[HoustonCurmudgeon]

Welcome to Free Republic.

I believe the difference in Clinton and Rush, is that one was a President of the United States in whom we had lost all faith, and the other is an entertainer / editorialist / newsman who many of us have come to trust. MOST of us can understand the failings of a friend, but not the repeated lies of a politician.

[weegee]

The difference between Clinton (or any president) and Rush Limbaugh is the difference between apples and oranges.

One had his finger on the nuclear button. The other can be turned off the radio by any listener pressing a button.

[proud American in Canada]

"I believe the difference in Clinton and Rush, is that one was a President of the United States in whom we had lost all faith, and the other is an entertainer / editorialist / newsman who many of us have come to trust. MOST of us can understand the failings of a friend, but not the repeated lies of a politician."

Good point.

You know, I will admit this to the world: I was a registered Dim. *sob*

It's true. But Bill Clinton cured me of that.

There's a huge difference between an elected President snorting a recreational drug and a radio broadcaster succumbing to a very powerful, prescribed painkiller after surgery.

The article was right about one thing, though--yep, Rush's listeners (most of them) are still behind him. But it's not because we're unthinking sheep. It's because, like you say, we can understand the failings of a friend who's been there with us, throughout the Clinton presidency, throughout the chad-fest that was November 2000, etc.

God bless you Rush! :)