Rush Limbaugh: Open Line Friday [Confirms Some Aspects of Drug Story, Checking In To Rehab]

[I Am Not A Mod]

A thread for those listening to today's show.

[weegee]

if someone is abusing drugs procured from the pharmaceutical industry, it's much less harmful to society as a whole?

Yes.

Some may take this to mean that we should end the war on drugs and let the corporations manufacture consistent quality drugs.

Would we even have prescription drugs then? If marijuana, cocaine, heroin, and lsd become as legal as alcohol and tobacco why would someone need a prescription for oxycontin?

If oxycontin still proved to be a better reliever of backpain than heroin (or did not have the same health/withdrawl factors) would there be some people seeking pain relief by illegally buying oxycontin without a prescription?

Unless we are willing to legalize all drugs (including medicinal and including doing away with the FDA) there will always be a war on drugs.

The purchase of street drugs does finance a lot of criminal enterprise (from bribing public officials to gangsters defending their territory to some paramilitary rebel/terrorist organizations). Also organized crime exists to fill the niche markets. If they don't traffic in drugs, they will traffic in prostitution and pornography; there are also payoffs between organized labor and contracts, murder for hire, gambling, and all sorts of enterprises (including "protection money" shakedowns).

Ending the war on drugs won't spell the end of the mob. Just like the RIAA keeps seeking out new sources of revenue to fill the gap caused by shrinking markets (the baby boomers no longer buy as much music as they once did), so organized crime would continue to keep revenue at current levels or higher.

[weegee]

OTOH if he was privately scoring pills on his own and his physician did not know what was going on because limbaugh was keeping it from him then he brought it all on himself and deserves consequences and prosecution.

At least at some point Rush let his physician know about his addiction because he made the statement that he is entering rehabilition after consulting with his doctor.

If his doctor was taking any sort of bloodwork from Rush, there were probably some readings that pointed to a continued use of Oxycontin over those 2 years.

We don't know if Rush was consuming more oxycontin than his doctor was prescribing or if his doctor had ceased prescribing oxycontin (or if his doctor was unwilling to continue writing prescriptions for oxycontin but told him that it would be helpful to remain on it if he could find alternate sources for the medication).

Certainly there have been doctors who have told patients that it may be helpful for them to get marijuana even though those doctors may have never written a "prescription" for it or noted that in the medical record.

[ellery]

I think we basically agree, then, on the role of prison. I don't believe people should go to jail for illegal drug possession/procurement at all. I do believe they should go to jail if they commit other crimes on drugs (e.g., robberies, endangering minors, etc.)

[ellery]

It may not have been a need for increased quantity. Maybe the doctor's prescription levels were being monitored and it could red flag him. He tells Rush that he can't continue prescribing him Oxycontin. Alternatively he may tell Rush that he is concerned about longterm problems with withdrawl from Oxycontin and is only willing to prescribe it to him for a short period (after which Rush goes to alternative avenues after finding it works better than other medications).

That's possible -- and Rush would certainly not be the first person whose only crime was needing something he could only procure illegally. The problem is that people who do this are often not treated sympathetically by the law or even by people here.

[solitas]

No, but a kid could be buying it to get looped, no?
I posted in the thread about the kid who saved another by sharing an asthma inhaler and is now getting crucified for it: I'm on the kid's side and agree that there are differences in situations that the zero-tolerance laws ignore. All drugs are NOT bad - it depends on the circumstances and situations to properly assess and judge how the laws should be administered. Protecting health and saving lives are MOST DEFINITELY NOT zero-tolerance issues.

I couldn't care even if his stepdaughter was sharing a bed with Arafat or clinton on alternate even-dated Wednesdays - that's HER business. All I'm saying is that he would've shown more character to the GENERAL public by admitting it right from the start, rather than secretly dropping out of sight, off the air, twice, for extended periods of time, explaining it as 'vacation', to do rehab - especially after his on-air goings-on about drug abuse and tolerance of crimes and offenses and all else RATHER than the way it happened (getting caught/exposed and THEN making explanations). Is it a case of "don't do as I do - do as I say"?

[solitas]

ewww! :)

[ellery]

Some may take this to mean that we should end the war on drugs and let the corporations manufacture consistent quality drugs.

:) I was going to point out that this was the logical end point of that argument. No, ending the war on drugs won't mean the end of the mob -- but it would weaken them. I'm actually not in favor of ending the war on drugs -- I am in favor of re-Constitutionalizing it, decriminalizing it and channeling the current criminal measures toward education and treatment. I don't believe you can fight it from the supply side -- the only hope is to decrease demand through education. And even then there will always be people who succumb.

[Pan_Yans Wife]

I do believe they should go to jail if they commit other crimes on drugs (e.g., robberies, endangering minors, etc.)

The irony is that the defense in these crimes is often that they can't be held responsible because they were under the influence of a controlled substance and are addicted and thus need treatment. Drug and alcohol addiction have become diseases in America.

[Hildy]

Well Laz, we have something else in common.

[CodeMonkey]

Some addicts lash out violently at society (even drunks do this, witness bar shootings) while others steal to feed their addictions. Should a convenience store robber get a lighter sentence because he is struggling with an addiction?

That's not part of the issue. You're talking about violent offenders. You never have a right to commit armed robbery or lash out violently.

Rush like many conservatives has had little sympathy for those who are addicted to hard drugs and so to a large extent I can't really feel sorry for him more than I would for anyone who has an addiction. If Rush had been more of a champion of the principle that it is your body, not society's, then that would be different.

Either you are the absolute owner of your mind and body or you aren't. There is no exception to this rule. Either you have exclusive right of property in them or the government does.

[ellery]

The irony is that the defense in these crimes is often that they can't be held responsible because they were under the influence of a controlled substance and are addicted and thus need treatment. Drug and alcohol addiction have become diseases in America.

I would argue the victim culture is the biggest disease. Many more people argue they aren't responsible for their crimes because of their sad childhoods. Talk about a slippery slope! I think most of the anti-WOD people here would argue that people should still do their time if they commit crimes like robbery, endangerment, drunk/drugged driving, etc. At least I would hope so!

[solitas]

There is actually NO difference in both classes of addicts except motivation. And whatever the motivation was, the motivation is now addiction.

True, and true. But it's not motivation that gets you prosecuted: it's method. Were the drugs administered under a physician's (even though possibly wildly incompetent) care or obtained illegally through a third party? THAT'S what hasn't been properly explained as of yet.

A conscientious physician would have most likely recognized the situation and taken the appropriate steps to remedy the pain and addiction. How many good doctors does anyone know who would say "just go ahead and take all the pills you want and don't let me know how you're feeling"?

[weegee]

Someone has posted a monologue from Rush about the difference between the left's attack on tobacco and other drugs:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/999497/posts?page=69#69

With drug addiction you are dealing with human failings. A recreational user willingly comes to the table; a prescription addict does so initially under the guise of treating a condition (mental or physical). Once addicted, the cause is mute.

One does not have to be an addict to be a recreational drug user or abuser. It feels "good". Hedonists say "if it feels good, do it". This is self-destructive because it can lead to addiction where the individual no longer has the opportunity to make a choice between using or not using; the addiction requires them to keep using until they can break the addiction.

Those in charge deem that this can be harmful to society (that the recreational user does not fully understand the torment of the addict and cannot readily consent to this lifepath). Some of these substances are even lethal in a single use. As bad a tobacco may be, in a room with at least some fresh air, it is an impossible task (it is a slow death). Even alcohol is lethal only in the heaviest of binges (competition drinking) as the drinker is likely to throw up or pass out before hitting a lethal blood alcohol level.

When there are people in America (and around the world) who insist that there is a positive aspect to "drug culture" it is difficult to win through sheer education.

Some people accept their use/abuse as a "failing" and want to be accepted for who they are, be it a drunk, toker, heroin addict, etc.. Some people see the former bad boys Keith Richards and Jim Morrison as "role models" and want to see if they can immitate their levels of consumption. A stupid act that leads to the thinning of the herd. They spend much of their time chasing a "good time". Everyday people don't realize that celebrities have larger bank accounts, less commitments, and better handlers (not to mention legal advisors).

[Sweet_Sunflower29]

My support for Rush won't change in the least.

I became addicted to prescription pain killers a few years ago after having major surgery; being addicted was easy, admitting it to someone is not. I can still remember how scared I was to finally tell my husband and seek help.

Good for you Rush for taking this all important first step, and God speed.

[weegee]

The condition of rehabilitation centers is that they do not disclose who is seeking treatment. There was even a case where a teenage girl had been abducted and was made a sexual slave. There was a search for her and her captor forced her to write a note to her parents saying that she was seeking treatment for drug addiction.

Her parents did not believe it and even the police could not get a confirmation or denial from area rehab centers.

Rush does not owe you a release of his medical records.

Where is the outrage that President Clinton kept his medical record sealed from the public? Here is a man who was elected to serve the country (not just a hired radio host); a man who controlled the military and signed legislation into law. Some believe that his medical reports showed evidence of past drug use (including a near fatal experience with cocaine) and that he may have been using cocaine while in the White House.

Degree of scale?

[solitas]

"...after consulting his doctor..."

Yeah, okay, agreed. But it would be interesting to know if he went to his doctor, or his doctor discovered his condition via lab tests/bloodwork, or his doctor read the papers and called him up asking "what the hell's THIS stuff I'm reading about?". :)

Maybe it's just me, but I can't envision a doctor saying "I can't prescribe this stuff for you any more even though you still need it: go find it on your own.". As long as there is supporting evidence (peer review, second opinions, corroborative diagnoses) that a medication IS need for a particular condition then a physician could prescribe a patient's continued medication until the end of time. They do that now for certain conditions.

[madison10]

A question, hope you don't mind: You became addicted to pain killers, but your doctor/hospital was prescribing them? Just because you became addicted does not mean you obtained the drugs illegally, right?

How does one become addicted on a pharmacy prescription?

Just asking because some of the main accusations against Rush seem to be that in order to be addicted he had to have been obtaining the drugs illegally. This may not be the case.

[weegee]

Good to hear that you beat your addiction. Johnny Cash beat his long addiction to pain killers and refused to take them in his later years even though it meant enduring much pain; he didn't want to have to fight that addiction again.

I only took painkillers for back pain (from a car accident) for a few days. They made me sluggish and clouded my mind. Even after just a few days I had painful muscle spasms in muscles that had not been experiencing pain; I attributed this to withdrawl. When I took the medication, those spasms subsided (these were muscle relaxers). I toughed it out for a few days (including some painful spasms that would wake me up in the middle of the night). If it was that bad after just a few days of use, I didn't want to have to contend with a more intense withdrawl.

[Mad_Tom_Rackham]

God bless and good luck.

My hunee and I were discussing this topipc over breakfast this morning. We wondered how many people might be moved to help themselves since Rush has taken this step. With 20M listeners, he just may have saved many lives this Friday past.

[Phil V.]

no comment . . . just wanted to be 1400