Rush Limbaugh caught in drug ring

[xouper]

hgc: Pssst. Here's a tip on how to ignore right-wing hypocracy: Just chant "Clinton" over and over again.

Pssst. Here's a tip on how to ridicule someone else's point: Accuse them of chanting and ignoring.

But seriously, I hope you aren't accusing me of ignoring right-wing hypocrisy or chanting "Clinton" over and over. I agree with the prediction made by Lurker that fans of Rush are likely to forgive and forget his hypocrisy. I was trying to point out that there is merit in what Lurker said, since there is much evidence to suggest that kind of thing has happened before. I offered Clinton as an example that forgiveness of hypocrisy is not limited to one political ideology, in case anyone was trying to imply otherwise.

 

[hgc]

Pssst. Here's a tip on how to ridicule someone else's point: Accuse them of chanting and ignoring.

But seriously, I hope you aren't accusing me of ignoring right-wing hypocrisy or chanting "Clinton" over and over. I agree with the prediction made by Lurker that fans of Rush are likely to forgive and forget his hypocrisy. I was trying to point out that there is merit in what Lurker said, since there is much evidence to suggest that kind of thing has happened before. I offered Clinton as an example that forgiveness of hypocrisy is not limited to one political ideology, in case anyone was trying to imply otherwise.

Well I, for one, don't forgive Clinton his crimes or his hypocracy. But I do notice his name coming up in connection with others' wrongdoing, with stunning regularity, and with the goal of diverting attention from the issue at hand. That is: that if Rush doesn't come back from this, and re-address his previous stands about drug addicts and drug addiction, then he and those of his followers left are world-beating hypocrites. This applies just as much now as it would in a world where Clinton never existed. Is this idea even ideological? Not in my opinion.

 

[Frank Newgent]

In general, the subjunctive expresses uncertainty, possibility, a feeling, or a wish. In English, the past perfect subjunctive is structured the same as the past perfect indicative: Bill O'Reilly was hoping that Rush Limbaugh hadn´t gone through his medicine chest again.

The structure of the subjunctive is extremely simple in English. For all verbs except the past tense of to be, the subjunctive conjugation is the same as the bare infinitive (infinitive without "to").

The subjunctive is typically used after verbs or expressions which express commands, desires, feelings, possibilities, followed by the word that.

Additionally, though the past tense of to be is normally was, in the past subjunctive form it instead would be were.

(Some fixed expressions also use the subjunctive.)

After words such as if or suppose, when this tense is triggered, we get the subjunctive form: I suppose that if someone here were to joke ¨Hey, why do you think they call him Rush?¨, Heaven forbid, someone else might demand that the librarian be subpoenaed.

 

[xouper]

hgc: Well I, for one, don't forgive Clinton his crimes or his hypocracy.

OK, good to know. Obviously, my earlier comments weren't about you, were they.

But I do notice his name coming up in connection with others' wrongdoing, with stunning regularity, and with the goal of diverting attention from the issue at hand.

It's not reasonable to heap all that blame on me, especially since I haven't done that here. I know you didn't address your comment directly to me, but you did post it immediately following my post about Clinton, so the implication is obvious.

That is: that if Rush doesn't come back from this, and re-address his previous stands about drug addicts and drug addiction, then he and those of his followers left are world-beating hypocrites. This applies just as much now as it would in a world where Clinton never existed. Is this idea even ideological? Not in my opinion.

I agree that it's not ideological, or that least that it knows no ideological bounds. Considering that most Rush bashing comes from the left, I thought I would add some balance to the bashing. And given all the Rush bashing in this thread, I'm not going to be intimidated into retracting my comments about Clinton. Also, I'm not trying to divert attention away from the point being made about Rush, but to add to it. I'm also observing that some people should be careful not to be hypocritical in their accusations of other people's hypocrisy.

 

[hgc]

Maybe it wasn't directed to you alone, xouper, but you were the most proximate inspiration.

I would expect a heavy amount of Rush bashing in the "Rush Limbaugh caught in drug ring" thread.

Fair enough that you want to build on the point by pointing out the hypocracy of the hypocracy-criers, but I stand by my point that Clinton's name comes up more often than not in these scenarios as a diversion.

 

[Ladewig]

The bigger problem here is that it becomes harder to teach children not to lie when the President of the United States lied under oath.

And is it hard to teach children not to engage in type of illegal political conspiracies that Nixon engaged in after all that came out? Anyone who is using a living U.S. president to serve as an exemplar when teaching moral behavor to children is a few decades behind the times (Jimmy Carter not withstanding). There are valid reasons for criticizing Clinton (and GWB), but "what about the children!" is not one of them.

 

[xouper]

Ladewig: And is it hard to teach children not to engage in type of illegal political conspiracies that Nixon engaged in after all that came out? Anyone who is using a living U.S. president to serve as an exemplar when teaching moral behavor to children is a few decades behind the times (Jimmy Carter not withstanding). There are valid reasons for criticizing Clinton (and GWB), but "what about the children!" is not one of them.

You have missed the point. Perhaps your children haven't used this excuse: "Hey if the president can lie under oath and get away with it, why can't I?" It is not a hypothetical problem. Compared to teaching children about the simple concept of lying, the illegality of political conspiracy is quite abstract, especially to a ten year old. I stand by my comments.

 

[Julia]

Then again, the last person I knew who was hooked badly on oxycontin was self-deluded into thinking he really needed it for pain. It becomes psychologically addictive to some and they feel like they can't stand the pain without it.

Then again, there are others. Those who are not self-deluded. Those who live every day and every night in pain, and they really can't stand the pain without it. Those who have never had this type of incorrigable, chronic, defeating pain, often don't understand that need.

And I don't care who it is, a celebrity or anyone else, every time I read a story like this, about those whose excess is almost beyond comprehension, it makes me angry. Angry because I know that those who need and deserve not to have to live with mind-boggling pain day after day, will find it a bit harder to find a doctor willing to prescribe.

Now, once again, the media will be focusing on pain pill abuse. Every newspaper, magazine, every time you turn on the tv, it's in our faces. And everyone you talk to seems to know someone who . . .

There is no question it is a problem. No question that addiction is a powerful, evil, foe. It's just too bad that so many people seem to have difficulty determining who has unmanagable pain, and who has a habit.

 

[ShowMe]

Well, I make a special case for Rush.

It's easy to make "a special case" for people you don't agree with. But feeling sorry for people you like isn't true compassion.

I am merely appaled at his hypocrisy.

Whenever someone preaches one thing and does another it's appalling. Jimmy Swaggart comes wuickly to mind.

Hopefully he will come back with some changed attitudes (I doubt it) and will become a voice of reason about drugs. Hopefully his audience will learn from him (I doubt it).

We'll see. Hard to say with these things, but I'm willing to bet his 4Q numbers will be astronomical.

 

[Lurker]

It's easy to make "a special case" for people you don't agree with. But feeling sorry for people you like isn't true compassion.



Actually, many people I disagree with I do not put in that special case. I actually DO feel sorry for Rush's affliction and hope he gets better. He created his problem and only he can fix it. I wish him sell. But I am not going to be silent on his hypocracy either. If we liberals had not voted against his sort of vision of America he would be in prison after a quick trial. Luckily for him we stood against that sort of vision.

...but I'm willing to bet his 4Q numbers will be astronomical.

True. And that does not bother me tremendously. Even I will be curious as to what he will say.

Lurker