Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

America owes talk host Rush Limbaugh a debt of gratitude, Libertarians say
LP Press Release ^ | October 16, 2003 | Libertarian Party Press

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."


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society
KEYWORDS: abnorml; allaboutdope; bigllosers; dontbogartdope; doobydoobydoo; doperpressrelease; dopertarians; doublestandard; drugwar; drugwarriorfascists; drugwarriorreligion; drugworshippers; fanatics; fatfreddiescat; fatfreddy; franklin; freedope; gimmemyweed; giveusdope; gottahavemytoke; harryanslingersghost; hypocracy; hypocrites; ideologues; ididntinhale; imtoostonedtoread; imtoostonedtowrite; ineedmydope; itsallaboutdrugs; itsareligion; jackbootedthugs; jokerpapers; junkies; jusblowingsmoke; libertarian; libertarianreligion; libertarians; limbaugh; losertarians; lovablefuzzball; lpassclowns; maryjaneisabitch; mrnatural; mycauseisdope; needalife; ondcpsocialists; onenotejohnnies; onestringbanjo; onetrackminds; ourladyofthebuzz; ownsdoritosstock; passdeganjamon; passitoverdude; phineas; potheads; prisonrape; puritanhypocrites; rush; singleissueparty; socialengineering; theirrelevantparty; toohighforlogic; twofaced; victimlesscrime; wewantourdope; willneverwinanything; wodlist; yawwwwwwwn; zzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 621-640641-660661-680681-688 next last
To: noprob
"I can't think of any other..."

Nope, just cut if off before "of". And you might be able to call a home service technician to come by and make the time stop flashing on your VCR.

661 posted on 10/17/2003 12:03:37 PM PDT by CWOJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 659 | View Replies]

To: noprob; CWOJackson
CWOJackson:
"Frenchie? Is that all you can do?"

__________________________________

I can't think of any other group that would stand with you in your intentional bombardment of your Constitution and Bill of Rights... So, yes... Frenchie.. That's all I have to say to you...
659 -noprob-




You could remind our 'chiefy' of the oath he supposedly took to protect & defend. It appears he's either forgotten it, or he just doesn't care about honoring it anymore.
662 posted on 10/17/2003 12:10:41 PM PDT by tpaine (I'm trying to be 'Mr Nice Guy', but Arnie won, & politics as usual lost. Yo!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 659 | View Replies]

To: tpaine
"You could remind our 'chiefy' of the oath he supposedly took to protect & defend."

Forget? Not at all. I just don't accept you and yours interpretations of the Constitution. That's what the "against all enemies, foreign and DOMESTIC" part covers.

663 posted on 10/17/2003 12:12:51 PM PDT by CWOJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 662 | View Replies]

To: tpaine
You could remind our 'chiefy' of the oath he supposedly took to protect & defend. It appears he's either forgotten it, or he just doesn't care about honoring it anymore.

He is quite a joke.. I'm done with the idiot..

664 posted on 10/17/2003 12:24:06 PM PDT by noprob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 662 | View Replies]

To: CWOJackson
Yeah, the People are the Enemy.

'Living Constitution' bump.
665 posted on 10/17/2003 12:45:42 PM PDT by headsonpikes (Spirit of '76 bttt!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 663 | View Replies]

To: noprob
I'll be the first to admit that I haven't a clue as to how to solve the meth and crack problem. I do know that legalization isn't the right way.

If they haven't commited a crime, then I'm all for an effective treatment since all throwing people in prison accomplishes is to turn them into hard core criminals if they weren't before. The only problem I see is that the drugs are so seductive that I bet the relapse rate for even the best programs is pretty high.




666 posted on 10/17/2003 4:07:32 PM PDT by Lx (Vote for Hillary because Hitler isn't running.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 460 | View Replies]

To: headsonpikes
Not at all, people who think the world hasn't changed are...just stupid.
667 posted on 10/18/2003 4:10:44 AM PDT by CWOJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 665 | View Replies]

To: noprob
Hello.
668 posted on 10/18/2003 4:11:13 AM PDT by CWOJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 664 | View Replies]

To: CWOJackson
...people who think the world hasn't changed are ... just stupid.

People who think human nature has changed are ... just gullible.

669 posted on 10/18/2003 8:37:54 AM PDT by headsonpikes (Spirit of '76 bttt!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 667 | View Replies]

To: headsonpikes
"People who think human nature has changed are ... just gullible."

LOL! People who don't think it's changed are just plain stupid.

670 posted on 10/18/2003 9:09:13 AM PDT by CWOJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 669 | View Replies]

To: CWOJackson
I'm a conservative - you're a utopian; we'll just have to agree to disagree.
671 posted on 10/18/2003 10:18:31 AM PDT by headsonpikes (Spirit of '76 bttt!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 670 | View Replies]

To: headsonpikes
Of course in your world you're a conservative. The only problem you have is your world is 200 years ago.
672 posted on 10/18/2003 10:58:23 AM PDT by CWOJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 671 | View Replies]

To: CWOJackson
No, 200 years ago, my views had but very recently been seen as revoultionary and radical.

American conservatives are attempting to preserve those early American principles - utopians such as yourself imagine that they can improve them.

'Bringing them up to date', as you would put it.

'Making America more congruent with European socialist thinking' is how I see your supposed 'improvements'.
673 posted on 10/18/2003 11:21:03 AM PDT by headsonpikes (Spirit of '76 bttt!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 672 | View Replies]

To: headsonpikes
No, 200 years ago, my views had but very recently been seen as revoultionary and radical

Especially as you turn on a button from a remote and a picture of talking person mysteriously(at least to the Founding Ftahers) appears on a 25" screen and is talking magically to them from what seems nowhere.

And then also they would be freaked out that you could take something out of the freezer(an already foreign concept to them) pop that pre-packaged dinner into a microwave and have a meal in 5 minutes.

JMO, but if the Founding fathers saw you doing that they would call you the spawn of satan.

674 posted on 10/18/2003 11:27:10 AM PDT by Dane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 673 | View Replies]

To: Dane
Am I expected to respond to your putative description of me as the 'spawn of satan'?

Really.
675 posted on 10/18/2003 11:37:56 AM PDT by headsonpikes (Spirit of '76 bttt!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 674 | View Replies]

To: headsonpikes
As usual, you have no clue what you're talking about. You have no interest whatsoever in defending our founding principles, you're only interested in attempting to use them to somehow demonstrate that your own desires are somehow Constitutionally protected. They aren't.

I'd suggest that you try to get over it, but you really need to get over yourself first. Of course, this will never happen. Fortunately for our society, your hangups have no impact at all...only in perpetuating your own misery.

676 posted on 10/18/2003 11:43:05 AM PDT by CWOJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 673 | View Replies]

To: headsonpikes
Am I expected to respond to your putative description of me as the 'spawn of satan'?

Uh dude, I didn't call you the "spawn of satan". My reply #674 was my opinion of what the Founding Fathers would call you if you showed them a TV and making dinner in 5 minutes from a microwave oven.

Yes the Founding Fathers opinions are very important, but to ignore modern contingcies is naive at best and disingenous at worst.

Just a question did Thomas Jefferson have to deal with a crack addict smoking it up on his street corner?

677 posted on 10/18/2003 11:45:54 AM PDT by Dane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 675 | View Replies]

To: Dane
In Jefferson day an angry nation would require months...many months...to attack America.

In Jeffersons day the economy wasn't trade internationally over the net, with billions moving around the world every second.

In Jeffersons day, one of the brightest minds of the world was flying a kite in a storm TRYING to get lightning to strike it.

Then again, in Jeffersons day he died pretty much penniless and living in a home that was being basically paid for by friends.

The founding fathers were brilliant for their day and age, more so then most of their modern day defenders give them credit for however. Which is why they recognized their words and documents would not, and could not, be the answer for everything. That is why they wisely established a government that could be changed, and evolve, as necessary.

678 posted on 10/18/2003 11:57:20 AM PDT by CWOJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 677 | View Replies]

To: CWOJackson
Your squalling retort does merit a reply as you have abandoned anything like debate for mere invective.
679 posted on 10/18/2003 1:20:19 PM PDT by headsonpikes (Spirit of '76 bttt!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 676 | View Replies]

To: Dane
Thomas Jefferson had to deal with public drunkenness.
680 posted on 10/18/2003 1:22:12 PM PDT by headsonpikes (Spirit of '76 bttt!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 677 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 621-640641-660661-680681-688 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson