 02/06/2012 - 1:16pm.
You know, I've watched a bit of the game (as mentioned elsewhere, I know I said I wasn't going to, but decided to do so once I heard about Avengers and other movie trailers coming out, it was worth watching) and I gotta admit, there were some good plays and etc. For a guy who doesn't normally watch football anymore, that's saying a lot on my part.
So while I can understand why some people watching wanted the pats to win on hand, but wanted the giants to win, I don't understand this business of Tom Brady getting all dejected and etc, which is something they are talking a lot about in the news today. Especially with his hottie model wife who once wanted to be paid in Euros over dollars(how's that going these days, eh?) defending Brady by blaming the receivers which is all well and good, but they seem to be forgetting something:
Regardless of what one might feel about it, Brady DID make it to the Superbowl before, so to do so again is nothing to sneeze at. He should be grateful for the opportunity to do it again.
So all this stuff about him being upset about it doesn't make sense to me, especially since he got injured a few times, and guess what, excrement occurs.(For those of you in Rio Linda, that means sh!t happens) He's got a sterling career, a loving wife, hopefully he won't do stupid things with his money and fame, what more could anyone ask for in his position?
-Jon
Where's NATO?
Submitted by Galvanic on Mon, 02/06/2012 - 1:48pm.
Where are the airstrikes against Syrian security forces and Assad's residences?
How can NATO not respond forcefully to this "humanitarian crisis?"
Where is our Nobel Peace Prize winning President as hundreds of innocent women and children are slaughtered?
Why aren't we supporting the popular forces of democracy in Syria? And who are those forces, anyway?
Yeah, didn't Comrade 0 tell us that Libya was necessary?
Submitted by UpNorth on Mon, 02/06/2012 - 6:13pm.
You know, to prevent the deaths of thousands of "innocents"? Yet there was no credible evidence of any "humanitarian" crisis, no story of hundreds killed in a single attack. Now, there are stories of "thousands" who've died already, and the "Leader" of the free world says we have to "rely on diplomacy" to solve this small problem.
Yeah, his diplomacy has worked so well thus far. As DocSam pointed out, the State Department is clueless as to what goes on up on the Hudson River, and we're supposed to believe that they'll be able to defuse this and make everything unicorns and Skittles?
Those Syrians who'd actually like to be able to go to bed and wake up still alive have been thrown under the same bus the democracy protesters in Iran were.
Assad is not anti-Isreal enough to suit the Muslim barbarians
Submitted by Dave. on Mon, 02/06/2012 - 1:51pm.
...and just like Mubarak and Col. Daffy, he must be forced out to make room for someone that is.
And the Kenyan Muslim communist in the White House, whose only interest in the region is to make it safe for the rise of the Israel-hating Islamic true-believers, is all too ready to aid them in their cause.
-Dave
Vote for the American in November
Was anyone creeped out by the Clint Eastwood Detroit Ad?
Submitted by Blonde on Mon, 02/06/2012 - 2:20pm.
I couldn't believe it!
Clint sold us out. THAT makes me want to cry.
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
⇒ Yes, Blonde
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Mon, 02/06/2012 - 2:32pm.
Balboa is busy touting his ignorance on the subject here.
J, A clip on youtube is all i saw of the superbowl, yea creepy
Submitted by upcountrywater on Mon, 02/06/2012 - 2:43pm.
Tell me why wasn't he touting Ford.
Doesn't he own a Ford Torino, and a ford pickup?
Tying to live down that movie he made.
Must have gotten a chunk of bail funds himself.
You Didn't Build That.
I'd imagine, upc
Submitted by Blonde on Mon, 02/06/2012 - 3:05pm.
...it's because the unions paid him to do that ad.
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
Tie a yellow ribbon round the ol oak tree
Submitted by upcountrywater on Mon, 02/06/2012 - 2:31pm.
Egypt to prosecute 43 NGO workers
Soviet rise yeehaa
Keep hitting that reset button
The good news is moslems can't resist the march into the 7 th century. The transition to all this democracy Ahab spring stuff.. Is the left over western technology that might blow up right here on US soil.
You Didn't Build That.
Arab Scream
Submitted by kilrod on Mon, 02/06/2012 - 2:35pm.
Looks like the "Arab Spring" has devolved into an Arab Scream, as in death to the infidels and you spell democracy s h a r i a. The Egyptos just arrested 19 Americans and maybe 40 more are in hiding. Bout time we laughed this bunch of libturd jokes outta the Whitehouse before somebody gets hurt. What you say boy? Naw, all them dead people in Libya, Egypt, Syria, and Iran don't count, you only count those in Iraq are Afganistan that Bush caused to get killed.
kilrod "the Birther"
If an unborn child cannot trust you, why should I,??
"Fascinating stuff."
Submitted by bkeyser on Mon, 02/06/2012 - 2:54pm.
"Fascinating stuff."
The Bible refutes Obama's Prayer Breakfast Sermon
Submitted by motherbelt on Mon, 02/06/2012 - 2:56pm.
I am SO fed up with this president preaching to us about what makes a good Christian!
Doug Giles had this at townhall.com:
Who Would Jesus Tax?
Money quote:
Lastly, with just a cursory glance at the gospels, the honest reader will note that Christ Jesus never commanded Caesar or Herod to collect taxes in order to take care of the poor. He told his disciples to give to the needy, of their own volition, as worship to God and in service to mankind, and only—only—when it’s done by these means and motivations is it deemed virtuous and Christian.
Oh, and by the way, the Scripture has a lot to say about taxes. Progressives might want to put on a cup before they click this hyperlink to see what “God” thinks about Obama’s tax plan.
(emphasis mine)
⇒ Tru Dat, MB
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Mon, 02/06/2012 - 3:06pm.
And Matthew, a tax collector, was seen by the others as a person not to be respected.
IIRC, Jesus' retort to those who protested Matthew's presence was something about "Does a physician avoid the sick" (Forgive me, Lord, if i'm wrong on this one).
Found it. "It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick".
Today is Ronald Reagan's 101st Birthday
Submitted by Blonde on Mon, 02/06/2012 - 3:22pm.
Oh how I miss him. This link has some of his best quotes.
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
The MSM is out touting the
Submitted by ricklail on Mon, 02/06/2012 - 3:38pm.
The MSM is out touting the wisdom of Ron Jr. on his father. Funny how Michael was adopted but knows and acts more like his dad than the fairy boy,.
The children of Ronald Reagan and Jane Wyman . . .
Submitted by Galvanic on Mon, 02/06/2012 - 6:02pm.
. . . are/were conservatives and outspoken proponents of their father's policies and legacy (the late Maureen; Michael).
The children of Ronald Reagan and Nancy Reagan (nee Davis) are decidedly liberal, a reflection of their mother's influence (Patty Davis; Ron Reagan).
Rmoney?
Submitted by bkeyser on Mon, 02/06/2012 - 3:58pm.
It's a photoshop, but it's fooled a lot of people so far. Only marginally creative yet drastically farfetched. That a reporter would be fooled indicates a re-disposition; clearly.
Here's the original.
On a juicier note!
Submitted by Newsbubba on Mon, 02/06/2012 - 4:08pm.
Have you heard the one about JFK popping some 19 year old college student who was into her fourth day at the White House before he pounced on her?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't 19 considered a minor in the early 60's?
One thing about Democrat presidents. They don't let morality on any level stand between them and a great wick dipping, apparently.
Come on, Obama. Get with the program. Surely there is at least one intern around the White House that will fancy your tickle. It would be easier for you than the others, since you can shop both the boys and the girls!
14 in Hawaii at the time....
Submitted by upcountrywater on Mon, 02/06/2012 - 5:03pm.
And a long hard slog to raise it..
Tuesday morning to vote to override Gov. Ben Cayetano's veto of a bill to raise Hawaii's age-of- consent for sex from 14 to 16.
Obowboy, was already out of the state at that time.
You Didn't Build That.
KNOWN SERIAL ADULTERERS
Submitted by reelman46 on Mon, 02/06/2012 - 8:16pm.
Its (now) widely known that both JFK and Clinton were serial adulterers...and not with 3 other women either...very very serial...and was known "back when" but kept from America by the lib-media.
Of course, "all is forgiven" because they are democrats with a big smile and line of baloney so the diaper-changing media hid those dirty diapers thru JFK and were "a blue dress short" of hiding the moral midget lifestyle of Clinton.
The pawn media has taken the demo-socialist utopian side and so it matters not if both of these lying moral zeroes were also serial adulterers, dopers or thieves. The media mission is not about finding the whole truth for voters anymore...witness Obama...whose grades were so good they were sealed...yet sealed court divorce records of his Senate opponent got leaked so his opponent dropped out.
The real lowlife has been the lib-media and that is why Talk radio and the Web rose up as a needed (and hated/trashed) counterbalance.
Doug Schexnayder, Ph.D. (theconservativecrawfish<
Oh, this is what we (pseudo) Crackers do during winter
Submitted by Blonde on Mon, 02/06/2012 - 4:15pm.
Check it out! Very nice.
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
Best Super Bowl bet of the day
Submitted by bkeyser on Mon, 02/06/2012 - 7:10pm.
placed at the MGM Grand.
THE REST OF THE GINSBERG COMMENT STORY
Submitted by reelman46 on Mon, 02/06/2012 - 8:21pm.
As Egyptian officials prepare to send to trial 19 American democracy and rights workers,
Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg visited Cairo last week where she suggested
Egyptian revolutionaries not use the U.S. Constitution as a model in the post-Arab Spring.
"I would not look to the U.S. Constitution, if I were drafting a constitution in the year 2012,
" Ginsburg said in an interview on Al Hayat television last Wednesday. "I might look at the constitution of South Africa.
That was a deliberate attempt to have a fundamental instrument of government that embraced basic human rights, have an independent judiciary.
It really is, I think, a great piece of work that was done."
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/02/06/ginsburg-to-egyptians-wouldnt...
=====
Most people don't know that the ANC...the major party in South Africa is a communist-socialist party
and members address each other by comrade!!!...It calls itself "the discplined force of the left"
and is also a member of the Socialist International.
In 2011 the ANC pushed through the secrecy bill
condemned by Tutu, Mandela and others for restricting freedom of the press and freedom of expression
God bless "comrade" Ginsberg...who obviously does NOT read about South African politics.
=====
So a communist party BO Rights is better than ours?????
Only a kook liberal democrat could say that! How creepy OR ignorant is that?
Doug Schexnayder, Ph.D. (theconservativecrawfish<
How to launder money in
Submitted by bkeyser on Mon, 02/06/2012 - 9:30pm.
two easy steps.
How many times have I been reminded at NB that nothing
Submitted by Jer on Mon, 02/06/2012 - 9:36pm.
the NYT reports about Obama can be believed. ;-)
Jer
⇒ Good one, Jer
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Mon, 02/06/2012 - 9:40pm.
Let me see if I've got a comeback.
⇒ Nahh, too easy.
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Mon, 02/06/2012 - 9:42pm.
Never mind.
You're probably right Jer,
Submitted by bkeyser on Mon, 02/06/2012 - 9:52pm.
there's no way Obama gave that money back.
Jer, have you not learned?
Submitted by MightyMouth on Mon, 02/06/2012 - 11:30pm.
It's about the PAGE it is on with the NYT. Let's see... conservatives bad ...front page, democrats bad... buried as deep as possible.
Ohhh...got it.
Submitted by Jer on Tue, 02/07/2012 - 1:35am.
Now that makes sense.
Jer
No offense Blonde
Submitted by MrShy on Mon, 02/06/2012 - 11:31pm.
But step aside, Tebow...
We have a new God-fearing overachiever (although, jury's out): Knicks PG Jeremy Lin.
He's an end-of-bencher who I had no idea was even on our roster, and we'd been completely rudderless this season, even with our "big 3" super star players, pathetically losing 11 of 13.
Enter "Linsanity", an Asian American brainiac graduate from (wait for it...) Harvard. He is burning opposing point gaurds, driving to the hole, scoring, dishing, crossing everyone over, and making things happen. We now have a shiny two-game winning streak!! :)
EDIT: And, again, the Tebow angle: he pointedly gives praise to "Jesus Christ, my Lord and savior" in every interview. Funny, smart guy, too.
- shy on vinyl
Join Mr. Shy and The 1* Percent
Leftist Medical Board Activism
Submitted by stratman on Tue, 02/07/2012 - 12:25am.
Birther physician denied license to practice in Kansas.
Spotless medical record ignored.
More tolerance from the Left.
strat...
Submitted by Jer on Tue, 02/07/2012 - 1:56am.
I'm not trying to be contentious. It did seem, at first blush, to be a politically-charged indefensible ruling by the board [particularly after reading what now appears to be an article penned by a reporter with an agenda]
Did you read the first 9-10 comments? They provide some additional perspective which makes this a closer call in my opinion.
Jer
Jer
Submitted by stratman on Tue, 02/07/2012 - 3:38am.
Birther posts get your attention. If only WND was quoted in the article.
I use NoScript with Firefox and it blocked any hint of comments. As soon as I turned off NoScript the page reloaded and I was able to read the comments.
I read that he was given a dishonorable discharge from the military but missed the part that he served prison time. Prison is bad for obtaining licensure but not necessarily the kiss of death for licensure. Certain offenses, though, will garner permanent suspension or refusal to obtain licensure. Each state has their own guidelines and historically have been subject to the whims of the Board members.
That the physician is a birther is neither here nor there. While ethically near impossible to justify a refusal to deploy and leave people short, there is zero evidence the physician would abandon patients, and there is no record of him abandoning patients for any reason from the article and comment section. However, moral turpitude counts in Medicine, as witnessed by clauses concerning such behavior written into contracts with physicians, oftentimes vague but enough to get one terminated, or refused licensure in a state.
Refusing the physician licensure because he is a birther would be garbage as their are plenty of Leftwing kooks practicing medicine while harboring all sorts of bizarre ideas and lifestyle practices. For all I know the physician in question is a nutjob, but that wasn't sufficiently illuminated in the article. A clean record in practicing medicine does not guarantee a desirable colleague or personal physician. My issue was with denial of licensure based on the Boards purported concentration on the birther issue. The comment section discusses separate reason for the refusal as you alluded.
Lastly, you seem quick to take the charge of purposeful journalistic malfeasance based on some comments. Do you have proof beyond the anonymous comments?
See the links at the bottom
Submitted by stratman on Tue, 02/07/2012 - 7:52pm.
See the links at the bottom of the article to go to a web page that lets you download a ZIP file that has both a transcript and an audio file of the brief hearing.
From the transcript of the hearing (Conley a Board member and Bond the attorney for the Board)
One thing I wanted to know was whether Lakin's Court Martial was considered a felony. Apparently it is not according to the testimony. A large hurdle for licensure has been surmounted.
Next, according to the article and anonymous comments, another physician was dispatched to replace Lakin, so Ms. Bond is incorrect. Hurdle two surmounted for this specific point to patient care: No patient was left without care. Before you comment about the patients of the physician who went in place of Larkin - this is the inescapable situation for all physicians called up for their three month tour.
Duty is the key point Ms. Bond makes and argument about Lakin's character with regards to his relationship with future patients. Since he abandoned no patient before, during, or since his refusal to deploy - he had no patients at all since he was not deployed at that time - the term duty is being used for events not in occurrence yet.
In fact, Lakin never refused to see patients, only a refusal to deploy, and was working with patients in the Military until shortly before his Court Martial and did not stop of his own volition:
Lakin's ability to perform the duties of a physician were obviously not in question and there is no mention of any malfeasance with regard to patient care or unprofessional conduct in the scope of a practicing physician. I have not read he refused to care for patients at any time.
Lakin does not appear to be a coward as he has deployed to combat areas in the past. He faced a moral and ethical dilemma wholly unrelated to Medicine.
Then came the Birther cross-examination used to set up the point that if Larkin is unsure of the legality of Obama holding the office of the Presidency then would he refuse to treat patients under ObamaCare law. Once again, no evidence that Lakin has refused to treat any patient nor has there been mention of psychiatric opinion as to the soundness of mind of Lakin. As Lakin said, the birther issue is not relative to treating patients. The tactics used at this point by the Board are reminiscent of a kangaroo court.
There was a mention of an alleged error on his National Practitioners Data Base record that the Military reported he "failed to render
medical services on deployment" which appears to not be the case as he was not deployed. The Board, though, appeared to not be concerned with this alleged error and proceeded to ultimately find against Lakin on the grounds of dishonorable discharge:
What is the Statute? You can read the pertinent Statute components used in the PDF found in a link at the bottom of the article. I wasn't able to copy and paste from the PDF so I found it on the internet here:
As you can see, the Board has latitude in deciding the fate of Lakin. They were on railroad tracks with this case. It is clear they desired Lakin's Court Martial to be considered a felony so they could use another section (c) of the Statute, but they came up short. The next angle of attack was moral turpitude as defined under dishonorable conduct language. Vague as it is, and at the whim of the Board, Lakin had no chance. It was a done deal that only needed the cover of a show pony hearing
As it turns out, the article was solid. If we had both done our due diligence with the Board's hearing transcript and audio then your response would have been unnecessary instead of just incorrect..
strat....
Submitted by Jer on Tue, 02/07/2012 - 9:34pm.
What part of my response was incorrect?
Last night, having replied to MightyMouth just moments earlier, I noticed your post at the end of the thread, opened your link, and skimmed the article (which made a very strong case against the Board). However, a quick perusal of the comments which followed suggested the issue might not be quite as cut and dried--or the ruling as unprecedented and baffling--as it initially appeared. And a close rereading of the article revealed, in my view, an unnecessarily sarcastic and slanted assessment by the reporter.
Even so--and despite the counterbalancing points offered by several of the commenters--I concluded and stated that it was still a close--or at least closer--call. And indeed the doubts raised did commend the matter to further research, which you have performed and summarized with your customary thoroughness and persuasiveness. I'll try to give the case some further attention as well, assisted by your additional information and sourcing.
Jer
Jer
Submitted by stratman on Tue, 02/07/2012 - 10:51pm.
The due diligence was studying the links at the bottom of the article which included the transcript and audio recording of the hearing. The article reflected these links well. It was both our lack of due diligence that resulted in unnecessary reliance on anonymous comments for clarification.
I don't understand why Lakin did not have legal representation at the hearing. Lakin was rather shaky in expressing himself at times.
Regardless of the Board's obnoxious lines of inquiry, based on the Statute, specifically where subjective determinations suffice in paragraph (b), the Board had the right to deny Lakin licensure.
I don't care for what Larkin did but I don't know if I would deny him licensure because of it without proof or convincing evidence he would not provide standard of care. None appeared to be presented, but we don't know all the prior proceedings and documentation presented. (there's always a "but")
The Board in Ohio suspends licensure if a physician does not pay child support. Is that proper providence of the Medical Board? Why not adulterers? (Because a lot of high power, well-connected physicians would lose their licenses)
strat...
Submitted by Jer on Wed, 02/08/2012 - 1:21am.
A good point. Let's identify the "winners" after a ruling in a Board proceeding suspending the license of an otherwise eminently qualified physician due solely to child support arrearages: Obviously not the doctor, nor his existing or potential patients who were or would be afforded--but now are denied-his care, nor any of the medical practitioners with whom he may have had a business relationship, nor any hospital with which he may have been associated, nor the state and federal governments which would lose their slice of revenue, and certainly not his ex-wife or his children who are now likewise deprived of an income source from which the support obligations could have been enforced. Well, I guess the lawyers won.
Regarding child support vs. adultery, it's not too difficult to obtain a judgment for back child support or secure a contempt citation for non-compliance with a court order to satisfy an arrearage by a date certain. And such judicial rulings would be direct evidence virtually impossible to overcome in a medical licensure hearing. On the other hand, adultery is far more likely to be an evidentiary "he said/she said" nightmare and thus a much greater hurdle to clear, both practically and legally--and therefore something a licensing board would prefer to avoid.
On a side note, I have a problem with the continuing trend over the past several decades which has witnessed the gradual but steady erosion of discretionary authority formerly invested with judges and adjudicatory bodies. Where once common sense distinctions could be made between deliberately callous, egregious behavior and well-intentioned but technically culpable acts are now all too often subjected to identical mandatory penalties. That's not to say the underlying arguments which originally propelled the policy were unsound, but good motives don't always produce the best results.
Jer
Jer
Submitted by stratman on Wed, 02/08/2012 - 2:01am.
I appreciate your thoughtful post.
Concerning adultery, even if there is child born from the extra-marital affair, ie proof, this would still not trigger a morals/dishonorable clause in Medical Boards licensure status (unless it was with a patient, for instance). This is the capriciousness of governing boards. That failure to pay child support is recognized by the Medial Board because it's viewed as a morals/ethics issue. Meanwhile, adultery... not even a batted eyelash. I guess I need to research the obvious subtle differences between deadbeat and SOB.
Inconsistency and nanny statism.
~Guys, I saw the BEST bumper sticker this afternoon
Submitted by Wrathful Brunette on Tue, 02/07/2012 - 8:17pm.
I was coming back into the city from picking up some chicken feed when I saw a sticker on the back window of a truck that, at first glance, looked like an Obama campaign bumper sticker because it was that blue color with his logo in the 'O' of Obama. But, on second glance I realized it read....
Wait for it........
"Obama, the quicker f*cker upper." (minus the asterisk)
I pulled up alongside, the driver glanced at me, and I was giving him an emphatic thumbs up and mouthing "LOVE THE BUMPER STICKER" and "PERFECT". We shared a warm, fuzzy moment at 65 mph. :-p
Oh, yea
Submitted by Boudin on Tue, 02/07/2012 - 8:22pm.
There cheap too!
~What a deal!!
Submitted by Wrathful Brunette on Tue, 02/07/2012 - 8:37pm.
They're even MORE AWESOME in person. :-D
And anyone who cannot see that Obama is ---
Submitted by matthewdean on Tue, 02/07/2012 - 9:15pm.
precisely that, and has done exactly that, is a god-%&%*@# fool.
MD
~It was the best traffic moment EVER
Submitted by Wrathful Brunette on Tue, 02/07/2012 - 9:41pm.
Usually when someone gives you the finger in traffic, it isn't the thumb. I think I made his day, too.
Bru
Submitted by Radical1979 on Tue, 02/07/2012 - 9:47pm.
You have no idea how excited I get here in progressive PA when I see the bumper sticker of a like minded person. When I see a "Don't Believe the Liberal Media" sticker I try to catch up to them with the idea of asking if they're an NB'r. Usually they spot me and think I'm a crazy stalker and get the heck away. Someday I'll catch up and meet someone in person I only know from here. At least that's my dream.
~Rad
Submitted by Wrathful Brunette on Wed, 02/08/2012 - 10:10am.
I've seen a few good anti-Obama stickers around town, but in city traffic I've never been able to pull up alongside and express my approval. Honking from right behind wouldn't send the right message, I don't think. :-p
Being able to pull up next to that guy yesterday made my day; I was about to honk the horn to get his attention when he glanced over and saw me. He probably doesn't get that many thumbs up from women, but I made up for lack of quantity with quality and vigor.
More Obama bumper stickers
Submitted by 26CX on Tue, 02/07/2012 - 9:26pm.
I saw this bumper sticker on the way home tonight. They ARE more awesome in person!
Maybe the Obama bumper stickers are starting to catch on in a big way.
~Love it
Submitted by Wrathful Brunette on Tue, 02/07/2012 - 9:33pm.
Brought a tear to my eye.