Letter from Commissioner
Today’s blog analyzes the letter sent from Commissioner Freiberger related to my not being reappointed to the Hospital Board. Certainly letters may not reflect the competence of the individual, but it certainly says something to the integrity they hold for the office they serve. I am sure he didn’t personally type the letter, but I would think he should have read it before allowing it to be sent.
First off is the date that shows it was typed on January 12th. It arrived at my office on January 24th after the Board had already met once. There was never a phone call or any other correspondence from Commissioner Freiberger related to my not being reappointed.
Next, you will notice that the zip code for Floyds Knobs is incorrect. He is the Commissioner for Floyd County and lives in Floyds Knobs from my understanding, and I would think he knows the zip code.
I was the only physician on the Board but was addressed as Mr. rather than Dr. This certainly is not inappropriate, but it leads one to wonder if he was making a statement, or clueless as to the fact he was removing the only physician on the Board.
And lastly, he misspelled the newest Board member’s name. The last name is Megraw and not McGraw.
Does this really matter? Probably not, but I do think it says a lot for the integrity of the individual that signed his name to this letter.
I many times jokingly use the phrase "you'd better keep your day job" when someone isn't very good at a secondary activity, but since he teaches our kids as his primary job; I am reluctant to consider this phrase with him.
posted by Anonymous at 5:08 AM
13 Comments:
I blogged yesterday and concluded my comments requesting that Reisert resign. I'd like to add Professor Frieberger to that list.
Dan, I have a file of correspondence from commissioners going back for years...riddled with incorrect grammer, spelling and facts.
I'm afraid we are looking at another reason to be proud of our rock-solid County leadership.
By the way, since I'm throwing spears, I sure wish this blog had a spell checker...
I know, I know...I mispelled Freiberger...WHERE IS THE SPELL CHECKER?
Spell check doesn't help when you spell the wrong word the right way, or when words of foreign origin are being used, as is the case with "Freiberger." In German, I can remember it because beer is "bier" -- and "ei" is the other way.
Anyway, with all due to respect to my former classmate, the commissioner, the errors in the letter are somewhat embarrassing given Charlie's status as a school teacher (now there's another whole blog waiting to happen), but I'd stop short of linking it to integrity.
Sloppiness is a poor work habit, and it becomes magnified the higher you go, hence our interest in this letter.
I'd hazard a guess that most of those mulling questions of proper form in writing letters and Internet anonymity (and I'm one) are older.
There's a whole generation or three behind us for whom these considerations are wholly irrelevant. They've spent a life writing e-mails and text messages (if writing at all), and they commonly have avatars and aliases on-line.
It's societal, and we must learn to adapt, I suppose, but without sacrificing all the ideals of proper communication.
Indeed, there's an aspect of integrity to this discussion. I'm not quite sure where.
First I would like to say that your postings over the past couple of weeks have been very interesting and informative. I have also enjoyed the feedback of others. My knowledge of the issues with FCMH is much better.
HB, you are a person with deep passions. Your sincerity always comes through. You ask us to think "deeper" which is good. Here is where my bone to pick comes in.
You speak of other's integrity or lack thereof. Have you thought anymore about what you did right before you went public with your identity? I (and others) were upset at that time and let you know it. I decided to wait awhile to see if my feelings changed or if you would address the issue again. I do not feel any different and you have not addressed.
You were a member of the board of MY hospital. Yes MY. As a resident of Floyd County I own it, along with a few thousand other people. You were using information from your position to try to influence the selection of board members and doing it in the third person. Sir, excuse me, Doctor, this is not the board of the local euchre club. You even had the gall to later ask an anonymous poster for their identity. I believe a little more deep thinking is called for.
Dan, you and I have discussed many times the manner in which teachers (K through 12)are certified in Indiana (and in many other states).
They have an "Education Degree."
This means, that they have minors at best in the subjects that they teach and a major in a bunch of methods and theory courses, half of which are complete BS, not to mention useless in the "real" classroom.
So, am I shocked at the letter? No, in fact, it is the norm. Education degrees are rivaled only by Business degrees in the lack of actual education they provide. Yes, 2+2=4, debit to the left, credit to the right, but where the Hell is Europe and is Fiji really an island?
Floyd County is saturated with this level of "competence."
How can our kids know about the world in which they live if their teachers, bosses and civic leaders don't know?!
I've got to go...my blood pressure is rising.
Roz Tate
Professor of History
Concerned Citizen
iamhoosier,
Thank you for the comment and challenge.
If you will review the blogs from September until January 9th 2006 you will not find any negativity related to the commissioners or the hospital. I specifically did not address those topics until AFTER the commisioners made their reappointments on January 2nd.
The first open discussion on any of these topics began January 9th which was nearly 1 week after the reappointments and I no longer served on the Board.
This was intentional, because I did not want to influence the commissioners with my views on many other topics.
If you review the blog postings, you will see I covered topics from toilet flushes, to smoking, child abuse, religion, creation science, communtiy activities, to morality and was not critical about the hospital, policies etc., during these months.
So as I have said to others, if you really will go back and review the facts and the postings, you will find that this is an unfair accusation.
My identity was known to several people and I did want people to be reading the blog before I started down the path of exposing the truth about some of the dealings at Floyd.
People need to know some of these things and there is not many ways to get information out. I still believe that if people have all of the information, they will make the best informed decisions.
Please go back and verify the postings and let me know if you still feel that way.
HB,
On January 3rd, the day of the appointments, you wrote about yourself and Ms Garry. This was BEFORE the official appointments and BEFORE you came out. The last part of your post that day was:
"This is the time when the commissioners can show their integrity by choosing who is best for these positions and not making choices because of politics.
Any decision other than re-appointment of these two individuals would have to seriously be questioned as to motive."
Can you seriously say that was not an effort at pressure? You cannot imagine my shock when I read your coming out post approx. a week later. I was actually reading you giving the commissioners down the road for not reappointing Dr. E and planning my response with "I guess it is safe to assume that you are not Dr. E". Wow, got to the end of the post and was just blown away.
Finally, Bluegill and myself called you out on January 9. You know perfectly well that it was before your series of articles appeared. It was about what you did BEFORE you came into the light. I have no problem with what you are doing now that you are public. Actually I consider it a service. I would not have had a problem with the other if you had been public then. Posing as something or someone else is just a flat lie especially when it involves a public institution. I am sorry, just have a hard time seeing it any other way.
I have let you know. I believe that I have verified.
For the record, I do not know Bluegill and am not speaking for him. Only used as a point of reference. I have no knowledge if he still feels the same way he did then.
The January 3 blog was a statement of support for the two appointees for very valid reasons. Where the information originated from did not change the facts.
You imply that there was this ongoing attempt prior to this one posting to persuade a decision when in fact, there is just this one comment to inform people of the upcoming appointments and the stakes.
In addition, there is nothing wrong with making a statement of support and challenging an appointment even if you are the candidate.
At that point anonymity was still in place and therefore I don't see how that would influence the decision. I think if the identity was known, that had a much greater potential for influence.
The January 9th posting was the first of the series related to the hospital and commissioners. I am still unsure of your comment related to what I did before that.
Besides the Jan.3 posting you cited there was no attempt to influence appointments at all in the blogs and we'll have to disagree on whether this one statement after months of postings on varying topics was or was not influential.
I know you don't agree with the manner in which things transpired and you are certainly entitled to that. I would hope that you could view things from my perspective but that may not be possilbe either.
I think the information since January 9th should be enlightening to everyone even if they disagree with the events prior.
Again, I have no problem with your series. Never said there was anything wrong with supporting yourself. Never questioned your facts.
I ask you(and anyone else reading) to go back and read your 1-3 post. Does it not appear to be a somewhat, if not very, knowledgable THIRD person endorsing you? Your partial defense of "some people knew" is useless unless everyone knew. Also, I don't think this quote helps your case much:
"At that point anonymity was still in place and therefore I don't see how that would influence the decision. I think if the identity was known, that had a much greater potential for influence."
Yeah, negative(for you)influence. It would not have appeared to be an independent person endorsing you.
If it appeared that I was making reference to several deceptions, then I apologize. Sincerely.
Late to the game but echoing Iamhoosier. I'd also add my thought that the three day highlighting and seeming endorsement of the Forum's very negative article regarding the hospital and the commissioners, months before an identity was revealed, constituted fairly obvious negativity. I also think it was a bit shady of HB to argue about doctors' salaries while not making it clear that, as a doctor, his personal financial situation was obviously in play.
On a personal note, I was probably most offended when HB, still anonymous and presenting himself as an objective third party, emailed me to recommend his own office as a solution to my dissatisfaction with recent medical care. That's just dirty pool.
When HB later chastised someone else for anonymity, I laughed out loud. Reading about the hospital situation has been interesting, especially since I don't know enough about either side to make informed comments. I give HB credit for making the debate more public but it's a little hard to swallow the integrity lecture from someone who's been less than forthcoming about his own self-interests.
Chuckie is a joke as a teacher, and an insult to those who take it seriously.
Anonymous attacks like yours are a joke, and an insult to those who take dialogue seriously.
Post a Comment
<< Home