Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Limbaugh lurches to the left
St Peterburg's Times ^ | December 29, 2003

Posted on 12/29/2003 6:17:39 AM PST by Alissa

Didn't Rush Limbaugh used to be pro-law and order?

Now that the once conservative commentator finds himself on the wrong side of a police investigation, he and his lawyers are accusing prosecutors and other members of the law enforcement community of concocting a vast, politically motivated conspiracy against him.

Not even the most linguini-spined liberal would have the gall to spew such irresponsible nonsense.

Limbaugh recently completed treatment for an acknowledged addiction to prescription drugs, and Florida prosecutors are investigating evidence that he may have broken the law by going "doctor shopping" to acquire his massive supplies of OxyContin and other painkillers.

A West Palm Beach judge ruled last week that prosecutors had established sufficient cause to examine Limbaugh's medical records, but Limbaugh's lawyers succeeded in getting the records resealed while they appeal the decision.

Either way, the judge and prosecutors have agreed that Limbaugh's medical records will not be made public. By all accounts, police, prosecutors and the courts have have taken great pains to protect Limbaugh's civil rights.

But Limbaugh claims that his problems stem from a massive conspiracy on the part of his political enemies in law enforcement.

"The Democrats still cannot defeat me in the arena of political ideas," Limbaugh said on his Tuesday radio show. "And so now they are trying to do so in the court of public opinion and the legal system."

Limbaugh used to defend the legal system - and he used to ridicule citizens who claimed that their constitutional rights had been violated by police and prosecutors. But now Limbaugh, who is fortunate enough to be able to afford the representation of celebrity attorney Roy Black and a team of defense lawyers, has joined the conspiracy nuts.

The people who have been hunting for someone to host a new left-wing radio talk show may have found their man.


TOPICS: Editorial
KEYWORDS: cheechlimbaugh; cline; communist; conspiracymybutt; hilary; hitpiece; hypocrite; junkie; leftistmedia; liberals; limbaugh; lovablefuzzball; media; palmbeach; rush; socialists; trolls; xanaxman
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-178 next last
To: Alissa
Now that the once conservative commentator finds himself on the wrong side of a police investigation, he and his lawyers are accusing prosecutors and other members of the law enforcement community of concocting a vast, politically motivated conspiracy against him.

Not even the most linguini-spined liberal would have the gall to spew such irresponsible nonsense.


Not when the Clintons had someone like Janet Reno flacking for them. Though in this case Rush didn't say anything about a "vast" conspiracy against him. But it's evident, given the facts, that there have been political motivations at the bottom of choosing to pursue a rather minor thing by letting those guilty of major crime (blackmail/extortion) off the hook in exchange for their help.
51 posted on 12/29/2003 6:58:03 AM PST by aruanan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ClintonBeGone
...Government doesn't make neighborhoods unsafer than crack houses, crack heads and the violence that comes with drug use...

How do you explain that before there was a war on drugs, there was almost no drug-related crime?

52 posted on 12/29/2003 7:00:37 AM PST by the gillman@blacklagoon.com (It's not a blanket amnesty, it's amnistia del serape!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: ClintonBeGone
No one in this country causes more fear among the law abiding population than the dopers and the violent people that engage in the trade that supplies them. Government doesn't make neighborhoods unsafer than crack houses, crack heads and the violence that comes with drug use.

The Clintons, their thugs, corrupt politicans, socialist reporters and ego-driven bureaucrats causes me much more fear that drug users ever could.

53 posted on 12/29/2003 7:01:52 AM PST by Paul C. Jesup
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Alissa
I support Rush BUT hasn't even he said himself
"IF you haven't nothing to hide then what's the problem?"
or words to that effect.
54 posted on 12/29/2003 7:02:32 AM PST by WKB (3!~ A fine is a tax for doing wrong.; A tax is a fine for doing well.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paul C. Jesup
The Clintons, their thugs, corrupt politicans, socialist reporters and ego-driven bureaucrats causes me much more fear that drug users ever could.

I've read that drugs do tend to increase ones paranoia.

55 posted on 12/29/2003 7:05:14 AM PST by ClintonBeGone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: the gillman@blacklagoon.com
How do you explain that before there was a war on drugs, there was almost no drug-related crime?

Do you disagree with my point?

56 posted on 12/29/2003 7:05:55 AM PST by ClintonBeGone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: Alissa
I only have one question for Rush about this mess: "What are you doing living in Liberal South Florida?"
57 posted on 12/29/2003 7:06:02 AM PST by bimbo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WKB
No - that doesn't sound like something he would say. I can't imagine Rush would agree with any kind of privacy invasion without strong probable cause.
58 posted on 12/29/2003 7:06:34 AM PST by Alissa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: Paul C. Jesup
Provide examples on how every one who is anti-tyranny is a drug user.

I'll use you as an example of someone who attempts to camouflage his pro-drug desires by wrapping them in words that have special meaning in our country's history. It's rather despicable.

59 posted on 12/29/2003 7:07:59 AM PST by ClintonBeGone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: Impeach the Boy
The left is the home of HATE and hypocrisy.

And Tommy Chong is in jail for selling bongs, not drugs.

60 posted on 12/29/2003 7:09:06 AM PST by Jim Cane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Alissa
Totally disagree with the editorial! I would bet money that this is politically motivated

I agree.Alissa. This has all the earmarks of a hit piece
61 posted on 12/29/2003 7:10:35 AM PST by gatorbait (Yesterday, today and tomorrow......The United States Army)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: the gillman@blacklagoon.com

In the 1950's there was no MTV extolling hedonism to children, the public schools allowed the pledge of allegiance and public prayers, the ACLU was more concerned with the rights of Communists than with pornographers, the youth of the middle class hadn't embraced aristocratic morals, the college professors were not lauding moral-liberalism to our nation's future leaders, and people generally adhered to the kindness of religious morality. Yet all these recreational drugs that are illegal today, which were extant then, were also perfectly illegal then.

62 posted on 12/29/2003 7:10:57 AM PST by Cultural Jihad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: ClintonBeGone
And I use you as an example of someone who is a pro-government control freak who thinks he knows what is best for everyone else and who is willing force their views on others at gunpoint and imprisonment.
63 posted on 12/29/2003 7:11:59 AM PST by Paul C. Jesup
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: Alissa
No - that doesn't sound like something he would say. I can't imagine Rush would agree with any kind of privacy invasion without strong probable cause.



You must not have been listening to Rush durning
the Clinton years.
64 posted on 12/29/2003 7:12:53 AM PST by WKB (3!~ A fine is a tax for doing wrong.; A tax is a fine for doing well.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: ClintonBeGone
And I use you as an example of someone who is a pro-government control freak who thinks he knows what is best for everyone else and who is willing to force your views on others at gunpoint and imprisonment.
65 posted on 12/29/2003 7:12:54 AM PST by Paul C. Jesup
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: WKB
I think it might also be fair to draw a comparison with how forthcoming Rush has been regarding his "problem" with, say, how up-front CLINTON was...

Rush has honestly, openly, admitted his drug addiction.

Does that mean he has forfeited all rights as a U.S. citizen?

Some here seem to think so.

66 posted on 12/29/2003 7:17:37 AM PST by daler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: WKB
That's exactly when I started listening to Rush. But no conservative would ever say something like it's ok to give up your rights is you don't have anything to hide.
67 posted on 12/29/2003 7:19:56 AM PST by Alissa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: AppyPappy
A conservative is just a libertarian who hasn't been mugged by The Man! ;-)
68 posted on 12/29/2003 7:23:11 AM PST by StriperSniper (Sending the Ba'thist to the showers! ;-)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Paul C. Jesup
And I use you as an example of someone who is a pro-government control freak who thinks he knows what is best for everyone else and who is willing to force your views on others at gunpoint and imprisonment.

You're a wonderful representative of your 'side'. And you've come to all this because 1 - I feel that drugs are a worse curse on this society than our government and 2 - I pointed out you can't cite authority for the things you claim.

69 posted on 12/29/2003 7:23:12 AM PST by ClintonBeGone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: Paul C. Jesup
Hypocrites Unite!

They already have, it is called government.

Yup. Cotton Mather would be proud.

70 posted on 12/29/2003 7:23:34 AM PST by headsonpikes (Spirit of '76 bttt!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: daler
Rush has honestly, openly, admitted his drug addiction


I love Rush and I am not trying to put him down
but just WHEN did he admit to his problem. Hmmmm? After he was exposed and not one minute before. That can not be counted as completely honest and forthcoming
71 posted on 12/29/2003 7:23:35 AM PST by WKB (3!~ A fine is a tax for doing wrong.; A tax is a fine for doing well.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: Alissa
The war on drugs has contributed greatly to social disorder and disrespect for law than any single thing currently.

Just as it's old-timey incarnation, the Temperance movement, did more to raise the murder rate than anything for so say the statistics. Prior to 1904 or so, we had an extraordinary low murder rate. What happened? The rise of the Temperance Movement!

We managed to get the Federal Prohibtion rescinded, hooray! But the shadowy evil twin -- the war on drugs -- continues bustiung up poor marginal families to this day. It has promoted the raising of fatherless bastards in every city and hollow.

Law and order? Anyone who truly respects Law and Order can have nothing but distain and dread of the "War on Drugs".

72 posted on 12/29/2003 7:25:44 AM PST by bvw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ClintonBeGone
Yes, I do disagree. there was no violence until the government got involved.

There was no crack before the war on drugs.
There was no crystal meth before the war on drugs.

We had a Constitution before the war on drugs.
73 posted on 12/29/2003 7:27:02 AM PST by the gillman@blacklagoon.com (It's not a blanket amnesty, it's amnistia del serape!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: Lando Lincoln; Ben Hecks; dix; tubebender; Don Carlos; oprahstheantichrist; nutmeg; cyborg; ...
      Rush Ping!

Freepmail me if you would like on/off the Rush Pinglist!
Search for the latest Rush Limbaugh news on Free Republic.

Limbaugh Prosecutor a Janet Reno Democrat

Lawyers accuse maid of blackmail.

Limbaugh takes off the gloves!

Limbaugh medical records ordered resealed!

ACLU Offers Help to Limbaugh

Rush Limbaugh Question....

Kendall Coffey Comments on the Rush Limbaugh Case

Rush Limbaugh.com

Have yourself a Merry Little Burger.
 

74 posted on 12/29/2003 7:28:00 AM PST by ConservativeMan55 (You know how those liberals are. Two's Company but three is a fundraiser.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: Alissa
That's exactly when I started listening to Rush. But no conservative would ever say something like it's ok to give up your rights is you don't have anything to hide.


I just believe I heard him say that to the Clintons
at least once. I may be wrong but I doubt it.
75 posted on 12/29/2003 7:31:21 AM PST by WKB (3!~ A fine is a tax for doing wrong.; A tax is a fine for doing well.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: Alissa
Where's that guy with the BS meter when you need him?
76 posted on 12/29/2003 7:31:42 AM PST by ConservativeMan55 (You know how those liberals are. Two's Company but three is a fundraiser.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Alissa
...But no conservative would ever say something like it's ok to give up your rights is(if?) you don't have anything to hide....

It is shouted here on FR all the time by so-called conservatives.
77 posted on 12/29/2003 7:32:05 AM PST by the gillman@blacklagoon.com (It's not a blanket amnesty, it's amnistia del serape!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: ChadsDad
"...to ridicule citizens who claimed that their constitutional rights had been violated by police and prosecutors."

I don't recal this as a part of the Rush Limbaugh show I've been enjoying since 1989. Exactly what are we refering to here?

This is a grand example of what I call "quasi-irony." It's defined as the shadenfreude enjoyed by liberals when a conservative suffers loss that can be tenuously associated to liberal's cliche'd fantasies.

Quasi-irony carries as much weight as "but he said he'd call."

78 posted on 12/29/2003 7:32:44 AM PST by papertyger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Paul C. Jesup
It is CORRECT. I listen to Rush and if you went back and listened to a bunch of his broadcasts from, oh, 5 or 6 years ago he sang a totally different tune. The difference is now it impacts HIM so he has shifted course -- and of course that means all his loyal listeners adjust their principles as well, since he is on our side.
79 posted on 12/29/2003 7:33:09 AM PST by jraven
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: Common Tator
Don't forget, BC also trashed Starr on the Whitewater investigation - remember, it was a "political witch hunt"....
80 posted on 12/29/2003 7:43:33 AM PST by TheBattman (Do it your way - just don't come crying to me when it doesn't work!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeMan55
Bump in support of Rush!!!!!!
81 posted on 12/29/2003 7:51:05 AM PST by E.G.C.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: ClintonBeGone
Don't forget the Meth houses -- guess we should just let those be in neighborhoods too. Agree with you totally. I would love to wipe drug pushers off the face of the earth.

In my State, I don't remember one raid that got the wrong house this past year -- the cops just don't go storming a house and breaking down doors for the fun of it -- they have probable cause to suspect drug dealing and have a warrant or they don't go in the house. Wonder how many times, people claim it was the wrong house when they were able to get rid of the drugs or were tipped off. Bet the number of actual wrong houses is very small.

Find a neighborhood with drug pushing and you will find crime -- they are like a hand and glove -- they fit together.
82 posted on 12/29/2003 7:52:28 AM PST by PhiKapMom (AOII Mom -- Support Bush-Cheney '04)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: E.G.C.
Bump back at ya in support of Rush!
83 posted on 12/29/2003 7:52:28 AM PST by ConservativeMan55 (You know how those liberals are. Two's Company but three is a fundraiser.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: Qwinn
Great point...I had missed it (the fact that they would NEVER give immunity to the seller to get the user). Thanks.
84 posted on 12/29/2003 7:53:45 AM PST by Pharmboy (History's greatest agent for freedom: The US Armed Forces)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom; Paul C. Jesup
Find a neighborhood with drug pushing and you will find crime -- they are like a hand and glove -- they fit together.

Betcha some of the pro-druggies on this thread live in gated communities. They're more than happy to let the rest of us live with the results of their dangerous desires.

85 posted on 12/29/2003 8:00:26 AM PST by ClintonBeGone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: Protagoras; Zechariah11; Alissa
Many here can't resist the temptation to attack the messenger.

It could be because they are relatively new to FR and just assumed the messenger was trolling.

86 posted on 12/29/2003 8:05:42 AM PST by new cruelty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

Comment #87 Removed by Moderator

To: Jim Cane
So......
88 posted on 12/29/2003 8:13:37 AM PST by Moby Grape
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: Impeach the Boy
In addition to Rush, the statists on this very forum are full of hypocracy.
89 posted on 12/29/2003 8:20:41 AM PST by Jim Cane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: AppyPappy
So if I drive 60 in a 55 at any point in my life, I cannot complain about a person driving 100 in a school zone.

So does a man who say, has one or two flings with women not his wife have more of a moral high ground than someone like Clinton?

Anyone can complain about anyone else. The issue regarding Rush is that he has lost a great deal of the moral high ground that he has spent the last decade or so building.

90 posted on 12/29/2003 8:35:51 AM PST by A2J (Oh, I wish I was in Dixie...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: WKB
Agreed.

But I was drawing a comparison with others (Clinton specifically) in similar situations.

The Slick One is still denying wrongdoing and is not only given a pass by the press and others, but is invited to make speeches at a couple hundred grand a pop.

Just pointing out the double-standard.

91 posted on 12/29/2003 8:45:54 AM PST by daler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: Jim Cane
You are silly....Chong broke the law multiple times...and even if I may think the penalty harsh, it has NOTHING to do with Rush's privacy right volations, and that is what we are talking about, not the stupid, inane, silly idea of legalizing drugs...which is where YOU are really playing....(and by the way, most folks at FR as really TIRED of the childish "statist" labels you boys spew).

92 posted on 12/29/2003 8:46:08 AM PST by Moby Grape
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: Alissa
I have a great deal of sympathy for Rush's little drug problem. I struggled with similar things (how many of us are addicted to cigarettes?), and I wish him God's speed in overcoming his problem.

But didn't Rush also support vociferously the whole "War on Drugs"?

Has Rush changed his mind on that? Please correct me if I'm wrong, but he hasn't yet admitted the error of his ways yet. He seems to want it both ways - it's okay when he breaks the law and takes illegal drugs, and when the cops come after him it's a vast left wing conspiracy, but when they go after the little junkie down the block, well, that's a different thing altogether.

Maybe the whole idea of prosecuting people for their chemical dependencies is wrong from the get-go. Maybe it makes much more sense to stop treating addiction as primarily a moral problem and start treating it as a disease (medical science takes this position). Mabye we could stop treating addicts as criminals, and look at them rather as sick people who need help.

Because that's what they truly are.

Rush is just a sick guy who needs help and deserves our sympathy. That's the same situation every alcoholic or drug addict faces. They're sick, and they need help. And treating them like criminals simply takes no accounting of that truth. I think that Rush ought to continue admitting that he is an addict and in need of lots of help, but also then admit that his support for the War on Drugs - of which he is now a victim - was always wrong.

Hey, Rush, just admit you were wrong about the War on Drugs, which is actually a War on People and the vehicle the state used to repeal the 4th Amendment and continue its relentless march to totalitarian power.

And then join us civil libertarians in resisting the encroachments of Big Brother in all our lives, and not just those who earn gazillions of dollars for a few hours of radio air time.

And get your chubby but to some 12-step meetings.

Heartbreak
93 posted on 12/29/2003 8:49:39 AM PST by Heartbreak of Psoriasis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeMan55
Rush Will Persevere ~ Bump!

Be Well ~ Be Armed ~ Be Safe ~ Molon Labe!
94 posted on 12/29/2003 8:56:55 AM PST by blackie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: Impeach the Boy
You are silly....Rush broke the law multiple times...and even if I may think the penalty harsh, the WOD has everything to do with Rush's privacy right volations, and that is what we are talking about, which includes the stupid, inane, silly idea of confiscating a person's property such as tubes of glass...which is where YOU are really spinning away from....(and by the way, most folks at FR as really TIRED of the childish "legalize drugs" label you boys spew).


95 posted on 12/29/2003 8:58:52 AM PST by Jim Cane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: Alissa
he used to ridicule citizens who claimed that their constitutional rights had been violated by police and prosecutors.

I can't recall specific instances of this. Can you?

96 posted on 12/29/2003 9:04:11 AM PST by lasereye
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Heartbreak of Psoriasis
Having a propensity to addictions that runs in my family, I have to agree with you. Addiction, by it's nature, is something you cannot control, otherwise it wouldn't be an addiction. Most people cannot beat their addictions without help - throwing them in jail is useless unless they are violent to others. I think even if you are high as a kite you still know right from wrong.
97 posted on 12/29/2003 9:10:39 AM PST by Alissa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: lasereye
Half of what people claim he said, I've never heard him say. Maybe he said some of these things before I started listening to him, which was the early 90's.
98 posted on 12/29/2003 9:13:28 AM PST by Alissa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: Alissa
This is the problem with the linear scale the media likes to refer to in promoting left vs right ideology. Their methodology is outdated, left vs. right in the last century has become a fight over coercive centralized government and it's hold over the means of production.
The far left calls this communism and the opposite would obviously be anarchy( where anarchy does not mean a dismantling of private endeavours only public government institutions).
The less laws that coerce and restrict individuals is a far right issue....so if anything, Limbaugh is moving further right.
99 posted on 12/29/2003 9:15:23 AM PST by Katya
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ClintonBeGone; Jim Cane
One thing this thread shows to me is how the anti-WOD Libertarians on FR, on how eagar they are to grab onto any editorial that supports a pro-drug agenda, such as the St. Petersburg's Times. Of course lost on the pro-drug Libertarians on FR, is that the St. Petersburg's Times is even more leftist the New York Times.

But what the hey, the Pravda(St.Petersburg Times) of the Tampa Bay, has taken up the Libertarian cause. Oh that's correct I forgot, families usually stick together when on the attack(Soprano's etc.) and that is what you are seeing on this thread, the family of liberal demos and Libertarians sticking together.

100 posted on 12/29/2003 9:16:30 AM PST by Dane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-178 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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson