Why is it that libertarians call anyone who disagrees with them a socialist?
At any rate, in case you did not know, our drug laws are quite lenient towards drug addicts, and rightfully so. They receive minimal punishment if they agree to go into rehab and show progress. My guess is that Rush is probably already in rehab, or maybe has already completed it.
The only people who get the book thrown at them, and rightfully so, are dealers. No one is accusing Rush of being a dealer.
If Rush gets away with rehab and a slap on the wrist, which seems to be the most likely outcome, he'll have been treated like everyone else. Furthermore, if he accepts the consequences like a man, you can't possibly accuse hims of hypocrisy.
Bennet, BTW, is no hypocrite either. He admitted he had a problem and has taken steps to alleviate it.
Where do you get this idiotic notion that you have to be sinless in order to not be a hypocrite?
I was quoting a previous poster in that section, that why it says "by your definition". So, to be clear, I did not call Rush a Socialist, someone else did. The term I hear libertarians use most often is "statist". Rush could be called a "statist" fairly in regards to the WOD, as he has always advocated a large role for the state in deciding who can take what, when.
At any rate, in case you did not know, our drug laws are quite lenient towards drug addicts, and rightfully so. They receive minimal punishment if they agree to go into rehab and show progress. My guess is that Rush is probably already in rehab, or maybe has already completed it.
Our drug laws can be very harsh with people who have a large quantity of drugs, or have bought large quantity of drugs, or have brokered the sales of large quantity of drugs, or have been in proximity to people brokering large quantities of drugs. There are people doing hard time for all of the above, I assure you. The classic 'girlfriend bust' is too well known to need reiteration here. So yes, some courts some times are lenient with addicts, other times addicts and users get caught up in the draconian dealing laws and are severely punished.
The only people who get the book thrown at them, and rightfully so, are dealers.
It would be pretty typical for his maid, who was doing him a favor and probably makes $25,000 a year cleaning his house to get the book thrown at her while Rush gets treatment and a suspended sentence. Is that fair?
No one is accusing Rush of being a dealer. Again, under some drug laws mere possession of certain quantities is ipso facto proof of dealing intent. He may very well be charged with dealing or "intent to distribute" if he is treated like, say, a 22 year old ghetto dweller who was caught (or found out to have bought) 1000 or more pills.
If Rush gets away with rehab and a slap on the wrist, which seems to be the most likely outcome, he'll have been treated like everyone else.
He'll be treated like others with his background, I'll agreee with that.
Furthermore, if he accepts the consequences like a man, you can't possibly accuse hims of hypocrisy. Oh yes I can. He's sat on the air telling everyone how bad drugs are. I don't claim you must be a saint to avoid hypocracy, but you should not take up as preacher if you don't believe in God. You should not be simultaneously urging on the WOD and breaking the laws you are telling everyone else they must support. If that is not hypocrasy, what is?
Where do you get this idiotic notion that you have to be sinless in order to not be a hypocrite?
I didn't say that, you did. I think there is a threashold of reasonableness for a hypocrasy charge to have weight. I think, if the accusations are true, that Rush is way over the line. Remember, Rush could have behaved the same way (ie: taking pain pills illegaly) and taken the position that government has no legitimate business telling grown ups what things they can put in their own bodies. But he didn't, he took the statist position that our bodies belong to the collective, and they may set rules for us. Fine, but then as a supporter of that position LIVE WITH IT. He did not. "Do as I say, not as I do". Maybe he should work that into his setup piece.