1
   

The psychosis of Rush Limbaugh

 
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Mon 30 Oct, 2006 10:37 am
Thomas wrote:
McGentrix wrote:
Rush has publically taken responsibility for his addiction and has asked for no sympathy.

In this case, his addiction makes no difference to me. I believe that people have a right to consume whatever recreational drugs they want to. I also believe they're responsible for the consequences. My problem with Rush Limbaugh is that he's a dork, a liar, and a bully. I have no problem with his use of drugs, which is his private matter.


Hmmm... I can't help but agree. odd that I have been placed in the postion of defending him here, but truth is truth whether we like it or not.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Mon 30 Oct, 2006 10:40 am
kelticwizard wrote:
McGentrix wrote:
Yes, he had posession of a large quantity of pills, but that is not what I asked for is it?

Do you believe he took that many pills? That would average 92.5 pills a day... That would kill him.

So, I ask again, can you provide a link as to how many he actually took.

(don't worry, I know you can't because that fact isn't known, but I want you to realize that.)


So what do you think he was doing with the pills-selling them back on the street at a profit? The man only makes 50 million a year from broadcasting. Do you think he is going to chance that?

Making he was taking some and then, wracked with guilt, was throwing them up? Is that your thesis-hydrocodone bulimia?

Get serious. He bought them because he planned to take them. Even if Limbaugh shared them with another person whose identity he has managed to keep out of the investigation, half is still an enormous number.

Sozobe's link has showed just how little Lorcet/Vicodin is necessary to affect the hearing. Considering the number of pills we are talking about, and that Lorcet/Vicodin was a substantial part of them, it is clear that he had consumed far, far more than enough to cause hearing loss.


*sigh*

As an addict, he was probably stockpiling them so he would have them when he needed to take them. You seem to think that he was pooping them like tic-tacs and I have some news for you, if he were, he wouldn't be deaf, he would be dead.

All his prescriptions that he had illegally used were for oxycontin. not vicodin, not lorcet.
0 Replies
 
kelticwizard
 
  1  
Reply Mon 30 Oct, 2006 10:43 am
Thomas wrote:
What do you mean specifically by "accepts sympathy"?


McGentrix wrote:
Rush has publically taken responsibility for his addiction and has asked for no sympathy.


Some years before his addiction was discovered, Limbaugh, with great fanfare, went partly deaf. Sympathy was poured all over him, and he accepted it. He portrayed himself as a man fighting the medical odds to continue to blast away at the supposed hipocrisy of liberals.

Years later, Limbaugh was exposed to be taking drugs illegally which cause that hearing loss-in dosages which almost certainly far exceed the dosages necessary to do so. At exactly the time that he lost his hearing.

Yes, Limbaugh has admitted his illegal drug use, and his addiction. Yes, he has publicly proclaimed he wants no sympathy for his addiction, how heroic.

But nowhere does anyone mention the all the sympathy he gladly took when the hearing was lost. Limbaugh played that bit up for all it was worth. But nobody ever says, "Not only did he criticize everyone opposed to him when he was himself engaging in illegal behavior, but he got everyone feeling sorry for him for his hearing loss and it turns out he was doing it to himself with illegal drugs."

As far as I am concerned, this sympathy ploy he used on the hearing loss is still on the table. That is a gigantic hypocrisy in itself that nobody has ever held him accountable for. And then Limbaugh has the nerve to turn around, after accepting all that sympathy on his self-induced hering loss, and lambaste a fellow who makes commercials supporting candidates who support government funding for a type of research which might well help others with his natuarally occurring[/b] condition.

Michael J Fox didn't do anything illegal to get his medical condition. Limbaugh did. And Limbaugh thinks he has the right to decry the sympathy shown Michael J. Fox?
0 Replies
 
DrewDad
 
  1  
Reply Mon 30 Oct, 2006 10:48 am
Interesting subtext to Limbaugh's comment(s): Disabled, sick, handicapped people should do their best to hide the effects of their maladies, so as to protect the sensibilities of "normal" people.

Showing the effects is allowing oneself to be exploited.



What a putz.
0 Replies
 
kelticwizard
 
  1  
Reply Mon 30 Oct, 2006 10:49 am
McGentrix wrote:
All his prescriptions that he had illegally used were for oxycontin. not vicodin, not lorcet.


But he took the Lorcet/Vicodin, by all indications. What he eventually pleaded out to is irrelevant. Whether he stockpiled them to an extent or not, he took an enormous number of pills, all indications being that a substantial percentage of them were the kind which causes deafness. And he took them at the time that he went partially deaf.
0 Replies
 
Thomas
 
  1  
Reply Mon 30 Oct, 2006 10:51 am
kelticwizard wrote:
Michael J Fox didn't do anything illegal to get his medical condition. Limbaugh did. And Limbaugh thinks he has the right to decry the sympathy shown Michael J. Fox?

I hear you.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Mon 30 Oct, 2006 11:12 am
What a disgusting sack of **** Limbaugh is. Anyone supporting/defending him should be ashamed.

It's just unbelievable that in this day and age, such hatemongering and simplistic worldviews could gain such popular support...

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Mon 30 Oct, 2006 11:14 am
Cycloptichorn wrote:
What a disgusting sack of **** Limbaugh is. Anyone supporting/defending him should be ashamed.

It's just unbelievable that in this day and age, such hatemongering and simplistic worldviews could gain such popular support...

Cycloptichorn


Speaking of hatemongering...
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Mon 30 Oct, 2006 11:16 am
What exactly do you mean by that statement, McG? Please take the time to explain yourself further.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Mon 30 Oct, 2006 11:47 am
Cycloptichorn wrote:
What exactly do you mean by that statement, McG? Please take the time to explain yourself further.

Cycloptichorn


hate‧mon‧ger  /ˈheɪtˌmʌŋgər, -ˌmɒŋ-/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[heyt-muhng-ger, -mong-] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
-noun
a person who kindles hatred, enmity, or prejudice in others.

Cycloptichorn wrote:
What a disgusting sack of **** Limbaugh is. Anyone supporting/defending him should be ashamed.

Cycloptichorn


I think it speaks for itself Cyc.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Mon 30 Oct, 2006 11:51 am
Shrug. It is amazing to me that one is not allowed to criticize a hatemonger without becoming a hatemonger themselves.

Truly a mendacious defense

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Mon 30 Oct, 2006 12:02 pm
McGentrix wrote:
parados wrote:
And you asked for a medical literature that showed that oxycodone caused what Rush had.


No, the only evidence provided so far indicated Vicodin could cause such damage and it has not been shown that Rush was taking Vicodin or acetaminophen combined with the oxycontin he was abusing.

Quote:
Once given that you didn't like it and have trotted off claiming no one has evidence he abused oxycodone with the other over the counter drugs that met your original request.


Well, duh.
Your "duh" is not very clear. Are you agreeing that oxycodone causes hearing loss or not?

Quote:
Quote:
Nothing but complete BS from you McG. You are the one that has tried to hide behind your ever changing argument.


My argument hasn't changed because no one has been able to refute it beyond hypotheticals.

Quote:
The simple fact is oxycodone has been shown to cause the hearing loss Rush had.


No it hasn't.
Yes it has been shown to cause that type of hearing loss. (I was referring to the type not Rush specifically.) I provided you a link to the paper that shows it. Your arguing that it wasn't personally related to Rush does nothing to dispute that codone taking with acetaminophen causes that exact kind of hearing loss.
Quote:

Quote:
Rush didn't have to take vicodin. Vicodin combines a codone and acetaminophen in one pill. There is no requirement that both have to be in the same pill to combine codone and acetaminophen in the system.


But studies show that both have to be present. If he was addicted to oxycontin, it would be for the drugs effect. Why would he also take acetaminophen? It has no side effect that would enhance the "high" from Oxy and therefore he would have no reason to take it.
Are you unfamiliar with how the body builds up resistance to drugs? Rush would have had to take more and more oxycontin with less and less effect. Rush claimed he took the pills for pain. They would have no longer blocked the pain at the level they did originally. What over the counter medicines are easy to get for pain? It is easy to see why he might have taken acetaminophen if he was trying to restrict the number of oxycontin he was taking either because of availability or because it was the same number he took the day before.
0 Replies
 
snood
 
  1  
Reply Mon 30 Oct, 2006 12:10 pm
These rightwingnut apogists make me ill.

"Well, there's no proof that Rush took Oxycontin."

"Yes, there is."

"Well, then - there's no proof that Rush's hearing loss had anything to do with his taking Oxycontin."

"Yes, there is."

"Well, I still don't think you've proven anything beyond a doubt, and anyway, he wasn't prosecuted."


Just makes you want to barf.
0 Replies
 
Phoenix32890
 
  1  
Reply Mon 30 Oct, 2006 12:12 pm
I don't care if Limbaugh took rat poison. What he said about Michael was unconcionable, period!
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Mon 30 Oct, 2006 12:13 pm
snood wrote:
These rightwingnut apogists make me ill.

"Well, there's no proof that Rush took Oxycontin."

"Yes, there is."

"Well, then - there's no proof that Rush's hearing loss had anything to do with his taking Oxycontin."

"Yes, there is."

"Well, I still don't think you've proven anything beyond a doubt, and anyway, he wasn't prosecuted."


Just makes you want to barf.


I have yet to see anyone make posts like you have made up here Snood so you must be feeling well.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Mon 30 Oct, 2006 12:15 pm
Phoenix32890 wrote:
I don't care if Limbaugh took rat poison. What he said about Michael was unconcionable, period!


That's the exact position Rush was fighting against.

Bring out a victim becasue he/she is "untouchable". It's a good ploy and works amazingly well. As you have demonstrated.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Mon 30 Oct, 2006 12:20 pm
McGentrix wrote:
Phoenix32890 wrote:
I don't care if Limbaugh took rat poison. What he said about Michael was unconcionable, period!


That's the exact position Rush was fighting against.

Bring out a victim becasue he/she is "untouchable". It's a good ploy and works amazingly well. As you have demonstrated.


Bullsh*t. Michael J. Fox isn't 'untouchable.' It's just horrendous to attack him instead of attacking his position.

Your logical disconnect on this one says a lot about you, McG

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Mon 30 Oct, 2006 12:37 pm
Cycloptichorn wrote:
McGentrix wrote:
Phoenix32890 wrote:
I don't care if Limbaugh took rat poison. What he said about Michael was unconcionable, period!


That's the exact position Rush was fighting against.

Bring out a victim becasue he/she is "untouchable". It's a good ploy and works amazingly well. As you have demonstrated.


Bullsh*t. Michael J. Fox isn't 'untouchable.' It's just horrendous to attack him instead of attacking his position.

Your logical disconnect on this one says a lot about you, McG

Cycloptichorn


Wow, you are just full of irony today, huh?
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Mon 30 Oct, 2006 12:58 pm
Again, shrug. Limbaugh's position has been attacked by myself and others many times on this issue, in this thread and others. That he was completely factually incorrect has already been established. I merely pointed out that he is a repugnant sack of **** who likes to make fun of those with debilitating diseases in order to stir the pot, and that those who defend him are probably the exact same way.

I love how you and other Republicans love to defend the worst amongst your commentators, and yet continually attempt to keep their views at arms' length from yours. The truth is that you agree with what they say; if you didn't, you wouldn't defend them.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Mon 30 Oct, 2006 01:37 pm
No, Limbaugh has been attacked repeatedly here, not his position. It's all so very typical of the many liberal posters here. Slander where you can, make up facts when you can't discuss the actual facts.

Cycloptichorn, you have barged in with guns blazing slinging **** everywhere and now try to look valiant about it. It's like you haven't read the thread, nor listened to Rush's actual comments. If you had, you would know Rush did not and has not made fun of anyone, but he did bring up an interesting tactict that the left has been using to their advantage. He also discussed a political advertisement in which Fox, who has admitted to not even reading the actual bill he was supporting, starred.

The only reason it appears I am defending Rush is because lying benefits no one and not understanding that actual facts of the issue leads to people being more ignorant then they usually are.

I agree with Rush's point that Fox was used BECAUSE of his disease. That was his point, which you have failed to understand. Fox used his disease and it's effects to try to garner sympathy with voters to vote for candidates who favor stem cell research. Michael J. Fox is allowing his illness to be exploited and in the process is shilling for a Democratic politician.

Now, take notice that I have addressed your statement without calling you a "sack of ****". See if you can do the same.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 01/15/2025 at 07:13:32