I take great offense to the inclusion of Bill Bennett in this list. He's (a) not an anti-gambling crusader (b) had the money to waste (c) did nothing illegal. If he hurt his family or othes with his gambling you might have a tiny point. Bennett is a highly moral individual. OTOH, Rush is a total shitfvcker because he has railed against addicts for years, totally unsympathetic to their plight, while popping pills himself, illegally. And, of course, Newt is scum of the earth.
And isn't very "Clinton" of him to deny it at first. I hope he gets better. Sad. Will his fans ever be able to take what he says serious and with conviction. Conviction-hmmm, sound funny now doesn't it? Hopefully he doesn't get a conviction. Like 5 to 10 I just hope I & And Everyother Honest , Hardworking American TaxPayer dont have to pay for this rehab. (Music in Background: Clapton Unplugged...".. before you' cuse me, take a look at yer'self...")
My question is what did he do with all of these drugs? He bought thousands of pills. They could possibly go after him with intent to distribute.
It's not about Bennett's being an anti-gambling crusader (though there are some positions he's taken which kind of suggest that he was anti-gambling on the surface), or having the money to waste, or his activities being illegal. It's about his hypocrisy with regards to personal vices. http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2003/0306.green.html "We should know that too much of anything, even a good thing, may prove to be our undoing...[We] need ... to set definite boundaries on our appetites." --The Book of Virtues, by William J. Bennett "But Bennett, a devout Catholic, has always been more Old Testament than New. Even many who sympathize with his concerns find his combative style haughty and unforgiving. Democrats in particular object to his partisan sermonizing, which portrays liberals as inherently less moral than conservatives, more given to excusing personal weaknesses, and unwilling to confront the vices that destroy families. During the impeachment of Bill Clinton, Bennett was among the president's most unrelenting detractors. His book, The Death of Outrage, decried, among other things, the public's failure to take Clinton's sins more seriously." "Despite his personal appetites, Bennett and his organization, Empower America, oppose the extension of casino gambling in the states. In a recent editorial, his Empower America co-chair Jack Kemp inveighed against lawmakers who "pollute our society with a slot machine on every corner." The group recently published an Index of Leading Cultural Indicators, with an introduction written by Bennett, that reports 5.5 million American adults as "problem" or "pathological" gamblers. Bennett says he is neither because his habit does not disrupt his family life." If you are going to hold yourself up as a paragon of virtue and you're intolerant of other peoples vices your own personal life better be beyond reproach. Bennett claims that his gambling was perfectly acceptable and that he had nothing to be ashamed of, yet paradoxically, he immediately stopped and briefly retreated from the public eye after it became public. Gambling may not be illegal but it most certainly is a vice (especially when you're losing the amounts that Bennett did) whether you can afford it or not. And if you oppose the extension of casino gambling in the states like Bennett maybe you shouldn't be dropping hundreds of thousands of dollars in said casinos. Like Limbaugh and Gingrich, Bennett's pompous, moral elitism sets him up as a target for accusations of hypocrisy. Bennett once joked on a radio show that his friend said to him after the gambling story had broke that "maybe [he] should become a liberal, then [he] wouldn't have to have any standards at all." It's nauseating, holier than thou, drivel like this from these moralists that makes one assume that they possess the highest moral fiber imaginable. Clearly given Bennett's gambling habit he didn't set "definite boundaries on [his] appetites". Therefore he did not live up to the standards that he so arrogantly demands of others or even the standards he insinuates that liberals lack. Thus he deserves inclusion in a list that includes Gingrich and Limbaugh.
I realize that some liberals would prefer to celebrate sin and immorality, but I won't blame Bennett for failing to join that chorus. Nor will I blame him for not being a completely perfect human being. That hardly makes him a hypocrite. Morality is not a dirty world.
http://www.dailyinterlake.com/NewsE...mand=search&db=news.db&eqskudata=98-736139-68 Bottom of the article 2. Rush Limbaugh. The ex-ESPN commentator admitted he’s addicted to pain killers. Turns out he knew more about the NFL than he was given credit for. I really don't like Rush...he takes half-truths and makes them conservative propaganda....To his credit, he acted like a true politician: Announcing his drug addiction on a Friday, like politicians do when they announce controversial and/or flatout disturbing news....and the fact that he would not name the drugs he is taking...Of course the fact that he'll be away for a month helps in case he gets questioned in the future, so that he could be prepared (by lawyers) if necessary....
Well, it turns out nobody can find a quote from Rush about drugs since 1995 (and, believe me, they've tried). So, apparently he hasn't been speaking out on the subject since he's been addicted to painkillers. Not a hypocrite. A hypocrite is doing one thing while saying another. Unless someone comes up with a Rush quote about drug use in the past few years, it turns out he's not a hypocrite on this subject.
can you ever admit when one of your heroes is full of crap?... unbelievable! even manny's fresh tuna is staying away from this one 1-oooooooor maybe he just picked the one he liked best? is that even possible? 2-and how do you know this ian? 3-i've heard him on his radio show discussing precisely the same ideas that are the gist of the '95 quote in ML's sig... FCOL the guy doesn't even believe half the stuff he says on the air! he's just pandering to his audience of sheep! 4-yes because the true basis for rush's hypocrisy is how much research BigSoccer posters can do for you... grow up!
Couple of questions. #1) Did he ever speak out against drug users? Perhaps saying its their fault/problem/mistake? I bet he believes his policy on drugs, and they were not for a finite period of time. I.E "andbody who uses drugs in the next 5 years are wrong", he did not say that. To paraphrase his belifs "anyone who uses drugs is wrong." #2) If the answer to question 1 is yes, that he did speak out against them, that if they used Drugs at anytime they were wrong, wouldn't Rush himself be a hypocrite? Wouldn't he also be wrong? Listen, everybody makes mistakes and has misfortune. Lets hope he gets better. He is a human, Lets respect humanity.
Look, unless you guys can come up with Rush quotes on drugs since 1995, then he can't be called a hypocrite. A man with failings, perhaps. A man who became addicted to pain medication while he was taking them for a medical condition. It's not like he was recreationally snorting crack and then became addicted. He had a medical affliction. This is the reason why drugs are ILLEGAL...because they are addicting (unlike alcohol, but that's another debate). This story just proves that if you legalize drugs you're going to get alot of otherwise law-abiding citizens falling victim to their lure. If Rush has illegally purchased or used pain medication then he should pay the price for that crime. He should get whatever time Brett Favre got, since he had the same affliction. I'm watching Brett on TV right now and he seems to have overcome his failings.
You may not be familiar with the definition of hypocrite hypocrite one who puts on a mask and feigns himself to be what he is not; a dissembler in religion. Our Lord severely rebuked the scribes and Pharisees for their hypocrisy (Matt. 6:2, 5, 16). "The hypocrite's hope shall perish" (Job 8:13). The Hebrew word here rendered "hypocrite" rather means the "godless" or "profane," as it is rendered in Jer. 23:11, i.e., polluted with crimes. hy·poc·ri·sy ( P ) Pronunciation Key (h-pkr-s) n. pl. hy·poc·ri·sies The practice of professing beliefs, feelings, or virtues that one does not hold or possess; falseness. An act or instance of such falseness. So I'm assuming you can find a post-1995 quote that shows that Rush no longer believes what he said in 1995? Perhaps. And obtained them illegally. It's been more likened to heroin if you want to get specific. You're an idiot. Show me one study that says alcohol isn't addicting. Actually, all this story shows is that you will go out of your way to condone behavior by people on your side. I wonder what you would have said if it were a prominent liberal. Rehab is a good first step for the addiction. Was Favre accused to illegally purchasing the drugs to which he became addicted? I'm not familiar with that facet of his problem.
Awesome read!! This is great stuff, because you know how spot-on it is. http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/ne...re++an+addict,+here\'s+how+Rush+might+spin+it It's just perfect.
I haven't seriously listened to Rush in a couple of years, but this post by Dave is good, because it is the most honest criticism that can be leveled at Rush on this issue. If it had been a political enemy, he indeed would have used it against them and nit picked anything that person said. OTOH I think a lot of people who are criticizing Rush aren't really interested in the truth. The fact is Rush was not the anti-drug crusader that some people want to make him out to be, just so they can call he a hypocrite. He basically opposed legalization (and those who supported legalization) because he realized how destructive drug use can be, and that legalization ammounted to giving up and allowing peoples lives to be destroyed. I think that is a reasonable position, whether it comes from someone with a drug addiction or not.
I'm all for banning alcohol, but it doesn't appear anywhere as addictive as many other drugs. The vast majority of casual drinkers do not become addicts. That can't be said about, for example cocaine or nicotine.
There's a big difference between saying something isn't as addictive as something else, and saying it isn't addictive. By that criteria, heroin should be legal and cigarettes shouldn't, since many studies state it's easier to quit shooting heroin than smoking cigarettes.
People should learn to separate Rush the commentator from Rush the human being. As a commentator he supports an extremist point of view, and he makes no apology for it. We may agree with that view or we may dissagree. This fact should not change, regardless of the fact that he is now an admitted drug addict. As a person, he should be treated the same way that the other people who are in the same predicament are treated. If this investigation uncovers a number of people who are addicted to pain killers and who were supplied by the same ring of doctors, then I would expect Rush to be treated exactly the same as the others. His political views and his celebrity status should not matter. He should neither be given a pass, nor should he be made into an example. One significant thing about what happened is that this investigation and this article by The National Enquirer may be the thing that saves Rush. If he somehow manages to beat his addition, then he should be forever thankful to the Enquirer. Because it forced him to deal with his problem.