Rush Limbaugh

[Ailerongirl]

Re: That's a bit of a reach, isn't it?

Yeah, in the Muslim world.

Tut, tut......

Generalizations.......

 

[Timebuilder]

Check your facts

...like Rush does.

That's certainly a good start. Rush as a higher accuracy rate than Peter Jennings. What's more, on the occaision he is wrong about something, he discusses it, sometimes at length.

You won't see Al Franken do that.

You won't see Katie Couric do that.

It's a very good record when you consider how long Rush talks every day, and how many years he has done his work, and finally how many people who listen to him are checking his facts for him, hoping he will make a mistake.

Imagine 30 million people giving you a checkride. Every time you fly.

That's not bad, is it?

 

[N2264J]

Re: That's a bit of a reach, isn't it?

Tut, tut......

Generalizations.......

OK, how about this:

women being stoned to death for adultery in 2003 have a zip code in a Muslim country.

 

[N2264J]

Re: bit of a reach

Adultery is still illegal in the US. Check your facts.

Well then, give me some help with the facts.

If adultery is a crime against the state, what's the punishment?

Is it like a parking ticket? Do they tatoo an "A" on your forehead? Do they lock you in a cell where you have to listen to Rush Limbaugh all day?

 

[Timebuilder]

If adultery is a crime against the state, what's the punishment?

I did not say that adultery was a crime against the state.

I DID say it was a crime.

How and when it is punished under statute is a completely different discussion. You can research this, if you like. I haven't the time or inclination.

How it is punished socially is loss of your family, loss of your money (child support, alimony, depending on the state) loss of public character and reputation, etc.

I suspect that if you were locked in a cell all day and forced to listen to Rush Limbaugh, you would have a better understanding of the deterioration of American culture. Perhaps you should read Slouching Toward Gomorrah.

 

[N2264J]

Re: Say what?

I suspect that if you were locked in a cell all day and forced to listen to Rush Limbaugh, you would have a better understanding of the deterioration of American culture.

Yeah, like taking 30,000 pain pills a year?

The man was imparting his narrow political views while he was as high as a kite. I predict he will blame his drug addiction on the Clinton administration, the liberal media and the role they played in the deterioration of American culture. But at least we're not stoning women to death for adultery.

 

[flywithastick]

Re: Re: Say what?

Yeah, like taking 30,000 pain pills a year?

he'll probably have a higher price to pay than even loosing his hearing. I can't imagine what that much drug usage would do to your liver.

The man was imparting his narrow political views while he was as high as a kite.

Can't say I see how having narrow views and being high makes a difference. Maybe I ought to take some of that stuff if it would help me speak so effectively.

Negatively judging others for doing drugs would be bad though. I've listened quite a bit over the last 10-12 yrs and can't recall him hammering on people too much for drug abuse. Besides - comparing him to Clinton is apples and oranges. Clinton was president. Limbaugh is a radio commentator/entertainer.

I predict he will blame his drug addiction on the Clinton administration, the liberal media and the role they played in the deterioration of American culture.

No. he already took blame for the problem upon himself.

 

[Timebuilder]

Yeah, like taking 30,000 pain pills a year?

What does taking any number of pills, or trips to the moon for that matter- have to do with being able to articulate the deterioration of the American culture?

The man was imparting his narrow political views while he was as high as a kite.

By "narrow" I assume that you are ignoring that his radio show is the MOST listened to program in the country. BY "narrow" I assume that you mean not the "broadminded" liberal view that has helped to destroy American values. I can tell you this about "narrow" views:

Matthew 7:14

"Because narrow is the gate and difficult is the way which leads to life, and there are few who find it."

The "broad" way is the easy, lazy, self-absorbed, 'don't stand for anything, can fall for everything' way.

If Rush Limbaugh's political views are "narrow", he has a lot of support, and I count myself lucky that my views went from "broad" to "narrow" several years ago.

High as a kite? I worked in radio and I had many calls for "OZZZZZzzie!!!!!!" from parties where the callers were as "high as a kite". Rush has never sounded "high" at ANY time. If you are being treated for severe pain, it is unlikely that you would sound "high" at all.

I predict he will blame his drug addiction on the Clinton administration, the liberal media and the role they played in the deterioration of American culture.

You missed this too. He has taken responsibility, and told the world of his problem, and taken the steps to finally rid himself of this problem.

What you have done, in typical liberal fashion, is to attack the man since you have no luck at all taking on his ideas.

I'm sure Katie Couric will give you 15 minutes on her show. She likes personal attack politics, and has nothing to say. You'll fit right in.

But at least we're not stoning women to death for adultery.

No need to. Most women stone themselves DURING adultery.

 

[DEVO]

Alcoholism and Chemical dependancies are defined by the AMA in the DSM lV, and V as "Diseases". Doesn't matter what your biases toward chemical dependance are, a chemical is a chemical (Be it alcohol, cocaine, marijuana, crank, or prescription drugs). Up until the early 1900's, there wasn't such a thing as an "Illegal" drug- there was nothing to protect U.S. citizens from these substances. The US government got involved and started to tax these substances (That is what makes a drug illegal- not paying taxes on it.) Up until the late 1930's alcohol was an illegal substance. With the repeal of a constitutional ammendment, alcohol, again, was a legal substance (As long as the tax was paid on it). Any substance that is utilized for a purpose that it wasn't intended is chemical abuse. If you go out and get loaded and drive your car- this is chemical abuse. If you pour your testors model cement into a bag and inhale it- this is chemical abuse. If you take 40 prescription pills when the directions say to take two- this is chemical abuse. Where abuse becomes a problem is when it has an effect on a persons ability to function, has an effect on other people. If a person has developed a "Tolerance" I.E. requires more of the substance to attain the same effect, if the person cannot excercise "control" over the substance, if continued use of the substance has a negative effect over the persons health, professional life, personal life- this indicates a problem. The answer is treatment. It's not "Locking some one up and sending them up the river". Alcoholism and chemical abuse affect approximately 10 percent of the general population. The direct cost of alcoholism and substance abuse is over 200 Billion dollars a year (Health and Human Services report to congress 1997). As aviators we are no different. Since 1972 the HIMS program has returned over 1500 airline pilots to flying with a 90 to 95 percent success rate (Depending on what year you want to look at). The HIMS program doesn't differentiate between alcohol or drugs (They are all chemicals). The disease is the same- chemical dependance (The difference being the type of chemical that is abused).
In order for these people to get help, first you have to educate yourself about the disease concept. This is not a question of "Will power" or "Discipline" or "Character flaws", it is about a disease that compels a person to do things that no "Right" thinking person would do.
Hopefully, Mr Limbaugh will actually take his treatment serioously. Part of Mr. Limbaugh's treatment is going to be a "12" step program. Through education and treatment, I'M sure that Mr. Limbaugh can beat this addiction. Additionally, through his 12 step program, he will learn some humility and recognize that "Treatment Works" Incarceration doesn't.

 

[DEVO]

Alcoholism and Chemical dependancies are defined by the AMA in the DSM lV, and V as "Diseases". Doesn't matter what your biases toward chemical dependance are, a chemical is a chemical (Be it alcohol, cocaine, marijuana, crank, or prescription drugs). Up until the early 1900's, there wasn't such a thing as an "Illegal" drug- there was nothing to protect U.S. citizens from these substances. The US government got involved and started to tax these substances (That is what makes a drug illegal- not paying taxes on it.) Up until the late 1930's alcohol was an illegal substance. With the repeal of a constitutional ammendment, alcohol, again, was a legal substance (As long as the tax was paid on it). Any substance that is utilized for a purpose that it wasn't intended is chemical abuse. If you go out and get loaded and drive your car- this is chemical abuse. If you pour your testors model cement into a bag and inhale it- this is chemical abuse. If you take 40 prescription pills when the directions say to take two- this is chemical abuse. Where abuse becomes a problem is when it has an effect on a persons ability to function, has an effect on other people. If a person has developed a "Tolerance" I.E. requires more of the substance to attain the same effect, if the person cannot excercise "control" over the substance, if continued use of the substance has a negative effect over the persons health, professional life, personal life- this indicates a problem. The answer is treatment. It's not "Locking some one up and sending them up the river". Alcoholism and chemical abuse affect approximately 10 percent of the general population. The direct cost of alcoholism and substance abuse is over 200 Billion dollars a year (Health and Human Services report to congress 1997). As aviators we are no different. Since 1972 the HIMS program has returned over 1500 airline pilots to flying with a 90 to 95 percent success rate (Depending on what year you want to look at). The HIMS program doesn't differentiate between alcohol or drugs (They are all chemicals). The disease is the same- chemical dependance (The difference being the type of chemical that is abused).
In order for these people to get help, first you have to educate yourself about the disease concept. This is not a question of "Will power" or "Discipline" or "Character flaws", it is about a disease that compels a person to do things that no "Right" thinking person would do.
Hopefully, Mr Limbaugh will actually take his treatment serioously. Part of Mr. Limbaugh's treatment is going to be a "12" step program. Through education and treatment, I'M sure that Mr. Limbaugh can beat this addiction. Additionally, through his 12 step program, he will learn some humility and recognize that "Treatment Works" Incarceration doesn't.

 

[TonyC]

Disease?

Alcoholism and Chemical dependancies are defined by the AMA in the DSM lV, and V as "Diseases".

I realize I could be opening up a can of worms and quickly fill another five pages with responses, but I'm gonna speak up anyhow.

Disease? What's the mechanism for infection?

It seems to me that calling chemical dependancy a disease is somewhat of a copout, a way of blaming the problem on something over which the individual has no control. And this concept, I submit, flies in the face of the principles of personal responsibility that Rush embodies.

On the contrary, it would seem that the problem is the direct result of poor choices followed by more poor choices. Granted, there is a physiological element involved in the initial comforting effect of the chemical, and in the resistance that the body may build towards a chemical, so the poor choices become seemingly easier to make. But they're still poor choices.

I may be wrong about how Rush would feel about the "disease" characterization, but I still feel like the DSM IV, V is off in this case.

Fire away.

 

[414Flyer]

What is unfortunate is that the painkiller he is addicted to, is extremely addicting, and many who know about its affects are pessimisstic that he can kick it in 30 days, its just that powerful.
While he did not go out trying to get high or anything, in the end, addiction is still addiction, regardless of what the initial circumstances where.

 

[N2264J]

Re: Say what?

You missed this too. He has taken responsibility, and told the world of his problem, and taken the steps to finally rid himself of this problem.

I miss a lot of things. But one thing I didn't miss is that he took responsibility, told the world of his problem and took steps to finally rid himself of the problem after he got caught.

What you have done, in typical liberal fashion, is to attack the man since you have no luck at all taking on his ideas.

Typical liberal fashion? And you're a Limbaugh fan? How can you say that after the personal heckling Clinton took and is still taking from this demagogue? Referring to Senator Waxman as Senator Nostrils. Hillary's new haircut makes her look like the hood ornament on a 1957 Buick? Chelsea characterized as the new White House dog. I could go on but we all know what I'm talking about.

One of the things the dittoheads don't seem to understand is that the 20,000,000 listeners Limbaugh draws in a week are not all fans. Like Howard Stern's audience, some tune in just to see what outrageous thing he'll say next. To the sponsers, that's good radio.

No need to. Most women stone themselves DURING adultery.

Are you taking pain killers?

 

[DEVO]

Hey Tony,
To answer your question: A disease may be organic, genetic or environmental in orgin. A lot of diseases haven't had a "Cause" or "Precipitating Factor" identified. Alcoholism/chemical dependance are thought to have both "Environmental and genetic" components, there is also a chemical imbalance in the brain. Diseases like: diabetes, HIV, Coronary heart disease share one trait in that they don't know what the causal factor is. They do know, however, the Pathology (Course) of the disease, there are diagnostic indicators, they all respond to treatment, and like alcohol/chemical dependance, there is no cure (Meaning that ther is no "Magic" pill that will cure you of this condition. Alcohloism/ Chemical dependance are only treated and the treatment is abstinence. Once a person is identified with a problem, they receive treatment and can never return to the "Normal useage" of that particular substance.
One big problem with addiction is a process called "Denial". The denial process is a self defense mechanism that prevents the addicted person from actually seeing "Reality". Addiction is both a physical process that, because of the chemical imbalance in the brain, actually causes the brain to change (When combined with the Chemical of choice).
If you are an ALPA pilot, Contact your MEC AERO-MEDICAL chair. They can give you more information and if you are willing to volunteer, could probably use the help.

 

[Timebuilder]

and took steps to finally rid himself of the problem after he got caught.

If he had "gotten caught" as you claim, my friend in the DA's office would have him being charged and arraigned. That hasn't happened.

He brought his problem to light after a tabloid printed a story told by his former maid. Now, would you be surprised if a former employee had an axe to grind, or simply wanted to sell a story to a newspaper for money? I would not be surprised.

In any event, you have not made a factual statement yet. Let's see if there are any here.

How can you say that after the personal heckling Clinton took and is still taking from this demagogue?

Easily. Because before Clinton and his comical twists of english ("that depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is") became the subject of a good laugh on Rush's show, Rush first took on his ideas and refuted them. Rush also pointed out that Clinton got some of his best poll numbers when he talked like a republican, as he did in the state of the union speech in 1995. Essentially, he was giving an increasingly conservative nation what they wanted to hear, and lying through his teeth. Although he can talk like a conservative, he governed as a liberal.

Referring to Senator Waxman as Senator Nostrils. Hillary's new haircut makes her look like the hood ornament on a 1957 Buick? Chelsea characterized as the new White House dog. I could go on but we all know what I'm talking about.

All of these wonderful examples have taken place after the ideas have been refuted. Waxman's record. Hillary's healthcare. The apology for the Chelsea segment on his show. We all know, at least those of us who know what we are talking about, that these humorous observations are mere moments in several hours of serious discussion of the issues and the issue makers.

One of the things the dittoheads don't seem to understand is that the 20,000,000 listeners Limbaugh draws in a week are not all fans.

It's 30 million, but who's counting? Answer: every program director in America.

I occaisionally watch Peter Jennings and Dan Rather to keep tabs on media bias. I'll give you one for that. Not all listeners are fans. No surprise there, but it IS a fact. Ding, ding, ding!!!

Most women stone themselves DURING adultery.

Are you taking pain killers?

No. You aren't giving me THAT much of a pain.

I'm talking whatever mind altering substances (including alcohol, Mr Devo) women have become convinced the use of makes them more liberated and self-actualized as the engage in illicit sex with men who are not their husbands. Instead of being stoned by others, they willingly stone themselves to suppress their feeling of wrongdoing as they seek this new brand of "love" on their own terms. Of course, this is a cause of depression and self loathing as they go against the standards set forth by God in Proverbs 31:10-31

10 Who can find a virtuous wife? For her worth is far above rubies. 11 The heart of her husband safely trusts her; So he will have no lack of gain. 12 She does him good and not evil All the days of her life. 13 She seeks wool and flax, And willingly works with her hands. 14 She is like the merchant ships, She brings her food from afar. 15 She also rises while it is yet night, And provides food for her household, And a portion for her maidservants. 16 She considers a field and buys it; From her profits she plants a vineyard. 17 She girds herself with strength, And strengthens her arms. 18 She perceives that her merchandise is good, And her lamp does not go out by night. 19 She stretches out her hands to the distaff, And her hand holds the spindle. 20 She extends her hand to the poor, Yes, she reaches out her hands to the needy. 21 She is not afraid of snow for her household, For all her household is clothed with scarlet. 22 She makes tapestry for herself; Her clothing is fine linen and purple. 23 Her husband is known in the gates, When he sits among the elders of the land. 24 She makes linen garments and sells them, And supplies sashes for the merchants. 25 Strength and honor are her clothing; She shall rejoice in time to come. 26 She opens her mouth with wisdom, And on her tongue is the law of kindness. 27 She watches over the ways of her household, And does not eat the bread of idleness. 28 Her children rise up and call her blessed; Her husband also, and he praises her: 29 "Many daughters have done well, But you excel them all." 30 Charm is deceitful and beauty is passing, But a woman who fears the Lord, she shall be praised. 31 Give her of the fruit of her hands, And let her own works praise her in the gates.

Is there any wonder why adultery is not an option?

 

[Typhoon1244]

Re: Check your facts

Rush [has] a higher accuracy rate than Peter Jennings. What's more, on the occaision he is wrong about something, he discusses it, sometimes at length. You won't see Al Franken do that. You won't see Katie Couric do that.

See? It works, doesn't it? Take any issue, decide what the truth is, then state the exact opposite. For example, "Rush has a higher accuracy rate than Peter Jennings." It'd be laughable if so many people didn't really believe it was true.

Thanks for the demo, T.B.

 

[Timebuilder]

It would be laughable were it not so sad that so many people don't know that it's true. Apparently, you are one of them.

When I was a liberal broadcaster, I knew that I was dissembling and obfuscating at every turn. The idea was to give no quarter to the opposition, much like the senate democrats are refusing to give an "up or down" vote to qualified justices like Miguel Estrada, and how the true colors of the color focused liberals are coming to light when an extremely qualified black female justice gets a hard road. Why? She refuses to toe the liberal line as expected, and regularly enforces the laws of the United States instead of legislating from the bench, as does the ninth circuit.

Really, try a few nights of Jennings reporting on the Mideast. You'll get the idea that the palestinian terrorists are just hapless victims fighting for their homeland.

Except for one thing. Since 1948, the world has said that it isn't their homeland. They were well on their way to peace several times, but the extremist elements keep that from happening. But do check out Jennings reports on this topic. It's very enlightening to observe his unique perspective.

And please, try to catch an interview with lifelong democrat Zell Miller, and find out how my old party left me, rather than me leaving it.