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 last
To: headsonpikes
Thomas Jefferson had to deal with public drunkenness.

Which had been a problem for a 1000 years before Thomas Jefferson was born.

Crack, heroin, and even pot smoking were basically unknown in Jefferson's day.

Yeah, yeah, I know that Jefferson and Washington grew hemp, but they didn't smoke it and Martha Washington didn't put out the communal bong in the parlor after dinner.

They grew hemp for rope and paper.

681 posted on 10/18/2003 1:28:13 PM PDT by Dane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 680 | View Replies]

To: noprob
"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."

It is an unforgivable crime.

682 posted on 10/18/2003 1:32:35 PM PDT by thepitts (Hell hath no fury like vested interest masquerading as a moral principle!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dane
Public drunkenness and private drunkenness also will be a problem for the forseeable future. Only lunatics wish to make the control of people's eating, drinking, and drug-using a priority of government.

I'm astonished that this essentially totaliarian and utopian view has so much traction among American conservatives. When 'Liberals' draw up guidelines for improving the world, I am not surprised; when conservatives do so, I am.

Human nature is not changing as quickly as cooking methods.
683 posted on 10/18/2003 1:41:19 PM PDT by headsonpikes (Spirit of '76 bttt!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 681 | View Replies]

To: headsonpikes
Far, far better then abandoning reality...but I'm sure you are far, far happier in your safe place.
684 posted on 10/18/2003 2:03:38 PM PDT by CWOJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 679 | View Replies]

To: Dane
Martha Washington didn't put out the communal bong in the parlor after dinner.

Haven't you ever seen "Dazed and Confused"?

685 posted on 10/18/2003 4:48:21 PM PDT by jmc813 (Ron Paul for President in '08!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 681 | View Replies]

To: CWOJackson
...but I'm sure you are far, far happier...

You're right. I'm happier than a certain old non-com I see posting.

686 posted on 10/18/2003 6:17:45 PM PDT by headsonpikes (Spirit of '76 bttt!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 684 | View Replies]

To: Hemingway's Ghost
Political ideology is not about who attacks whom most successfully, it's about outlining and adhering to a set of political beliefs. You make it sound like an us-versus-them thing, winner take all, and that's it: good guys vs. bad guys, white hats vs. black hats.

Ideology doesn't mean squat if you can't get other people on your side. You don't do that by alienating those who could be your allies. Read Dale Carnegie's "How to Win Friends and Influence People".

Why do all you GOP cheerleaders sound like you care more about the GOP's best interests than America's best interests?

I see the GOP as the best vehicle for implementing what I believe are America's best interests and combating those who are against those interests (Democrats), therefore I guess I am a "GOP cheerleader".

Do I agree with the GOP on everything? No, but that's the way political parties work. As Maggie Thatcher says, parties are "organized consensus". You can't get your ideology implemented in a representative government if you don't have a sufficient number of allies.

What I don't see with the LP is any type of long term strategy for implementing their ideology. They focus their campaigns against both parties, and it gets them nowhere.

Do they think the country is going to embrace the libertarian ideology overnight, with the size and intrusiveness of the current government? No - it must be done gradually. IMHO, helping Democrats get elected (by attacking Republicans) does not move the country towards the libertarian ideology. Electing Democrats is going to expand government giveaways into the middle class (like national healthcare, etc.), and once that happens you will lose all hope.

687 posted on 10/19/2003 7:33:29 PM PDT by Mannaggia l'America
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 484 | View Replies]

To: Lady Heron; WFTR; jmc813
He should be treated like any other first time offender.
Deja vu! Rush Limbaugh should be punished as any other first-time offender is punished.
You people don't seem to understand that even a first time offender can get several years in prison, even if it is just their first offense. It has to do with amount/quantity!

jmc813, the playbook is getting awfully transparent these days. Getting away for a while helps...

688 posted on 10/21/2003 10:17:15 PM PDT by philman_36
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]


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