DrJohn has been a health care professional for more than 30 years. In addition to clinical practice he has done extensive research and has published widely with over 70 original articles and abstracts in the peer-reviewed literature. DrJohn is well known in his field and has lectured on every continent except for Antarctica. He has been married to the same wonderful lady for over 30 years and has three kids- two sons, both of whom are attorneys and one daughter on her way into the field of education. DrJohn was brought up with the concept that one can do well if one is prepared to work hard but nothing in life is guaranteed. Except for liberals being foolish.

49 Responses to “De Blasio: there is great wisdom in some of his words and yet none in him”

  1. 26

    Greg

    The Nazi’s have been correctly and generally recognized as fascists and right-wing extremists since the early 1930s. No one who’s been paying attention for long is going to be fooled by recent revisionists. Perhaps better luck can be had by twisting the minds of a younger generation. Much can be accomplished by razor-blading pages you don’t like from high school history books.

  2. 27

    another+vet

    @Randy: A couple of definitions of right wing. Notice the reference to conservative.

    http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/right%20wing
    http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/right-wing

    Some definitions of conservative. Notice the references to opposing change and favoring traditional values.

    http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/conservatism
    http://www.thefreedictionary.com/conservatism

    Taken in the context of the current debate, if Hitler and the NAZI’s were right wing they would have embraced conservative ideals, i.e. opposition to change etc., which means they would have embraced the liberal democracies of the period in their case the Weimar Republic. Now you are probably asking yourself- WTF and for good reason. Anyone with knowledge of that period in history knows it’s the exact OPPOSITE of what happened.

  3. 28

    Ditto

    @Greg:

    Much can be accomplished by razor-blading pages you don’t like from high school history books.

    Or you can take the progressive Democrat route (espoused by their fellow socialists, including Alinsky, Lenin and Marx) where you infiltrate and take control of the education system with socialist-agenda indoctrination-minded (ahem) “educators” and revise history with a heavy hand towards the leftist and anti American propaganda. Instead of taking a razor blade to the textbooks, you replace textbooks with new ones written by “progressive” publishers intended to fill the minds of America’s youth with far left dogma.

  4. 29

    Tom

    @another+vet:

    Hey AV ,

    One of your definitions for conservative includes the word “reactionary”. By any measure, I’m a pretty traditional and conservative guy. But I’m not a reactionary. I’m not “opposing political or social liberalization or reform”. I think most who identify as “right wing” probably are. Conservatives seem to have a habit of confusing what has passed into tradition in the current age with ideas and concepts they would have vehemently disagreed with when they were new. When I was younger, I remember getting sh*t from a bunch of biker types in a bar for putting Nirvana on a juke box more used to playing Lynryd Skynryd. Now Nirvana is considered “classic rock” and all those old timers probably believe they always liked it. I think a lot of conservatives like to take credit for ideas that were shoved down their throats by liberals. Eventually, once they taste good enough.

  5. 30

    Tom

    Just a few other thoughts:

    Dr John likes to blame all liberals for the deaths of two police officers by a madman because they “perpetuated a lie” . So I assume he is accepting responsibility for all the attempts on the President’s life and should be held responsible in the case of successful attempt.

    Dr John is apparently very anti-democratic in his belief system regarding civilian control of the police.

    Dr John is apparently very much against the rights of freedom of speech, peaceably assemble and petitioning for a governmental redress of grievances.

    Using the deaths of honorable men to score partisan points. Ugly.

    The man who murdered those two police officers in Brooklyn is a cold blooded and possibly insane murderer. The victims are innocent heroes and the murderer deserves nothing but our collective disgust for his act. I am comfortable calling a murderer a murderer regardless of the color of the suspect or victim’s skin, or whether one or the other wore a uniform. Dr John and his acolytes, I am sadly forced to conclude, cannot. Dr John is cheerleader for his cause, and nothing more. He can’t bring himself to condemn the death of a black man killed on video, but he’ll call half of America murderers if the victim is to his liking. He’s a cheerleader. For those who are looking to bend down and be part of the pyramid, let him climb on your back.

  6. 31

    another+vet

    @Tom: Modern liberalism is a far cry from traditional liberalism. Traditional liberalism advocates small government whose primary responsibility is protecting people’s rights, free markets, balanced budgets, and allowing people to live their own lives as long as it doesn’t endanger others. If they had my picture, you’d find it next to that definition.

  7. 32

    Bill

    @Greg: The only thing socialist about fascism is the socialism. I find it hilarious how socialists try to distance themselves from other socialists that practice socialism.

    @Tom:

    Dr John likes to blame all liberals for the deaths of two police officers by a madman because they “perpetuated a lie” . So I assume he is accepting responsibility for all the attempts on the President’s life and should be held responsible in the case of successful attempt.

    In the case of the President, there are laws which punish any such threat against his life, either by print, statement or action. If the same was true of threats against police, Farrakhan, Sharpton and some others would be in jail and Obama and Holder would be co-conspirators.

    Dr John is apparently very anti-democratic in his belief system regarding civilian control of the police.

    Does civilian control include being able to execute the police on a whim? I think that is the action in contention.

    Dr John is apparently very much against the rights of freedom of speech, peaceably assemble and petitioning for a governmental redress of grievances.

    It is universally agreed that freedom of speech ends where it put lives in jeopardy; yelling “FIRE” in a theater, for instance. Or, inciting violence against innocent citizens, their businesses or the police. When cops are killed as a direct result of the rhetoric (based entirely on lies, by the way) it is apparent (or should be) how dangerous such rhetoric is and should be condemned by all, not just conservatives.

    Are you by any chance familiar with the term “war on women”? Exactly what actual violence or abuse by conservatives against women is this phrase addressing? Lying to incite public response, action, violence and murder is a left wing staple.

    Using the deaths of honorable men to score partisan points. Ugly.

    How about using the deaths of dishonorable men to score partisan political points, create an issue that does not exist, incite violence against persons and property and, ultimately, cause the deaths of two totally innocent officers? How about inventing a case of rape to score partisan points? How about invoking racism where there is none to score partisan points? Come on, Tom. You can’t change your stripes that easily.

  8. 33

    Randy

    @another+vet: Actually, Thomas Jefferson was considered a liberal in his day. Manifest destiny was a liberal concept. Since then, liberals have continued to move so far left that they have exceeded reality.

  9. 34

    Greg

    @Bill, #32:

    The only thing socialist about fascism is the socialism. I find it hilarious how socialists try to distance themselves from other socialists that practice socialism.

    Social Security and Medicare are not built on fascist concepts. Nor does the fact that a nation has such important social programs mean that it’s a socialist state. The people who created and who support such programs are not far left radicals.

  10. 35

    another+vet

    @Randy: In those days our Founders would have been considered liberal and the Tories would have been considered conservative. Now it is reversed. Those backing our Founder’s beliefs are conservative and those backing big government are liberal.

  11. 36

    another+vet

    @Tom: I do remember when folks came here and blamed Sarah Palin for Gabby Gifford’s being shot even though the shooter was someone whose profile would be that of someone who would NOT have listened to Palin or any other conservative. The shooter in this case was someone who was part of the anti-cop rhetoric that has been rampant for the last few months. And just to refresh everyone’s memory, here is the original FA thread:

    http://floppingaces.net/2011/01/08/congresswoman-giffords-in-critical-condition-after-shooting-in-arizona-shooter-identified/comment-page-1/#comments

    So if I understand this correctly, it is not okay for people to blame the left for the shooting of these two officers but it was perfectly acceptable to blame Palin for the Gifford’s shooting?

  12. 37

    Redteam

    @Tom: 30.

    He can’t bring himself to condemn the death of a black man killed on video,

    Such a silly attempt to equate the death of someone that is breaking the law and attempts to fight the police officers and because of a medical problem dies, with two police officers sitting in a patrol car enforcing the law and is shot by someone that they don’t even have a conversation with. (notice I didn’t mention race or color).

  13. 38

    Tom

    @another+vet:

    I do remember when folks came here and blamed Sarah Palin for Gabby Gifford’s being shot even though the shooter was someone whose profile would be that of someone who would NOT have listened to Palin or any other conservative.

    AV, I think we can both point to knee jerk reactions to incidents like this. They are not hard to find it you’re looinf for them. Can I just point out to you that Dr John blamed not only protesters who allegedly used anti-police rhetoric, but all liberals for the horrific murders of those two officers. That would include millions of people, the vast majority who were not directly involved in protests.

    The shooter in this case was someone who was part of the anti-cop rhetoric that has been rampant for the last few months.

    I don’t know all the facts, but let’s remember this man murdered a women a state away before he killed the cops. This sounds like the act of a desperate crazy person, not some sort of partisan statement, as some of the right would have us believe.

    So if I understand this correctly, it is not okay for people to blame the left for the shooting of these two officers but it was perfectly acceptable to blame Palin for the Gifford’s shooting?

    Funny to see that post again. What happened to all those people?

    My point is no one can have it both ways. I’m sure you do not appreciate when someone labels all Tea Party protesters as racists who want harm to come to the President because he’s black. So I think you can understand why someone else might not appreciate being lumped in with a cold blooded murderer. Generalizations are probably best avoided on all sides.

  14. 40

    Tom

    @Bill:

    Bill, rather than going around in circles with you again, let me call time out and wish you and all my conservative friends Happy Holidays Merry Christmas. With the economy growing, the deficit shirking and gas prices falling, I’m sure we all have much to be thankful for. My personal holiday wish for you is that you fight the urge to fall in with the chorus for easy back-slaps. You’ll be a more interesting conservative for it.

  15. 41

    Redteam

    @Tom:

    I’m sure we all have much to be thankful for

    No. 1 on that list has to be that as of Jan 20, 2017 we will likely get an American to be our president again.

  16. 42

    Nanny

    In 1919 a man was distributing leaflets encouraging men of draft age to oppose acceptance of ”the draft.”
    The unanimous Supreme Court decision is often quoted in part where Oliver Wendell Holmes II stated that it was criminally liable to shout FIRE (falsely) in a crowded theater.
    Today I doubt a case like that would even win, much unanimously.
    Yes, Eric holder, BHObama, deBlasio, Sharpton and others blew their dog whistles loudly for all to hear:
    The crowd even put that between-the-lines message into a chant:

    What do we want?
    Dead cops.
    When do we want them?
    Now!

    Rousing up the rabble was the purpose of all these speakers.
    Then they got what they wanted.
    So, naturally now is the time to parse each word and ”prove” none of them ever overtly ordered this act.
    But Obama is a student, not just of Cloward-Piven and Saul Ailinsky.
    He also learned from Rahm Emanuel when he proffered that a liberal must never let a crisis go to waste.
    Obama wanted single payer and just might get it.
    He also wants a large FEDERAL security force over civilians as big as our military was when he first took office.
    He might get that, too.

  17. 44

    Common+Sense

    @retire05: Greg still won’t admit that President Obola lied when he told America you can keep your insurance and/or doctor!! If he’s put in a corner his only counter is to blame Republicans or Bush!!

  18. 45

    another+vet

    @Tom:

    My point is no one can have it both ways. I’m sure you do not appreciate when someone labels all Tea Party protesters as racists who want harm to come to the President because he’s black.

    Which is exactly what has happened. Tea Party protestors have been accused of being racists big time. And now there is a pleading of being reasonable to those on the left? It sounds to me like stacking the deck. In other words, don’t do to me as I’ve done to you? Doesn’t cut it with me. Sounds like a power play and hypocrisy or like bullies on a playground.

    Can I just point out to you that Dr John blamed not only protesters who allegedly used anti-police rhetoric, but all liberals for the horrific murders of those two officers. That would include millions of people, the vast majority who were not directly involved in protests

    .

    Kind of like how the Dems blamed everyone with conservative values for the Gifford’s shooting despite the fact that the shooter had leftist beliefs? Or about how DICK Durbin comparing the military to Pol Pot, Joseph Stalin, and Adolph Hitler? Or how about John Kerry comparing the military to people terrorizing women and children in the middle of the night? Or how about John Kerry telling young people that if they didn’t get an education that they would end up in Iraq implying like that those of us who served there were too fucking stupid to be as “smart” as leftists like himself?

    I have little tolerance for hypocrisy. When you compare the Gifford’s shooting to this, the left has shown it big time. Back in the day, I blasted the left for calling for the impeachment of Nixon for lying to the American people while giving a free ride to Clinton for perjury. Both deserved impeachment. At the same time, I blasted the right for condemning Clinton (D) for adultery while giving a free ride to Henry Hyde (R) (my Congressional rep at the time) for the same.

    The left wants to have it both ways big time and this is a prime example. And I do recognize there is a difference between the left and liberals just like I recognize there is a difference between the right and conservatives.

    With the economy growing, the deficit shirking and gas prices falling,

    The GDP growth for the last year is still nothing to brag about. Quite dismal for a recovery when you think about it. Please provide evidence for what Obama has done to lower gas prices or to stimulate the economy.

    http://www.tradingeconomics.com/united-states/gdp-growth

  19. 46

    Redteam

    @Greg: 13

    it will turn to those who have most consistently foretold the
    coming ruin and have sought to dissociate themselves from it. And that
    party is either the Left: and then God help us! for it will lead us to
    complete destruction – to Bolshevism,

    And that’s exactly what happened, they went left, to utter destruction. Remember?

  20. 47

    Redteam

    @Rich+Wheeler: 20

    The Nazis were neither far left nor far right–they were extremists whose primary goal

    Rich, while I don’t disagree that one of their primary goals was to eliminate Jews, they had some other ‘primary goals’ also. To rule the country was one, to have the masses support the masses was another. You will note that even Hitler did not mess with the Superrich, just as neither party does today. see the Rothchilds, for example.

  21. 48

    Redteam

    @Tom: 30

    So I assume he is accepting responsibility for all the attempts on the President’s life

    I read and watch the News every day and have not heard of even a single attempt on the President’s life. Would you refer me to a list of these incidents? All I can find is a list of alleged ‘threats’ and no ‘attempts’. Maybe you have inside knowledge.

  22. 49

    Raymond

    With the assassination of two of their own the New York police have finally awaked to the true nature of the Marxist agenda. However the question of whether the Sheeple will ever have a similar epiphany remains unanswered.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *