PDA

View Full Version : Oh, Rush! You scamp!


Ultra Peanut
06-26-2006, 08:23 PM
http://www.bradenton.com/mld/bradenton/news/breaking_news/14908131.htm

"The problem was that on the bottle itself was not his name, but the name of two Florida doctors," Miller said.

The matter was turned over to the sheriff's office, whose investigators interviewed Limbaugh.

"He said he had the Viagra in his possession for his use and that he did obtain it from his doctors," Miller said.

Sheriff's investigators confiscated the drugs, and Limbaugh was released around 5:30 p.m. without being charged.
Rush is TOTALLY getting some! And so are some lucky deputies!

Brock
06-26-2006, 08:33 PM
Lortab is the bomb.

Mr. Kotter
06-26-2006, 09:13 PM
http://www.bradenton.com/mld/bradenton/news/breaking_news/14908131.htm


Rush is TOTALLY getting some! And so are some lucky deputies!

Psic: you sound jealous of the big guy...I wouldn't have pegged him as your "type." Heh. :)

banyon
06-27-2006, 08:02 AM
These tough sentencing laws were instituted for a reason. The American people, including liberals, demanded them. Don't you remember the crack cocaine epidemic? Crack babies and out-of-control murder rates? Liberal judges giving the bad guys slaps on the wrist? Finally we got tough, and the crime rate has been falling ever since, so what's wrong?
--RushLimbaugh.com (8/18/03)

When you strip it all away, Jerry Garcia destroyed his life on drugs. And yet he's being honored, like some godlike figure. Our priorities are out of whack, folks.
--Rush Limbaugh radio show (quoted in the L.A. Times, 8/20/95)

I have a solution for Mrs. [Jocelyn] Elders. I mean, if she wants to legalize drugs, send the people who want to do drugs to London and Zurich and let's be rid of them. Now...The problem with legalizing drugs is, it's just another abhorrent example of human behavior that we've suddenly decided, "Hey, we can't handle it. We've given up and we're going to sanction the destruction of lives. We're going to let you destroy your life. We're going to make it easy, and then all of us who accept the responsibilities of life and don't destroy our lives on drugs--we'll pay for whatever messes you get into."...
--Rush Limbaugh TV show (12/9/93)

FringeNC
06-27-2006, 08:38 AM
These tough sentencing laws were instituted for a reason. The American people, including liberals, demanded them. Don't you remember the crack cocaine epidemic? Crack babies and out-of-control murder rates? Liberal judges giving the bad guys slaps on the wrist? Finally we got tough, and the crime rate has been falling ever since, so what's wrong?
--RushLimbaugh.com (8/18/03)

When you strip it all away, Jerry Garcia destroyed his life on drugs. And yet he's being honored, like some godlike figure. Our priorities are out of whack, folks.
--Rush Limbaugh radio show (quoted in the L.A. Times, 8/20/95)

I have a solution for Mrs. [Jocelyn] Elders. I mean, if she wants to legalize drugs, send the people who want to do drugs to London and Zurich and let's be rid of them. Now...The problem with legalizing drugs is, it's just another abhorrent example of human behavior that we've suddenly decided, "Hey, we can't handle it. We've given up and we're going to sanction the destruction of lives. We're going to let you destroy your life. We're going to make it easy, and then all of us who accept the responsibilities of life and don't destroy our lives on drugs--we'll pay for whatever messes you get into."...
--Rush Limbaugh TV show (12/9/93)

I don't understand why some as so preoccupied with hypocrisy. Are all parents full of shit when they tell their kids "do as I say, not as a do"? To me, it smacks of attacking the messenger rather than the message.

It just seems people think pointing out hyprocrisy is the ultimate "gotchya" rather than evaluating the point trying to be made.

Now I'm for legalizing drugs, and don't listen to Limbaugh, but I don't think his hypocrisy is relevant when evaluating what he says.

I found the bashing of Bill Bennett for his gambling to be repulsive. Because Bill Bennett gambles, we should dismiss his argument that teaching kids virtue is a good thing? I just don't follow....

oldandslow
06-27-2006, 08:51 AM
I wonder if this violates his probation???

Transporting drugs from another country...hmmm.

and Fringe, source credibility is important. Your child analogy doesn't apply. Children are NOT adults. When an adult pulls the "do as I say not as I do card" out against another adult, it's BS.

banyon
06-27-2006, 09:16 AM
I don't understand why some as so preoccupied with hypocrisy. Are all parents full of shit when they tell their kids "do as I say, not as a do"? To me, it smacks of attacking the messenger rather than the message.

It just seems people think pointing out hyprocrisy is the ultimate "gotchya" rather than evaluating the point trying to be made.

Now I'm for legalizing drugs, and don't listen to Limbaugh, but I don't think his hypocrisy is relevant when evaluating what he says.

I found the bashing of Bill Bennett for his gambling to be repulsive. Because Bill Bennett gambles, we should dismiss his argument that teaching kids virtue is a good thing? I just don't follow....

It all points to the credibility of the messenger, not the accuracy of the message.

Unlike the Bill Bennett case, though, where there is some sort of vague immoral hypocrisy (who hasn't committed immoral acts?),

The Rush hypocrisy here is direct. He seems to be very strongly against the illegal drugs that he dislikes, but ok with the ones that he likes.

So I agree with your assessment that we probably focus too much on hypocrisy in our current political climate, but people still have to be held to some standard of accountability. In this case, it's akin to going to a dentist who has a set of baked beans in his mouth like some homeless man and you just sort of say "uh, no thanks" even though he may be the most gifted dentist in the world.

Baby Lee
06-27-2006, 09:16 AM
This is the problem I have with the whole furor over the wiretapping issue.
People are up in arms that the government is intercepting calls based on intelligence to thwart terrorist attack because it might someday be abused, without detailing how it could be abused or giving evidence that it has been abused.
But those same people crow when someone like Rush gets outed for taking Viagra [gasp!!!], when some lackey is rummaging through his stuff with enough attention to detail to notice that the prescription is actually in his Dr's. name.
Do you really think this would've been headline 'breaking' news if it had been, say Coumadin, or Lipitor??
This issue can easily be cleared up by the Dr. producing an affidavit that he indeed prescribed the Viagra for Rush [or simply the script]. But the stain remains.
Seems to me, this is the precise kind of abuse of privacy people are scared might happen with expanded intelligence gathering in the WoT, but when it actually happens in a routine setting to an unpopular guy, the concerns evaporate in a cloud of Schadenfruede.

Ultra Peanut
06-27-2006, 09:19 AM
You mean to tell me that public figures receive more scrutiny from the media and the populace at large than Joe Nobody? Well, I never!

But yes, luggage searches at airports and wiretaps without warrants are entirely the same. Strawman? What strawman?

banyon
06-27-2006, 09:20 AM
No, BL. I'd be for protecting even a douche like Rush's privacy.

Alton deFlat
06-27-2006, 09:25 AM
Sheriff's investigators confiscated the drugs, and Limbaugh was released around 5:30 p.m. without being charged.

and evidently............... without a boner.

Cochise
06-27-2006, 09:29 AM
Seems to me, this is the precise kind of abuse of privacy people are scared might happen with expanded intelligence gathering in the WoT, but when it actually happens in a routine setting to an unpopular guy, the concerns evaporate in a cloud of Schadenfruede.

:clap:

FringeNC
06-27-2006, 09:30 AM
This is the problem I have with the whole furor over the wiretapping issue.
People are up in arms that the government is intercepting calls based on intelligence to thwart terrorist attack because it might someday be abused, without detailing how it could be abused or giving evidence that it has been abused.
But those same people crow when someone like Rush gets outed for taking Viagra [gasp!!!], when some lackey is rummaging through his stuff with enough attention to detail to notice that the prescription is actually in his Dr's. name.
Do you really think this would've been headline 'breaking' news if it had been, say Coumadin, or Lipitor??
This issue can easily be cleared up by the Dr. producing an affidavit that he indeed prescribed the Viagra for Rush [or simply the script]. But the stain remains.
Seems to me, this is the precise kind of abuse of privacy people are scared might happen with expanded intelligence gathering in the WoT, but when it actually happens in a routine setting to an unpopular guy, the concerns evaporate in a cloud of Schadenfruede.

Not to mention the squandering of resources used in hassling Rush Limbaugh and making grandma take off her shoes. This is a war not on terrorism as terrorism is only a tactic of the enemy, not the enemy itself. This is a war on Islamic Jihad, and should be prosecuted as such.

In other words, don't throw away information in the name of political correctness.

Baby Lee
06-27-2006, 09:32 AM
You mean to tell me that public figures receive more scrutiny from the media and the populace at large than Joe Nobody? Well, I never!
I assume that was your reaction to the revelation that the CIA was gathering evidence of Martin Luther King Jr's infidelity.

But yes, luggage searches at airports and wiretaps without warrants are entirely the same. Strawman? What strawman?
It's not about the method, it's about the abuse of the information gathered.
Are you really taking the position that, if the intrusion is routine and generally accepted, abuse is OK?
Maybe they could run a segment called 'the butt plugs and toys files' on the local news every night, where they highlight the funniest and most embarassing luggage scans, along with surveillance footage of the luggage owners.

the Talking Can
06-27-2006, 09:41 AM
possessing a prescription in someone else's name is against the law, I'm assuming, otherwise they wouldn't have stopped him...

funny, people don't give a shit about the government spying on millions of americans in direct violation of FISA, but if Rush Limbaugh gets caught well then it's just an outrage! outrage I say!!

Baby Lee
06-27-2006, 09:45 AM
possessing a prescription in someone else's name is against the law, I'm assuming, otherwise they wouldn't have stopped him...

funny, people don't give a shit about the government spying on millions of americans in direct violation of FISA, but if Rush Limbaugh gets caught well then it's just an outrage! outrage I say!!
It's exactly the opposite. It's 'funny' that people are up in arms because some intelligence gathering methods MIGHT SOMEDAY be abused, but don't give a shit when another intelligence gathering method ACTUALLY IS abused.

Bootlegged
06-27-2006, 10:31 AM
John Murtha would never use Viagra.

patteeu
06-27-2006, 11:12 AM
It all points to the credibility of the messenger, not the accuracy of the message.

Unlike the Bill Bennett case, though, where there is some sort of vague immoral hypocrisy (who hasn't committed immoral acts?),

The Rush hypocrisy here is direct. He seems to be very strongly against the illegal drugs that he dislikes, but ok with the ones that he likes.

So I agree with your assessment that we probably focus too much on hypocrisy in our current political climate, but people still have to be held to some standard of accountability. In this case, it's akin to going to a dentist who has a set of baked beans in his mouth like Chiefs4me and you just sort of say "uh, no thanks" even though he may be the most gifted dentist in the world.

It's not even real hypocrisy if the guy had a change of mind. I'm not sure exactly when Limbaugh had the surgery that he says led to his addiction, but I suspect that it was well after your 93 and 95 quotes. I don't think Limbaugh is in favor of legalization now, but I'm confident he has a modified opinion of drug abuse.

Boyceofsummer
06-27-2006, 12:50 PM
I still feel that his alleged addiction to pain killers was his personal health issue and not one for a drug task force. Viagra will soon be an over the counter medication, and rightfully so. Now, if Rush was on vacation without the 'little woman' and was using Viagra...........................

Radar Chief
06-27-2006, 01:03 PM
I still feel that his alleged addiction to pain killers was his personal health issue and not one for a drug task force. Viagra will soon be an over the counter medication, and rightfully so. Now, if Rush was on vacation without the 'little woman' and was using Viagra...........................

Hes divorced. Just FYI.
BTW, he opened his show today sayn, I tried to tell them they had my luggage confused with Bob Doles. ROFL

Baby Lee
07-05-2006, 01:25 PM
possessing a prescription in someone else's name is against the law, I'm assuming, otherwise they wouldn't have stopped him...
Looks like you assumed wrong.
Like I originally surmised, they checked the veracity of the script itself, and when it was found legit, there was no violation.
Oh well, cat's out of the bag now, Rush needs boner pills, hee-heee!!!

Pitt Gorilla
07-05-2006, 03:41 PM
I don't understand why some as so preoccupied with hypocrisy. Are all parents full of shit when they tell their kids "do as I say, not as a do"? To me, it smacks of attacking the messenger rather than the message.

It just seems people think pointing out hyprocrisy is the ultimate "gotchya" rather than evaluating the point trying to be made.

Now I'm for legalizing drugs, and don't listen to Limbaugh, but I don't think his hypocrisy is relevant when evaluating what he says.

I found the bashing of Bill Bennett for his gambling to be repulsive. Because Bill Bennett gambles, we should dismiss his argument that teaching kids virtue is a good thing? I just don't follow....
Yeah, this reminds me of when many were referring to Kerry as "flip-flop." Granted, he was actually voting on different pieces of legislation with different clauses, but he was still accused of, seemingly wrongly, changing his mind. There are many reasons not to vote for the guy, but I didn't understand this particular angle.