billvon 3,085 #76 October 17, 2003 >That article is just plain silly. I agree. A lack of criticism does not equate to condoning an activity. Bush and Ashcroft may actually have better things to do than to go after a drug using talk show host. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheAnvil 0 #77 October 18, 2003 >QuoteNow, 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. I haven't listened to Rush regularly for quite a while. However, even when I did I didn't recall him lambasting drug users quite often. It was only today, after reading an Ann Coulter column that I realized where all of the Rush-drug-user-hypocrisy-hatred came from : http://www.anncoulter.org Though sometimes admittedly venemous, I find her column on Rush's detractors right on the mark. Quote >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. To claim otherwise is to believe in the victim culture? I don't see this connection dude. Please elaborate. Quote >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. Do you really want me to compare and contrast Limbaugh with a standard issue crack addict? Quote >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. Such value judgements do lie with the individual. I've made mine. If you should choose to give ANY of the above - especially everyone's FAVORITE Harvard expelee - the edge over Rush, I'm greatly disappointed in you.Vinny the Anvil Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL JACKASS POWER!!!!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,085 #78 October 19, 2003 >To claim otherwise is to believe in the victim culture? I don't see >this connection dude. Please elaborate. Rush Limbaugh intentionally, willfully and with full knowledge of the illegality of his actions, took illegal drugs for his own personal (not medical) reasons. It almost sounded like you were saying "yeah, but he didn't make a conscious choice to do that, he was a victim of addiction." Glad to hear that you do not believe in such nonsense. >Do you really want me to compare and contrast Limbaugh with >a standard issue crack addict? No. And that was exactly my point. Rush is either a standard issue drug addict or a man with problems and extenuating circumstances, who deserves to be heard before we judge him. That standard issue crack addict is either a standard issue crack addict or a man with problems and extenuating circumstances that deserves to be heard before we judge him. Take your pick - but then be consistent. > If you should choose to give ANY of the above - especially >everyone's FAVORITE Harvard expelee - the edge over Rush, So you would choose a drug addict and college dropout over a man who won the 2003 George Bush Award for Excellence in Public Service? Your choice. It can be hard to see past the "republican" or "democratic" labels sometimes. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,113 #79 October 20, 2003 QuoteQuoteWell, 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. I'm guessing that his ratings will be higher than ever because of this scandal. People still listen to Jimmy Swaggart and Jim Bakker too. I don't understand it, but I'm just an engineer. Matt.7 [3] And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheAnvil 0 #80 October 20, 2003 Quote >To claim otherwise is to believe in the victim culture? I don't see >this connection dude. Please elaborate. Rush Limbaugh intentionally, willfully and with full knowledge of the illegality of his actions, took illegal drugs for his own personal (not medical) reasons. It almost sounded like you were saying "yeah, but he didn't make a conscious choice to do that, he was a victim of addiction." Glad to hear that you do not believe in such nonsense. The last time I checked oxycontin can be prescribed by MDs and crack can't. Perhaps I am incorrect, but sincerely doubt it. I still don't see your point. Quote >Do you really want me to compare and contrast Limbaugh with >a standard issue crack addict? No. And that was exactly my point. Rush is either a standard issue drug addict or a man with problems and extenuating circumstances, who deserves to be heard before we judge him. That standard issue crack addict is either a standard issue crack addict or a man with problems and extenuating circumstances that deserves to be heard before we judge him. Take your pick - but then be consistent. I'm extremely consistent and will take your response as a 'no' answer to my question. Rush has a problem - he's addicted to painkillers and can't beat the addiction without help. He was illegally obtaining these pain killers to feed this addiction. How does one legally obtain crack for personal ingestion? Quote > If you should choose to give ANY of the above - especially >everyone's FAVORITE Harvard expelee - the edge over Rush, So you would choose a drug addict and college dropout over a man who won the 2003 George Bush Award for Excellence in Public Service? Your choice. It can be hard to see past the "republican" or "democratic" labels sometimes. Absolutely. Hands down. Any day of the week. I'd choose Bill Gates high on weed (another college dropout) before the man as well. Yes, everyone's favorite Harvard Expellee (for cheating) and murderer (Mary Jo Kopechne) and Drunk Driver (Mary Jo Kopechne) and Senate obstructionist did get that award. I'm extremely disappointed in Mr. Bush for that, but congrats to him nonetheless. When Mr. Limbaugh has been expelled from a university for cheating(No me digas!), gotten hammered (old habits die hard), driven a young lady off the road and then let her die in a submerged automobile whilst he wondered around (or stumbled around) worrying about his career, I'll consider placing him on a level with Mr. Kennedy. When he joins the KKK and then leaves yet still continues to support programs that discriminate based upon one's race, I'll put him on a moral level with Byrd. When those criticizing Rush and screaming 'hypocrisy' (true), 'drug user', 'loser', 'criminal', and the like actually stop voting for folks such as Byrd and Kennedy, I'll give them credibility and take what they say seriously. In comparison, becoming addicted to pain killers one was legally using in the first place I can easily forgive. Vinny the Anvil Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL JACKASS POWER!!!!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,113 #81 October 20, 2003 Quote When Mr. Limbaugh has been expelled from a university for cheating(No me digas!), gotten hammered (old habits die hard), driven a young lady off the road and then let her die in a submerged automobile whilst he wondered around (or stumbled around) worrying about his career, I'll consider placing him on a level with Mr. Kennedy. When he joins the KKK and then leaves yet still continues to support programs that discriminate based upon one's race, I'll put him on a moral level with Byrd. When those criticizing Rush and screaming 'hypocrisy' (true), 'drug user', 'loser', 'criminal', and the like actually stop voting for folks such as Byrd and Kennedy, I'll give them credibility and take what they say seriously. In comparison, becoming addicted to pain killers one was legally using in the first place I can easily forgive. I have no difficulty "forgiving" Limbaugh for his addiction to pain killers (not that it is my place to forgive). I do not forgive him for being a self-righteous, sanctimonious, hypocritical humbug and ramming his hypocrisy down the nations throat.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #82 October 20, 2003 QuoteBush and Ashcroft may actually have better things to do than to go after a drug using talk show host. Really?? Ashcroft made it his number one priority to go after a pipe selling comedian. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
