Home The Book Dr Articles Products Message Boards Journal Articles Search Our Surveys Surgery ESWT Dr Messages Find Good Drs video

Dear Dr. Ed

Posted by Dorothy on 10/07/04 at 23:24 (161128)

He met him three times: the photographed event was at the National Prayer Breakfast where they sat next to each other for approximately 2 HOURS and during which breakfast he acknowledged the other, John E.,by name in his remarks; second time was when Elizabeth Dole was sworn in; third time was another event; FOURTH time was this week when he said this is the first time!
I'm not on Marie's site, but your 'get real' got my goat.
None of those meetings had one single thing to do with John's swearing in, nor with the other's inauguration.
It seems to be a case of lies or dementia characterized by memory loss. Hmmmm - which is preferable.
This is not the most important issue; there ARE very important issues, but this is just nasty.
Hey, I'm talking about feet here, not politics. Everybody use your feet and go to the polls!

Re: Dear Dr. Ed

Moderator on 10/08/04 at 08:06 (161138)

Please direct me to where his comments are posted Dorothy.
Thank you.

Re: Dear Dr. Ed

Suzanne D. on 10/08/04 at 09:21 (161148)

I was curious and had the time as school is out right now, so I checked. Dr. Ed's comment to which Dorothy refers was made on Marie's site on which there is a political discussion board. As far as I can see, the comment was not made here on Heelspurs.com.

Why not address comments on the site on which they are made? That would be my only question. It only serves to confuse people here.

I am not trying to be mean to Dorothy - I hope she knows that I like her, and she was missed when she didn't post here for awhile. I hope she is feeling better, and I respect her freedom and right to her opinion. It just seems the only fair way to reply to someone is in the context in which the comment was made.

That's just my opinion, and I am using my freedom to express it.

Have a good day!
Suzanne :)

Re: What we need is -

SteveG on 10/08/04 at 13:02 (161160)

A return to the rousing days of yesteryear, when we could discuss politics and other current events.

Re: What we need is -

john h on 10/08/04 at 13:40 (161163)

Hi Yo Silver to you Steve.

Re: What we need is -

Ed Davis, DPM on 10/08/04 at 14:59 (161176)

I wish that we could but could not keep things from getting too emotional, which in turn, would tend to take the whole site off topic.
The important thing is that we may agree with each other on 10 times more things than we disagree but take two emotional areas such as religion and politics and that can seem to negate the positive relationships between posters based on those other areas. I wish it would not be that way but think that we just have to chalk the decision to keep such topics away based on past experience.

Re: What we need is -

marie on 10/09/04 at 08:45 (161193)

Emotions are just running high right now period. People are doing and saying things they may regret later. Lets just focus on feet here. Ya'll are the best!

best wishes marie

Re: What we need is -

marie on 10/09/04 at 08:51 (161195)

PS: If you like discussing politics and current events there are plenty of blogs out there for folks to talk away on.

Re: What we need is -

Ed Davis, DPM on 10/09/04 at 09:35 (161196)

My associate is a 'hard core' GOP'er and I am an independent conservative so we actually have a lot to disagree upon although, to an 'outsider' it may not seem as such. I have reminded him that liberal guys marry conservative women and vice versa; GOP guys marry Dem women and the marriages do fine. He and others get sidetracked over by forgettting that we are complex and munitdimensional people with hundreds of ideas on life, kids, etc. and that the political arena is just one of those many areas. I think that that needs to always be kept in perspective and it may not be 'healthy' if we allow one area to completely dominate our thought processes or make us 'who we are.' I am a compassionate husband and father first, a caring physician second and then, somewhere down the line there is politics and religion. Discussing politics for some, including myself is a way of 'jousting' and a diversion but that is not true for many others. Depending on the 'passion' of the moment or time, it may be too easy to let one area 'whipsaw' the rest, in other words, to allow one area of interest become so dominant in our minds and/or expression that that area comes to define who we are. I saw that happen here a year ago when people who knew very little about each other too easily tended to label and characterize others based on political beliefs, myself included, and that, I believe was truly a mistake.

You are corect in that passions are running high now, particularly in an election year so to let such an area on to this site risks a major diversion from the purpose of the site. This is more than our opinion but something we learned from experience here.

Re: What we need is -

marie on 10/09/04 at 11:48 (161211)

Well said Dr. Ed.


Re: What we need is -

Suzanne D. on 10/09/04 at 15:14 (161217)

Yes, I would agree: well said.

Suzanne :)

Re: What we need is -

Kathy G on 10/10/04 at 09:22 (161235)


I echo the others. You said it all. And we've learned that this Board doesn't lend itself to political discussion, especially in these turbulent times.

As for Democrats marrying Repubicans, etc., one of my best friends says that in the thirty-five years she and her husband have been married, their votes have cancelled each other out in every election. They simply never discuss politics and he votes his way and she votes hers. They're still happy so it's working well!