[witnesstothefall]

No you're wrong.

Now answer me a question. Have you heard a single report of a disinterested party reporting ever seeing Rush Limbaugh in visible pain? Ever? Sure is strange, considering all the arguments defending the illegal use of narcotics to treat chronic pain. Very strange indeed.

So have you?

[AlwaysLurking]

I have seen Rush in visible pain.

[k2blader]

Have you heard a single report of a disinterested party reporting ever seeing Rush Limbaugh in visible pain? Ever?

Are you suggesting Rush wasn't in physical pain because there have been no reports by "disinterested" parties that he was?

[Tree of Liberty]

No you're wrong.

So you do see a difference, correct? Then how can you not see a difference between acquiring an addiction from the orders of a doctor and acquiring an addiction from simply entertaining yourself?

Now answer me a question. Have you heard a single report of a disinterested party reporting ever seeing Rush Limbaugh in visible pain? Ever? Sure is strange, considering all the arguments defending the illegal use of narcotics to treat chronic pain. Very strange indeed.

I reject the notion that there's any such thing as a "disinterested party". Everyone has an angle. I have never seen him in pain, but he did say that he became addicted after spinal surgery. Because of the vicious nature of the press against conservatism, I am fully confidant that 1) if he never had the surgery and 2) he was never prescribed the medication, they would have reported it.