Articles by JCS
Throughout its 100+ year history, no doubt the public and media’s perception of the chiropractic profession has been one of “healthy” skepticism, to be kind. While most folks acknowledge that chiro care has been effective for many NMS disorders and for some organic problems in anecdotal cases as the New Zealand report mentioned back in 1978, these are not the sources of the skeptical attitudes we still encounter still today. The public is willing to accept us as specialists for "spine and spine-related disorders"...to a point, but beyond that point we are open to honest criticism.
Indeed, the leading source of public skepticism still comes from the evangelistic chiro spokesmen who have fostered a snake oil imagery. Although the chirovangelists will object, their iconoclastic leader, BJ himself, has been characterized by most as a bizarre and theatrical spokesman for ol’ time Palmer chiropracTIC. His love of the bizarre included the circus life, the Far East, and his collection of phallic and pornographic materials. Just one visit to his home, especially the upstairs, illustrates this icon’s "uniqueness."
Following in BJ’s footsteps we’ve seen other charismatics selling chiropractic as a cure-all for whatever ails you. The Rev. Reggie Gold and his Church of the Divine Spine was rivaled only by Big $id and his diploma mill where metaphysics supplanted science and sensibility. Never the pretense to be modern or scientific, these chirovangelists carried on the suspect slant of yesteryear in defiance of modern evidenced based efforts by the mainstream chiro profession that developed from the JFA Howard branch of the chiro tree beginning in 1906. Regrettably, when most folks think of our profession, they don’t think of these progressive colleges and DCs stemming from the National branch, instead they think of the Palmer branch of iconoclastic radicals who still profess the theatrics of chirovangelism. Regrettably, we've all been tainted in one fell swoop that continues to this day.
This is especially true here in the Peach State where for the last 28 years Georgians had the displeasure to see and read of the incredulous claims of Big $id. Whether it was his TV ads on TBS (particularly the one with him, his lovely wife, Nell, and their young grandsons in which he touted that they never had vaccinations) or news articles written about his infamous Money Hum chanted at his religious sermons on campus, or his trademark exclamation that “rigor mortis is the only thing chiropracTIC cannot help,” $id was always good for outrageous copy. Indeed, Big $id and his snake oil salesman image has been the source of most of our image problems for decades, and certainly the loss of accreditation of Life Diploma Mill and its ineffective damage control effort only added to the wacko appearance of the chiro profession to the media and public.
But that’s old news now. Although Big $id may be gone with the wind, his role as a leading obstructionist and misinformer has been carried on by another self-serving DC who wraps himself in the banner of BJ’s chirovangelism to promote himself and his $ervice$. Now Terry Rongberg with his national publication, The Chiropractic Journal, and his phony "World" Chiro Assn. continue to disseminate misinformation to this profession. Ironically, in many instances, Rongberg actually places himself as a so-called unifier and defender of the holy grail of chiropracTIC. To say that Rongberg is a journalistic spinmeister is clear in his many writings and political actions. His spin and subtle acts of misinformation are obvious to many DCs “in the loop,” but regrettably, very few field docs understand his use of misinformation to distort the truth. Indeed, this man who wants to speak for the entire profession is a journalistic fraud.
Coincidentally, a new book has been published that deals with this very problem in the real media. Author Bob Kohn has written, “Journalistic Fraud: How the New York Times Distorts the News and Why It Can No Longer Be Trusted,” and the following editorial review on Amazon.com parallels exactly what we see in Rongberg’s TCJ/WCA.
“For over a hundred years, the New York Times has purported to present straight news and hard facts. But, as Bob Kohn shows with absolute clarity, the founders’ original vision has been hijacked, and today, instead of straight news, readers are given mere editorial under the pretense of objective journalism. Kohn shows point by point the methods by which the Times’ mission has been subverted by the present management—routinely slanting the presentation of the facts in leads, headlines, and placement; utilizing polls, labels, and loaded language to convey particular views, not genuine news; and staffing the newsroom with hacks who manipulate information to further a leftist agenda. Kohn shows how such fraudulence directly corrupts hundreds of news agencies across the world; and by revealing all their methods of manipulation, he teaches readers how to decipher the slants in even the subtlest of cases, providing an entertaining and enlightening lesson in fraud-busting.”
Without question, Terry Rongberg has taken the NY Times editorial schemes to heart with his publications and press releases—he slants the facts, misrepresents his power base, hides his hidden agendas and conflicts of interest as he directly corrupts the genuine news and political efforts to further his own business interests (CBS malpractice insurance) and those of his cronies (Subluxation Station). We’ve seen this illustrated clearly of late with his HR 2560 bill that he purports would save our profession and is supposedly supported by 3 of the 4 major chiro organizations (WCA, ICA, FSCO) and nine chiro associations from around the world. Ostensibly, many naive readers would be swayed by his argument, but what he doesn't reveal is even more persuasive--as Kohn might allege, "routinely slanting the presentation of the facts."
What he does NOT say is that these 3 minor groups have less of a combined membership than the ACA, FCA, WFC, CCA and many state associations that each alone have larger memberships. As well, Rongberg fails to mention that while nine small chiro groups may support his ill-conceived effort, the vast majority of the 80+ national chiro groups in the WFC and the 50+ state chiro associations don’t support him. In fact, a low-ball estimate of his support on this bill is his 12 small groups versus 128 larger associations against it, which he constantly fails to mention. If this were to occur in the US Congress, he would have been laughed off Capitol Hill for misrepresenting his power base, but only in the world of chiro yellow journalism can he get away with his misinformation.
As I have shown before with his editorials on the CCE and VA issues, anyone with an ounce of knowledge on these issues could examine any of his editorials and press releases line-by-line to see further examples of his fraudulent journalism, as author Kohn would say, "mere editorial under the pretense of objective journalism," starting with the WCA webpage:
“The Chiropractic Journal (TCJ) -- Read and respected by more doctors of chiropractic than any other professional publication in the world.”
No doubt the TCJ is neither the most read or respected professional publication in the world, yet Rongberg has no difficulty with his hyperbole. In fact, most DCs I speak with ignore his journal since it’s so blatantly biased, negative, and rarely contains any relevant information or original research articles. In fact, most of his contributors are advertisers or his own cronies like Chris Kent, a WCA board member, CLA owner, and owner of the Subluxation Station, the $10,000 surface EMG device mistakenly billed as an “objective” instrument to detect VSC.
It was also noticed in his HR 2560 and in his VA bills that Rongberg endorsed the use of “instrumentation” (read “Subluxation Station”) although he didn’t include actual instruments, modalities or equipment that would actually help patients with their pain control or spinal rehab. Fortunately, the sober folks on the VA committee vetoed this proposal to include this dubious instrumentation.
His cronyism is just too obvious to hide, yet he persists on every issue of TCJ to push his agenda, as Kohn said, "staffing the newsroom with hacks who manipulate information to further a leftist agenda." Rongberg's journalistic fraud continues with his own description of the TCJ from his WCA website. Inexplicably, his statement is so full of lies and distortions, it’s hard to imagine he wrote it with a “straight” face. (Pun fully intended, thank you very much) I admit this article and my responses in [blue brackets] make for a long read, but please bear with it. Enjoy.
"Promoting a vertebral subluxation-free world."
[“Promoting anything that will make Rongberg money.”]
The Chiropractic Journal was started in 1986 in response to a widespread [little] demand for a professionally edited newspaper which would present news and features of interest to all segments of the chiropractic profession. [Lie #1: it’s obvious the TCJ is solely aimed to the straight segment, certainly not "all segments" such as the mixer or therapeutic segments—the majority of DCs.]
At that time, chiropractic was at a crossroads. [More aptly, chiropractic was heading down the more scientific, evidence-based road, a direction that frightens these chirovangelists who want to practice as they did in the 1950s.]
One path led to chiropractic duplicating medical diagnostic procedures, and limiting chiropractic as merely another medical "therapy" used to treat musculo-skeletal symptoms or diseases. [Lie #2: the rational branch of chiropractic utilizes modern diagnostic methods shunned by the straights, but they are not exclusively “medical” but rather competent, modern, and professional. His use of "medical" as a derisive quality illustrates his "anti-anything medical" attitude. He often uses the argument to legislators that DCs are "duplicating" procedures: so what's wrong with competition, Terry? Afraid of the big bad PTs and MDs? And what’s wrong with helping NMS disorders—this epidemic that brings us 95% of our patients? I'm offended also that a non-practitioner like Rongberg has taken it upon himself to tell us field docs working on the front lines fighting infirmity how to best fight and what tools to use. Get out of our way, Rongberg, we real chiropractors will use whichever "therapy" or method we can to fight in this war against pain and disorders.]
The other path led [regressed] chiropractic into a unique [unproven] paradigm as a subluxation-based health care field focused on the detection and correction of vertebral subluxation (nerve interference) [unproven] for lifetime family wellness care [unproven].
[Lie #3: please show us the research that proves a lifetime of spinal adjustments alone will create “wellness” care? In fact, most maintenance patients are seeking therapeutic care for chronic spinal problems, not for so-called “wellness” care which actually would include much more than just CMT, such as nutritional supplements, dietary changes, aerobic and spinal exercises, and a strong spiritual and PMA. How these straights can claim CMT alone is wellness care is the height of stupidity and intellectual dishonesty, but that never stopped them before (and we wonder why much of the public doesn’t trust us?).]
The Chiropractic Journal was the first chiropractic newspaper to openly serve as an advocate for subluxation-based chiropractic while maintaining high journalistic standards. [Lie #4: I think BJ’s/PCC's Fountainhead periodicals or Big $id’s Today’s Chiro might argue they carried the torch of chirovangelism for years before Rongberg appeared and, secondly, his claim of “high journalistic standards” is too ridiculous to believe--not even his supporters would say his editorials reflected this ridiculous contention.] It employed experienced journalists to report news in an unbiased and accurate manner and welcomed input from all perspectives. [Lie #5: Does he think he’s Fox News or what?… “experienced journalists…unbiased and accurate manner…welcomed input from all perspectives”? Geez, Terry, are you off your meds or what? This is so obviously untrue it's preposterous. As Kohn would contend instead, Rongberg can easily to accused of "staffing the newsroom with hacks who manipulate information to further a leftist agenda."] It immediately won the respect of a large portion of the profession. [Lie #6: the jokes keep coming—“respect of a large portion of the profession” reminds me of his claim that his Chiro Coalition represents 3 of the 4 major chiro associations, which is another bold face lie.]
Today, most chiropractors have chosen the path away from disease and towards health, [Lie #7: why then do 95% of DCs treat NMS disorders and why does his WCA only have around 300 members or the ICA only 1,500 members if “most chiropractors” have chosen this path of non-diagnostic, non-therapeutic care? Plus, most straight DCs know painfully little about real “health” care or preventative measures that these straights deem as mixer stuff like vitamins, exercise, or anything remotely “medical.”] informing consumers to choose chiropractic first, before drugs or surgery. [Lie #8: This old cliché is so dated it’s laughable: does he really think CMT will replace the many meds or surgeries that folks need to help with cancer, heart disease, diabetes to name just a few of the many maladies plaguing society? If he does, he's a very dangerous man who's willing to jeopardize patients' health under the guise of his unproven dogma that CMT is a proven form of wellness.] They have chosen to follow the same path as The Chiropractic Journal -- and the Journal has become an important companion on their journey. [Lie #9: Oh great leader, Terry, show us the path to chiro salvation for we have sinned by our mixer paths of temptation from the Evil Satan—the medical profession. Tell me: do all straight chiros have the Messiah complex or just Terry and Big $id?]
The three-fold mission of The Chiropractic Journal has not changed since it was founded: [and it would like to keep chiropractic the same as it was founded in 1895.]
To provide accurate, up-to-date and well-written reports of current events and issues; [Lie #10: “accurate”? he has to be kidding—every article he writes is full of distortions; “well-written”? his bias is so obvious that his skewed reputation precedes himself—no one, not even his supporters, would say he’s fair and balanced in his reporting unless they consider Al Jezeera the same, or as Kohn described, the TCJ uses "loaded language to convey particular views, not genuine news.]
To offer an open forum for the opinions of all members of the profession; [Lie #11: why then does Terry curtail sending his TCJ to anyone who disagrees with him, such as yours truly? Why doesn’t he allow the ACA to rebut his erroneous editorials in his TCJ? Why won't he print this response in his TCJ? This lie--"an open forum...of all members of the profession"--is perhaps the biggest of all his journalistic fraud.]
To be an advocate for subluxation-based chiropractic and chiropractors, without sacrificing journalistic integrity. [Lie #12: and perhaps the oddest one of all—“journalistic integrity” sounds like the NY Times refuting the phony articles it’s published. Rongberg’s agenda is clear to any sober DC who knows of his conflicts of interest, his egomania as prez-for-life of the little WCA, and of his legislative efforts to restrict chiro care to a 1950s version of chirovangelism. HAHAHAAHAAHAHA. Thanks Terry, I needed a good laugh.]
The Top Hits Continue...
Another example of journalistic fraud is easily seen in Rongberg’s latest editorial in his September 2003 TCJ. Again let me dissect his article line-by-line to show you how far from the truth this propagandist really is. Indeed, it’s as easy as shooting fish in a barrel.
Over the past few years, the American Chiropractic Association (ACA) has raised (and spent) about $5 million in a campaign dubbed "Save our Subluxation." The effort was supposed to ensure chiropractic's exclusive domain over subluxation correction and prevent physical therapists and other health care providers from being reimbursed for the unique chiropractic service of subluxation correction. The message was supposed to be clear, that physical therapy and chiropractic are two different things. [Wrong again, Rongberg: the real message was that the correction of VSC was originally written into law as the “chiro benefit” to be done by DCs "physicians," not by secondary-level PTs.]
At the same time, the ACA is positioning chiropractors as physical therapists. [Wrong again. DCs are supposed to be primary access who address NMS disorders, not as secondary-level PTs, and our treatment may include physical modalities, rehab, or supplementation, not just VSC adjustments. Clearly Rongberg has done exactly what Kohn described as: "routinely slanting the presentation of the facts." ]
According to an ACA press release, thanks to "the aggressive legal posture of the American Chiropractic Association (ACA) ... doctors of chiropractic will be reimbursed for providing physical therapy services under the national Blue Cross Blue Shield Association's (BCBSA) Federal Employee Program (FEP)." [True, the ACA and ACC have spear-headed this burden since the Chiro Coalition members are too cheap to help, but they certainly obstructed these efforts with its suggestion, however, that DCs were to do only correction of VSC. Fortunately, this decision allows DCs to do whatever their state scope allows.]
The message is becoming a bit garbled at this point. [Only to you, Rongberg. For those DCs who do modern, comprehensive, therapeutic spinal care, many methods may be employed aside from simply detection and correction of VSC. Indeed, there's more to stabilization and correction of VSC than a pop and a prayer to Innate.]
We are, supposedly, different from physical therapists, yet we fight to be reimbursed for physical therapy services ‑‑ and the ACA calls this one of the "benefits of ACA Legal Action." [True, we are different from PTs in that we’re primary access providers, altho good PTs may use similar therapeutic methods to help patients. At least these PTs and DCs are professional enough to use therapeutic methods that Rongberg’s non-therapeutic, non-diagnostic, so-called “wellness” DCs refuse to do to help patients with this epidemic of NMS disorders.]
[Note: Just as Rongberg’s ploy of “non-diagnostic, non-therapeutic, detection and correction of VSC only” blew up in his face when the VA committee voted to make DCs secondary providers since straights refuse to do differential diagnostics, ironically this "non-therapeutic" approach he also preaches is not eligible for reimbursement through ANY third party pay system since third party pay is for therapeutic interventions intended to palliate or cure injury or illness (remember there is a secondary diagnosis required with each Medicare claim that is supposed to be related to the subluxation primary diagnosis). If these guys truly had the courage of their convictions they would submit a statement with each of their third party claims that their method of care is "non-therapeutic." Watch them scream when their patients dry up as a result of no third party reimbursement, which may explain why the WCA and ICA folks promote the cash-only practices, along with the 70-90 visits annually sales pitch that we see among these straight practice gurus like Mertz. Once again we'll see this non-therapeutic, non-diagnostic chiropracTIC blow up in their faces as we've seen with the VA decision of MD referral. Indeed, how wonderful will Rongberg appear to his sycophants when they cannot get reimbursed for their non-therapeutic care? His leadership will surly lead them to a dead-end.]
What's more perplexing is why the ACA feels that being considered a physical therapist is a "promotion" for chiropractors. [Wrong again, but being able to do comprehensive care is certainly preferable over the non-therapeutic straights who only pop and pray to Innate, along with the questionable Subluxation Station to upcode and increase patient costs with no clinical benefit whatsoever to the patient.] That's exactly what they say in the press release: "... this inclusion brought about a welcome elevation in status for doctors of chiropractic, as they became formally recognized as 'covered providers' under both the FEP's basic and standard options." [Ironically, Rongberg’s insistence that "DCs only detect and correct VSC and nothing more" has already caused the VA committee to limit access to DCs by requiring an MD referral, yet Rongberg now thinks the ACA’s success to expand our scope, services and income as "covered providers" is inappropriate. Exactly why does Rongberg persist on taking this dead-end approach? He seems willing to shoot our profession in its foot in order to have his chirovangelist way.]
Nowhere does the release mention the word subluxation. [Oh the dread! Altho these chirovangelists may think their entire world revolves around “subluxation,” modern DCs do that and much more. It’s equivalent to an MD whose world still revolves exclusively around germs and antibiotics. His narrow and fundamentalist thinking is not only outdated, but a reason why the VA felt compelled to limit access to his brand of chiropracTIC. Geez, talk about throwin’ good money in after bad!]
In fact, the word seldom shows up in ACA material. [ I guess the ACA leaders didn’t learn their chiro catechism very well, eh Terry? Let’s all chant “SUBLUXATION, SUBLUXATION, SUBLUXATION” until we’re accepted into the chiro cult of chirovangelism. Perhaps another reason is that the chirovangelists have made SUBLUXATION into such a controversial issue with their metaphysical connotations that it's a lightning rod of suspicion since few can agree on exactly what it is.]
The "ACA ACTION BULLETIN" it sent out to spur support for its Medicare Demonstration Project doesn't use the word. Neither does their press release, "What is Causing the Asthma Epidemic? Journal of the American Chiropractic Association Looks for Answers," or the highly touted Public Service Announcement featuring Olympic skater Derek Parra. [Perhaps other terms are more appropriate than the ambiguous SUBLUXATION, such as joint dysfunction or segmental articular compression—concepts far too scientific for straights like Rongberg to understand (nor do they want to). It’s also been shown in PR tests that the public rejects SUBLUXATION as a palatable term, nor do they believe it’s the killer that Rongberg and his ilk suggest, yet he continues to force it upon all.]
Why would the ACA bother trying to "save" the subluxation if they're never going to mention it? Who are they 'saving' it for? [Just as the medics have evolved past their old germ theory as the singular cause of all disease, most modern DCs realize that SUBLUXATION is not the single cause of dis-ease nor is it alone the cause of all NMS disorders. Even though the old VSC definition itself describes myopathophysiology and kinesiopathophysiology, these straights routinely ignore these aspects of care, and certainly these non-therapeutic straights ignore care for pain, inflammation or soft tissue instability. Indeed, a case could be made that these chirovangelists do much too little to help most patients with NMS disorders. Perhaps that’s why they choose to speak of non-therapeutic care only because they know they’re incompetent to care for therapeutic cases.]
To find out who is really saving the subluxation ‑‑ and the unique character of the [old time] chiropractic profession [chirovangelism] ‑‑ you don't need to look any further than a small but courageous band of college presidents who are working to rescue the profession from the near disaster created by the ill‑conceived diagnosis statement developed by the Association of Chiropractic Colleges. [Now he condemns all the chiro presidents, including the many straights!]
As you can read in the front page story, the ACC statement on diagnosis literally stripped away the neurological component of the subluxation and mandated "physical, neurological, orthopedic, and other appropriate examination procedures." [Did Terry miss something here? Doesn’t it clearly state “neurological” or does he really mean Innate—the metaphysical "power" behind the "matter"? In that case, we need to include the Innatometer in this definition.]
No one is quite sure how the statement managed to pass by a unanimous vote. [Geez, were they all asleep or what?] There has been a suggestion [by whom, Terry, or is this another example of journalistic fraud where he quotes unnamed sources?] that a critical word (specifying that "diagnosis by a doctor of chiropractic MAY include...) was part of the original version of the statement, but was omitted in the final version without notifying the presidents.[Okay, so just prove it] Apparently, the text was displayed on a screen in a darkened room and no mention was made of the revision. [Perhaps Big $id was doing the Money Hum at the same time and everyone was mesmerized?]
There's no way to prove at this point whether the wording was changed, or if it just slipped by the group by mistake. [But that doesn’t stop this journalistic fraud from suggesting this imaginary mistake.] But the statement as passed would have dramatically changed the entire definition of chiropractic. [Perhaps that’s why it is the way it is because smarter men and women than Rongberg knew exactly what they were doing and voted to pass this diagnostic definition rather than his non-diagnostic, "wellness" care only baloney.]
The ACC Position Paper No. 1, which has been endorsed by nearly every major [minor] chiropractic organization in the world [Once again, another case of obvious distortion--recall the actual count: 12 orgs for versus 128+ against it.], is a model of the "inclusive" [primitive] vision of chiropractic. It allows for doctors [non-diagnostic, secondary-level chirotherapists] who focus solely on the detection and correction of vertebral subluxation, as well as those whose practice purpose includes diagnosis and treatment of neuromusculoskeletal conditions. This new statement of diagnosis would have tossed that historic document into the garbage can. [Thankfully it didn't because smarter minds prevailed]
Something had to be done, and done quickly. That's when the Chiropractic Coalition stepped in. [Like Mighty Mouse, Rongberg comes to save the day!] Within hours of learning about the statement (even before the ACA made its official announcement), the leaders of the Coalition's three [little] founding organizations ‑‑ the ICA, WCA, and FSCO ‑‑ were discussing the issue and taking actions to rectify the situation. [A call to arms of the chirovangelists who must obstruct any progress in our profession beyond their simplistic detect and correct VSC only. Geez, if the electronic industry was as intransigent as these chirovangelists, it would still be in the vacuum tube era!]
The Coalition leaders worked together with efficiency and solidarity on a joint response and strategy to prevent the ACC statement from destroying the nature of chiropractic [Read: chirovangelism, not chiropractic as a whole. “Real” chiropractic is that which is practiced by the majority of DCs: clearly the real nature of chiro is NMS specialists, not chirovangelism as Rongberg wants.]. It was an incredible experience for those of us who have witnessed so much intra‑professional animosity and conflict over the years. [Animosity created mostly by the same folks! These simple-minded chirovangelists have constantly worked to prevent progress and unity in this profession by limiting our scope to a pop and a prayer, yet they actually think of themselves as “inclusive.”]
The Coalition then contacted those college presidents who have, in the past, shown the most commitment to subluxation‑centered chiropractic or a true willingness to be inclusive in their definition of chiropractic. [Inclusive? Another misuse of the term: if anything, these straight chirovangelists have always been the most exclusive bunch of all. When the Coalition embraces Joe Janse’s view: “Legislate as broadly as possible and practice as narrow as you want,” and when they adhere to a true democratic org where majority rules (and not little autocrats like Rongberg), only then I will consider them inclusive.]
At the top of the list were Drs. Jerry Hardee, Carl Cleveland, Jr., Guy Reikeman, Fabrizio Mancini and Gerry Clum. [Don’t get me started on how many of these men have qualifications to be a chiro college prez, since the usual academic standard doesn’t apply to chiro colleges: some folks actually think a college prez is supposed to be trained in that position, ya folla?] For several days, they discussed the issue and decided to ask David S. O'Bryon, ACC Executive Director, to poll the presidents for another vote. Dr. Hardee made the first strong stand by withdrawing his approval of the statement until the wording can be corrected. [Why should this small group of straights object to a document that was unanimously accepted already? And who the hell is Dr. Hardee—a relatively unknown and inexperienced Sherman prez? Geez, I know thousands of DCs better qualified and more experienced than him on the issues facing this profession.]
At the very least, the ACC will not be able to claim "unanimous approval" of the statement and hopefully it will see the wisdom of making the needed corrections. [Of this group, only CCC the III and Clum were members of the old ACC presidents council, and they apparently voted for it. Even Big $id voted for it, but now Rongberg wants another vote. I say let’s hold a vote on whether or not Rongberg should call himself a president since he’s appointed himself prez-for-life of his little WCA club--perhaps "autocrat" would be more appropriate: maybe "dictator" or "tyrant" or even "king."]
Regardless of the outcome, what is clear is that these college presidents took the slogan "save our subluxation" to heart and pulled our profession from the brink of catastrophe. [“Catastrophe”? Once again a clear distortion of the truth and another example of journalistic fraud as Kohn mentioned when he said, "utilizing... loaded language to convey particular views." I daresay chiropractic will survive long past the “detect and correct VSC” only “unique paradigm” from yesteryear, but Rongberg will bleed it for all he can in order to appear as the chiro savior against the dreaded ACA and ACC.] Most academicians have the reputation for moving at a slow, deliberate pace, for being better at theorizing than acting. [“Theorizing”? He has to be kidding. These straight DCs have never theorized about anything with their anti-Educated Mindset except for their dogma of chirovangelism, Innate, ADIO and all the other clichés they typically use.] But these presidents have shown that, when it comes to defending chiropractic [he really means "limiting" chiropractic as a whole], they can move swiftly and surely ‑‑ and in unity [and in obstruction]. They have the courage of their convictions and place their principles before their ambitions and their egos. [HAHAAHHAAHAA—now that’s too funny and just too ironic coming from Rongberg, perhaps the most self-serving egotist since Big $id. Too many of these chiro-entrepreneurs wrap themselves in the banner of Innate as the beguile and profit from their misled sycophants. I wonder if they all did the Money Hum at the end of their meeting too?]
The next time you hear someone complain about the "in‑fighting" in chiropractic, point to the actions of the Chiropractic Coalition and these college presidents [as a minority group of obstructionists who misrepresent themselves]. It will provide ample proof that we can ‑‑ and do ‑‑ work together as long as we share a similar [limited and outdated] vision of chiropractic. [Sounds like Osama saying he’ll work together as long as everyone is a radical Muslim fundamentalist, otherwise, “kill the infidels!” For Rongberg to posture himself as one seeking unity, this is without question the most absurd of all his lies. The only unity he’ll accept is if every chiro org adopts solely his VSC only scope with him as prez for life of the entire chiro world.]
Accountability or Autocracy?
I hope this account of Rongberg's journalistic fraud has been example, as Mr. Kohn said, that "teaches readers how to decipher the slants in even the subtlest of cases, providing an entertaining and enlightening lesson in fraud-busting." Obviously Rongberg is either delusional or has consistently and consciously misrepresented the truth on the issues in his quest for power and money. His intellectual dishonesty is painfully obvious, but what makes him more dangerous is his complete lack of accountability. Whereas Big $id was finally ousted at Life (which is a dumb name for a college), and both the ICA's and ACA’s officers’ terms are limited, this WCA prez-for-life is accountable to no one. He ignores all critical accusations against him, he continues to misinform the entire chiro profession with his yellow journalism, and he defies the wishes of the vast majority (recall 128 chiro orgs versus his 12 small radical orgs of supporters) as he misrepresents himself to Congressmen.
Indeed, Rongberg may be the most dangerous loose cannon this profession has ever known. Even though Big $id was largely unaccountable for 28 years until the CCE forced his removal, Rongberg has no oversight group that he must answer to on any issue. His WCA board members are his hand-picked cronies, he is dictator-for-life of his WCA, and as publisher of his own TCJ, he has shown us all the power of an abusive press, even when his paper reeks of journalistic fraud as author Bob Kohn illustrated.
Since Rongberg is unaccountable to anyone, if he believes in the “power of unity” and an open press, I challenge him to include a non-chirovangelist writer in his TCJ in every edition to balance his blatant misinformation—simply have a Point/Counterpoint section that discusses important issues. I challenge him to attend the next NCLC along with Don Harrison, Don Petersen, Dana Lawrence and the publishers of every chiro publication to an open debate in front of the HOD and any guests about the present state of affairs in the chiro press and profession. I challenge him to bring his Chiro Summit supporters with him to unify our voice to legislators on these important issues.
If Rongberg were a proponent of democratic principles and an advocate of an accurate press, he would accept this offer. But, as the replacement for Big $id as the leading obstructionist and propagandist, I doubt he has the intellectual honesty and professional ethics to participate in any discussion where he’s not in complete control and unaccountable for his poisoned pen. Autocrats are beholding to no one, ya folla?
But if he does have the backbone to appear at the NCLC, we all can ask him many questions about his intentions and policies. Whaddaya think? Does he have a yellow spine that goes with his yellow journalism or not? We'll see soon.