Mark writes: (to set up the following transcript)

SUCCESS! After spending the entire week end monitoring radio stations that
broadcast Rush Limbaugh replays I found the much discussed Thursday show. I
have taped it and transcribed some of it below.

For the sake of brevity only the pertinent drug reform quotes are included.

An asterisk (*) indicates quite pretinent statements Multiple asterisks
indicate most crucial statements.

_underscored_ words emphasized by Rush

Hour one:

Rush played a tape of Bill Clinton disparaging tobacco companies for a
range of things like providing T-shirts free cigarettes, Joe Camel and now
that some stores were selling cigarettes at a quarter a piece on an
individual Basis.

RUSH: Hmm I wonder where that was I've not seen any such thing. I've not
heard about that. I know that's how drugs are sold and we're not doing
anything about that but I think we gotta jump real hard on this cigarettes
for a quarter. Unless there's something else in those cigarettes that those
kids are buying and the president just doesn't know it. This is getting
stranger and stranger

(Goes to a phone call)

CALLER ( voices a rambling opinion that adults should be able to choose
tobacco but parents should not because it effects their kids who don't know
any better)

RUSH: OK Glenn thanks for the phone call. I have an E-mail note here folks

E-MAIL from a listener. the pertinent part reads: This smoking thing has
just gotten way out of control. In our country today we have become totally
and irrationally obsessed with fault and even more obsessed with blame.
_Personal responsibility is at an all time low_. The thing that's
happening with the tobacco industry is happening in other areas as well.
People and companies are less and less willing to accept fault and rectify
their wrong. I use to smoke it was my choice. It was also my choice to
quit. I choose RJR has nothing to do with it. Smokers out there who see it
any differently are _weak_ they lack _will_ say it's Joe Camels fault. Were
now living in the blame era.

RUSH: That is an interesting take on this

CALLER (irrelevant Clinton discussion)

2nd hour

* RUSH: The views expressed on this program are right and that's why so
many people are upset at the views of the host expressed on this program
because these views challenge the cocoon like world view of those who live
sheltered lives, sheltered from the truth. We don't shelter the truth we
blast it at you ladies and gentlemen. You must have courage to believe the
truth and face it as heard on this program otherwise you go nuts and make a
fool of yourself in any number of ways.

(Call) Rush Limbaugh 800 282 2882

(Ginsberg comedy routine.)

RUSH (explains that a company that wants to market a snoring medicine
wasn't allowed to run ads on national TV because it took a shot at Clinton.
Funny but irrelevant)

CALLER: (Wife of a youth pastor wonders about underage drinking and why
that hasn't been addressed. Alludes to violence and alcoholism at early
ages, the presidents family history of alcohol problems father and brother)

RUSH Why do you think it hasn't been?

CALLER: maybe because the president drinks.

RUSH: I don't know and I've never heard anyone say whether the president
drinks a lot of a little or at all.

* Lisa let me give the answer. The answer is; be patient. If you want them
to go after the alcohol companies I suspect that they will take what they
have learned in the tobacco companies and modify however necessary in order
to next target the alcohol companies.

* One of the things that you have to realize is that this push against the
tobacco companies is largely about money. Largely, largely, largely, 90%
about money. The federal Gov't is out of money. They don't have any more.
They can't raise taxes any more but here's a huge amount of money out
there. Here's an entire industry willing to part with $368 Billion and they
consider it a win to do that and what they want in exchange is limits on
how many more times they can be sued.

* The people that really hell bent on this want to take the $368 billion
and then keep going back for more and more. One of the things that gives
them impetus is that executives of the tobacco companies are really a bunch
of lying skunks. They lied about lied about the addictive qualities of
nicotine they lied about how much they stoked cigarettes with nicotine.
They lied about their efforts to market to kids etc. So they've made
themselves easy targets.

* The alcohol companies have never really done that but everybody knows
that (they are marketing to youth) whether it's fogs, alligators, dogs and
so forth. It's gonna be tougher but the alcohol companies know they're
next. You can see some of their spots (trying to increase the appearance of
legitimacy) They know what's coming. The tobacco companies are just easier.
But if this works and it will, maybe not nationally, but you'll see some
bright eyed state attorney general who wants to make a name for himself go
after alcohol next. It's not because they are inconsistent about it it's
just that they see a pile of potential money.

(These people are puritans in the attack on vices but it's not for moral
reasons it's for huge amounts of money)

* Don't assume they are ignoring teenage drinking they just haven't gotten
to it yet . And there will be more after that.

We've already seen the first signs that they are going to go after fatty
foods. We've already got this madcap group of loco weeds called the Center
for Science and the Public Interest. This group is trying to make
everything that tastes good not outlawed but undesirable.

* There's all kinds of parental types of people out there...Nanny's who
don't think that you have the intelligence or guts to make up your own mind
and don't think that you ought to be able to make up your own mind and live
with the consequences. And they see big targets of money in every one of
these industries and as they figure out ways to go about it I assure you
that they'll make their moves.

NEW CALLER irrelevant on the dues we owe to the UN

NEW CALLER: I wanted to make a contrast between the Clinton administration
position on cigarettes and drugs. When it comes to cigarettes what they are
is supply siders. They're trying to stop the sale of cigarettes to minors
(something I am for) and they're trying to raise the price but nevertheless
both of those are supply side.

When it comes to drugs what they're concerned with is treatment and education.

* RUSH (interrupts) I think you are correct but that you miss spoke. What
you mean to say is they're dealing on the demand side of the cigarette
side. They're trying to effect demand. They're trying to convince people
not to smoke and at the same time your supply side obviously is that
they're trying to convince people not to sell it to minors. Is that what
you mean?

CALLER Yeah essentially the cigarette policy is that they're trying to
control the supply they want to raise the price which is essentially a
prohibition to make it more expensive for anyone especially children they
focus in on for buying cigarettes.

Whereas with drugs they are more available and cheaper than ever and
there's less interdiction. So the supply of drugs is up. For drugs they
want to convince you that via treatment and education that if they just
talk to you enough that they will convince you not to use them. I think the
difference between the tow positions is completely irrational.

** RUSH: The interdiction efforts (tape ends few seconds loss) (don't work.
They basically address the) demand side. That being educate those who want
it and get them not to want it and when nobody wants it then you won't have
to worry about interdiction. So what your saying is... and that hasn't
worked by the way. In the first place interdiction doesn't work and the
effort to convince people not to do it really doesn't work in fact with
young people it may even entice them more. Uh are you saying that the same
practices are being used on cigarette smoking and that that will fail as well?

CALLER Well first I would make the point that the Clinton administration
has reversed it's policy as compared to all previous administrations. The
first thing Clinton did of course was to get rid of the drug czar post and
the white house bureau of drug interdiction. I mean he is not interested in
stopping the flow of drugs or police efforts. Yeah I wouldn't argue that
hey work. They never worked real well but it's still a fact that since 1992
six short years that teen drug use has doubled. and this is something that
strikes home with me Rush. We stand to lose an entire generation to drug use.

RUSH: Do you like the effort that are being made to reduce the numbers of
people that reduce cigarettes

CALLER: I'm a Mormon (I don't smoke) but I consider it offensive that this
administration uses cigarettes a as a smokescreen. I, Yes I'm concerned
about smoking I'm concerned about teen smoking. I'm concerned about my own
children smoking but I want to handle that as a parent. It's a legal
substance and I'll take that thank you kindly.

* What upsets me is the plethora of drugs that are available at a low
price. I can't do anything about that. It's much harder for a parent to
attack a drug problem.

* RUSH: OK let me ask you a question because this came up yesterday and I
gave an answer that many would call a flippant answer. I will give you the
same answer you tell me if it's flippant.

** Based on the reality of how we're going after cigarette smokers, The
thing that we cannot do in the drug fight right now is regulate because
it's illegal. Drugs are against the law and so the manufacturers are
illegal. They're not even on shore they're down there in Columbia and the
Calli Cartel and they're working to poison the brains and minds of the
future of America. And so what we do is to try to keep those drugs from
getting in. And I agree with you that it's a half baked effort.

** But what are we doing with cigarettes. Well we are punishing the
manufacturers We're suing them left and right we're going to cause them to
settle out of court for $368 billion. We're gonna let them keep making them
but then we're going to have the price go way way up so that we ostensibly
say by virtue of that we don't want anybody to smoke cigarettes anymore and
we're going to try to price it out of most peoples existence but we're
going to raise those prices and most of that money will be taxes and we're
going to use that money for health care programs for our kids and so forth.

*** It seems to me that what is missing in the drug fight is legalization.
If we want to go after drugs with the same fervor and intensity with which
we go after cigarettes let's legalize drugs. Legalize the manufacture of
drugs. Licence the Calli Cartel make them tax payers and then sue them. Sue
them left and right and then get control of the price and generate tax
revenue from it. Raise the price sky high and fund all sorts of other
wonderful social programs.

**** Because it seems to me, flippant as though it may sound to you, that
what gives us the power to do what we're doing, what gives the government
the _power_ to do what it is doing, state and federal, in cigarettes is
that it's a legal substance regulated by uh the federal government. And
they don't have any such power and control over drugs because it's illegal.

**** So let's legalize them and then go after them the same way.

CALLER Well could I make the point the road to hell is paved with good
intentions and I don't get how good of a deed you can do with blood money
it's still blood money and there's a great rift in our moral fibre.
Cigarettes cause lung cancer and if they cause harm in our society why
would you want to make money off that. We've become a society of pimps
(gambling)

RUSH: What is this _we_ ? You are talking about governments.

CALLER: Well I mean as a people. I mean these policies have broad support
throughout America. (People see raising taxes of cigarettes as a good thing
if the money is going to be used for a good purpose)

RUSH Most people don't smoke so they think the other guy is going to get
saddled with it and that's fine with them.

*** I agree with you. Don't misunderstand me now. I think your point is
well made and I'm not arguing with you I'm I'm continuing to sort of uh
you know devils advocate.

CALLER: I don't want to make be money on a bad issue

RUSH: Then you should be in favor of outlawing cigarettes and making it
illegal to even grow tobacco refine it manufacture it and sell it. Because
you talk about making money off of illness and that sort of stuff. Look at
what the tobacco companies have done.

** CALLER: Personally I believe that cigarettes aren't as bad for you as
most people believe OK? (Talks about his religion and keeping his kids from
smoking) It's just offensive to me that (cigarettes) are being made out to
be this great social ill. When what is really destroying this country is
being ignored. As a matter of fact drug use is well documented Clinton
admits that use is up drastically in the last six years. Let's go after
that leviathan

**** RUSH We _can't_ We can't (excited) well we (sighs and says under his
breath "patients") When I say we can't what I mean to say is we won't.
There's no way to score big money on it. You have to understand that
there's not a big morality play going on here with cigarettes. All there
is... in the minds of the citizens they think it's all about morality and
our kids... but it's about money. Look at the lawyers down in Florida they
had a contract 25% of whatever they could collect. Well that would mean
that some lawyers are going to make $200 million. The purpose of all this
was to help our kids and so forth (the lawyers just want money) Everybody
wants their cut Clinton congress the states all want their cut. It's all
about money

*** That's why I'm telling you. You may think my statement here flippant
but you asked why aren't we going after drugs as fervently as we're going
after cigarettes. I agree with cocaine marijuana uh well cocaine, crack,
LSD, heroin, all those you can...I don't know of anybody whose overdosed on
cigarettes. I do know that people have burned their houses down but I don'
know anybody whose said I'm going to smoke cigarettes until I die and then
pulled it off inside of 12 hours. I do know people who've overdosed on
drugs and know of them. You talk about death and the ruined lives...heroin
addiction is far more debilitating that tobacco addiction let's be honest
about it. Tobacco addiction is a 30 year death. Heroin addiction is instant
death and yet we're not going after this stuff with the same moral fervor
that we are. Why? Because we're not going after cigarettes with a moral
fervor either we're going after cigarettes because of money.

**** Now if you want to go after drugs on the same basis you've _got_ to
make it a target for money and the only way that I can think of to do that
is either the government become the pimp and sell the stuff make it
prescription with the government as the pharmacist or you legalize drugs
let them come into the country get a whole bunch of generations of people
using these things and then decide some years later that "This is terrible.
We must stop this. This is horrible.Those drug manufacturers have lied to
us about the safety of the product. They said they were going to control
the amounts and they haven't. We're suing them." And then go and get some
money from the Calli drug cartel legally.

I'm not being flippant. I'm trying to illustrate a point.
(end of segment)