Originally Posted By Jim in Merced CA ^^^I'm working on it SuperDry. I've exchanged all the various colors of paint in my life, to just black and white, so I'm hoping that helps.
Originally Posted By wahooskipper Someone who got addicted to pain pills is being labeled a "junkie" by some liberals? Hate raised its ugly head once again.
Originally Posted By Jim in Merced CA <Someone who got addicted to pain pills is being labeled a "junkie" by some liberals?> He's still an addict, isn't he? I like how when it's convenient, there's all kinds of grey area here. Especially, when it's 'Mr. NiceGuy' Rush Limbaugh.
Originally Posted By Beaumandy Being a crack addict is different than being addicted to painkillers. Rechnically they are both " addictions ", but the crack addict is engaged in drug abuse that was brought on for personal pleasure or recreation. You make a decision to be a low life crack addict. A person that is prescribed painkillers from his doctor for a medical condition is a total different situation. I know people on the left are a bit slow sometimes, but i know you can figure this out. Who on the left doing radio comes close to Rush again in total numbers? Why is Fox news news # 1 again? And the part about wanting saddam back in power..... that is the positon of the anti war types who protested the war before we went in regardless of what Rush does.
Originally Posted By wahooskipper I don't believe I have ever referred to a person who got addicted to pain pills as a "junkie" nor do I refer to alcoholics as "drunks". A disease is a disease whether it victimizes a conservative or a liberal. I just like how liberals portray themselves as more compassionate yet have no problem knocking around Rush. He deserves grief for a lot of things, to be sure.
Originally Posted By Jim in Merced CA <And the part about wanting saddam back in power..... that is the positon of the anti war types who protested the war before we went in> So, help me understand. If someone doesn't want a war in The Middle East, they want Saddam Hussein back in power? Is that more of the 'black and white' world of thinking?
Originally Posted By Beaumandy In the end all chrges are going to be dropped... everything. You think if the State Attorney had anything he would agree to drop all charges? Uhhh.. no. He would demand this stay on Rush's record. What's so funny is the libs who worship drug addiction and bad behavior all of a sudden are upset about Rush being addicted to painkillers. I think they are really upset that Rush beats then like a rented mule everyday and there is not a single thing they can do about it because they can't compete intellectually. From Rush's attorney. The actions taken today are as follows: • The State Attorney has filed a single charge of doctor shopping with the Court. The charge is being held in abeyance under the terms of an agreement between the State and Mr. Limbaugh. • Mr. Limbaugh has filed a plea of "Not Guilty" with the Court. The formal agreement between Mr. Limbaugh and the State Attorney will be filed with the Court on Monday. The terms of the agreement are substantively as follows: • Mr. Limbaugh will continue in treatment with the doctor he has seen for the past two and one half years. • After Mr. Limbaugh completes an additional 18 months of treatment, the State Attorney has agreed to drop the charge. • Mr. Limbaugh has agreed to make a $30,000 payment to the State of Florida to defray the public cost of the investigation.
Originally Posted By Beaumandy <<So, help me understand. If someone doesn't want a war in The Middle East, they want Saddam Hussein back in power?>> Let me help you Jim. If you protested the war before we went in or if you today say we are " occupiers " or the war is " illegal ", you by default are aguing Saddam, should be in power. The left has a knack for defending dictators and thug leaders throughout history. Especially the worst president ever, Jimmy Carter. Who on the left doing radio has numbers close to Rush again?
Originally Posted By Jim in Merced CA <What's so funny is the libs who worship drug addiction and bad behavior all of a sudden are upset about Rush being addicted to painkillers.> Well, libs [you know, treehuggers, Hollywood actors et al] like their drugs. It's the Neo-Cons who get so upset about drug addiction. And the reason that it's fun to poke out the eyes of someone like Rush Limbaugh, is that he has a lot of judgement toward many, many groups of people. So, yeah, when someone who is so sure about 'The way things ought to be' gets in a bit of trouble with drugs, there's a bit of a 'ha-ha!' feeling to it. And so what, he admits to having an addiction. He's still an addict. Oh yeah, but being addicted to painkillers is so much sexier than crack.
Originally Posted By wahooskipper Yes, he is an addict. I only criticized the folks calling him a "junkie".
Originally Posted By Jim in Merced CA <I think they are really upset that Rush beats then like a rented mule everyday and there is not a single thing they can do about it because they can't compete intellectually.> LOL!!! Yeah. Between Rush Limbaugh and President Bush, I feel like a real failure as an intellectual. If those guys are the smartest ones in the room, I should run for President!!!
Originally Posted By ADMIN <font color="#FF0000">Message removed by an administrator. <a href="MsgBoard-Rules.asp" target="_blank">Click here</a> for the LaughingPlace.com Community Standards.</font>
Originally Posted By wahooskipper Rush admitted he had a problem immediately after this story broke. If you read his statement you would in no way believe he was "enabled". He has accepted responsibility and he is making amends. His lawsuit had more to do with government's "right" to delve into one's medical history and that is something we should all be concerned about. The ACLU actually took his side. I get what this is. A good time to bash Rush. "Ha-ha...look at him...what a fool." I'd hardly be accused of being a Rush supporter. I've read his books, I don't get to hear his show. I take exception to many of his positions.
Originally Posted By Jim in Merced CA <His lawsuit had more to do with government's "right" to delve into one's medical history and that is something we should all be concerned about. The ACLU actually took his side.> Wait a darned minute. The ACLU took Rush Limbaugh's side on an issue? LOL! How do the Neo-Cons keep their heads from exploding?
Originally Posted By Beaumandy The ACLU will take a conservative's side of an issue about ever 10,000 cases or so. They think this token effort will fool people that they are fair and don't have a communist / socialist, anti American agenda. Anyone with any sense or a clue gets this. Hey, Saddam and Castro and Hitler, the Gambino crime family did "good things" for the people once in while. Only a fool would be..... fooled.
Originally Posted By Darkbeer Amazing what was being said by the Palm Beach prosecutors 2 years ago.... <a href="http://www.drudgereport.com/flash2rl.htm" target="_blank">http://www.drudgereport.com/fl ash2rl.htm</a> >>Palm Beach County prosecutors rejected an overture in 2004 from Rush Limbaugh's attorneys that would have allowed the nation's top talkshow host to enter drug rehabilitation, rather than face criminal charges for prescription drug abuse. Prosecutors, at the time, claimed they had evidence that Limbaugh committed at least 10 felonies! It now appears James Martz, the prosecutor who headed the investigation into Limbaugh's prescription drug use, was bluffing when he said that medical records "indicate evidence that would support in excess of 10 felony counts for violations." Prosecutors said Limbaugh, in any deal, would have to plead guilty to doctor shopping, a third-degree felony punishable by up to five years in prison. [Prosecutors also suggested at the time that Limbaugh may have been involved in illegal money laundering.] In an anticlimactic Florida finish, Limbaugh today will respond that he is "not guilty" of a single charge of fraud for concealing information to obtain a prescription -- and in 18 months the charge will be dropped and the record expunged. The case of the vanishing evidence... << So, should Rush sue Palm Beach for slander?
Originally Posted By Darkbeer Here is a good Newsweek article on the matter.... <a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12555181/site/newsweek/" target="_blank">http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12 555181/site/newsweek/</a>
Originally Posted By StillThePassHolder All this defending of Limbaugh is so incredibly transparent as to defy credibility. if he didn't do anything wrong, he wouldn't be taking any deal. Period, end of discussion. He's a rich hypocrite whose money allowed him to file motions and stall this to a point where he got himself a deal he could live with. There simply isn't another explanation, no matter what kind of spin is put onthis by defense lawyers, and gee, that's what defense lawyers do. Spin, spin, spin. Rich hypocrite bought himself justice. Be very proud, all you dittoheads, the system worked.
Originally Posted By wahooskipper "What I did, I did knowingly. What I did, I did because I wanted to do it, but I knew it was wrong the whole time. It's a powerful addiction this stuff has." More to my previous point that Rush doesn't feel "enabled."
Originally Posted By StillThePassHolder "What I did, I did knowingly. What I did, I did because I wanted to do it, but I knew it was wrong the whole time. It's a powerful addiction this stuff has." I've heard embezzlers give the exact same excuse.
