http://www.lp.org/press/archive.php?function=view&record=652 America owes talk host Rush Limbaugh a debt of gratitude, Libertarians say WASHINGTON, DC -- The entire nation owes radio broadcaster Rush Limbaugh a debt of gratitude, Libertarians say, because his ordeal has exposed every drug warrior in America as a rank hypocrite. "One thing we don't hear from American politicians very often is silence," said Joe Seehusen, Libertarian Party executive director. "By refusing to criticize Rush Limbaugh, every drug warrior has just been exposed as a shameless, despicable hypocrite. "And that's good news, because the next time they do speak up, there'll be no reason for anyone to listen." The revelation that Limbaugh had become addicted to painkillers -- drugs he is accused of procuring illegally from his Palm Beach housekeeper -- has caused a media sensation ever since the megastar's shocking, on-air confession last week. As the Limbaugh saga continues, here's an important question for Americans to ask, Libertarians say: Why are all the drug warriors suddenly so silent? "Republican and Democratic politicians have written laws that have condemned more than 400,000 Americans to prison for committing the same 'crime' as Rush Limbaugh," Seehusen pointed out. "If this pill-popping pontificator deserves a get-out-of-jail-free card, these drug warriors had better explain why." Given their longstanding support for the Drug War, it's fair to ask: Why haven't President George Bush or his tough-on-crime attorney general, John Ashcroft, uttered a word criticizing Limbaugh's law-breaking? Why aren't drug czar John P. Walters or his predecessor, Barry McCaffrey, lambasting Limbaugh as a menace to society and a threat to "our children?" Why aren't federal DEA agents storming Limbaugh's $30 million Florida mansion in a frantic search for criminal evidence? Why haven't federal, state, and local police agencies seized the celebrity's homes and luxury cars under asset-forfeiture laws? Finally, why aren't bloviating blabbermouths like William Bennett publicly explaining how America would be better off if Limbaugh were prosecuted, locked in a steel cage and forced to abandon his wife, his friends, and his career? The answer is obvious, Seehusen said: "America's drug warriors are shameless hypocrites who believe in one standard of justice for ordinary Americans and another for themselves, their families and their political allies. "That alone should completely discredit them." But there's an even more disturbing possibility, Seehusen said: that the people who are prosecuting the Drug War don't even believe in its central premise -- which is that public safety requires that drug users be jailed. "The Bushes and Ashcrofts and McCaffreys of the world may believe, correctly, that individuals fighting a drug addiction deserve medical, not criminal treatment," he said. "That would explain why they're not demanding that Limbaugh be jailed. "But if that's the case, these politicians have spent decades tearing apart American families for their own political gain. And that's an unforgivable crime."
Eh, maybe we owe his maid gratitude for exposing the bum. It's not like he gave a tearful confession or anything, he was shamed into an admission.
Rush should spend a long time in jail, with a long mandatory stay before parole. The quantity of pills that he was apparently popping may classify him as a dealer (whether he was one or not is immaterial). Thus, while he is in jail, his "ill gotten" assets need to be seized and sold on the court house steps, just like everybody else who is in his shoes. Maybe in jail, he can kick his habit, which would be more likely than his 30 day stint in a rehab facility. I wonder if Rush thinks that 30 days in rehab is the only "punishment" he will need to serve for his "crime".
Does anybody know what percentage of jailhouse residents due to drug convictions are there because of prescription abuse versus recreational use?
It matters because people slip into abuse from useage for medical purposes. That population would seem to be very different from the sad sacks who just seek a high for its own sake-- never contributing anything to society for the most part. You vultures are lumping Rush Limbaugh in there with that crew and it seems to me to be wrong.
You vultures are lumping Rush Limbaugh in there with that crew and it seems to me to be wrong. Breaking the law is breaking the law, no matter how you slice it, right?
I don't think Rush will be getting anymore invitations from a Bush to stay at the White House for his promotion of the Republican cause.
It disgusts me that people who have drug problems are not lumped together in the same category. No matter the substance, no matter the addiction of choice, all people deserve to have their health care issues dealt with by doctors. Every single person with a drug problem and seeks it should be able to get treatment and none of them deserve to be in jail just because they chose to injest a substance. It does not matter how someone gets addicted, what matters is what we do with those people. Some people get a slap on the wrist and have to do a Public Service Announcement and others go to jail for decades. BTW, your comment about people who never contribute to society is mostly a fallacy. The percentage of people who use drugs and do not contribute is very small. The fact is that even hard core heroin addicts can live relatively normal, productive lives as is being proven by the Swiss, who are experimenting with prescription heroin trials. Prohibition causes more harm than drugs themselves ever have. We can solve the problems with drugs rather easily, the problems with prohibition cannot be cured because prohibition is a flawed model.
This should begin: Every single person with a drug problem should be able to get treatment when they seek it and none...
Tsk tsk... how dare you suggest that breaking the law in the convenience of your mansion is the same as doing so on a street corner in a poor neighborhood. You dreamer!!
<b>andymoon</b>: You describe a group that every drug abuser should belong to ... one seeking and getting help with ridding themselves of the addiction. Unfortunately, some of the other posters here are just enjoying one man's misfortune and want to pile on. <b>NoWorries</b> and <b>Timing</b>: Yes, breaking the law is breaking the law, but Rush isn't commiting crimes or terrorizing neighborhoods or waylaying youth to support his habit. That makes him a different kind of offender, doesn't it? What Rush did "in his mansion" in all likelihood is probably substantially different than what goe on at these "drugstore streetcorners."
Unfortunately, there are huge lines and waiting lists at every treatment facility that treats on a sliding scale. There are addicts that can't get treatment and other addicts are too scared to come in for fear of the criminal justice system. In addition, the system we have incarcerates drug offenders without providing treatment and then turns them loose for more incarceration down the line. We could deal with the problems created by drugs much more effectively and economically with a different model. If you believe the drug war rhetoric being advertised on prime time TV, Rush's actions cast him in the same arena as terrorists. Eventually, someone had to go to a street dealer of some type to acquire the pills Rush wanted and since he was buying more than your average person, you could argue that he contributed more to the problem than other people. That being said, I reiterate that Rush does not deserve to be thrown in jail any more than any other person who commits offenses against the drug war.
It has much less to do with him popping pills instead of smoking crack, or being a Republican mouthpiece, than it does with him haviong a lot of money. Money is the get out of jail free card. If you have a lot of it, chances are good that you are never going to prison.
Not factual. [sarcasm]Think of the greater good that Rush could have done for his cause if he was not high as kite these last seven years or so. I bet his employer is a bit miffed by all of this.[/sarcasm]
What I said was that he had not commited crimes in support of his drug habit... meaning he didn't commit robberies or some like crime to afford his drug habit. Damnit man, he worked to be able to afford his drug habit.
As do the VAST majority of drug users. Most users of currently illegal drugs are hard working taxpayers who go to work or school every day, contribute to society, and do not commit crimes other than their choice of intoxicants. Rush didn't commit any more crimes than the vast majority of other Americans who use illegal drugs or who use legal drugs illegally. Damnit man, there is a statistically insignificant number of people who rob, steal, or commit other crimes to acquire or because of drugs. Despite the fact that these are the people that are publicized and are the ones who most often impact other people, it is also a fact that those people are relatively few and far between compared to the estimated 70 million Americans who have used currently illegal drugs.
