A Message To Conservatives: "Your Silence About Rush Limbaugh Is Deafening."

MichaelGraham.com ^ | 12/24/03 | Michael Graham

[suspects]

A NOTE TO MY FELLOW CONSERVATIVES:

Your silence regarding Rush Limbaugh is excruciating.

I like Rush, too, and given that he and I have the same employer, I'm not exactly improving my career prospects by being consistent. It's a bad habit I picked up after years of listening to, and admiring, Rush Limbaugh.

And if we learned the lessons of Limbaugh (individual responsibility and the rule of law), how can we now agree to "Clintonize" ourselves defending him? A drug addiction is one thing, but blackmail? He's allowed himself to be blackmailed for years--the same years he was rightly pounding the stuffing out of the Clintons? And now he claims he's the victim of a politically-motivated prosecution?

What's next: "The b**** set me up?"

Of all the disappointing decisions Rush has made, these last two are the most disheartening. Consider for a moment what blackmail is: An admission that you know what you're doing is wrong.

The decision to fork over the cash is just that--a decision. It can't be any less difficult to make that decision than to decide to, say, go to your lawyer, spill your guts and spend a month in detox at Charter. So why not choose to do the RIGHT thing?

But that's not what Rush chose to do. He chose instead to continue, for years, to do the wrong thing and then--after he was caught--blame the consequences on the vast, left-wing conspiracy. As Rush himself said very wisely and correctly when Jim Carville made the same argument defending President O.J., "It doesn't matter what Ken Starr's politics are if you're innocent."

Bill Clinton wasn't an innocent victim of political vendettas. He was a perjurer and obstructer of justice who blamed others for his own lack of character and its consequences.

Which means, my fellow conservatives, that Rush Limbaugh is....?

I'm sorry, I can't seem to hear you. It must be that deafening silence again.

[randita]

The comparison between Rush and Clinton does not hold up. Clinton was elected President. He swore to uphold the Constitution and he failed. He should have been held accountable and fired.

Rush is accountable to no one except himself. It's entirely his responsbility to make money for the stations that carry him. If he fails to do that, he is kaput. His future is entirely in his own hands.

I was proud of Rush for initially owning up to his problem and will reserve judgement until this thing plays out. It will not sit well for Rush to play the "victim" even if that is the correct legal strategy. Nor will it play well if he blames others for the situation he's in.

If he handles the whole scene with humility and grace, he will emerge scarred, but not beaten. If he allows anger to overcome good sense, he will degenerate into a yapping, effete lap dog.

[alnick]

Sorry, you can't have it both ways. If you don't like the Law, change the Law, but as it stands, Rush either had a Legal Prescription for his Drugs, or he didn't. If he didn't, his obtaining them, and taking them was a violation of law.

I don't think there are many people around here arguing that point. The problem is that there are many who, for some reason, want Rush to be thrown in prison for something that John Doe would get community service and/or probation for.

[B Knotts]

I've been against the war on drugs from day one. I should change now that a prominent conservative is in trouble? Not gonna do it. This prosecution is politically motivated; that's why it looks that way.

[laredo44]

LOL! You asked a question and didn't like the answer...it's as simple as that.

Not quite so simple from my perspective, but perhpas we can find something to agree about. Have a very Merry Christmas.

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

it is really hard to believe that the case against Rush is not politically motivated

. . . especially if you consider that Rush's supposedly confidential medical record are reportedly (I try not to imbibe) being trumpeted by network newsmen leftists.

and after hours of listenting to Rush I never knew what an anti-drug crusader he was until the left-wing media decided to tell me

It is remarkable to see Rush pilloried on FR by people who insinuate that they have bitter first-hand experience of seeing everyone they know get railroaded into prison for first-conviction on simple possession of small doses of prescription medicine.

I have to wonder if their claims in that regard gibe any better with reality than their suggestions that Rush has been the leading WOD crusader in the country. As a retiree I have been able to listen to Rush a great deal, and that just doesn't ring true.

[Bug]

Neil Boortz put out a (libetarian) challenge to listeners to name one person who was harmed by Rush.

Marta, other family members, his staff, his business partners, and the conservative movement for starters.

[Dane]

2)Unlike Clinton, Rush admitted his short-comings and sought help

Exactly, he admitted that he is a human being with human frailties to millions of people. He sought help and is on the road to recovery. Any other person in his situation(non-violent, non-trafficking, first time offender) would get probation, but there is a witch hunt to be had at the Palm Beach County prosecutors office.

Mr. Graham should get off his high horse and wish Rush the best. Oh yeah I forgot Michael Graham is a radio talk show host, he probably covets Rush's 600 stations and decides to take this disgusting pot shot at him.

With friends like Michael Graham, who needs enemies.

[alnick]

Tommy Chong of "Cheech N Chong" had 20 agents bust down his door, sieze his computer and bongs he was selling on the internet. Show of hands: Who feels safer with Tommy Chong off the street today??

The parents of the children who bought bongs from him?

[CWOJackson]

"Not quite so simple from my perspective..."

If you have a problem understanding how one harms themself by knowingly breaking the law and suffering the consequences that is something you need to resolve on your own.

And a Merry Christmas to you as well.

[thinking]

He that is without sin; cast the first stone!

[Abogado]

Not trying to be argumentative. From what I have read, a large percentage of homeless people are vets, with a large percentage of them addicts. Also, doctors are scared to prescribe pain-killing medication in quantities sufficient to kill the pain (fear of addiction, fear of the WOD nailing them).

[alnick]

What about vets who became hooked on pain-killing drugs after suffering injuries, but are unable to afford, or unable to obtain, "legal" drugs in civilian life? Seems the main difference between Rush and a poor vet hooked on pain-killers is economic resources - one can afford to obtain "legal" drugs, the other cannot.

Should we throw Rush in jail because he has lots of money?

Should we confiscate the money of wealthy people and distribute it amongst the poor?

Some people have lots of money; others don't. That's life.

[steve50]

I would say it has more to do with the drug controlling and affecting his behavior.

No doubt that's a big part of it. But it doesn't change the fact that until he became addicted himself he was fairly rabid about prosecuting those who meet the definition of his behaviour.

But this is the pattern, witch hunts like the WOD never end until they strap your hero to the stake and light the match. Rather than blow the match out on this particular fire we need to rethink the whole issue while we still have something of our Constitution left. It's already cost us the 2nd, the right to privacy, and the right to property to name a few.

[eeriegeno]

If the doctor/patient privacy privilege is to be broken in the courts unsealing of Mr Limbaugh's medical records, then so too must the court break the reporter/leaker privacy privilege to reveal exactly where all of the Limbaugh related news is coming from! Might as well go after the priest/confessor privilege while we are at it.

What about Mr Clinton's medical records? Will those records be revealed to prove what the brother said about his vacuum nose?

[CWOJackson]

Sniff, sniff.

You really do like to paint a heart tugging image to support your claims. I'm so choked up.

As I've already pointed out, the vets can acquire help if they so desire.

[TigersEye]

The parents of the children who bought bongs from him?

If we can only save one child ...

[nicmarlo]

I'll not get into the "WOD" issue with you, as that "debate" is an effort in futility. I don't agree with the Libertarian view. I do wish people, of their own accord, would make healthy choices for their lives and not do harmful things to themselves which ultimately, and statistically, does affect themselves and others. But, we live not in a Utopia.

[Hillarys Gate Cult]

Graham was the drive-time follower to Rush here in Charleston, SC before he went to Richmond. He would constantly insult rural people and Clemson fans as hicks. He said he was a Libertarian but sometimes sounded closer to a NPR host on some issues.

If the move to Richmond was a step up in the industry for Graham ( larger market ), he owes some thanks to Rush for getting him there.

Graham was on the show "Politically Incorrect" a few times and calls Bill Maher a good friend.

[Print]

Here's my mixed bag of feelings about Rush:

- he helped Conservatives a lot, and I admire him for that;

- he (allegedly) broke the law, undermined his own words by his own actions, and I am losing my respect for him;

- he is fighting to stay out of jail, and I understand that;

- from now on he has to adjust his rethoric to fit his circumstances, and I don't like it.

[HighWheeler]

Hey Michael, why do you NEVER respond to the FR posters to whom you troll for thoughts?

You use FR to promote your own personal columns, then refuse to answer questions and comments. It's rude if nothing else, especially since this is a DISCUSSION FORUM, not a blog, mmmmmkay?

You lob out a provocative title on a subject that has been covered nine ways to Sunday on FR, why don't you read those threads instead of starting a new one here?

Maybe you can mention some actual thoughts of your own on the subject today as you fill in for Glen Beck, instead of using the ones that FReepers post here. Let's see if you can come up with anything original.

And the "silence is deafening" oxymoronic tag is not very original, is it?