Skip to comments.
LIBERALS ARE BESIDE THEMSELVES WITH GLEE (about Rush)
boortz.com ^
| 10/13/03
| NEAL BOORTZ
Posted on 10/13/2003 6:56:17 AM PDT by Pokey78
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-97 next last
To: unixfox
Maybe it's the doctors that should go to jail !! Then who would all those drug reps ply with endless supplies of pizzas, donuts, free dinners, and other 'perks'? If anyone is a 'pusher' in this situation, it's those guys. Follow the money (and there's LOTS of it in pharmaceuticals)...
61
posted on
10/13/2003 8:10:38 AM PDT
by
who knows what evil?
(Under the personal care of the Great Physician...full coverage.)
To: lucysmom
The liberals have been providing "drugs" for the little "black kid" for years....we are all born with the SAME Chances....here in America....that's what FREEDOM is all about, except that the libs have continued to keep many on their PLANTATION of POORNESS for their own benefit, because it SERVES their PURPOSE. We need to talk Apples and Apples, not apples and lemons.
I agree Rush has a problem....but it's interesting that people are already deciding what exactly his motivations were....I can't read his mind, nor can YOU or anyone else...we just have to wait this out....but, I'm not going to CONVICT him YET.
62
posted on
10/13/2003 8:15:37 AM PDT
by
goodnesswins
(If I had to deal with liberals every day, I'd take oxycotin, too!)
To: who knows what evil?
Follow the money...Now, there you go, bringing the Big Picture into the debate!
That's not fair to the WODdies. ;^)
63
posted on
10/13/2003 8:20:08 AM PDT
by
headsonpikes
(Spirit of '76 bttt!)
To: oopimrehs
Be sympathetic to him if you want to. But you can't deny that HE gave them ammo by being completely unsympathetic to drug users who are just like him. True, but it shouldn't be very powerful ammo. I was once addicted to nicotine, does this mean I have no right to rail against cocaine?
I know of no USERS "just like him" that are going to jail, anyone?
To: jetson
You are correct in forcasting a good audience for Rush regardless of this situation.
As for what I have heard from a couple of very liberal people I know is best wishes for recovery when this very subject came up, and were pointedly opposed to legal harm coming to him over this.
Thinking about it, it makes sense to apply the medical problem model even handly if indeed one believes drug problems are medical in nature and recovery is more logical then to seek stronger and stronger retribution for use and sale to remedy the situation involved with drug use. Sometimes liberals try to remain consistent in this way.
I bet that anyone who posed it to someone who was gleeful at the woes of a fellow human being with a medical problem, I bet they would quickly agree that they need to lighten up on Rush.
Many feel like Rush is a part of their family, and nothing really has changed. Hype or no hype, nobody ever seriously thought Rush was not a fallible human being anyway you look at it. Life goes on.
65
posted on
10/13/2003 8:24:41 AM PDT
by
bicycle thug
(Fortia facere et pati Americanum est.)
To: goodnesswins
I agree Rush has a problem....but it's interesting that people are already deciding what exactly his motivations were....I can't read his mind, nor can YOU or anyone else...we just have to wait this out....but, I'm not going to CONVICT him YET. Who's reading minds here? I asked a question that was sincerely meant.
If you think a child born in poverty without solid family support has an equal shot at life with those born in better circumstances, I am at a loss for a response.
66
posted on
10/13/2003 8:28:47 AM PDT
by
lucysmom
To: lucysmom
I wasn't talking about YOU reading minds, just others....
YES...I do think a "child born in poverty here without solid family support has an equal shot at life".....think about how many of those born at higher levels destroy THEIR lives, with drugs, sex, booze, etc.....I believe AMERICA is the BEST place for ANYONE to make it.....it's the LIBS who are keeping little POOR kids down.....with a moral landscape, it would be different, but the LIBS are amoral and intent on keeping their little PLANTATION GOING.
Look at all the IMMIGRANTS who come here penniless?
Now....back to the issue at hand....(since we've gotten off topic a bit.)
67
posted on
10/13/2003 8:37:26 AM PDT
by
goodnesswins
(If I had to deal with liberals every day, I'd take oxycotin, too!)
To: oopimrehs
He's already been to rehab twice. That's what gives his detractors ammo. Rush has taken sixty days off? (That would be two rehab stays which are at a minimum--30 days).
Hasn't he tried detox twice; a brief period 48 - 72 hour hospital stay to cleanse the system of the drug?
Detox without rehab never works.
Rush now has the chance to get this monkey off his back once and for all.
To: Right_in_Virginia; oopimrehs
Right_in_Virginia, I believe you're correct about Rush going to detox (48-72 hours), rather than in-patient rehab.
69
posted on
10/13/2003 8:45:57 AM PDT
by
Catspaw
To: Catspaw
And rehab is what he needs. Thank God he's finally getting the help.
To: Right_in_Virginia
He's taken the first step by admitting he's addicted, but it's only the first step.
What he has to focus on now is going through the program successfully--whichever program he, his family and his doctors have chosen. He also he needs help with pain management for his back. He also doesn't needed added stress, pressure from those who expect him to be back on the air on day #31 and pressure from those who have other agendas. His recovery is going to be difficult, and relapses are common.
That said, I am deeply disappointed that he would allow drugs to take over his life, the same disappointment I'd have if he'd allowed alcohol, gambling or another addiction to control his life. I'm angry because those like my daughter, who has rhuematoid arthritis, pay the penalty because they do not have access to medication they need (in my daughter's case, one of her prescribed drugs is Oxycontin) because others have abused it.
I also don't wanted him treated any differently by the law than anyone else.
71
posted on
10/13/2003 8:56:46 AM PDT
by
Catspaw
To: bray
He should be punished as any person who broke any laws that he may have broken. As a former drug addict, I have little compassion for his weaknesses. Did you break any laws while you were addicted?
Were you punished by the legal system?
72
posted on
10/13/2003 9:03:16 AM PDT
by
Ken H
To: oopimrehs
"The moral of this story is people in glass houses should not throw stones"
BS.
What you're saying is that because we are all short of the mark in one way or another that no one has the right to take a moral stand. That's liberal/libertine/libertarian Baloney.
Your gratuituous insult to all Priests demonstrates my point exactly. If you had one ounce of wit you'd know that the per centage of pedophilia w/i the clergy is lower by far than any other segment of society, yet you would use the (human) failure of the few to cast disgusting insults at an institution that does more humanitarian work in this world than any other man made organization.
The difference between a hypocrit and an honest man is the honest man takes responsibility for his own failings, like Rush did and Bill Bennett did. Look at the clintonites of this world to see true hypocricy where they pass "sexual harrassment" laws and then twist the judicial system onto its head to avoid the consequencies of the laws they passed.
73
posted on
10/13/2003 9:04:27 AM PDT
by
Pietro
To: unixfox
I must be missing your point. First you said:
Nonethleless, if Rush gets back on the drugs after rehab he should face jail time.
And then you say:
If he goes then miliions of others would have to go as well, including my ex-wife who in fact went to treatment 3 times for PRESCRIPTION pain killers before she finally came clean.
Do you believe that people who get back on drugs (and prescription drugs are just as illegal as non-prescription drugs without a prescription) after rehab should go to jail or not?
To: goodnesswins; wayoverontheright
I don't see any difference between illegally purchasing drugs to quell an addiction to pain killers or to quell an addiction to "recreational" drugs. For example, Demerol is just a synthetic heroin whether it is used for pain or recreation. Either way, you are supporting a criminal sub-culture.
Rush really should have found someone to write him a prescription...
At some point I acquired a understanding, probably erroneous, that there mandatory Federal sentences for some drug offences that put otherwise inoffensive druggies in prison, using space that could have otherwise been filled with violent offenders. I guess I was wrong.
75
posted on
10/13/2003 9:16:14 AM PDT
by
Little Ray
(When in trouble, when in doubt, run in circles, scream and shout!)
To: Little Ray
If your point is that there are certain druggies in prison who should not be....I agree. By the way, Rush did find someone to "write him a prescription".....but, as with pain management, it wasn't ENOUGH to take care of the pain, or so we're told....time will tell, but I will not try to second guess Rush's problems right now, unlike some others here.
76
posted on
10/13/2003 9:19:47 AM PDT
by
goodnesswins
(If I had to deal with liberals every day, I'd take oxycotin, too!)
To: goodnesswins
er...correction..."as with SOME pain management"
77
posted on
10/13/2003 9:20:22 AM PDT
by
goodnesswins
(If I had to deal with liberals every day, I'd take oxycotin, too!)
To: All
Read the Newsweek hatchet job on Rush and tried to email them with a reply but it was rejected. Apparently Evan Thomas doesn't like people to call his writing yellow journalism. He took every bit of Limbaugh's life and put it on the griddle and then turned up the heat. I would like to do the same to Thomas...... Got to Lucianne's site and read what she has to say called "A Rush to Judgement"
78
posted on
10/13/2003 9:45:17 AM PDT
by
cousair
To: Orangedog
Instead the conservatives have decided to rationalize this...Sorry, but there is a difference. becoming addicted to a substance because one has chronic back pain is far different then becoming addicted because you hang out with n'er do wells and partied all the time so you got hooked.
The drug war has failed, just like the war on poverty failed.
That may be true. But you libertarians and libertarian/conservatives need to wake up and consider all the ugly fun liberals could have with a populace more dependent on drugs-- giving them more welfare, more social security, more free drugs and needles for the "poor" addicts, skyrocketing medical costs for overdosers et al.
If you think that's all automatically going to transfer itself into "smaller government" than you have certainly once again underestimated liberals and their mischief.
79
posted on
10/13/2003 10:05:41 AM PDT
by
Cubs Fan
To: Stone Mountain
that doesn't rewally make sense. He's never been absent 30 days before. So how could he have gone through rehab before?
80
posted on
10/13/2003 10:12:47 AM PDT
by
Cubs Fan
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-97 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson