Recommended Posts
billvon 3,118
.thumb.jpg.4bb795e2eaf21b8b300039a5e1ec7f92.jpg)
>Those comparing his addiction to that of some of the street urchins
> who made a conscious choice to try illegal drugs really need a reality
> check.
Why is it different? There's nothing wrong with his back, by his own words.
From an interview at the American Century Championships July, 2003:
RUSH LIMBAUGH: You know, I've played the Bob Hope three times and the AT&T twice. It wasn't bad. It's just the game is mental. Once you've mastered the physical aspect, not mastered, but 90 percent of the game, all of the other things being equal is mental, and for some reason, I just was not able to execute my swing today. And I think it had nothing to do with physical characteristics. There's nothing wrong with me.
> who made a conscious choice to try illegal drugs really need a reality
> check.
Why is it different? There's nothing wrong with his back, by his own words.
From an interview at the American Century Championships July, 2003:
RUSH LIMBAUGH: You know, I've played the Bob Hope three times and the AT&T twice. It wasn't bad. It's just the game is mental. Once you've mastered the physical aspect, not mastered, but 90 percent of the game, all of the other things being equal is mental, and for some reason, I just was not able to execute my swing today. And I think it had nothing to do with physical characteristics. There's nothing wrong with me.
QuoteWell, this whole thing is over ratings.
Nothing bad ever happens to Rush until the fall ratings period. Last fall it was 'Oh, the sky is falling, I'm going deaf" and by the way, whatever happened to that?? I guess he'll come up pregnant next fall.
He went deaf because of all the pain killers he was taking. Same thing happened to a girl I work with now ex-husband. Had a bit of a vicodin problem and lost his hearing and now gets fricking disability payments.
Judy
Be kinder than necessary because everyone you meet is fighting some kind of battle.
Quotehe turns up pregnant next fall, I'll vote for Geo. W. Bush in November
you should anyway
TheAnvil 0
Nice quote from Herr Limbaugh.
Tell me, exactly how many cocaine or heroin addicts had a prescription for their first use of the drug?
I'd answer my own question: aboug ZERO. They made a conscious choice to use an illegal drug.
Now, in contrast, Rush and others like him became addicted to a drug after being prescribed it by a doctor. Neither he nor anyone in his predicament made a conscious choice to use an illegal drug. They did not CHOOSE to get injured. They CHOSE to make use of a legal means to mitigate pain induced by some sort of medical condition. The substance is addictive, and he fell prey to that addiction after using it in a legal manner.
Completely different and you know it.
Because Limbaugh is such an ardent and vocal critic of the left and has lambasted drug users in the past, lefties everywhere are taking great glee from his predicament. Your referral to Limbaugh as a shining star of the right sounds quite nice but I can't remember him writing any legislation, submitting any budgets, or anything else. He's a great source of ENTERTAINMENT for us right leaning folk, but not much else.
That's OK. Let the left lambast the man. Does that diminish what he's accomplished in talk radio? No. Does his addiction make him the moral equal of some crack addict? Absolutely not. When compared from a moral standpoint with TeddyK(D-UI), ALGORE, Al Franken, Byrd (D-KKK), or El Jefe Clintonista or most other lefties I'd give Limbaugh the edge any day.
Tell me, exactly how many cocaine or heroin addicts had a prescription for their first use of the drug?
I'd answer my own question: aboug ZERO. They made a conscious choice to use an illegal drug.
Now, in contrast, Rush and others like him became addicted to a drug after being prescribed it by a doctor. Neither he nor anyone in his predicament made a conscious choice to use an illegal drug. They did not CHOOSE to get injured. They CHOSE to make use of a legal means to mitigate pain induced by some sort of medical condition. The substance is addictive, and he fell prey to that addiction after using it in a legal manner.
Completely different and you know it.
Because Limbaugh is such an ardent and vocal critic of the left and has lambasted drug users in the past, lefties everywhere are taking great glee from his predicament. Your referral to Limbaugh as a shining star of the right sounds quite nice but I can't remember him writing any legislation, submitting any budgets, or anything else. He's a great source of ENTERTAINMENT for us right leaning folk, but not much else.
That's OK. Let the left lambast the man. Does that diminish what he's accomplished in talk radio? No. Does his addiction make him the moral equal of some crack addict? Absolutely not. When compared from a moral standpoint with TeddyK(D-UI), ALGORE, Al Franken, Byrd (D-KKK), or El Jefe Clintonista or most other lefties I'd give Limbaugh the edge any day.
Vinny the Anvil
Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL
JACKASS POWER!!!!!!
Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL
JACKASS POWER!!!!!!
Gawain 0
QuoteQuoteWell, this whole thing is over ratings.
He went deaf because of all the pain killers he was taking. Same thing happened to a girl I work with now ex-husband. Had a bit of a vicodin problem and lost his hearing and now gets fricking disability payments.
Judy
I can't remember the name of the condition, but he had surgical implants which restored a percentage of his hearing.
So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!
QuoteNice quote from Herr Limbaugh.
Now, in contrast, Rush and others like him became addicted to a drug after being prescribed it by a doctor. Neither he nor anyone in his predicament made a conscious choice to use an illegal drug. They did not CHOOSE to get injured. They CHOSE to make use of a legal means to mitigate pain induced by some sort of medical condition. The substance is addictive, and he fell prey to that addiction after using it in a legal manner.
Completely different and you know it.
But I read that he asked his housekeeper for a couple pills because her husband was taking them. I was under the impression he was not prescribed these drugs by a doctor.
Of course I got that info from the media so its probably not true.
Judy
Be kinder than necessary because everyone you meet is fighting some kind of battle.
billvon 3,118
>Now, in contrast, Rush and others like him became addicted to a
>drug after being prescribed it by a doctor.
I agree, actually. He's got an extenuating circumstance. One thing you may discover, though, is that almost EVERYONE has an extenuating circumstance. No drug addict, ever, has thought about it beforehand and said "I think I'll start taking drugs to support crime, sicken me and ruin my life." They start because they're drunk and make a bad decision, or they get pressured into it by friends, or they misuse a prescription drug, or they want to avoid a painful withdrawal from another drug.
So I don't condemn him for his illegal drug usage; I hope he beats his addiction. I also hope he stops condemning others for theirs, and recognizes that you can't plop all drug users into the category of evil shortsighted greedy drug pushers.
>Neither he nor anyone in his predicament made a conscious choice to
> use an illegal drug.
Do the pills just fly into his mouth when he's sleeping, then?
He makes a conscious choice to use an illegal drug every time he puts one in his mouth. To claim otherwise is to believe in the victim culture - and I don't believe in that.
>Does his addiction make him the moral equal of some crack addict?
> Absolutely not.
He IS a drug addict, and apparently has no more control over his habit than any crack addict that checks himself into a treatment program. Trying to claim that he's different because of the kind of drugs he takes is like trying to claim someone's not a prositute (or isn't the moral equivalent of a prostitute) because they wear nice clothes when they get paid for sex.
>When compared from a moral standpoint with TeddyK(D-UI),
>ALGORE, Al Franken, Byrd (D-KKK), or El Jefe Clintonista or most
>other lefties I'd give Limbaugh the edge any day.
I think I'd choose someone who is not a criminal over one who is (although many of the people you've listed above may well be guilty of criminal acts.) But such value judgements are up to the individual.
>drug after being prescribed it by a doctor.
I agree, actually. He's got an extenuating circumstance. One thing you may discover, though, is that almost EVERYONE has an extenuating circumstance. No drug addict, ever, has thought about it beforehand and said "I think I'll start taking drugs to support crime, sicken me and ruin my life." They start because they're drunk and make a bad decision, or they get pressured into it by friends, or they misuse a prescription drug, or they want to avoid a painful withdrawal from another drug.
So I don't condemn him for his illegal drug usage; I hope he beats his addiction. I also hope he stops condemning others for theirs, and recognizes that you can't plop all drug users into the category of evil shortsighted greedy drug pushers.
>Neither he nor anyone in his predicament made a conscious choice to
> use an illegal drug.
Do the pills just fly into his mouth when he's sleeping, then?
He makes a conscious choice to use an illegal drug every time he puts one in his mouth. To claim otherwise is to believe in the victim culture - and I don't believe in that.
>Does his addiction make him the moral equal of some crack addict?
> Absolutely not.
He IS a drug addict, and apparently has no more control over his habit than any crack addict that checks himself into a treatment program. Trying to claim that he's different because of the kind of drugs he takes is like trying to claim someone's not a prositute (or isn't the moral equivalent of a prostitute) because they wear nice clothes when they get paid for sex.
>When compared from a moral standpoint with TeddyK(D-UI),
>ALGORE, Al Franken, Byrd (D-KKK), or El Jefe Clintonista or most
>other lefties I'd give Limbaugh the edge any day.
I think I'd choose someone who is not a criminal over one who is (although many of the people you've listed above may well be guilty of criminal acts.) But such value judgements are up to the individual.
QuoteQuoteQuoteWell, this whole thing is over ratings.
He went deaf because of all the pain killers he was taking. Same thing happened to a girl I work with now ex-husband. Had a bit of a vicodin problem and lost his hearing and now gets fricking disability payments.
Judy
I can't remember the name of the condition, but he had surgical implants which restored a percentage of his hearing.
Yeah I'm sure he had the bionic ear put in just like the girl at works ex-husband. His deafness was still a result of his abuse of pain killers. Oh yeah, BYW, we are all paying for it now cause he gets a disability check.
Judy
Be kinder than necessary because everyone you meet is fighting some kind of battle.
mailin 0
http://www.lp.org/press/archive.php?function=view&record=652
October 16, 2003
America owes talk host Rush Limbaugh a debt of gratitude, Libertarians say
WASHINGTON, DC -- The entire nation owes radio broadcaster Rush Limbaugh a debt of gratitude, Libertarians say, because his ordeal has exposed every drug warrior in America as a rank hypocrite.
"One thing we don't hear from American politicians very often is silence," said Joe Seehusen, Libertarian Party executive director. "By refusing to criticize Rush Limbaugh, every drug warrior has just been exposed as a shameless, despicable hypocrite.
"And that's good news, because the next time they do speak up, there'll be no reason for anyone to listen."
The revelation that Limbaugh had become addicted to painkillers -- drugs he is accused of procuring illegally from his Palm Beach housekeeper -- has caused a media sensation ever since the megastar's shocking, on-air confession last week.
As the Limbaugh saga continues, here's an important question for Americans to ask, Libertarians say: Why are all the drug warriors suddenly so silent?
"Republican and Democratic politicians have written laws that have condemned more than 400,000 Americans to prison for committing the same 'crime' as Rush Limbaugh," Seehusen pointed out. "If this pill-popping pontificator deserves a get-out-of-jail-free card, these drug warriors had better explain why."
Given their longstanding support for the Drug War, it's fair to ask:
Why haven't President George Bush or his tough-on-crime attorney general, John Ashcroft, uttered a word criticizing Limbaugh's law-breaking?
Why aren't drug czar John P. Walters or his predecessor, Barry McCaffrey, lambasting Limbaugh as a menace to society and a threat to "our children?"
Why aren't federal DEA agents storming Limbaugh's $30 million Florida mansion in a frantic search for criminal evidence?
Why haven't federal, state, and local police agencies seized the celebrity's homes and luxury cars under asset-forfeiture laws?
Finally, why aren't bloviating blabbermouths like William Bennett publicly explaining how America would be better off if Limbaugh were prosecuted, locked in a steel cage and forced to abandon his wife, his friends, and his career?
The answer is obvious, Seehusen said: "America's drug warriors are shameless hypocrites who believe in one standard of justice for ordinary Americans and another for themselves, their families and their political allies.
"That alone should completely discredit them."
But there's an even more disturbing possibility, Seehusen said: that the people who are prosecuting the Drug War don't even believe in its central premise -- which is that public safety requires that drug users be jailed.
"The Bushes and Ashcrofts and McCaffreys of the world may believe, correctly, that individuals fighting a drug addiction deserve medical, not criminal treatment," he said. "That would explain why they're not demanding that Limbaugh be jailed.
"But if that's the case, these politicians have spent decades tearing apart American families for their own political gain. And that's an unforgivable crime."
October 16, 2003
America owes talk host Rush Limbaugh a debt of gratitude, Libertarians say
WASHINGTON, DC -- The entire nation owes radio broadcaster Rush Limbaugh a debt of gratitude, Libertarians say, because his ordeal has exposed every drug warrior in America as a rank hypocrite.
"One thing we don't hear from American politicians very often is silence," said Joe Seehusen, Libertarian Party executive director. "By refusing to criticize Rush Limbaugh, every drug warrior has just been exposed as a shameless, despicable hypocrite.
"And that's good news, because the next time they do speak up, there'll be no reason for anyone to listen."
The revelation that Limbaugh had become addicted to painkillers -- drugs he is accused of procuring illegally from his Palm Beach housekeeper -- has caused a media sensation ever since the megastar's shocking, on-air confession last week.
As the Limbaugh saga continues, here's an important question for Americans to ask, Libertarians say: Why are all the drug warriors suddenly so silent?
"Republican and Democratic politicians have written laws that have condemned more than 400,000 Americans to prison for committing the same 'crime' as Rush Limbaugh," Seehusen pointed out. "If this pill-popping pontificator deserves a get-out-of-jail-free card, these drug warriors had better explain why."
Given their longstanding support for the Drug War, it's fair to ask:
Why haven't President George Bush or his tough-on-crime attorney general, John Ashcroft, uttered a word criticizing Limbaugh's law-breaking?
Why aren't drug czar John P. Walters or his predecessor, Barry McCaffrey, lambasting Limbaugh as a menace to society and a threat to "our children?"
Why aren't federal DEA agents storming Limbaugh's $30 million Florida mansion in a frantic search for criminal evidence?
Why haven't federal, state, and local police agencies seized the celebrity's homes and luxury cars under asset-forfeiture laws?
Finally, why aren't bloviating blabbermouths like William Bennett publicly explaining how America would be better off if Limbaugh were prosecuted, locked in a steel cage and forced to abandon his wife, his friends, and his career?
The answer is obvious, Seehusen said: "America's drug warriors are shameless hypocrites who believe in one standard of justice for ordinary Americans and another for themselves, their families and their political allies.
"That alone should completely discredit them."
But there's an even more disturbing possibility, Seehusen said: that the people who are prosecuting the Drug War don't even believe in its central premise -- which is that public safety requires that drug users be jailed.
"The Bushes and Ashcrofts and McCaffreys of the world may believe, correctly, that individuals fighting a drug addiction deserve medical, not criminal treatment," he said. "That would explain why they're not demanding that Limbaugh be jailed.
"But if that's the case, these politicians have spent decades tearing apart American families for their own political gain. And that's an unforgivable crime."
Arianna Frances
skydyvr 0
That article is just plain silly.
Once again, the Loozer-tarians have piped up from the depths of near-obscurity, only to prove why they reside there in the first place.
. . =(_8^(1)
Once again, the Loozer-tarians have piped up from the depths of near-obscurity, only to prove why they reside there in the first place.
. . =(_8^(1)
"Some call it heavenly in it's brilliance,
others mean and rueful of the western dream"
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites