Comments on: RUSH REDUX http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/rush_redux/ Online Journal of Politics and Foreign Affairs Thu, 26 Nov 2009 05:37:08 -0600 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5 hourly 1 By: Anonymous http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/rush_redux/comment-page-1/#comment-6721 Anonymous Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000 /?p=3555#comment-6721 Both this article and your commentary mirror my thoughts. First, while I enjoy listening to Rush, I always appreciated his schtick as an "act" - he had a lot to say that was not being said in the mainstream press, but all that bombast and the like was added for entertainment sake and made driving three hours bearable (like someone stated about Howard Stern, the reason people listen to him - both those that love and hate - is that you can't wait to hear what he's going to come up with next). On the addiction portion, I also had the same thoughts - getting hooked on cocaine or heroine (recreational drugs) is a lot different that someone coming out of surgery getting addicted to their pain medication. I personally have never used an illegal drug in my life (no, not even pot, not even once) since there is no way I would put that kind of $)% in my body. On the other hand I have had both dental and body surgery and have been given codeine and the like and happily took them to drive away the pain. I never had a problem stopping when the script was out, and would like to think this would be true for a higher pain level and a stronger drug, but the truth is I don't know. So I can't really fault Rush and hope he makes his recovery. Both this article and your commentary mirror my thoughts. First, while I enjoy listening to Rush, I always appreciated his schtick as an "act" - he had a lot to say that was not being said in the mainstream press, but all that bombast and the like was added for entertainment sake and made driving three hours bearable (like someone stated about Howard Stern, the reason people listen to him - both those that love and hate - is that you can't wait to hear what he's going to come up with next).

On the addiction portion, I also had the same thoughts - getting hooked on cocaine or heroine (recreational drugs) is a lot different that someone coming out of surgery getting addicted to their pain medication. I personally have never used an illegal drug in my life (no, not even pot, not even once) since there is no way I would put that kind of $)% in my body. On the other hand I have had both dental and body surgery and have been given codeine and the like and happily took them to drive away the pain. I never had a problem stopping when the script was out, and would like to think this would be true for a higher pain level and a stronger drug, but the truth is I don't know. So I can't really fault Rush and hope he makes his recovery.

]]> By: roger http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/rush_redux/comment-page-1/#comment-6722 roger Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000 /?p=3555#comment-6722 Blameless act? I agree with you -- and I disagree with R.L -- that drugs should be decriminalized. I also think there is more than a little hypocrisy in granting pharmaceutical based drugs that basically imitate heroin "habit forming" status, while demonizing heroin. However, the law is the law and exchange is exchange. The accusation against Rush Limbaugh is that he used an intermediary to acquire those drugs. That is a little bit more than a "blameless act." It is called conspiracy. Obviously, you weren't paying attention to a certain impeachment that happened in the late 90s. Fellatio is a harmless act -- lying about it, and getting others to lie about it, is an offense that Ken Starr, at least, thought was a big deal. There is no way, given the reports out about Limbaugh's drug use and the way he acquired those drugs, that it can be construed as a blameless act. Hopefully, he will get his day in court, and we will see if he can get out on a technicality -- it seems to me, from the news reports, that he can argue entrapment, which is a standard defense in drug cases. But blameless... wow! Blameless act? I agree with you -- and I disagree with R.L -- that drugs should be decriminalized. I also think there is more than a little hypocrisy in granting pharmaceutical based drugs that basically imitate heroin "habit forming" status, while demonizing heroin.
However, the law is the law and exchange is exchange. The accusation against Rush Limbaugh is that he used an intermediary to acquire those drugs. That is a little bit more than a "blameless act." It is called conspiracy. Obviously, you weren't paying attention to a certain impeachment that happened in the late 90s. Fellatio is a harmless act -- lying about it, and getting others to lie about it, is an offense that Ken Starr, at least, thought was a big deal.
There is no way, given the reports out about Limbaugh's drug use and the way he acquired those drugs, that it can be construed as a blameless act. Hopefully, he will get his day in court, and we will see if he can get out on a technicality -- it seems to me, from the news reports, that he can argue entrapment, which is a standard defense in drug cases. But blameless... wow!

]]> By: James Joyner http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/rush_redux/comment-page-1/#comment-6723 James Joyner Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000 /?p=3555#comment-6723 Roger, I don't say that Rush is blameless for using illegal means to feed his addiction; just that he's blameless for getting addicted in the first place. That makes it different from illegal drugs which require a conscious choice before addiction is possible. Roger,

I don't say that Rush is blameless for using illegal means to feed his addiction; just that he's blameless for getting addicted in the first place. That makes it different from illegal drugs which require a conscious choice before addiction is possible.

]]> By: roger http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/rush_redux/comment-page-1/#comment-6724 roger Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000 /?p=3555#comment-6724 James, okay, that makes sense. But I disagree with your idea that addiction is something a person choses. In fact, I don't completely understand it. I've known heroin users. But I've never known anyone who said, I wanted to be a heroin addict. If that is why Rush is blameless, well, then every heroin user is blameless. I think your point is that pain somehow made Rush into an addict. But this, too, seems a little funny. I mean, I would imagine that, in a given set of heroin users, many of them, maybe most, could describe personal and mental pains that preceded the use of the drug. We would probably all say, well, they chose to use the drug to get out of that situation. Now, I would think that the opportunities for therapy increase as income increases. So that a person with more money -- who is, presumably, a person with more access to therapy -- has less excuse for the painkiller lifestyle than someone who has access to fewer therapies. Choice, in other words, is about a whole set of choices having to do with how you live your life. I'm sorry -- if you are asking me to hold a man blameless for boosting medical heroin because he has a back ache, given that he has the resources to chose other forms of therapy, and to pile on blame on some twenty year old heroin user who possibly had no father, or has seen his relatives shot, or ... you know the story -- I'm not going to opt for the first choice. There's a sort of odd, displaced, liberalism in this feeling sorry for Rush. But if you do, then you must surely feel the same pity, maybe even more, for your average Bronx Rikers Island inmate. Do you? James, okay, that makes sense. But I disagree with your idea that addiction is something a person choses. In fact, I don't completely understand it. I've known heroin users. But I've never known anyone who said, I wanted to be a heroin addict. If that is why Rush is blameless, well, then every heroin user is blameless. I think your point is that pain somehow made Rush into an addict. But this, too, seems a little funny. I mean, I would imagine that, in a given set of heroin users, many of them, maybe most, could describe personal and mental pains that preceded the use of the drug. We would probably all say, well, they chose to use the drug to get out of that situation. Now, I would think that the opportunities for therapy increase as income increases. So that a person with more money -- who is, presumably, a person with more access to therapy -- has less excuse for the painkiller lifestyle than someone who has access to fewer therapies. Choice, in other words, is about a whole set of choices having to do with how you live your life.
I'm sorry -- if you are asking me to hold a man blameless for boosting medical heroin because he has a back ache, given that he has the resources to chose other forms of therapy, and to pile on blame on some twenty year old heroin user who possibly had no father, or has seen his relatives shot, or ... you know the story -- I'm not going to opt for the first choice. There's a sort of odd, displaced, liberalism in this feeling sorry for Rush. But if you do, then you must surely feel the same pity, maybe even more, for your average Bronx Rikers Island inmate. Do you?

]]> By: James Joyner http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/rush_redux/comment-page-1/#comment-6725 James Joyner Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000 /?p=3555#comment-6725 roger, To use heroine the first time--presumably prerequisite to getting hooked--requires the conscious act to break the law. Not the same for a prescription drug addict. Do I feel sympathy for pathetic losers who chose to escape via illegal drugs? Sometimes. And I think they should be free to make that choice, anyway. I simply say it's a different thing and that one could conceivably think heroine should be illegal and abusers should be punished and still feel sorry for Rush. roger,

To use heroine the first time--presumably prerequisite to getting hooked--requires the conscious act to break the law. Not the same for a prescription drug addict.

Do I feel sympathy for pathetic losers who chose to escape via illegal drugs? Sometimes. And I think they should be free to make that choice, anyway. I simply say it's a different thing and that one could conceivably think heroine should be illegal and abusers should be punished and still feel sorry for Rush.

]]> By: PoliBlog http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/rush_redux/comment-page-1/#comment-6727 PoliBlog Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000 /?p=3555#comment-6727 <strong>OTB on Limbaugh</strong> James of OTB comments on the Newsweek piece on Limbaugh as well (joining myself and Stephen Green).... --- OTB on Limbaugh
James of OTB comments on the Newsweek piece on Limbaugh as well (joining myself and Stephen Green)....

---

]]>