Rush Limbaugh caught in drug ring

[clk]

Or so Drudge says....

UPDATED LINKS:
http://www.ajc.com/news/content/new...aughdrugs.html
http://www.nydailynews.com/10-02-2003/front/story/122839p-110349c.html

http://www.drudgereport.com/

Check out the links.

edited to add new links.

[Mr Manifesto]

What a peculiar web site.

[clk]

Originally posted by Mr Manifesto
What a peculiar web site.

Don't tell me you've never heard of Drudge...
His site is probably one of the biggest on the Internet. The reason is because he usually breaks "big" news faster than anyone. Actually, it's not him breaking the news most of the time, but he always finds the source quicker than anyone and posts it on his site. He usually has a lot more content on there but of course, this story is really "big", so he is focusing on it.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by clk


Don't tell me you've never heard of Drudge...
His site is probably one of the biggest on the Internet. The reason is because he usually breaks "big" news faster than anyone. Actually, it's not him breaking the news most of the time, but he always finds the source quicker than anyone and posts it on his site. He usually has a lot more content on there but of course, this story is really "big", so he is focusing on it.

He couldn't post anything on this story that has some resemblence to a fact?

[clk]

Originally posted by a_unique_person


He couldn't post anything on this story that has some resemblence to a fact?

If the story is breaking as we speak, where are you going to get the facts from? We'll find out everything tomorrow, if Drudge is telling the truth.

[corplinx]

Drudge apparently is not "scooping" this story. He is scooping that National Enquirer will run the story.

As always, wait for the facts to come out.

Rush Limbaugh, pill popper? Could be. Pain pills are highly addictive.

[Ziggurat]

Originally posted by corplinx

Rush Limbaugh, pill popper? Could be. Pain pills are highly addictive.

Are the pain pills for that boil on his ass that kept him out of the Vietnam war?

http://www.snopes.com/military/limbaugh.htm

:D

[Hand Bent Spoon]

It's a National Enquirer story. The National Enquirer's only reputation is for writing fiction.

[Evolver]

I don't know about drugs. I had heard that he used to get high way back when he was a sportscaster. (so what!)

But he HAS resigned over allegedly racist remarks he made last weekend. What a surprise! A Republican propagandist making racist remarks. Who woulda thunk it?

[Ladewig]

It's a National Enquirer story. The National Enquirer's only reputation is for writing fiction.


They broke the Jimmy Swaggart story. That was better than any fiction I've ever read.

[Tricky]

Originally posted by Ladewig

They broke the Jimmy Swaggart story. That was better than any fiction I've ever read.
National Enquirer has broken a few stories that turned out to be real. Of course, John Edward gets an occasional correct prediction too.

[Blue Monk]

Yes, the National Enquirer has been correct before and I believe their accuracy has soared to a whopping 0.0056%

I'm holding back judgement, however, until this has been confirmed by a more reliable source.

I've been a little skeptical of the Enquirer ever since they burned me with that 'Three Headed Man Working at Burger King' story.

[hgc]

To put the focus on Drudge for just a sec, he says...
IN A SEEMINGLY ORCHESTRATED ATTACK, THE MEDIA BLITZ ON RUSH LIMBAUGH WILL INTENSIFY ON THURSDAY WITH CHARGES OF DRUG ABUSE...Call me dense, but orchestrated by whom? Rush was the one that opened his fat mouth last weekend and got himself canned. He would have had to have been in on it too! Or does Drudge think that The Enquirer was just sitting around with this story, waiting for a good opportunity to orchestrate an attack to arise?

[Upchurch]

Originally posted by hgc

Call me dense, but orchestrated by whom? My guess is that it is the same people who got Michael Savage kicked off the air: the general public who is not used to, nor agrees with, the extemist view points often presented on conservative talk shows.

That evil general public.

[hgc]

Oh, and I'm not one to usually invoke the diety, but God Bless Howard Stern. He's been boring for years now, and I just listen to him every morning out of habit. But, what a great way to start the day today by waking up to hear Mike Walker of the National Enquirer on Howard's show breaking this story.

[corplinx]

In breaking news, Rush Limbaugh has switched to the green party citing their more libertine philosophy on certain issues he holds dear.

"I deny that I have ever used oxycontin. Sweet, sweet oxycontin. Crushed and snorted and oh so nice or just chewed up and swallowed. That awesome feeling like a koala bear crapped a rainbow on my brain! So, I have never used drugs but have become sympathetic to those who do and now endorse the green party."

[thrombus29]

I guess now he isn't just a big fat idiot, but a big fat hypocritical junkie idiot.

Made me buy that rag the Daily News for the first time in years.

http://www.nydailynews.com/10-02-2003/front/story/122839p-110349c.html

In one missive, Limbaugh pushed Cline to get more "little blues" - code for OxyContin, the powerful narcotic nicknamed hillbilly heroin, she said


Only thing better would be if he died on the crapper like Elvis.

Sympathy= 0.0

[UnrepentantSinner]

Originally posted by hgc
Oh, and I'm not one to usually invoke the diety, but God Bless Howard Stern. He's been boring for years now, and I just listen to him every morning out of habit. But, what a great way to start the day today by waking up to hear Mike Walker of the National Enquirer on Howard's show breaking this story.

Yes! I'm hoping that thrombus and some of our other NYC (and those in cities where his show airs) happened to tune in this morning. I work nights and only listen on my way home - a time frame from 6:30am-7am. I ran some short errands I could have put of until tomorrow just to hear that segment.

Arriving home I tuned into all 3 morning shows and ESPN. Surprise! Not a single mention of the accusations. I suppose the "liberal media," unlike "truth outlets" like Rush wait to verify stories before they run them (Vincent Foster murdered in an apartment owned by Hillary Clinton anyone???).

I hate to wish drug addiction on anyone as I have more than my fair share of both pain (and efforts to alliviate it) or substance abuse but the only person I could have wished it upon more than Rush would be Dr. Laura and D. James Kennedy.

So sue me...

[clk]

Originally posted by thrombus29


Made me buy that rag the Daily News for the first time in years.

http://www.nydailynews.com/10-02-2003/front/story/122839p-110349c.html




That link seems to be down, atleast right now. Here is another one: http://www.ajc.com/news/content/news/1003/02limbaughdrugs.html

[corplinx]

Oxycontin is a powerfully addictive drug. I wouldn't be surprised at all if Rush or anyone else was hooked on it.

My brother just went through rehab this past year for it. He has chronic back pain and at some point someone offered him oxycontin for his pain. It worked. And he kept taking them. Before long he couldnt stop.

How do you get these pills without a prescription? You "doctor shop". You go around to a bunch of doctors known for being easy with the prescription pad and get them all to write you valid prescriptions. You pick up the meds, then sell them for profit.

Who needs to buy from a dealer when buying from doctors is so much easier and safer?

[thrombus29]

I also listen to Stern on the way to work 6:20-6:45 every day out of habit. Used to listen to Curtis/Kuby untill after 9/11 when it seemed that Kuby just gave it up to that blowhard.

Other than Stern's rabid pro-war stance, he has pretty reasonable (IMHO) positions on most political issues that I have heard him rant over.

Best moment was when they wondered if Rush and Tommy Chong would be sharing a cell.

How is this one going to be spun by the Drudges, Newsmaxes, Fox news people?

[corplinx]

Originally posted by thrombus29

How is this one going to be spun by the Drudges, Newsmaxes, Fox news people?

Drudge scooped that the Enquirer was going to run the story.

Newsmax will rail on the "coordinated atttack by the liberal media".

Fox will probably verify that there actually is an ivestigation before running the story.

[Jude]

I heard about this on Stern. Apparently the National Enquirer has an abundance of evidence including e-mails between Rush and his maid, and even an audio recording! Really great stuff.

[corplinx]

Today the Enquirer runs the story. The fact that they run the story becomes a news story with a few other news orgs.

Today is also the day Mr. Limbaugh delivers his keynote speech to some big radio convention.

I am open to the possibility that the Enquirer could be truthful but part of me thinks this is a "dirty trick" and the Enquirer is the only outlet that would pick it up.

[thrombus29]

Originally posted by corplinx
Today the Enquirer runs the story. The fact that they run the story becomes a news story with a few other news orgs.

Today is also the day Mr. Limbaugh delivers his keynote speech to some big radio convention.

I am open to the possibility that the Enquirer could be truthful but part of me thinks this is a "dirty trick" and the Enquirer is the only outlet that would pick it up.

Perhaps you are confused about the role of the Enquirer in this.

The Enquirer broke the story, their reporters researched it, 99% of the information that the other stories use come from the article about their investigation.

Now that they have broken the story it is time for the other news outlets to "Pick it Up" and run it.

Other news outlets who have it picked it up.

Daily News
Atlanta Journal
CNN
And I am sure many, many, more by tomorrow.

Regrdless of wether or not the Enquirer is just a scandal rag or not, they have been sued enough times to have a very tough fact checking operation in place.

There is no way they could have made someting like this out of whole cloth.

[corplinx]

"Perhaps you are confused about the role of the Enquirer in this."

Not at all, You must have misunderstood me.

"There is no way they could have made someting like this out of whole cloth. "

I agree. From the cryptic statement Rush released today about not being in contact with any investigator, I am guessing the old boy caught a bad case of the oxycontin blues. If there was no truth in this whatsoever, I think his people would have denied it outright. However, its the timing and the "spin" of the story that have me thinking dirty tricks. The worst ditry trick is of course buying oxycontin from doctor shoppers. If this is true, I think its time for Rush to once again endorse Victorian shame........ this time at himself.

[thrombus29]

I am sorry, it seemed to me from this line.


...part of me thinks this is a "dirty trick" and the Enquirer is the only outlet that would pick it up

That you might have thought that this story was created by the great leftist conspiracy to discredit Rush, and that the Enquirer was the only rag stupid enough to print it.

Now that my joy at seeing such an evil demagauge being brought down by a vice that he has spewed so much of his bile on has come down a bit, I do feel a little bit sorry for the guy on a strictly human level.

A little bit.

[jj]

Originally posted by corplinx
"Perhaps you are confused about the role of the Enquirer in this."

Not at all, You must have misunderstood me.

"There is no way they could have made someting like this out of whole cloth. "

I agree. From the cryptic statement Rush released today about not being in contact with any investigator, I am guessing the old boy caught a bad case of the oxycontin blues. If there was no truth in this whatsoever, I think his people would have denied it outright. However, its the timing and the "spin" of the story that have me thinking dirty tricks. The worst ditry trick is of course buying oxycontin from doctor shoppers. If this is true, I think its time for Rush to once again endorse Victorian shame........ this time at himself.

You know, I intensely dislike Crush Bimbo, but this kind of attack, that frankly does look orchestrated, makes me wonder just what is going on. He may be (I don't know!) addicted to Oxycontin, for whatever reason, he may not be, but in a sane world, one would TREAT that kind of thing, not criminalize it.

[corplinx]

Originally posted by jj

He may be (I don't know!) addicted to Oxycontin, for whatever reason, he may not be, but in a sane world, one would TREAT that kind of thing, not criminalize it.

Rush himself would be the last person who would excuse this sort of thing for someone else.

Oxycontin addiction is a horrible thing, and having an addiction is no crime. However, the means and method of getting the pills can be highly illegal.

[Ladewig]

You know, I intensely dislike Crush Bimbo, but this kind of attack, that frankly does look orchestrated, makes me wonder just what is going on. He may be (I don't know!) addicted to Oxycontin, for whatever reason, he may not be, but in a sane world, one would TREAT that kind of thing, not criminalize it.

Yes, I've been thinking about the treatment vs. jail time (or treatment and jail time). Most men in the early fifties who never sold drugs and committed no crimes other than purchasing drugs should go to treatment rather than jail. Society is neither more protected nor better served by sending these people to jail.

On the other hand, the evidence indicates that this addiction has been going on for years. So it seems somewhat duplicitous that Mr. Limbaugh railed against illegal drug use. Of course part of having that type of addiction is having one's judgement and views impared. Perhaps he really believed that he was not a drug addict and therefore there was nothing hypocritical about his stance.

My view is treatment and if he does not follow the rules or if he uses again, a stiff jail sentence - and not in one of those minimum security prisons. It's about time we had a vocal advocate for prison reform and Rush may just be that man.

It is somewhat embarrassing to take joy in another's misfortune. I suppose it comes from his very vocal positions. While he was not holding the reins on the bandwagon that gave us mandatory sentencing, stiffer drug penalties, no legal exemption for medical use marijuana, and reduced rights for those accused of drug use; he was sitting shotgun cheering the horses onward.

_______________________________
Yes, jj, in a sane world one would TREAT that kind of thing, not criminalize it. Unfortunately the U.S. in 2003 cannot be described as a sane world.

[jj]

Originally posted by Ladewig

Yes, jj, in a sane world one would TREAT that kind of thing, not criminalize it. Unfortunately the U.S. in 2003 cannot be described as a sane world.

My point exactly.

Treatment, in case it's not clear to some knee-jerker out there, is NOT the same as "encourage".

[Abdul Alhazred]

Originally posted by corplinx
Rush Limbaugh, pill popper? Could be. Pain pills are highly addictive.

It would explain his emaciated appearance. :D

[zakur]

I heard on TV last night that abuse of Vicodin and OxyContin can lead to hearing loss.

Here is a timeline on Rush's deafness and the drug allegations: http://shock-awe.info/archive/000923.php

On his show yesterday, he was vague about the drug allegations:I don't know what I'm dealing with, folks. I really don't know the full scope of what I'm dealing with. When I get all the facts, when I get all the details of this, rest assured that I will discuss this with you and tell you how it is -- tell you everything there is.

[clk]

Originally posted by zakur
I heard on TV last night that abuse of Vicodin and OxyContin can lead to hearing loss.

Here is a timeline on Rush's deafness and the drug allegations: http://shock-awe.info/archive/000923.php

On his show yesterday, he was vague about the drug allegations: [/B]

Aha! So his hearing loss might have been his own fault! If that is true, then there is no reason to feel sorry for him.

[corplinx]

Alright, two parts of this story are out right now. You have a women (his maid) who had some kind of connection with a doctor shopping ring and said ring was under investigation by authorities. She sold her story to the enquirer and got it out first.

Now parts of her story sound credible, others do not. Like him just asking her out of the blue for oxycontin. My guess is he complained about some sort of pain, and the happy maid said she knew of a pill that could knock out any pain, a prescription med. This is how some people get introduced to oxycontin. The other way I've seen people get introduced to it is through their pot dealer. Typically when there is a "dry spell" of pot, the dealer will recommend xanax or other pills (including oxycontin).

I just don't buy all of this woman's story. She painted it to where she was always a victim somehow.

[pupdog]

What I found amusing was how, when I mentioned this to some Limbo-admiring folks I know, they told me not to jump to conclusions--the very same people who readily leap to the most idiotic conclusions imaginable and begin ranting when some "liberal" person is mentioned.

[Ed]

I am a bit confused. Rush did exactly what? He talked about pills and might have used them. So? Any physical evidence that he broke a law? Dealt? Being addicted is not a violation of any law that I am aware of. "Having had them" in his posession is a non-starter. They say that he got people to get him drugs? Prove it. Show me the drugs. Show him taking physical possession of them.

This sounds like bull to me and the playing up of it does smack a bit like a conspiracy.

I will make a bet that any talk of legal action will fade away.

[thrombus29]

If it is bull than the Enquirer has a pretty big lawsuit on its hands.

I read the article, and it isn't painting the housekeeper with a victim brush.

Agreed, the E-mails could have been forged.

Guess we will have to wait till we hear the transcript of the recordings she made.

Even if there are no legal ends I think the Dittoheads need a fat, blubbery Mea Culpa.

[Silicon]

Here's to the holier than thou moralizers! The ones who are the first to tell us all what's wrong with everyone else. The ones who say that America is slouching toward Gomorrah.




http://www.normanmacrae.com/images/swaggart01.jpg


http://i.cnn.net/cnn/2002/ALLPOLITICS/05/02/bennett.cnna/story.bennett.jpg


http://radioroadtrip.com/limbaugh.jpg



And one of my personal favorites:



http://www.transgenderzone.com/features/hoover.gif



The louder they moralize, Bible-thump and wrap themselves in the flag, the more likely they like sex with prostitutes and riding crops, gambling to extreme excess, scoring illegal drugs and dressing like a girl and having sex with little blond boys.

Hell, everyone expects the democrats to be loose with their morals, smoking and inhaling, etc!

All hail Rush, the man who made personal attacks on the private lives of Democrats, saying it's absolutely about "character".

Rush, may you be shown all the sympathy you showed them.

[Julia]

I read about this last night on Google News (I don't recall the newspaper they linked), and from what they sketched out it sounded credible.

Now, reading these links, I still think, Enquirer or not, that the story is most likely true. She has put herself out there by claiming she has a tape, and some e-mails as evidence of her credibility. She must be aware that the authorities investigating will want her to produce them.

I must admit to doing a double-take at the figures. 4,350 pills in a 47 day time period? Of course it did not say the mg of the oxy, but even at their lowest strength, he was either selling some, or had quite a habit.

I have taken oxycontin in the past for severe, chronic pain. Never did I experience a 'high', or any sense of euphoria. It was however, something that finally gave me a few hours freedom from pain.

Someone I know told me recently that she is buying just about any pain killer she wants over the web. I don't know if it's true. If so, it's really frightening.

[Ed]

Originally posted by thrombus29
If it is bull than the Enquirer has a pretty big lawsuit on its hands.



Not if it is true. My point is that if it were you or I the cops might want to put the fear of god in you but there is not very much they can do. How long can you get for having a bad habit? No time.

[thrombus29]

During times when you have an ounce of weed in your possession and a box of Ziplocks in your kitchen they will get you with intent to distribute, for them not go after a guy who was going through (Allegedly) 4,000 of his "Little Blues" would cause a bit of an uproar (I hope).

With the draconian drug laws they have now, If the cops put their mind to busting him for something, they will.

Whether they put their minds to it or not is the question.

[Ed]

Originally posted by thrombus29
During times when you have an ounce of weed in your possession and a box of Ziplocks in your kitchen they will get you with intent to distribute, for them not go after a guy who was going through (Allegedly) 4,000 of his "Little Blues" would cause a bit of an uproar (I hope).

With the draconian drug laws they have now, If the cops put their mind to busting him for something, they will.

Whether they put their minds to it or not is the question.

Right, right I agree BUT "having gone thru" (past pluperfect, I believe) ain't nothing. See what you said (you did, damnit, DON'T TRY TO DENY IT!!) was "when you have" not "if you had but smoked". All he has to say is "prove it". The coppers won't waste a second on this.

[Tricky]

Originally posted by Tricky

National Enquirer has broken a few stories that turned out to be real. Of course, John Edward gets an occasional correct prediction too.
And it looks like this is one of them (http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/apus_story.asp?category=1110&slug=Limbaugh%20Painkillers). It is occasionally useful to have bottom feeding tabloids around. Rush should be grateful.

[headscratcher4]

You realize, of course, that Rush will come out of this smelling like a rose?

The Dittoheads will forgive him...you forgive your own, this is about pain and it doesn't involve sex (the only thing, actually, the dittoheads probably wouldn't forgive Rush is gay sex).

They'll forgive him because he was using a clean drug, brought to him in Palm Beach and not bought on the stoop from minorities...

He will be slightly chastized for a short time (at least about drugs) affecting a stance of greater compassion and understanding, but he will ultimately be just as hard on drug abusers, demanding that they be duely punished (maybe after a one strike try at treatment). Like GW Bush, this little episode will make him a born again, in the sense that he will be more convinced of the weaknesses of others because he will have faced up to his problem and kicked it...and, having kicked it himself, he will be even less tolerant of the weaknesses in others.

You can hear him now on the phone..."come on, if I can do it, any one can do it. If you are on drugs, you are weak....blah, blah blah...."


In short, in the words of the new governor of California, and to the joy of his fands, he -- like the terminator -- will "be Baaack..."

God help us all...

[Frank Newgent]

Originally posted by Ed
Right, right I agree BUT "having gone thru" (past pluperfect, I believe) ain't nothing. See what you said (you did, damnit, DON'T TRY TO DENY IT!!) was "when you have" not "if you had but smoked". All he has to say is "prove it". The coppers won't waste a second on this.
Having gone would be an example of the (past) perfect participle.

In English the pluperfect or past perfect indicates action prior to some other point in the past, such as Rush Limbaugh had ingested highly addictive and illegal opiates as many as 100 times a day before he was finally caught.

[Frank Newgent]

In English the pluperfect or past perfect indicates action prior to some other point in the past, such as Rush Limbaugh had ingested highly addictive and illegal opiates as many as 100 times a day before he was finally caught.
To further diagram this sentence: (I am studying Spanish grammar), the past perfect conjugation had ingested expresses action in relation to the subsequent was caught. The preterit was would be the verb here, with the (irregular in English) past participle caught acting as an adjective, modifying the noun Rush Limbaugh.

In Spanish, the past perfect or pluperfect is expressed in two very different voices: the past perfect indicative (just covered) and the past perfect subjunctive.

In general, the subjunctive expresses uncertainty, possibility, a feeling, or a wish. In English, the past perfect subjunctive is structured the same as the past perfect indicative: Bill O'Reilly was hoping that Rush Limbaugh hadn´t gone through his medicine chest again.

[ShowMe]

Throughout this particluar episode I am reminded why my leanings tend to be a bit more towards the right than to the left.

The left is going into a near frenzy at this story; "hypocrite" seems to be the word of the day. Yet the left are the folks who try and tell me they are the most compassionate, the most caring, the most feeling....not like those cold, unfeeling conservatives.

Had the leftist columnists I read said something to the effect that they understand what has happened, that they hope he can get help, that they're rooting for him to kick th ehabit...then, perhaps, I could have some respect for them.

But even the few that I've read that actually put something like that in their column always have a "BUT...." after it.

They're showing their own hypocrisy, which pushes my irony meter into the red.

Am I a Rush apologist? Hardly. I listen to the man two or three times a month and find some his bit amusing, at other times I am aghast at his ignorance. This holds true for most people I listen to, and read.

And, no doubt, applies to folks that listen to me.

[shanek]

I'm just gonna chime in with my 2¢, why not.

Personally, it doesn't matter to me one jot whether or not Rush is addicted to anything. It doesn't affect in one way, positive or negative, my opinion of him or his arguments. But there is one aspect of this I think is interesting.

About 13 years ago, I became addicted to codeine after a wrist operation. Now, I was only on the stuff for a couple of weeks, and I never turned to the black market to support my addiction, but I did experience first-hand the ease at which one can become addicted and the difficulty of fighting that addiction. In a way, I was lucky; since my term of addiction was so short I only had to go through a few days of withdrawl (although they were the longest and most miserable few days of my life). I can certainly understand the intense desire of someone wanting to maintain an addiction, and I can't honestly say I know what I would have done had the term of addiction been longer and more intense. I only got through it with the help of my friends and those who understood the nature of my addiction and how to best help me.

I'm hopeful (if a little doubtful) that Rush will come out of this with the same appreciation I have, and that these are the same issues facing those with addictions to cocaine and other, harder drugs. Hopefully he, and through him his listeners, will realize that addiction is a medical problem, not a legal one, and that trying to throw these people in prison is counterproductive at best.

Unless, of course, Rush himself thinks he should go to jail for his mistakes...

[Frank Newgent]

Originally posted by ShowMe
Throughout this particluar episode I am reminded why my leanings tend to be a bit more towards the right than to the left.

To me Rimbaugh´s exposure fullfills all the requirements of a successful joke, involving a cognitive juxtaposition of mental sets and followed by affective feelings of amusement.

[Lurker]

Originally posted by ShowMe

Had the leftist columnists I read said something to the effect that they understand what has happened, that they hope he can get help, that they're rooting for him to kick th ehabit...then, perhaps, I could have some respect for them.

But even the few that I've read that actually put something like that in their column always have a "BUT...." after it.

They're showing their own hypocrisy, which pushes my irony meter into the red.


As a liberal, your post applies to me. I was a bit conflicted at first in my feelings about this issue. At first, I remained silent cause I wanted to be compassionate about his addiction. But then I remembered all his monlogues about drug usage and how he was always for tougher laws and so forth. I then decided he should be hoisted by his own petard on this one.

Did your irony meter go in the red when this "tough on drugs" talker admitted he was addicted to drugs himself? I sure hope so otherwise your meter is clearly not working.

Lurker

[ShowMe]

Originally posted by Lurker
Did your irony meter go in the red when this "tough on drugs" talker admitted he was addicted to drugs himself? Lurker


Oh...absolutely! This should be a very interesting case & I'm wondering how he'll spin it.

Then again he hasn't been charged with anything as yet. Perhaps the police don't have enough evidence; while everyone & their brother knows it's true having enough evidence to present it in a court of law is an entirely different animal.

But the folks on the left who tell me they have compassion for everyone, who suddenly turn with hyena like glee when it's someone whose views they disagree with...they fill me with sadness more than anything.

You state you are a liberal, so tell me: In your view would it have done more for your cause for the leftists to come out and say something like, "We all know Rush is human. Perhaps now he can see that rehab does work, that locking away people who are addicted is not the answer. We all pray for his well being and hope that he will be turned around and preach his newfound wisdom to his 20 million listeners. Come on Rush...let's see if you're man enough to admit your wrong."

Or do you think it furthers the leftist agenda to (metaphorically) tap dance in the streets screaming insults?

It's hard to take someone seriously when they say they're compassionate towards everyone, when "everyone" only inclused the people they like.

[Tricky]

This link (http://www.fairandbalanced.us/docs/StoryID902.htm) doesn't have links to the quotes, so I don't know how accurate they are, but they sure sound like him.
"There's nothing good about drug use," he was saying. "We know it. It destroys individuals. It destroys families. Drug use destroys societies. Drug use, some might say, is destroying this country. And we have laws against selling drugs, pushing drugs, using drugs, importing drugs. And the laws are good because we know what happens to people in societies and neighborhoods which become consumed by them. And so if people are violating the law by doing drugs, they ought to be accused and they ought to be convicted and they ought to be sent up."
"What this says to me," he told his listeners that day, "is that too many whites are getting away with drug use. Too many whites are getting away with drug sales. Too many whites are getting away with trafficking in this stuff. The answer to this disparity is not to start letting people out of jail because we're not putting others in jail who are breaking the law. The answer is to go out and find the ones who are getting away with it, convict them and send them up the river, too."
(The heartless shrug when Jerry Garcia died.)

"'When you strip it all away," Rush had said of the Grateful Dead guitarist, "Jerry Garcia destroyed his life on drugs. And yet he's being honored, like some godlike figure. Our priorities are out of whack, folks."
But then he also said:
"What is missing in the drug fight," he said, "is legalization. If we want to go after drugs with the same fervor and intensity with which we go after cigarettes, let's legalize drugs. Legalize the manufacture of drugs. License the Cali cartel. Make them taxpayers and then sue them. Sue them left and right and then get control of the price and generate tax revenue from it. Raise the price sky high and fund all sorts of other wonderful social programs."
Wishy washy? Or did his opinions change when he became a drug user?

[corplinx]

Originally posted by Tricky

Wishy washy? Or did his opinions change when he became a drug user?

I wonder if that second quote was made out of his own guilt.

Then again, the last person I knew who was hooked badly on oxycontin was self-deluded into thinking he really needed it for pain. It becomes psychologically addictive to some and they feel like they can't stand the pain without it.

[Tricky]

Originally posted by corplinx


I wonder if that second quote was made out of his own guilt.

Then again, the last person I knew who was hooked badly on oxycontin was self-deluded into thinking he really needed it for pain. It becomes psychologically addictive to some and they feel like they can't stand the pain without it.
I wonder that too, and as I have said before, I pity Rush. Addiction is terrible. I don't want him to go to prison. I want him to recant some of those terrible things he said.

If that actually works, then I hope the next thing that happens to him is that he gets caught taking his girlfriend to an abortion clinic.

[Lurker]

Originally posted by ShowMe


But the folks on the left who tell me they have compassion for everyone, who suddenly turn with hyena like glee when it's someone whose views they disagree with...they fill me with sadness more than anything.

You state you are a liberal, so tell me: In your view would it have done more for your cause for the leftists to come out and say something like, "We all know Rush is human. Perhaps now he can see that rehab does work, that locking away people who are addicted is not the answer. We all pray for his well being and hope that he will be turned around and preach his newfound wisdom to his 20 million listeners. Come on Rush...let's see if you're man enough to admit your wrong."

Or do you think it furthers the leftist agenda to (metaphorically) tap dance in the streets screaming insults?

It's hard to take someone seriously when they say they're compassionate towards everyone, when "everyone" only inclused the people they like.

Well, I make a special case for Rush. He has gone on the record numerous times belittling drug users, calling for tougher penalties, and belittling liberals for bothering to try and understand addiction. Such rank hypocrisy is hard to difficult to just allow to pass. I am not dancing that this happened to Rush. I am merely appaled at his hypocrisy.

In reality I DO want him to get better and return to his profession. Hopefully he will come back with some changed attitudes (I doubt it) and will become a voice of reason about drugs. Hopefully his audience will learn from him (I doubt it).

Prediction: Rush will come out of it strong and his audience will ignore it ever happened and/or worship him as a hero. That is modus operendi for some people. Ignore the sins of your own side while talking tough. His audience will learn that Rush will probably not want to talk about it much after a week or two after he is back. Rush will not put on callers that discuss it or cut them off after about 2-3 weeks of it. Slowly, his audience will learn not to mention it and all will be happy again in dittoland.

Lurker

[xouper]

Lurker: Prediction: Rush will come out of it strong and his audience will ignore it ever happened and/or worship him as a hero. That is modus operendi for some people. Ignore the sins of your own side while talking tough.Seems like there's plenty of precendent for such a prediction. This kind of behavior has been seen before among fans of Bill Clinton, for example. And people still worship John F. Kennedy despite his abuse of prescription drugs. This sort of fan behavior is not limited to any one ideology, or even to politics.

[Lurker]

Keep this in mind:

Bill Clinton to the best of my knowledge did not actively preach against the 'crimes' he committed. I don't recall him talking tough about adultery or saying the penalties should be increased.

Rush Limbaugh daily took a tough on crime, specifically tough on drug users. He wanted tougher penalties. Further, what Rush did was against the law.

Comparing the die-hard fan of Clinton versus the die-hard fan of Rush has some similarities but there are also differences.

By the way, I think Clinton did a good job as president but I was none too happy about his private life. Glad he is gone.

Lurker

[xouper]

Lurker: Keep this in mind: Bill Clinton to the best of my knowledge did not actively preach against the 'crimes' he committed. I don't recall him talking tough about adultery or saying the penalties should be increased.Keep this in mind: As an example of what I am talking about for fans of Clinton, you have already forgotten about his impeachment, which is what my comment was about, not his sexual trangressions. Clinton lied under oath, for which congressional charges were brought against him. And I hope you aren't suggesting that his oath of office wasn't a direct promise to "preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States"?

The bigger problem here is that it becomes harder to teach children not to lie when the President of the United States lied under oath. I think that is a bigger moral transgression than Rush's abuse of prescription drugs. As always, Your Mileage May Vary™

Further, what Rush did was against the law.So is what Clinton did.

[hgc]

Pssst. Here's a tip on how to ignore right-wing hypocracy: Just chant "Clinton" over and over again.

[xouper]

hgc: Pssst. Here's a tip on how to ignore right-wing hypocracy: Just chant "Clinton" over and over again.Pssst. Here's a tip on how to ridicule someone else's point: Accuse them of chanting and ignoring.

But seriously, I hope you aren't accusing me of ignoring right-wing hypocrisy or chanting "Clinton" over and over. I agree with the prediction made by Lurker that fans of Rush are likely to forgive and forget his hypocrisy. I was trying to point out that there is merit in what Lurker said, since there is much evidence to suggest that kind of thing has happened before. I offered Clinton as an example that forgiveness of hypocrisy is not limited to one political ideology, in case anyone was trying to imply otherwise.

[hgc]

Originally posted by xouper
Pssst. Here's a tip on how to ridicule someone else's point: Accuse them of chanting and ignoring.

But seriously, I hope you aren't accusing me of ignoring right-wing hypocrisy or chanting "Clinton" over and over. I agree with the prediction made by Lurker that fans of Rush are likely to forgive and forget his hypocrisy. I was trying to point out that there is merit in what Lurker said, since there is much evidence to suggest that kind of thing has happened before. I offered Clinton as an example that forgiveness of hypocrisy is not limited to one political ideology, in case anyone was trying to imply otherwise. Well I, for one, don't forgive Clinton his crimes or his hypocracy. But I do notice his name coming up in connection with others' wrongdoing, with stunning regularity, and with the goal of diverting attention from the issue at hand. That is: that if Rush doesn't come back from this, and re-address his previous stands about drug addicts and drug addiction, then he and those of his followers left are world-beating hypocrites. This applies just as much now as it would in a world where Clinton never existed. Is this idea even ideological? Not in my opinion.

[Frank Newgent]

In general, the subjunctive expresses uncertainty, possibility, a feeling, or a wish. In English, the past perfect subjunctive is structured the same as the past perfect indicative: Bill O'Reilly was hoping that Rush Limbaugh hadn´t gone through his medicine chest again.
The structure of the subjunctive is extremely simple in English. For all verbs except the past tense of to be, the subjunctive conjugation is the same as the bare infinitive (infinitive without "to").

The subjunctive is typically used after verbs or expressions which express commands, desires, feelings, possibilities, followed by the word that.

Additionally, though the past tense of to be is normally was, in the past subjunctive form it instead would be were.

(Some fixed expressions also use the subjunctive.)

After words such as if or suppose, when this tense is triggered, we get the subjunctive form: I suppose that if someone here were to joke ¨Hey, why do you think they call him Rush?¨, Heaven forbid, someone else might demand that the librarian be subpoenaed.

[xouper]

hgc: Well I, for one, don't forgive Clinton his crimes or his hypocracy.OK, good to know. Obviously, my earlier comments weren't about you, were they.

But I do notice his name coming up in connection with others' wrongdoing, with stunning regularity, and with the goal of diverting attention from the issue at hand.It's not reasonable to heap all that blame on me, especially since I haven't done that here. I know you didn't address your comment directly to me, but you did post it immediately following my post about Clinton, so the implication is obvious.

That is: that if Rush doesn't come back from this, and re-address his previous stands about drug addicts and drug addiction, then he and those of his followers left are world-beating hypocrites. This applies just as much now as it would in a world where Clinton never existed. Is this idea even ideological? Not in my opinion.I agree that it's not ideological, or that least that it knows no ideological bounds. Considering that most Rush bashing comes from the left, I thought I would add some balance to the bashing. And given all the Rush bashing in this thread, I'm not going to be intimidated into retracting my comments about Clinton. Also, I'm not trying to divert attention away from the point being made about Rush, but to add to it. I'm also observing that some people should be careful not to be hypocritical in their accusations of other people's hypocrisy.

[hgc]

Maybe it wasn't directed to you alone, xouper, but you were the most proximate inspiration. ;)

I would expect a heavy amount of Rush bashing in the "Rush Limbaugh caught in drug ring" thread.

Fair enough that you want to build on the point by pointing out the hypocracy of the hypocracy-criers, but I stand by my point that Clinton's name comes up more often than not in these scenarios as a diversion.

[Ladewig]

The bigger problem here is that it becomes harder to teach children not to lie when the President of the United States lied under oath.

And is it hard to teach children not to engage in type of illegal political conspiracies that Nixon engaged in after all that came out? Anyone who is using a living U.S. president to serve as an exemplar when teaching moral behavor to children is a few decades behind the times (Jimmy Carter not withstanding). There are valid reasons for criticizing Clinton (and GWB), but "what about the children!" is not one of them.

[xouper]

Ladewig: And is it hard to teach children not to engage in type of illegal political conspiracies that Nixon engaged in after all that came out? Anyone who is using a living U.S. president to serve as an exemplar when teaching moral behavor to children is a few decades behind the times (Jimmy Carter not withstanding). There are valid reasons for criticizing Clinton (and GWB), but "what about the children!" is not one of them.You have missed the point. Perhaps your children haven't used this excuse: "Hey if the president can lie under oath and get away with it, why can't I?" It is not a hypothetical problem. Compared to teaching children about the simple concept of lying, the illegality of political conspiracy is quite abstract, especially to a ten year old. I stand by my comments.

[Julia]

Originally posted by corplinx



Then again, the last person I knew who was hooked badly on oxycontin was self-deluded into thinking he really needed it for pain. It becomes psychologically addictive to some and they feel like they can't stand the pain without it.


Then again, there are others. Those who are not self-deluded. Those who live every day and every night in pain, and they really can't stand the pain without it. Those who have never had this type of incorrigable, chronic, defeating pain, often don't understand that need.

And I don't care who it is, a celebrity or anyone else, every time I read a story like this, about those whose excess is almost beyond comprehension, it makes me angry. Angry because I know that those who need and deserve not to have to live with mind-boggling pain day after day, will find it a bit harder to find a doctor willing to prescribe.

Now, once again, the media will be focusing on pain pill abuse. Every newspaper, magazine, every time you turn on the tv, it's in our faces. And everyone you talk to seems to know someone who . . .

There is no question it is a problem. No question that addiction is a powerful, evil, foe. It's just too bad that so many people seem to have difficulty determining who has unmanagable pain, and who has a habit.

[ShowMe]

Originally posted by Lurker
Well, I make a special case for Rush.

It's easy to make "a special case" for people you don't agree with. But feeling sorry for people you like isn't true compassion.

I am merely appaled at his hypocrisy.

Whenever someone preaches one thing and does another it's appalling. Jimmy Swaggart comes wuickly to mind.

[QUOTE][B]Hopefully he will come back with some changed attitudes (I doubt it) and will become a voice of reason about drugs. Hopefully his audience will learn from him (I doubt it).[QUOTE][B]


We'll see. Hard to say with these things, but I'm willing to bet his 4Q numbers will be astronomical.

[Lurker]

Originally posted by ShowMe


It's easy to make "a special case" for people you don't agree with. But feeling sorry for people you like isn't true compassion.



Actually, many people I disagree with I do not put in that special case. I actually DO feel sorry for Rush's affliction and hope he gets better. He created his problem and only he can fix it. I wish him sell. But I am not going to be silent on his hypocracy either. If we liberals had not voted against his sort of vision of America he would be in prison after a quick trial. Luckily for him we stood against that sort of vision.


[QUOTE]
...but I'm willing to bet his 4Q numbers will be astronomical.

True. And that does not bother me tremendously. Even I will be curious as to what he will say.

Lurker