"People are all garbage! Anyone who doesn't live in a garbage bag is a hypocrite... dude!"
Posted on 10/17/2003 7:41:22 AM PDT by twittle
How should a person of conservative leanings regard the revelation that right-wing national talk radio host Rush Limbaugh has admitted his addiction to - as they say in polite circles - prescription painkillers?
That's a tough enough question. But I'm wondering if there aren't bigger issues here than just a famous man, back pain and an enterprising tabloid reporter.
Perhaps, in some odd and twisted way, Limbaugh's current rehabilitation - and possible arrest after it - will lead to some higher ground on the issue of drug use and how we handle it.
My sense is the Limbaugh situation has the potential to launch a new national soul search on drugs and our so-called zero-tolerance laws. The questioning could be especially acute in conservative circles. It might not produce a clean sweep of opinion on the matter, mind you. But it could be the first sprouting of change from a seed planted by conservatives who support the current President Bush - himself a clean and sober ex-substance abuser.
Conservatives were able to find empathy for the president and the troubles he endured early in life and look past them - no doubt aided by Bush's embracing of Jesus Christ.
But a day of reckoning is coming for conservatives, quickly after the sure-as-sunrise, triumphant return of Limbaugh to the airwaves.
The return could go one of two ways.
First, Limbaugh spends rehab looking into the eyes of men and women in the same situation and snaps to the fact that addiction is complicated and undiscriminating, and he returns with fresh, more-nuanced, more-tolerant views on drug laws. Ironically, he could single-handedly lead formerly tough-talking conservatives to those views, too.
Or, second, he doesn't change his tune, and the howls of hypocrisy rain down.
Either way, conservatives could end up in an uncomfortable box. Limbaugh's response could become a tipping point, especially in an election year, on the issue of how to handle the various layers of hypocrisy in our nation's war on drugs, worthy as that war may be.
Why is it that, when someone white gets popped, it's always an addiction to prescription painkillers, and for anyone else it's an addiction to drugs? There's a presumption of innocence, a "darn-the-luck" subtext for white people.
But is this fair? There are more than a few middle-class, college-age white kids who made the foolish mistake of peddling dope on campus and doing some seriously hard time.
And aren't all drugs intended to relieve pain? Haven't we been through enough national dialogue about the root causes of addiction to understand that, if someone gets jammed, he or she is in a world of emotional hurt?
I'm not advocating that Limbaugh go to the slammer for 40 years, nor is this a call for legalized pot - something I oppose. But, given what Limbaugh did by scoring Class 3 narcotics off the street, you'd expect a sentence commensurate with the crime, right?
I'd like to ask Limbaugh that one personally. I'd ask him what his view would be if another famous figure was in his situation. What call would he make? Historically, he has not been terribly sympathetic to other public figures in the same fix.
My prediction is that, no, Limbaugh will not receive a punishment by the book, and loud howls will follow. Yes, many are gleeful about Limbaugh's predicament. But their dark joy in seeing people fall are their own to reckon with.
I can hear you saying already, "Hold up - what about every high-profile professional athlete, especially black, who has glided past arrest without consequence?" Others will argue vehemently that this country is built upon the foundation of the second chance, and Limbaugh deserves the same break as everyone else.
Fair enough, but how did the notion of "everyone else" get so far off track? If a man getting out of control with drugs during his pursuit of an erect posture is less punishable than a man seeking emotional solace from a life of stooping under the whipping cane of the social order, how does locking up one and not the other heal either one?
We found a way to permit the healing of President Bush - rightly so, in my view. But maybe while Limbaugh mends over the next month, and while we're praying for him, we also could make some room for this question: Whose pain are you willing to relieve and why?
We may see a little of that here this morning.
This makes no sense to me, I guess in rude circles prescription painkillers have another name??
And how is it compassionate to look into the eyes of like addicts and then call for weaker drug laws, to allow pushers to profit from turning decent human beings, rich or poor, into pathetic slaves? That is compassion?
Let me ask you something twit little, did you ever ask yourself the same question when Clinton was spraying all over the Oval Office?
Scoring prescription pain killers off the street is illegally obtaining narcotics. It's the same as if he was going after heroin.
Only in the damaged minds of recreational drug use advocates.
You know, I don't recall Rush speaking that bad about other people's drug problems. I have seen two quotes over and over again from over 8 years ago to prove this so-called hypocripsy. It really is not a topic Rush spends much time on.
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.