Once again we don't pay Rush. The judge was being paid by taxpayers couldn't work half of the time he was there and could do more damage to people than Rush ever could. Perfectly "fair" is prosecuting them the same way and not what we have here.
The consumer always pays in the end for what he receives. After his addiction announcement, a lot of people said "Ah, that explains a lot" so it must have been affecting his performance.
The point is not to mix cases -- every case is different. Just because the judge was dumped doesn't mean Rush should be. Just because the judge is let off doesn't mean Rush should be (on the merits of comparison alone).