Posted on 12/09/2003 6:01:34 AM PST by Maria S
Late last week, rocker Ozzy Osbourne admitted to a 42-pill-a-day addiction to prescription drugs.
Few could be surprised about the revelation. On his MTV show and in other public appearances the aging rock star has appeared incoherent and intoxicated.
Justifiably, California state authorities are going after the pusher. In this case, the state medical board is going after Osbourne’s doctor, though the physician denies any wrongdoing.
Still, no one is suggesting that Osbourne should be prosecuted for his prescription drug addiction, an addiction that started with normal medical treatment. Another sensational case that should have been treated similarly is that of Rush Limbaugh.
His prescription addiction case should have been written off weeks ago as nothing more than a case of prescription drug addiction.
But the Limbaugh story has legs – long ones. The long legs of this story seem to have been generated by a liberal media out to get the conservative radio host by any means possible, including pushing for a legal investigation that seems more like a political inquisition.
If Rush were treated like every other case similar to his, it wouldn’t even rate news time, let alone a legal inquiry.
The facts of this case are now pretty clear: Rush has had a prescription drug addiction that began as a result of a surgical procedure for back problems. Admirably, Rush has admitted the problem and, after intensive rehab, is attempting to save himself.
The facts came to light when Rush’s former housekeeper, Wilma Cline, sold her story to the National Enquirer. In early October, when the Enquirer story broke, it appeared as if the Palm Beach County state attorney, Barry Krischer, was planning to treat Rush like other cases of individuals found to be abusing prescription drugs.
Press reports indicated that the state investigation was focused not on Rush’s addiction, but on the larger issue of enablers and pushers, notably doctors and a wider drug ring that was doling out these drugs. But since then, Krischer has apparently had a change of heart about the direction of his probe.
Soon after Rush came out of rehab, ABC News reported that its “sources” close to the probe were saying Rush was being investigated for money laundering.
Though Rush quickly explained that he had been advised by his bank to withdraw less than $10,000 from his account each time he made a withdrawal, and over the course of years withdrew some $300,000 – not a large sum for a man of his wealth – it was more fodder for his critics.
To further prove that unusual lengths were being employed to hurt Rush, last week the state attorney’s office obtained warrants for Rush’s medical records, with claims – so far unsubstantiated – that Rush was doctor shopping for prescriptions.
Rush’s lawyer, Roy Black, appeared on the “Today” show this past Friday and expressed amazement that Rush is being treated differently from millions of others with prescription drug addictions.
“Have you ever watched people on television leafing through records, calling out the names of their doctors and a list of medications they were using?" Black complained. "The first person is Rush Limbaugh." "Why is Rush Limbaugh the only person who gets treated like this in America?" he added.
Black, of course, is a well-known liberal. He also is honest. Rush is being singled out for political reasons.
Krischer issued a statement Thursday saying that Limbaugh remained under investigation, but added that he "is presumed innocent at this time."
But clearly Rush is being treated differently. Even Geraldo, no Rush fan, said this weekend on his Fox News program that Rush was being singled out, unfairly. Geraldo quipped that if every senior citizen in the state of Florida who “doctor shopped” was prosecuted, there wouldn’t be enough prison cells in the state. Mike Walker, a columnist from National Enquirer, appeared on Fox News and agreed with Geraldo. Walker described the government’s actions toward Rush as “overkill.”
Not privy to all the details here, I am not going to pass judgment on Rush.
But I will pass judgment on the state attorney so far. When Rush is treated for a prescription drug addiction differently from anyone in history with a similar drug addiction, legitimate questions about fairness arise. So much of Rush’s problems have been clouded in charges and countercharges, bogus reports and the like.
They all start with the housekeeper, Wilma Cline, first portrayed by the National Enquirer as a victim of Rush. But it seems to me that she was much more of a classic enabler – a person who encourages another’s addiction. In helping feed Rush’s addiction, Cline collected cash from him. She also kept very careful records of her activities almost from day one. Was this to blackmail Rush? To sell her story to the National Enquirer? Or to help the police?
We do know that Cline first came to the tabloid some two years ago seeking to sell her story about Rush. When the paper’s editors told her she didn’t have a story until there was an official police investigation, she came back to them when that investigation was triggered.
Cline reportedly received a cool $250,000 for the dirt on Rush’s prescription drug addiction.
Cline, by going to the papers, also may have compromised the state’s inquiry into pushers and doctors doling out these prescription drugs for big money.
So much for the Cline-as-victim story.
But when word broke about Rush’s problems, it must have been welcome news to many prominent Democrats who see him as an obstacle in next year’s election.
My guess is that the news also caused these top Democrats to talk about how nice it would be if Rush could be toppled. Those thoughts may have percolated down to the local prosecutor in Palm Beach.
One clue that this was the thinking comes from Kendall Coffey.
Coffey is the former Clinton-appointed U.S. attorney in Miami, a Janet Reno ally who most recently served as Al Gore’s lead recount lawyer in 2000.
Appearing on MSNBC this week, the well-connected Coffey said he didn't think the state attorney wanted to prosecute Rush but apparently feels he has to. Why does he feel this way?
Surely there is no public outcry that Rush be prosecuted, nor would there be if Rush were treated like every other person who has had a prescription drug problem, admitted to it, and immediately went into rehab.
Clearly the prosecutors know that the drug problem alone is not enough to warrant legal charges against Rush, that’s why they are going on a fishing expedition to find something else.
To his credit, State Attorney Krischer has no history of politicizing prosecutions. Hopefully that record will continue.
I can see that point, although human weakness is human weakness.
I believe Rush when he says he got addicated to relieve pain rather than to have a good time or escape life or to indulge in fashion.
So, I'm going to cut him slack and take every chance this gives me to point out the hypocrisy of the leftists. (note tagline.)
Should read: "More than were killed by 5 gallon buckets?"
Why should anyone be concerned with anyone else's personal drug use, not just Rush Limbaugh's personal drug use? What business is it of anyone? Rush didn't commit any crimes other than the ones government concocted in order to prosecute the War on Drugs.This is the whole flippin' point of every single W.o.D. thread on FR.
Concerning the govenment's concern, I'm inclined to agree with you. I don't see a point in punishing addicts or responsible users.
On another level, however, I'm a Christian. This means I feel an obligation to dissaude people from doing things that pointlessly hurt themselves, and I have no problem extending this obligation to society in general. Would you want to be addicted to OxyContin? How about someone you care about?
If we are discussing coercion and physical force, we are going to be mostly in agreement.
If, however, you are saying there should be no warnings, criticisms, restrictions on sale/distribution, then we are going to be in disagreement.
What you do of your own volition is of no consequence to me, and I wish you all the happiness and success in the world if you feel you have to preach to others in order to feel fulfilled. Personally I prefer to mind my own business, not the business of others.My problem is with people with a mindset like yours who've made the obligation they feel into cold, hard law, with all the coercion and physical force that goes along with it. You realize it's that kind of notion that perpetuates the War on Drugs, don't you?
I must have missed the occassion where Rush Limbaugh expressed the view that illegal use of drugs should be vigorously prosecuted and the illegal users should be imprisoned.
Care to cite it?
Don't bother trotting out the media-abused 1995 TV comment. It's point was about the disproportionate number of blacks in prison, not about drug abuse.
Cite something else. I'm waiting.
Where the political and electoral machinery is DEMOCRAT, and are still smarting from the election of 2000. I believe they are hoping to take Rush out as a factor in the 2004 election.
Dream on!
Someone offers you OxyContin, truthfully saying it will make you feel good. Would you also like to be informed that it is powerfully addicting?
Nothing personal, but you'd have to be pretty brain dead not to know that oxies are powerfully addictive. I think I could figure out that one on my own.
It's called "Law Shopping".
It was used on Linda Tripp, Billy Dale, Jim Robinson and many other enemies of the Democrats.
To amuse myself, I like to ponder the differences between Rush's "Doctor Shopping" and Hillary's "Cattle Futures Bribe".
Apparently, more people are "outraged" by "doctor shopping" than by a pol's wife stealing money from them in the market.
Go figure. ;-)
My question was "Would you also like to be informed that it is powerfully addicting?" Your answer was that you would know it automatically. By osmosis?
People get hooked on these drugs every day, to their very real and stated regret.
Great point
No, by reading, by paying attention, by asking questions, etc.: all the things required of a vigilant citizen. Do you honestly think Rush had no idea Oxies were addictive?
Really?? So, a vigilant citizen will never get fooled?
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.