Rush Limbaugh

[TWA Dude]

Hey Super 80, welcome to the fracas! I'm glad you found another forum to inject some religion. I'm too busy with training to spend much time on C&R these days.

I'm a card-carrying member of the ACLU and I can honestly say I couldn't care less about this whole Rush thing. He's an addict and he needs help. If he broke laws he should be dealt with appropriately and his punishment should fit his crime. It's only human nature that most conservatives will forgive him no matter what and liberals will vilify him no matter what.

For more information just read an Al Franken book.

 

[Super 80]

I'm a card-carrying member of the ACLU...read an Al Franken book.

If a man of twenty is not a liberal, he has no heart.

If a man of forty is not a conservative, he has no head.

Good to see you have heart.

 

[fLYbUDDY]

RO 2:1 You, therefore, have no excuse, you who pass judgment on someone else, for at whatever point you judge the other, you are condemning yourself, because you who pass judgment do the same things.

Kind of puts things into perspective doesn't it?

? ?

I guess, but what are you saying?

Are you implying that I am wrong because you think I am judging Rush (which I am not, I am just commenting on what is happening NOT condemning him to hell NOR am I saying I think he shouldn't be forgiven, I DO think he should be given a chance to get clean and be totally forgiven by anyone he may have hurt)

-or-

are you implying that Rush shouldn't pass judgment on anyone else since you think he might be condemning himself?

-or-

are you implying that you were originally implying that I was wrong for making any comment on Rush, but then you read Romans 2:1 and realized (by your own possible assumption of that verse) that you were in fact judging (as you have interpreted the context of judging to mean here in chapter 2) me and felt bad about it?

I am not trying to be a smart@-- , but I think in all three of the cases that seem likely as to why you brought that up (Romans 2:1) you not only took the verse out of context but you may have also miss-understood what I was saying in my posts. Once again I don't have beef with Rush and I am praying for him and his situation. The Romans 2:1 is talking about condemning someone, or judging someone, to hell; which I never did. That is between Rush and God. So if I am missing something by your post please help me out and let me know what you were implying (maybe I did goof it and am out of line on something.) Thanks!

 

[UpNDownGuy]

Foobar, you took the words out of my...

Monkey. My pot smoking monkey, that is...and yes, it IS funny. Especially with "monkey".


Super 80/Timebuilder:

You are both having trouble with a very simple concept. People think the whole Rush situation is funny because the guy has spent YEARS being absolutely intolerable of any "liberal's " mistakes. Doesn't matter the situation, policy, event...if that windbag could blow some gas at the other side, he did to the limits of his rather unimpressive oratory abilities. You two want to show me how fair and balanced 'ol Blimpo is, show me where he said ANYTHING nice about the hated liberals. And TWA dude is right: you should put down your Ann Coulter and pick up an Al Franken once in a while.

 

[Super 80]

Are you implying that I am wrong because you think I am judging Rush

No, that comment was reserved for others.

are you implying that Rush shouldn't pass judgment on anyone else since you think he might be condemning himself?

Rush passes judgment on others on a daily basis. That is the crux of Romans 2:1. You can't have it both ways.

are you implying that you were originally implying that I was wrong for making any comment on Rush, but then you read Romans 2:1 and realized (by your own possible assumption of that verse) that you were in fact judging (as you have interpreted the context of judging to mean here in chapter 2) me and felt bad about it?

No I had no problem with what you wrote. I was merely carrying your Scriptural quote to a logical conclusion. Besides a manner of right or wrong, we are not to judge others outside of the Church.

 

[fLYbUDDY]

Okay cool. I now think I understand what you meant. Sorry for the confusion.

 

[VFR on Top]

Let's ask about the context of Rush's statement about drugs. Was he saying that no person should be prescribed pain medication by a doctor, or that pain medication legally prescribed by a physician should be a reason for prosecution?

No.

As you already know, his statement dealt directly with illegal drugs used for recreational use, not for an addiction to legal drugs prescribed by a physician. This is the difference between a medical condition arising from a medical treatment and a criminal activity. If he went to illegal sources in order to releive the pain of his spinal condition, he was wrong for doing so. We don't yet know the facts surrounding this, so we must wait and see what, if any, wrongdoing comes to light as the result of the ongoing investigation.

Now, contrast this behavior with recreational drug use, where the drug is illegal under all circumstances, and the damage to society is overtly evident. I think you will agree that recreational drug use is for the purpose of pleasure. In the case of Rush, the legally prescribed painkillers never produced pleasure, but only made the level of pain bearable.

You don't know what you're babbling about, Timebuilder. We're not talking about physician-prescribed, legally obtained meds here. No physician in their right mind would prescribe enough OxyContin to sustain an addiction (sustain, not induce). OxyContin or any medication available by prescription is an illegal substance when obtained without one; legally, it's no different from heroin or crack. Moreover, a drug obtained for the purpose of satiating an addiction reasonably falls within the realm of recreational use; last I checked, doing so is not a legitimate medical purpose, certainly not without that almighty prescription.

Big Fat Idiot deserves everything he's got coming to him...which, by his rules, should include incarceration for fostering drug trafficking.

 

[Timebuilder]

I believe that Rush is a pilot, and flys his own twin engine prop plane to various engagements all over the country.

He is flown about in G3. He is usually too busy to fly the thing himself. That's what professional pilots are for.

I think Bush is clean now. Oh yeah, thats another one. Its always the re-born, I just found Jesus, or recently kicked the habit that yell the most about people still doing it.

So, in other words only those without sin should rule the world? At last we agree. There is only one individual who fits that idea. Care to guess who that might be?

All of the rest of us are sinners, and fall short of the glory of God. (Hey, it's Sunday)

It's only human nature that most conservatives will forgive him no matter what and liberals will vilify him no matter what.

I guess you din't read my clarification of the complaint foobar was making that Rush had suggested hard penalties for illegal drug use. He did not speak out against those who had been under a doctor's treatment and become dependant on the medication. To confuse this with shooting heroine or smoking crack requires a very simplistic perspective, to be kind.

For more information just read an Al Franken book.

Information on how to be a depressed liberal? Have at it.

People think the whole Rush situation is funny because the guy has spent YEARS being absolutely intolerable of any "liberal's " mistakes. Doesn't matter the situation, policy, event..

They only think it's funny because they don't understand what he was doing. Just because you can illuminate the stupid doesn't mean that your positions are invalidated by a condition arising from medical treatment. His parodies are hilarious to me because I was one of those who used to say stupid things like 'sharks are still looking for food along the routes taken by slave ships'. You can't make up stuff like that. You can only point out the absurdity of a guy like Major Owens saying something like that as a reason for public policy. But I digress.

if that windbag could blow some gas at the other side, he did to the limits of his rather unimpressive oratory abilities.

Hmmm. Five Marconi awards. The largest radio audience ever. The most articulate and entertaining conservative voice since Reagan. Pretty unimpressive, eh?

You two want to show me how fair and balanced 'ol Blimpo is, show me where he said ANYTHING nice about the hated liberals.

Why should I? That's your job as a listener to determine when and where that happens. But, you don't listen, and likely haven't seen him on TV, either. If you had, you would know that the term "ol' Blimpo" no longer applies to him.

Now stop and chide yourself. According to you liberals, you have engaged in "hate speech". Go turn yourself in to Nancy Pelosi.

you should put down your Ann Coulter and pick up an Al Franken once in a while.

Al is right about one thing: he has the perfect title for his book. Unfortunately, he ignores the biggest liars of them all, my old Democrat party. Since he and his lying friends lie, they must also be lying when they say that conservatives lie. I think it is a compulsion, based on my 23 years in the party.

I feel really sorry for Al. He used to be a pretty happy person when he was a writer for Lorne Michaels. Even his jokes are no longer funny. How depressing.

Rush passes judgment on others on a daily basis. That is the crux of Romans 2:1. You can't have it both ways.

Brother, I recommend discernment. Rush provides reproof, not judgement. Consider when Rush speaks out against what is happening in the public schools. Those who mislead youngsters face a special condemnation. This is not judgement made by Rush, it is a warning that is backed up by scripture. Remember this:

Matthew 18:6
"But whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to sin, it would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck, and he were drowned in the depth of the sea. "

To speak out against evil is always good. There are many evils that Rush speaks out against. Most of the time he does is with humor. Judgement? No.

 

[habubuaza]

I'm a card-carrying member of the ACLU and I can honestly say I couldn't care less about this whole Rush thing. For more information just read an Al Franken book.

Is that the same ACLU that's fighting for NAMBLA? And the same ACLU that's fighting on behalf of a man that RAPED A 13 year old boy? If it is then you better stay the f_ck away from the kids in my family.

 

[fLYbUDDY]

You don't know what you're babbling about, Timebuilder. We're not talking about physician-prescribed, legally obtained meds here. No physician in their right mind would prescribe enough OxyContin to sustain an addiction (sustain, not induce). OxyContin or any medication available by prescription is an illegal substance when obtained without one; legally, it's no different from heroin or crack. Moreover, a drug obtained for the purpose of satiating an addiction reasonably falls within the realm of recreational use; last I checked, doing so is not a legitimate medical purpose, certainly not without that almighty prescription.

Big Fat Idiot deserves everything he's got coming to him...which, by his rules, should include incarceration for fostering drug trafficking.

IMHO

I agree that Rush may have contradicted his own philosophy. I am not a Rush supporter nor am I against him. I don't have a necessary opinion about him. However on this subject of what happened in his life I do have an opinion. I think he is/was wrong for allowing an addiction to come into his life when he has strong convictions against it. Also I think he can be too hard on some people sometimes. However I also think every person that walked this earth (other than Jesus, but let's not go down that road...) is a hypocrite in some way. You are, I am, the political left is, the political right is, the religious groups are, and every single person that walks, or has walked, this planet is a hypocrite. So if you are so against Rush's strong personality, why are those he offends so willing to project such a strong personality back on him? Politics are great and having differences of opinion are necessary for a healthy society to exist. However it seems that politics, in modern America, have become a glorified name-calling, "cry to mommy" atmosphere that little kids would do on a kindergarten playground. Every year it gets more and more like it’s “us verses them” instead of “united we stand.” And this isn't targeted at any specific person it is just the unfortunate situation that is going on all across the country these days. I mean just look at what starvingcfi is doing to citationkid. That isn't a political example, but it shows you something similar as far as attitude is concerned. And come on, "big fat idiot?" Is that really necessary to say?

 

[Timebuilder]

You don't know what you're babbling about, Timebuilder.

I'll be more respectful of you than you are of me, and just tell you that you are wrong.

A chronic medical condition that causes extreme pain is indeed a legal and legitimate reason to sustain treatment with powerful pain medication. Some industry experts are now saying that Oxycontin is addictive with only a few doses, and it has been characterized as being five times more addictive than heroin. There are literally thoudsands of lawsuits being brought as we speak because of this.

OxyContin or any medication available by prescription is an illegal substance when obtained without one; legally, it's no different from heroin or crack.

This is correct, and I have not said anything that contradicts that. I AM pointing out that Rush's comments said nothing about addictions caused by legally obtained medication under a doctor's care. His anti-drug statements were a reference to recreational drug use, which I mainatain was never the case here, since the back condition is as bad or worse as it was years ago, and just as painful as it ever was. I was pointing out that this is an entirely different situation from smoking crack for pleasure, since there was never any pleasure involved in the case of Rush's use of Oxy.

Further, we have no evidence that Rush illegallly obtained any pain medication. We have charges, just as we have charges in the Kobe Bryant case. The next step will be revealed to us when the investigation has been played out and the DA's office decides how to proceed. I have a friend in that office, but I'm sure he would only tell me that I know that he can't tell me anything right now. So, I won't ask him. Like all of us, I will just have to remain patient.

Moreover, a drug obtained for the purpose of satiating an addiction reasonably falls within the realm of recreational use; last I checked, doing so is not a legitimate medical purpose, certainly not without that almighty prescription.

If an addiction is the ONLY reason for continued prescriptions, then there may be some creedence that it could be "recreational". The relief of withdrawl symptoms alone do not provide a need for treatment, since additional units of medication beyond the maintenance level can indeed provide pleasure. If we look at the facts as we know them, this isn't the case here. The pain of the back is still there, and a new medication will be substituted for the ones being terminated over the next four weeks. This opens the door to a new and different dependancy on pain killers, barring some miracle operation to relieve the persistant pain.

 

[jarhead]

I think you all are caught up in the morality, hypocracy, and political views of Mr. Limbaugh. I asked the question much earlier in this thread, about the legal ramifications of turning himself "in" for abuse of Rx drugs. No one has chosen, or perhaps no one knows, what trhe answer to my question is. If that's the case, so be it.

But, Timebuilder, I must coment on your understanding of Rush Limbaugh's pediciment. I currently am under prescription care for very recent back surgery, with PRESCRIBED OxyContin, and Oxycodone, The amounts that Rush is to alledgedly to have taken, and over the YEARS of use, would NEVER be under prescription. Do you know (I was told this by my surgeon) that I must never take an OxyContin tablet that is "nicked" or "broken" as the pill has a special coating that makes the dose be time released. If one were to crush, or "snort" the powder of OxyContin, it would provide a rush and addiction stronger than heroin in very short order.

If Rush were indeed taking this drug since his 1996 back operation, it was indeed done without prescription. He also has stated that he fly's airplanes. While I am taking OxyContin over a three week period, (a tenth of the dailly amount that Rush is reported to have used for many years) he indeed would be flying while in a drug induced euphoria. I have been told I must not even drive a car for the three weeks I am taking ever decreasing amounts of that drug, and my Rx will not be refilled, per my surgeon. I can tell you, I DO feel a euphoria while taking this drug. Rush is taking it because he elected to not have further surgery, and was (alledgedly) buying as much as $300,000 worth of these pills at a time illegaly on the black market.

Again, can ANYONE tell me how this affects the status of his pilot's license?

 

[Timebuilder]

Man, that's a lot of "allegedlys". I don't have the answers.

I do know that many physicians differ on the subject of pain control. The new thinking is that every patient has a right to be "pain free". This flys in the face of traditional views of what should constitute a maximum dose or a maximum period of treatment.

My understanding is that further back surgery could not guarantee, nor even suggest, a reduction of the pain. The original surgery was intended to provide relief, but it was ineffective.

Yes, he has flown airplanes, but I don't believe that he has acted as pilot in command of an aircraft while taking medication. If he is not acting as PIC, he does not need a medical, and is not restrained from manipulating the flight controls as long as someone else IS acting as PIC. This has no effect on a pilot's license, but may prevent him from acquiring a medical for the next ten years, as we discussed in the "weed" thread. (My assumption is that he would answer the question truthfully if he was applying for a medical, bu I also assume that he would be counseled about this restriction before he would attempt to obtain a pilot medical.) He also has a chauffer, so unlike for you and I, driving for Rush is not an issue.

If Rush were indeed taking this drug since his 1996 back operation, it was indeed done without prescription.

We have no reason yet to believe that Rush did not have legal prescriptions for his meds. If he acquired addition units of meds WITHOUT the prescription, he is in the wrong. We will find out when the investigation is complete.

Your surgeon may not prescribe higher amounts for you, and your pain may be of a low level that allows you to feel a euphoria when you use Oxy. Since neither you nor I have experienced Rush's pain, we cannot speak accurately to the clinical level of that pain or the effectivenes of the meds in relieving it.

My friends in medicine say that the subject of pain control is still very touchy with many Docs, and the new "pain free" view is taking a long time to catch on.

Have I answered your pilot question to your satisfaction?

 

[UpNDownGuy]

Ouch! Timebuilder is hurting my head!

You've GOT to be kidding me...right? I mean, you're not serious about that last post. It was a joke, right?


Hmmm. Five Marconi awards. The largest radio audience ever. The most articulate and entertaining conservative voice since Reagan. Pretty unimpressive, eh?

The Marconi awards? LOL! They are a radio industry give-away, decided not by the listening public, but by the General Managers and program directors of the member stations. It is just as valid as "Airline of the Year", given by the ATA. Howard Stern has been nominated twice that I know of personally. Does Howard represent your idea of "excellence in broadcasting"? "The most articulate and entertaining conservative voice since Reagan". Luckily, you're just plain wrong there. I used to listen to Rush, but the amount of dead air on his show would fill the Hindenburg in nothing flat. He often takes 10-15 minutes to make 1 simple point (usually an absurd one at that). It was simply too annoying to watch him stutter and stammer, egged on by his audience of "Dittoheads". Imagine that: A whole audience who was PROUD of the fact that they let Rush doing their thinking for them. "I can't be trusted to form my own opinion, so I'll just let Rush tell me what it is". Do you consider yourself a "Dittohead"?
I'm so curious.




Brother, I recommend discernment. Rush provides reproof, not judgement.

Ok, I'll bite...what's the difference? My dictionary says that reproof is "an expression of censure or rebuke". A synonym of rebuke is "reprimand", which indicates an official criticism. One of the elements of reproving someone is having the authority to do so. Do you imagine that Rush is in that position? I would listen to reproof from my boss or my priest, but I just don't recognize a self-appointed radio personality as an authority figure in my life.


I'm also amazed at how you latched on to blaming someone else, which I considered a Democratic technique. "The doctor did this to him". Baloney. Any addiction starts as a concious decision, whether it's the first pill or the first drink or the first snort of cocaine. In his case, the warnings are printed right on the accompying paperwork. The doctor was aware of the restrictions. Rush CHOSE to up the dosage himself.."It's not his fault; the 40 pills a day were for MEDICINAL purposes". Right...


I agree completely with Flybuddy. The 2 major political parties are pure scum. What I am finding so annoying is how Republicans can NEVER admit to any wrongdoing. Clinton spent half his term apologizing for some screw up or other. Bush (and Rush, and the rest of the so-called "conservatives") screw up just as often, but will never admit it.

 

[WrightAvia]

Hahahaha...I was never a "Ditto Head". Rush was a franchise of conservatism. He's human and he has his weaknesses.

You find one conservative with a problem and it illicits 13 pages of rebutal on this forum. Listen to any liberal and their comments on their party's agenda on "sensible gun laws for sportsmen" and I see a sickness worse that anything concerning Rush L.

I'm only voting Repbulican, till the Libertarian party gains strength. Till then, I could give a rats ass about Rush and his drug problem. He's human, he has a problem...so be it. I never listened to one of his shows, ever. I make my own decisions on how I vote and how I believe in politics...Rush's problems wont change how I feel about it.

This is a dead thread....nothing to see here folks.

 

[jarhead]

Timebuilder

I agree with you.....I did use a lot of "alledgedly" I fully agree that we are not guilty, untill convicted in a court. But, there will always be the court of public opinion.....right or wrong.

Thank you for your explanation about the pilot lisence issue.

And I agree.....no one knows the comparitive level of Pain, that Rush, me, or anyone elese can experience from a trauma to the body. I only relate to mine.....that's all I can do. My doc only told me that if I still had post operative pain that was not managable with aspirin or Tylenol, I would be given a different Rx than the Oxy narcotics, due to the addictive nature, and I appreciate that concern. I had a liquid IV drip of morphine immediatley after my surgery. That was stopped after two days due to addiction concerns, and I was then put on the Oxy drugs, even though the morphine was really managing the pain well. I just trust my doc, and will not do anything he says is not in my best interests.

I will not "judge" Rush, as all I can see are the allegations. Until the jury is in on that, I will withhold my concrete feelings about it, but, as they say, often where there is smoke, there is fire. We shall all see how this plays out, I am sure.

 

[TWA Dude]

Is that the same ACLU that's fighting for ...
If it is then you better stay the f_ck away from the kids in my family.

The feeling's mutual.

I'm not familiar with the examples you listed. Perhaps you're mistaken on a few details and just reacting to something you've heard?

 

[fLYbUDDY]

The feeling's mutual.

I'm not familiar with the examples you listed. Perhaps you're mistaken on a few details and just reacting to something you've heard?

I'm not trying to get into an ACLU debate and I am not trying to disrespect your choice in supporting them, but what is it about them that makes you care enough to become a member?
I am just curious, that is all.

 

[Timebuilder]

decided not by the listening public, but by the General Managers and program directors of the member stations.

Ah. Just like the Academy Awards are decided by the working professionals of Hollywood.

Maybe you would like a "people's choice" award for radio. Sounds like a good idea. Why don't you start one?

Does Howard represent your idea of "excellence in broadcasting"?

No, but they didn't ask me. I don't listen to Howard, and I haven't since he was on my station in 1984 until I left in 1987.

You didn't enjoy Rush's show, and many others did. So your point is similar to mine. Mine is that there are far more who enjoy his show, dead air not withstanding. When it's your show, and you have the most successful show in America, bar none, you can have as much dead air (or rustling papers) as you like!

Ok, I'll bite...what's the difference?

The difference is that the Bible says that reproof is good, and judgement is the Lord's. Critcizing evil is never wrong. "Discernment" is what a believer uses to provide accountability and reproof without engaging in "judgement". See a pastor at a Bible chuirch if you need more info. This is an aviation board. (Tongue firmly in cheek)

Imagine that: A whole audience who was PROUD of the fact that they let Rush doing their thinking for them. "I can't be trusted to form my own opinion, so I'll just let Rush tell me what it is". Do you consider yourself a "Dittohead"?
I'm so curious.

I don't require a label, and I have never said that I am "a dittohead". I must explain what that means, apparently.

People listen to Rush becuase they enjoy hearing someone say things that they had already thought themselves. The "ditto" does not mean that they are blindly agreeing with the host. It means that many people used to start their phone call by feeling compelled to tell Rush how much they enjoy his show, how much of a pleasant change it is from ther liberal controlled media of ABCCBSNBCCNNNYTLATBG etc. It became apparent that this just took up too much airtime, so people just started saying "ditto to what he just said to you" which became shortened to "ditto". It means that you agree with others that this show is a wonderful and life affirming experience for millions of Americans every day.

That's all it means. It does not mean that anyone is doing their thinking for them, as I used to allow people to do for me when I was a young Democrat.

One of the elements of reproving someone is having the authority to do so. Do you imagine that Rush is in that position? I would listen to reproof from my boss or my priest, but I just don't recognize a self-appointed radio personality as an authority figure in my life.

In this case, somone who handicaps the political landscape over a long period of time and generates the respect and admiration of millions of pols, pundits, and listeners can be regarded as someone who, in the legal sense, has the ability to be an expert witness on the subject of American culture and politics. This is more than enough authority to express that expert opinion in a public forum such as radio. While he has no regulatory authority over anyone, you have to remember that the people who are being reproved have no authotity that exceeds his own other than the authority of the office that they may hold as elected officials.

This kind of political speech is precisely the kind of speech that the founders were so concerned about. This active dialog of listener and host is a form of town hall that they did not envision, but would certainly approve of, based on their writings.

Any addiction starts as a concious decision, whether it's the first pill or the first drink or the first snort of cocaine. In his case, the warnings are printed right on the accompying paperwork.

I get it. You are in exteme pain, but you are not going to take your prescribed medication because it's addictive. Hello, McFly!!!!

Bush (and Rush, and the rest of the so-called "conservatives") screw up just as often, but will never admit it.

I see from this statement that you have not listened for very long to any conservative. Most of us believe that we are all hoplessly lost were it not for God's plan of salvation. Other conservatives who are not believers also acknowlege that they have feet of clay. Bush has said so, and so has Rush, long before this week. The info is out there in countless speeches and articles. I invite you to research this for yourself.

 

[Chas]

whats the difference between....

Rush Limbaugh and ted Kennedy Rush destroyed his hearing abusing prescription meds. Ted Kennedy killed an innocent girl using alcohol Both are drugs I think Rush screwed himself Now he will face the music .