Posted on 10/16/2003 10:48:07 AM PDT by noprob
The entire nation owes radio broadcaster Rush Limbaugh a debt of gratitude, Libertarians say, because his ordeal has exposed every drug warrior in America as a rank hypocrite.
"One thing we don't hear from American politicians very often is silence," said Joe Seehusen, Libertarian Party executive director. "By refusing to criticize Rush Limbaugh, every drug warrior has just been exposed as a shameless, despicable hypocrite.
"And that's good news, because the next time they do speak up, there'll be no reason for anyone to listen."
The revelation that Limbaugh had become addicted to painkillers -- drugs he is accused of procuring illegally from his Palm Beach housekeeper -- has caused a media sensation ever since the megastar's shocking, on-air confession last week.
As the Limbaugh saga continues, here's an important question for Americans to ask, Libertarians say: Why are all the drug warriors suddenly so silent?
"Republican and Democratic politicians have written laws that have condemned more than 400,000 Americans to prison for committing the same 'crime' as Rush Limbaugh," Seehusen pointed out. "If this pill-popping pontificator deserves a get-out-of-jail-free card, these drug warriors had better explain why."
Given their longstanding support for the Drug War, it's fair to ask:
Why haven't President George Bush or his tough-on-crime attorney general, John Ashcroft, uttered a word criticizing Limbaugh's law-breaking?
Why aren't drug czar John P. Walters or his predecessor, Barry McCaffrey, lambasting Limbaugh as a menace to society and a threat to "our children?"
Why aren't federal DEA agents storming Limbaugh's $30 million Florida mansion in a frantic search for criminal evidence?
Why haven't federal, state, and local police agencies seized the celebrity's homes and luxury cars under asset-forfeiture laws?
Finally, why aren't bloviating blabbermouths like William Bennett publicly explaining how America would be better off if Limbaugh were prosecuted, locked in a steel cage and forced to abandon his wife, his friends, and his career?
The answer is obvious, Seehusen said: "America's drug warriors are shameless hypocrites who believe in one standard of justice for ordinary Americans and another for themselves, their families and their political allies.
"That alone should completely discredit them."
But there's an even more disturbing possibility, Seehusen said: that the people who are prosecuting the Drug War don't even believe in its central premise -- which is that public safety requires that drug users be jailed.
"The Bushes and Ashcrofts and McCaffreys of the world may believe, correctly, that individuals fighting a drug addiction deserve medical, not criminal treatment," he said. "That would explain why they're not demanding that Limbaugh be jailed.
"But if that's the case, these politicians have spent decades tearing apart American families for their own political gain. And that's an unforgivable crime."
Nice try. Three expressions of sympathy from the pro-dope crowd in over 500 posts.
Pssssst. That won't convince anyone.
Great examples, I would have loved to post articles about that here and said the same thing... All are hypocrites, your right on!!
i want everyone to shut up about it, it's stupid. The biggest problem all of us have is big government programs that are not working...
the WOD, just one example....
At least you welcome liberty-minded people into the GOP unlike the imbeciles who claim that they want to "rid the party of the doper losertarian wing".
Ah. The ol' Al Gore "living constitution" argument.
You need to catch up with things. Seriously, walk through these Limbaugh threads. See if you can find one person who posts that they have been swayed to the pro-dope crusade. What you will find are people posting that this is the last straw for them...they are walking away from any affiliation with the LP.
That isn't the GOP driving them away...that is the LP driving them away.
Spare me the semantics - You know full well what I meant: We as taxpayers support a whole parasitic segment of the population, who have chosen to be drugged out zombies instead of productive citizens.
Actually, I don't.
I love the blue-Libertarian candidate, the spitting-Libertarian candidate, the free-state project, and the "lets use letters of marque and reprisal to get Osama Bin Laden" crowd. The Libertarians are so cute when they're being snobby.
But using a man's individual crisis to push their recreational drug agenda is really low.
Say what you want about Jackson's politics, but given the level of detail that he has described his military carrer with, I have no doubt that he is not BSing about his service.
My point is this: There is a demand, where there is demand, there will always be supply.... Where there is HUGE amounts of money to be made, there will be a gang banger, or hillbilly or someone that will want to get a peice...
Legalizing it, at the same time educating of the dangers..
legalizing removes the criminal element that makes the junk... It would still be available, but not the kind that can kill in one dose. Users wouldn't buy from gangs, they would buy from a pharmacy of some sort.
Educating removes demand, tell people of the horrors that this addictive drug can cause..
WOD empowers the drug lords, and doesn't stop them... Never has, never will...
Then your problem is with the socialized state. I don't support supporting a parasitic segment of the population of any kind.
Mother asks if you'll be home this weekend.
Sure...
I honestly wish the LP didn't focus on this one MINOR issue so much. It gives those who are of closed mind something to quickly label as "stupid dopers"
I wish they would focus on Social Security, Income and property taxes, taxation without representation, and of course government waste..
I hate the politics both dems and repubs play, both just spend wildly, and accomplish nothing!!
No, definately not government programs.. private programs would pop up to take the slack, churches, boys and girls clubs.. Scouts...
remember everyone has extra money to help fund what is important to them.. if they aren't being taxed to death..
You're in luck. There is a group that does all of that. Try the Constitution Party. To them, the drug issue is a states issue, not a federal issue. Thus there is little focus on drugs on the national platform.
Of course they get as many votes as the LP - next to none.
Punish them for the crimes they committed.
and don't tell me that will go away when we reduce the costs of drugs through decriminalization. If we lower the price, we increase demand.
There are far too many factors to consider w/r/t decriminalization to make this sweeping statement. For example, exactly what is decriminalization? Is it decriminalization based on the Dutch model? Is it a "don't ask/don't tell" type of decriminalization, in which cops simply choose to ignore certain drug laws? Is it a system of regulations whereby the state receives proceeds from licensed drugsellers? Each one of these variables affects the equation, and therefore the answer to "will decriminalization increase the number of drug users."It might interest you, also, to learn that one BU study has shown the Commonwealth of MA could save somewhere between $8 and $24 million in opportunity costs if marijuana were decriminalized.
Moreover, many drug users commit crimes not only to support their drug use, but to support their lifestyle, since once they become dependent upon the drug, they generally become to irresponsible to maintain regular employment.
You mean like Rush Limbaugh, a drug addict who made more money than everyone on FR put together and was one of the most successful Americans in his field ever?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.