Ohio GOP lawmaker fired from ER job over remarks about ‘colored population’ and covid-19

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
Question to put to the group...

It seems the consensus is, Team Health is a private organization and they have the right to fire who they want, especially if they feel it makes them look bad. As do other organizations too. (I think in this particular case we all agree the Ohio lawmaker/ doctor chose his words poorly, although there's certainly disagreement as to what his intentions were).

My fear here is the slippery slope. We are increasingly seeing a narrative in these protests which states that "Silence Is Violence". So my question is, along those lines, if Team Health or another corporation began firing employees for SILENCE, would you continue to support the statement that "they're a private organization and they have the right to fire who they want, especially if they feel it makes them look bad"? If a company said, "we feel that silence is violence and any employees who refuse to go to a march and post pictures of themselves on social media showing support, will be fired", would you support that right? If not, how does that reconcile with the previous assertion that private companies have the right to do and to fire whom they want?


I mean there’s no point in this hypothetical you don’t make the RV you you don’t get your press ganney or for some reason you piss off a nurse you’re gone. You’re just a cog in the wheel. It has nothing to do with support it’s just the reality.


Also he still has his government job.

Members don't see this ad.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Well theoretically yeah they could fire you at any time for any reason.

Physicians are regularly fired for even stupider reasons including refusing to write scripts for drug seekers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Question to put to the group...

It seems the consensus is, Team Health is a private organization and they have the right to fire who they want, especially if they feel it makes them look bad. As do other organizations too. (I think in this particular case we all agree the Ohio lawmaker/ doctor chose his words poorly, although there's certainly disagreement as to what his intentions were).

My fear here is the slippery slope. We are increasingly seeing a narrative in these protests which states that "Silence Is Violence". So my question is, along those lines, if Team Health or another corporation began firing employees for SILENCE, would you continue to support the statement that "they're a private organization and they have the right to fire who they want, especially if they feel it makes them look bad"? If a company said, "we feel that silence is violence and any employees who refuse to go to a march and post pictures of themselves on social media showing support, will be fired", would you support that right? If not, how does that reconcile with the previous assertion that private companies have the right to do and to fire whom they want?

If silence is violence and speech causes danger and respectful disagreements are unsafe, then it’s a moot point because private industry doesn’t exist in a world where war is peace, freedom is slavery and ignorance is strength.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: 4 users
Members don't see this ad :)
If silence is violence and speech causes danger and respectful disagreements are unsafe, then it’s a moot point because private industry doesn’t exist in a world where war is peace, freedom is slavery and ignorance is strength.

There's not even freedom to question any more. Even if I agree with a specific position, there's no room to even question individual components of it. Essentially BLM and the left wing want to enforce uniformity of thought. Anyone who questions anything they say, has no right to work, speak, or even go out in public. It's unfortunate that U.S. companies in pursuit of profit (see T-mobile) have been so quick to jump on the PC bandwagon, and are doing their part to enforce the new uniform code of thought.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Communication skills are everything in medicine. Whatever this doc meant to say, or meant to ask, he did not communicate it well. I can only wonder how he has remained employed thus far....
 
What that man said was racist, insensitive, ignorant and demeaning. I’m not even seeing how someone can debate this but then again people are murdered on camera and people want to debate how that’s justified too. We need to do and be better as humans.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 users
What that man said was racist, insensitive, ignorant and demeaning. I’m not even seeing how someone can debate this but then again people are murdered on camera and people want to debate how that’s justified too. We need to do and be better as humans.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN

The question wasn't over what he said was racist or insensitive. There is broad agreement that the very least it was insensitive and inappropriate. The question was whether or not a company like TeamHealth can fire you for making public statements or social media posts. The answer (unfortunately) is that yes they can, and there's little recourse.

I find Mr. Hat's question about "Silence is Violence" appropriate. If you DON'T show the appropriate virtue signaling, like black screens on IG, kneeling in public, etc, can you be fired? I've had several friends essentially get doxed by good friends of theirs for NOT posting anything about BLM on social media.

It's the natural extension of the cancel culture and PC insanity we are now experiencing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 6 users
Only time you should be speaking about race, is if you got a lot of F U money. Not if you have or need a job
 
What that man said was racist, insensitive, ignorant and demeaning. I’m not even seeing how someone can debate this but then again people are murdered on camera and people want to debate how that’s justified too. We need to do and be better as humans.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN

I find statements like this useless. You make an assertion then phrase it as you cannot be questioned due to the moral high ground, when the fact of the matter is your assertion is flawed.

He asked whether or not it’s possible that people of color wash their hands less often than white people, he didn’t say “black people are dirty.” Hand hygiene is a risk factor for infectious disease transmission. What if someone studied it and found out that public bathrooms in areas that are socioeconomically underprivileged are less likely to have soap or clean towels, or that stores in predominantly black neighborhoods are less likely to have hand sanitizer than those in white neighborhoods? What if white kids are predominantly taught to wash their hands by singing the birthday song but African American kids are taught to wash their hands more often with a song that is 3 seconds shorter with carryover effects into adulthood? Are any of those three ideas so far fetched to be impossible? No. So how is the suggestion that hand hygiene could be a risk factor in transmission racist. You’re closing yourself off based on an emotional response. The fact of the matter is, what if it is a factor? If you did a study and found that people of color wash their hands on average 2 seconds less or at 96% the rate if white people, that could have an epidemiologically significant result. But of course we can’t consider that, because, you know, it’s racist.

My goodness, interpret others statements 1) with charity and 2) understanding you may not have context and 3) that people aren’t binary - not good and evil, otherwise, it’s only a matter of time before you’re in the chopping block.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 9 users
The question wasn't over what he said was racist or insensitive. There is broad agreement that the very least it was insensitive and inappropriate. The question was whether or not a company like TeamHealth can fire you for making public statements or social media posts. The answer (unfortunately) is that yes they can, and there's little recourse.

I find Mr. Hat's question about "Silence is Violence" appropriate. If you DON'T show the appropriate virtue signaling, like black screens on IG, kneeling in public, etc, can you be fired? I've had several friends essentially get doxed by good friends of theirs for NOT posting anything about BLM on social media.

It's the natural extension of the cancel culture and PC insanity we are now experiencing.

There is a reason I am not on social media. Honestly, if someone has the thought that “I should abandon a relationship with this human being who I know and care about because they have not proactively demonstrated their virtue through a trite activity on social media,” they’re probably better off without them.

Note: I didn’t say “it’s ok to remake a scene of a police officer stepping on someone’s throat” with a smiley face emoji and “lol” even though that’s provably equivalent in some people’s mind.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 users
Completely agree.... but that’s the whole problem with “silence is violence”. Pretty soon your silence may be the thing that gets you fired. Silence isn’t enough. You have to vocally support the cause dejour or you’re out.

*du jour.
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
It's also a fact that racism is at the lowest point it's been in the history of our country, and perhaps on a global scale the history of the world.

I still don't understand what laws these protesters think are racist and want to change? "Reform the police" isn't really an actionable request unless you have specifics. I would wager that if you asked 10 protesters for specifics, you would get 10 different answers.
Have you researched the impact of the Supreme Court’s 2013 ruling of Shelby County v. Holder on the numbers of eligible non-white voters? See anything systemic about it? See anything that disproportionately affects minorities?
 
Members don't see this ad :)
I for one signed on with TeamHealth knowing that not saying stupid stuff like this was part of the deal. You know, I always figured that that's what it takes, at minimum, for a regular schmoe like me to make half a million dollars a year in this country. I'm OK with this restriction at the end of the day.

And at the same time I'm jumping ship in a few months, and I'm more than OK with that. My management are just way too corporate for me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
It is comical in its arrogance. Personally I think the guy is a dope. I also think its not right what TeamHealth did. He didn’t do it as a “representative” of team health. He didn’t do it while performing work for Team Health.

I have signed various petitions and place my MD behind it.. I never put the name of my employer on there or make any action that would suggest my employer supports my position on issues.

The world has gone mad. There is no discussion on any of these issues but rather they force any opinion not in line with the BLM folks to be silenced or punished. It is idiocy at its finest. I stay off of SoMe cause I wont change anyone’s opinion and more importantly I’m trying to be there for my kids and spouse. I ain’t got time for that stupidity.

I hear that FB group EmDocs has blown up and accusations of racism are being flung around.

Let me say this I do believe there is a component of systemic racism. Those who dont believe it we can simply point to the drug punishments of crack vs cocaine. This was meant to target black people as they leaned to crack Much more so that cocaine and cocaine was generally viewed as a rich persons drug.

On the other hand those of us in medicine see doctors from African flocking here for economic opportunity. Same for other countries like India, Pakistan etc.

It’s not like places where blacks are the majority they are overflowing with success. Black immigrants are much more likely to be wealthy in the racist US system than native countries. I say this for Nigerians, Jamaicans and Haitians i know. Maybe there is some country that is predominantly black where they have tremendous economic success.

I think we can have Multiple issues side by side. 1) systemic racism which I think exists and 2) tremendous economic opportunity For black people (and others) and 3) tremendous intraracial violence that those same SJWs happily turn a blind eye to. Black on black homicide is 8-9x more likely than white on white and Hispanic on Hispanic homocide. We wont even get into the Asians.

similarly lets not be idiots. Blacks and Hispanics are plenty racist themselves, same for Indians, Chinese, Japanese, Koreans, Russians, Jews, Christians, Muslims etc. Bias is natural, we have to actively work to overcome it.

Open mouth, insert foot. Cancel culture could have a field day with this one. Infinitly worse than what the senator said lol
 
Last edited:
  • Dislike
Reactions: 1 user
Open mouth, insert foot. Cancel culture could have a field day with this one. Infinitly worse than what the senator said lol
Meh. Listen Nigerian americans and Indian Americans are some of the wealthiest ethnicities in the US.
 
Meh. Listen Nigerian americans and Indian Americans are some of the wealthiest ethnicities in the US.

Yeah, but we really shouldn't be holding up highly selected immigrant groups as examples. When you can't simply walk across a border and instead need to fly 13 hours on Emirates to get to the US it tends to select out the riff-raff. Different groups have different push-pull factors and different barriers to entry which lead to very different outcomes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
He asked whether or not it’s possible that people of color wash their hands less often than white people, he didn’t say “black people are dirty.” Hand hygiene is a risk factor for infectious disease transmission. What if someone studied it and found out that public bathrooms in areas that are socioeconomically underprivileged are less likely to have soap or clean towels, or that stores in predominantly black neighborhoods are less likely to have hand sanitizer than those in white neighborhoods? What if white kids are predominantly taught to wash their hands by singing the birthday song but African American kids are taught to wash their hands more often with a song that is 3 seconds shorter with carryover effects into adulthood? Are any of those three ideas so far fetched to be impossible? No. So how is the suggestion that hand hygiene could be a risk factor in transmission racist. You’re closing yourself off based on an emotional response. The fact of the matter is, what if it is a factor? If you did a study and found that people of color wash their hands on average 2 seconds less or at 96% the rate if white people, that could have an epidemiologically significant result. But of course we can’t consider that, because, you know, it’s racist.

My goodness, interpret others statements 1) with charity and 2) understanding you may not have context and 3) that people aren’t binary - not good and evil, otherwise, it’s only a matter of time before you’re in the chopping block.

At the end of the day, the questions you ask--and especially how you phrase them--betray something about your framing of the world. So yes, you can certainly polish his turd of a question incredibly charitably to come up with something of value, but you cannot escape the original.

This is a physician and a lawmaker. If he wanted to make a nuanced point about education, access to sanitation, or the birthday song, he could have done so. But no, he chose to ask "Could it just be that African Americans or the colored population do not wash their hands as well as other groups?"

Do you disagree with him losing his job? Sure, that's an interesting discussion. But let's not go around doing mental gymnastics to pretend like his question added anything of value to the topic of public health.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 4 users
Some verbal acrobatics going on here to justify and frame this question as not being racist. His intent was quite clear
 
  • Like
  • Dislike
Reactions: 6 users
i think saying "black people are dirty and don't wash their hands enough" is a pretty reasonable place to draw the line. it's not that hard to not say racist **** in public, i've been able to do it my entire life without even trying.

world's smallest violin and a tiny, sad song for this idiot.
That is stupid. That’s not what he said. At all. The implication was “racism isn’t associated with the disease” so he was saying that it has to be other factors accounting for the higher infection rates, then posed different possibilities. He didn’t use the “politically correct” terminology but does he seriously deserve to be fired over this? Can’t people say dumb things every once in a While without being cancelled? Holy mackerel, I need to keep my mouth shut around my two Leftist medical directors from now on...
 
That is stupid. That’s not what he said. At all. The implication was “racism isn’t associated with the disease” so he was saying that it has to be other factors accounting for the higher infection rates, then posed different possibilities. He didn’t use the “politically correct” terminology but does he seriously deserve to be fired over this? Can’t people say dumb things every once in a While without being cancelled? Holy mackerel, I need to keep my mouth shut around my two Leftist medical directors from now on...

Of course he does. Do you think African-American patients are going to be psyched about seeing this doc, whose statement could be interpreted as saying they are dirty? What other choice does the company have?

He has an education. If he wants to ask if there are other factors regarding disease transmission, he can ask that, and let someone answer, without making assumptions or casting aspersions on any sector of the population.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
At the end of the day, the questions you ask--and especially how you phrase them--betray something about your framing of the world. So yes, you can certainly polish his turd of a question incredibly charitably to come up with something of value, but you cannot escape the original.

This is a physician and a lawmaker. If he wanted to make a nuanced point about education, access to sanitation, or the birthday song, he could have done so. But no, he chose to ask "Could it just be that African Americans or the colored population do not wash their hands as well as other groups?"

Do you disagree with him losing his job? Sure, that's an interesting discussion. But let's not go around doing mental gymnastics to pretend like his question added anything of value to the topic of public health.

Nothing I said “betrays” my world view. Sorry - you can think I’m a piece of crap racist if you want - making snap judgements about people and labeling them seems to be popular nowadays. What my question “betrays” about me is that 1) I assume I don’t know what is in someone’s heart because I am not omnipotent 2) I try to give people the benefit of the doubt/interpret people’s statements in the most charitable way possible when in question and 3) I am a scientist interested in testable hypotheses. But you’re right, it’s easier to say I’m a more polished racist.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 8 users
Of course he does. Do you think African-American patients are going to be psyched about seeing this doc, whose statement could be interpreted as saying they are dirty? What other choice does the company have?

He has an education. If he wants to ask if there are other factors regarding disease transmission, he can ask that, and let someone answer, without making assumptions or casting aspersions on any sector of the population.

African American patients probably wouldn’t care, not would white patient, because he’s an ER doc. You get who you get when you show up. If they smile and seem competent, people are happy. It’s not like 99% of my patients know my name the minute I walk out of the room. People aren’t rapidly googling everyone they meet.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Nothing I said “betrays” my world view. Sorry - you can think I’m a piece of crap racist if you want - making snap judgements about people and labeling them seems to be popular nowadays. What my question “betrays” about me is that 1) I assume I don’t know what is in someone’s heart because I am not omnipotent 2) I try to give people the benefit of the doubt/interpret people’s statements in the most charitable way possible when in question and 3) I am a scientist interested in testable hypotheses. But you’re right, it’s easier to say I’m a more polished racist.

It was the generic you. Feel free to restate as "At the end of the day, the questions one asks--and especially how one phrases them--betray something about one's framing of the world." I was alluding to the subject of this entire thread--the guy who got fired for his poor questions.

My point is that your interpretation of this guy's question was a huge stretch and that in the process of re-interpreting it to such a degree, we lose the ability to see something about how the guy views the world.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
African American patients probably wouldn’t care, nor would white patient, because he’s an ER doc. You get who you get when you show up. If they smile and seem competent, people are happy. It’s not like 99% of my patients know my name the minute I walk out of the room. People aren’t rapidly googling everyone they meet.

This isn't true at all.

I'm Black, and I live and work in a city where there are a relative abundance of hospitals to choose from and some have a reputation for having less than "enlightened" staff. Sure, if you're in extremis EMS will take you where they're gonna take you. However the ambulatory ESI 3s with insurance that pad our bottom line absolutely have a choice in the matter and will actively avoid hospitals with questionable reputations, and the place that hires a guy who says racist **** on television wouldn't get the business.

Especially in this day and age where there is soooooo much discourse about racism in medicine and health disparities, you would be silly to assume that Black people don't care if a hospital employs a racist who exposed their views on television for everyone to see.

Also, don't assume that people aren't rapidly googling you when they meet you. Particularly in cities with high concentrations of wealthy, tech savvy millennials and Gen - Xers like NYC, Boston and SF patients will google their ER doc. Patients' families have struck up covos w me about my alma mater without me having ever told them were I went to school - however that info is freely available online. Even in a relatively anonymous field like EM nobody is truly anonymous with the internet anymore.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 users
This isn't true at all.

I'm Black, and I live and work in a city where there are a relative abundance of hospitals to choose from and some have a reputation for having less than "enlightened" staff. Sure, if you're in extremis EMS will take you where they're gonna take you. However the ambulatory ESI 3s with insurance that pad our bottom line absolutely have a choice in the matter and will actively avoid hospitals with questionable reputations, and the place that hires a guy who says racist **** on television wouldn't get the business.

Especially in this day and age where there is soooooo much discourse about racism in medicine and health disparities, you would be silly to assume that Black people don't care if a hospital employs a racist who exposed their views on television for everyone to see.

Also, don't assume that people aren't rapidly googling you when they meet you. Particularly in cities with high concentrations of wealthy, tech savvy millennials and Gen - Xers like NYC, Boston and SF patients will google their ER doc. Patients' families have struck up covos w me about my alma mater without me having ever told them were I went to school - however that info is freely available online. Even in a relatively anonymous field like EM nobody is truly anonymous with the internet anymore.

That surprises me. You certainly may be right. Maybe it’s my bias due to my clinical experience, but I’ve never had that happen to me. Mind you, I’m not in Manhattan, SFC, etc.

Also, I would be super creeped out if a patient was like “oh, so how do you think <insert Alma mater>’s relief pitching is going to be this year?”
 
It was the generic you. Feel free to restate as "At the end of the day, the questions one asks--and especially how one phrases them--betray something about one's framing of the world." I was alluding to the subject of this entire thread--the guy who got fired for his poor questions.

My point is that your interpretation of this guy's question was a huge stretch and that in the process of re-interpreting it to such a degree, we lose the ability to see something about how the guy views the world.

That’s my point. You’re making an assumption about his world view. Not just that, but you’re making the least charitable assumption possible. Is your assumption right? Probably, but you don’t know. We don’t have context, we don’t know the guy. And when you make those assumptions about people, you start down a dreadful path.
 
This isn't true at all.

I'm Black, and I live and work in a city where there are a relative abundance of hospitals to choose from and some have a reputation for having less than "enlightened" staff. Sure, if you're in extremis EMS will take you where they're gonna take you. However the ambulatory ESI 3s with insurance that pad our bottom line absolutely have a choice in the matter and will actively avoid hospitals with questionable reputations, and the place that hires a guy who says racist **** on television wouldn't get the business.

Especially in this day and age where there is soooooo much discourse about racism in medicine and health disparities, you would be silly to assume that Black people don't care if a hospital employs a racist who exposed their views on television for everyone to see.

Also, don't assume that people aren't rapidly googling you when they meet you. Particularly in cities with high concentrations of wealthy, tech savvy millennials and Gen - Xers like NYC, Boston and SF patients will google their ER doc. Patients' families have struck up covos w me about my alma mater without me having ever told them were I went to school - however that info is freely available online. Even in a relatively anonymous field like EM nobody is truly anonymous with the internet anymore.

Thank you Lex:)

To Lex's excellent comment I can only add that there is a loooong history of racism in medicine (see: Tuskegee) and patients from communities that have experienced this are often extremely savvy out of necessity.

Even if people weren't savvy, TeamHealth (or frankly any other employer) had no choice; "Doctor, did you make a comment about 'colored people' and their hygiene habits? Mr. X died of an MI at home after being seen in your ED; perhaps you weren't attentive due to your concern over his cleanliness."
 
That’s my point. You’re making an assumption about his world view. Not just that, but you’re making the least charitable assumption possible. Is your assumption right? Probably, but you don’t know. We don’t have context, we don’t know the guy. And when you make those assumptions about people, you start down a dreadful path.

I would dispute the idea that I am making the least charitable assumption possible. It's impossible for me to pin down this guy's exact world-view because I'm not omniscient. However, I can get a general sense of what that world-view is based on his statement and, believe it or not, I am actually being quite charitable about where in that likely range I think he falls. Do I think he's going to a cross burning next week? No. Do I think he thinks minorities deserve to die? No. Do I think he believes racism isn't real? No. Do I think he is being dismissive of the concept of systemic/structural inequalities? It's very possible.

You say we don't have any context, but we do. It's a conversation about systemic/structural issues affecting the health of minority communities. The public health professional is talking about pre-existing health disparities being exacerbated during a pandemic, then this lawmaker busts out this supremely poor line of questioning to imply that there is likely something else that explains the disparity in morbidity and mortality. Earlier in this thread you said that this could simply be his bumbling way of asking important public health questions about access to sanitation and improved education in minority communities. But if you watch the exchange it is clear why he doesn't phrase the questions this way--because those arguments would very clearly dove-tail with the public health person's point about systemic problems; the exact same points he is trying to undermine with his questions.

I would say that it is incredibly naive to interpret all questionable statements in the most charitable possible way. One's going to miss a lot of nuance in the world that way. Not just semantic, theoretical nuance, but nuance that has an effect on people's lives, especially when it's coming from lawmakers.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Eeesh. Maybe that's why an increasing number of patients ask me for my name (I always introduce myself, but it's an unnusual name and people make me repeat it like 4 times. If they butcher it, I don't correct them cause my goal is to get in and out as fast as possible)

I think the senator is a racist pos, (either explicitly or implicitly). However, I don't think he should lose his job over something he said, as I view labor and earning-power as akin to property.

TH definitely had a choice. They chose to fire someone over a question asked in a public hearing, rather than loyalty to their employee.

Say a doctor in a rural area of the south went on the news calling Trump a racist and saying the police should be disbanded, and a bunch of MAGA-idiots start calling the hospital saying they're going to boycott. Should he lose his job as well?
 
Eeesh. Maybe that's why an increasing number of patients ask me for my name (I always introduce myself, but it's an unnusual name and people make me repeat it like 4 times. If they butcher it, I don't correct them cause my goal is to get in and out as fast as possible)

I think the senator is a racist pos, (either explicitly or implicitly). However, I don't think he should lose his job over something he said, as I view labor and earning-power as akin to property.

TH definitely had a choice. They chose to fire someone over a question asked in a public hearing, rather than loyalty to their employee.

Say a doctor in a rural area of the south went on the news calling Trump a racist and saying the police should be disbanded, and a bunch of MAGA-idiots start calling the hospital saying they're going to boycott. Should he lose his job as well?

Just trying to get some clarification: are you implying that a senator making statements that reveal him to be a "racist pos" (as you said) is comparable to someone calling the president racist? Or are you saying that no one should ever lose their job over their publicly-stated beliefs? Or is it something else entirely?
 
Just trying to get some clarification: are you implying that a senator making statements that reveal him to be a "racist pos" (as you said) is comparable to someone calling the president racist? Or are you saying that no one should ever lose their job over their publicly-stated beliefs? Or is it something else entirely?
I'm not a sith, and I wouldn't go so far as to say one should never lose their job over their publicly stated beliefs. But close.
 
I don’t know how in 2020 refering to anyone as “colored” could be called anything but racist. There’s very little ambiguity here
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
I don’t know how in 2020 refering to anyone as “colored” could be called anything but racist. There’s very little ambiguity here

"People of color" is acceptable, which is somewhat similar to what he said. I can give someone the benefit of the doubt on that.

I think the most disturbing part of his statement is everything else.
 
Say a doctor in a rural area of the south went on the news calling Trump a racist and saying the police should be disbanded, and a bunch of MAGA-idiots start calling the hospital saying they're going to boycott. Should he lose his job as well?

And therein likes the hypocrisy. Much of what BLM and their supports have to say about race, white people, privilege and original sin I find to be incredibly racist and offensive in its own right. Yet because it's within the orthodox thinking, they can say anything without being cancelled, given the total control by the left of academia, the media, and popular culture.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Yet because it's within the orthodox thinking, they can say anything without being cancelled, given the total control by the left of academia, the media, and popular culture.
qh1q74x3dwm31.png

The persecution complex of some people on the right while berating the left for being thin-skinned will never get old.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 4 users
View attachment 310322
The persecution complex of some people on the right while berating the left for being thin-skinned will never get old.

Other than Kathy Griffin for the severed Trump head incident, what other high profile people have been cancelled by the right for espousing anti-Trump, anti-conservative views?
 
If you feel that you frequently make comments which could be interpreted as being racist, then yes, that's probably a good idea in general.

You don’t need to say anything that could be interpreted as racist by a reasonable person to be labeled as racist by some of the more extreme folks. In a discussion about police shootings, I was called a racist for mentioning that Native Americans are killed at the highest rate of any race and as a country we largely ignore everything we’ve done to them systemically. The broader context was that police shootings are high in this country. It was racist because I wasn’t appropriately prioritizing black lives apparently.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Other than Kathy Griffin for the severed Trump head incident, what other high profile people have been cancelled by the right for espousing anti-Trump, anti-conservative views?

Why do they have to be famous or high profile? Are those the only people who matter?

Colin Kaepernick was blackballed because of his left-wing views against police brutality. That woman who gave Trump the middle finger a few years back was fired because of her political views. There was that police officer who was fired for having the very extremist left-wing views that handcuffed people shouldn't be choked. If you follow the news there was a recent landmark case from the supreme court about people who were cancelled out of their jobs by "traditional-values" folks because of who they were. If your point is that only the right/conservatives/traditionalists are the victims of events from their speech, actions, or just their existence, then you are willfully blind.

Anyways, I don't want to go down this rabbit hole because this is textbook moving the goalposts. Your original point was about the "the total control by the left" of modern-day discourse. You can check how untrue that statement is by reminding yourself who is the current president and how completely successful he has been despite his lack of following "orthodox thinking".
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Why do they have to be famous or high profile? Are those the only people who matter?

Colin Kaepernick was blackballed because of his left-wing views against police brutality. That woman who gave Trump the middle finger a few years back was fired because of her political views. There was that police officer who was fired for having the very extremist left-wing views that handcuffed people shouldn't be choked. If you follow the news there was a recent landmark case from the supreme court about people who were cancelled out of their jobs by "traditional-values" folks because of who they were. If your point is that only the right/conservatives/traditionalists are the victims of events from their speech, actions, or just their existence, then you are willfully blind.

Anyways, I don't want to go down this rabbit hole because this is textbook moving the goalposts. Your original point was about the "the total control by the left" of modern-day discourse. You can check how untrue that statement is by reminding yourself who is the current president and how completely successful he has been despite his lack of following "orthodox thinking".

Points and examples taken.

However, if I speak out FOR the BLM movement, I won't be fired or have any complaint against me. If I publicly lodge ANY criticism of BLM goals or methods on social media, and it reached my employer, I'd likely be terminated. That's the hypocrisy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Points and examples taken.

However, if I speak out FOR the BLM movement, I won't be fired or have any complaint against me. If I publicly lodge ANY criticism of BLM goals or methods on social media, and it reached my employer, I'd likely be terminated. That's the hypocrisy.
Yet you support your employer’s right to do so
 
Yet you support your employer’s right to do so

They have the right......but that still doesn't make it right for them to support one side instead of the other. They should equally punish ALL political speech so as not to have the perception of unfairness.

Unfortunately I don't know of one large EM company that wouldn't hesitate to fire a physician over posting conservative positions if there was a complaint.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Why do they have to be famous or high profile? Are those the only people who matter?

Colin Kaepernick was blackballed because of his left-wing views against police brutality. That woman who gave Trump the middle finger a few years back was fired because of her political views. There was that police officer who was fired for having the very extremist left-wing views that handcuffed people shouldn't be choked. If you follow the news there was a recent landmark case from the supreme court about people who were cancelled out of their jobs by "traditional-values" folks because of who they were. If your point is that only the right/conservatives/traditionalists are the victims of events from their speech, actions, or just their existence, then you are willfully blind.

Anyways, I don't want to go down this rabbit hole because this is textbook moving the goalposts. Your original point was about the "the total control by the left" of modern-day discourse. You can check how untrue that statement is by reminding yourself who is the current president and how completely successful he has been despite his lack of following "orthodox thinking".

That’s where you’re wrong. Yes, there are conservatives (or people who claim to be conservative) in government because this constitutes a large subset of the country. But the news, newspapers, Hollywood and academia are overwhelmingly controlled by liberals - I read something recently that said those in news identified something like 40:50:10 liberal:independent:conservative (or somewhere there about with the independents leaning left). Yes, public discourse is essentially owned by the left. See: editor or major US news paper forced out over allowing a sitting US senator who is a military vet discuss the potential utility of the military. I’m fine with you disagreeing with his opinions or even disliking the guy, but should allowing a senator room to speak in an opinion piece without endorsing any of his ideals be reason to lose your job when you are potentially the next editor in chief?

People need to read or reread 1984 and the coddling is the American mind.
 
Other than Kathy Griffin for the severed Trump head incident, what other high profile people have been cancelled by the right for espousing anti-Trump, anti-conservative views?
Kapernik?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Up until this year in main stream, people who were pro blm were painted as extremists. The feux persecution complex of the right is quite entertaining. Seems they are the real snowflakes
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Top