Nation Mag: Free Rush Limbaugh!

Sorry to betray such a low level of lust for revenge, but as a card-carrying member of the American Civil Liberties Union, I am duty-bound to defend the rights of even those I loathe. Not that Limbaugh, the talk-show bully, has been charged with a crime or sentenced to jail time. However, as an admitted addict who allegedly purchased drugs illegally, his freedom, were he an ordinary guy on the street, would be very much in jeopardy. In Florida, where Limbaugh allegedly committed his felony, the crime of purchasing large amounts of powerful narcotics without a prescription can get you a five-year sentence if prosecutors are so inclined. That is, if they are in a mood to be the tough anti-drug warriors that the Limbaughs of this world have long applauded.

Credit Limbaugh for riling up the public and politicians to imprison many addicts whose behavior was no worse than what he has admitted to. As he once told his radio audience: "If people are violating the law by doing drugs, they ought to be accused and they ought to be convicted and they ought to be sent up."

Limbaugh was an equal-opportunity drug warrior who, in response to the charge that drug laws singled out African Americans, said in an interview in 1995: "Too many whites are getting away with drug use The answer is to go out and find the ones who are getting away with it, convict them and send them up the river too."

Three years later, he is alleged to have begun his own white man's odyssey into a life of addiction and crime.

Let me be on record as being strongly opposed to sending Limbaugh up the river, even though that is the penalty he wished to inflict on others. Just chalk me up as one of those bleeding-heart liberals who believe that drug addiction should be treated as a medical rather than a criminal matter.

If convicted and imprisoned, Limbaugh could come back a hardened criminal, most likely having learned only how to get away with convenience store stickups to support his habit. Although in prison he might also be educated by fellow inmates to drop the OxyContin that he allegedly was hooked on for heroin, which has a similar high but may be less damaging to the body. We don't know why he didn't turn to pot for relief, but I suspect that prescription drug abuse is just more acceptable in right-wing circles.

But those are his choices, and I support his right as an adult to pick his own poison. I don't endorse the tough-love hard line that because Limbaugh has failed in his two previous attempts to end his addiction by voluntarily checking into a medical program, he shouldn't be given a third chance. He should get as many more as he needs. As one who has had bouts of addiction with truly dangerous drugs--good red wines and only the most aged of Scotch--I don't want them throwing me into jail just because I fall off the wagon.

Although Limbaugh is obviously a hypocrite, that is no reason to compound the madness of our drug problem by punishing him in what seems to have been a victimless crime--unless he pressured his housekeeper/supplier into the Florida narco-underworld, which would make him far more culpable. But we liberals believe in innocent until proved guilty.

Limbaugh's experience is the best argument against the demonization of all junkies--this one throughout his addiction held a big job and presumably paid a lot in taxes. The considerable harm he inflicts daily on the larger society can hardly be blamed on his addiction. The drugs may have even tempered his verbal brutishness. In any case, there is no evidence that the drugs caused him to daily savage others--he was equally offensive before and during his drug abuse. To put it another way, his drug use, if it has caused pain to others, is the least of his crimes.

Let's hope that Limbaugh emerges from this experience more tolerant of the weaknesses of others. Perhaps he could then prevail upon his buddy, Atty. Gen. John Ashcroft, to end his vicious crackdown on cancer and AIDS patients attempting to use marijuana to manage their pain without running afoul of the law.

The drugs may have even tempered his verbal brutishness. In any case, there is no evidence that the drugs caused him to daily savage others--he was equally offensive before and during his drug abuse. To put it another way, his drug use, if it has caused pain to others, is the least of his crimes.

There, Rush has his support. I'm sure he feels much better now.

I would treat Rush no beter, nor worse than any other man on the street who committed the same offense. Rush KNEW what he was doing was illegal, he knew there were consequences, and he has been on record for years for holding people responsible for their actions.

Has this author written an article saying that Ted Kennedy should not be punished for manslaughter while driving under the influence? Just curious if these people who bring up Rush "breaking the law" have every written about Kennedy breaking the law. Oh, and who got hurt more in these "crimes"? Mary Jo or Rush's housekeeper?

Pieces like this only prove what we already know, that the left never knows what it's talking about. Rush's drug use was "the least of his crimes"? (What crimes?) It's a silly rant meant to smear him, and us by association.

Typical.

"In Florida, where Limbaugh allegedly committed his felony, the crime of purchasing large amounts of powerful narcotics without a prescription can get you a five-year sentence ~~if prosecutors are so inclined~~ 1) if you are caught purchasing large amounts, 2) if you are then charged with that crime, 3) if it can be proven in a court of law that you did so, beyond a reasonable doubt and, 4) if a jury of your peers convicts you."

He left out a few steps.

....I assume the author of this smear piece against Rush is someone who advocates using and legalizing drugs, since he seems to be offended by antidrug types, even referring to them as "warriors".

The author is very condescending, even brutish and bullying in tone. Maybe he is on drugs.

Interesting timing. Jacob Sullum in Reason magagazine, Dec. 2003 (sorry, no link, it's not online yet.) title "Drug Rush" subtitle, Limbaugh to listeners: I belong in jail. Sullum uses the same qoutes as Nation and rather tongue in cheek suggests we should follow El Rushbo's own advice and give him a long term.

Sullum's main point really is that this long term use of drugs that would get me or thee incarcerated for a long stretch somehow failed to interfere in a demanding work schedule that has put Rush on top of the radio world. In fine point of fact, assuming the usage was primarily for pain management, the drugs may have helped make this work possible. What does this say to the notion that drug use has to be illegal lest users become incompetent leeches on society? Perhaps Rush might come out more inclined to listen to his friend Walter Williams on the subject.

The author is a fool. FL has a drug court system. The premise is to use the courts to force the defendant into treatment. In exchange the case is dropped and the record cleared.

That is how everone else is treated.

I doubt it will get that far. From the media reports and a few choice friends. They have no case and this is never going to court. UNLESS, there is political pressure on the elected state attorney of Palm Beach. But that is politics not evidence.

Has this author written an article saying that Ted Kennedy should not be punished for manslaughter while driving under the influence?

Nah, Scheer is more likely to be found writing fan letters to Kim Il Sung. Castro is too tame for him.

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.