News (Media Awareness Project) - US: Web: Rush's Chance For Redemption |
Title: | US: Web: Rush's Chance For Redemption |
Published On: | 2003-10-03 |
Source: | DrugSense Weekly |
Fetched On: | 2008-01-19 10:44:23 |
RUSH'S CHANCE FOR REDEMPTION
Rush Limbaugh thrives on controversy. His words are calculated to arouse
reactions. That's his job, and if popularity is any indication, he's quite
good at it.
I'm not a regular Limbaugh listener, though I've heard his show. I was
dying to hear it yesterday, Thursday, the day the headlines broke. But
alas, he had a substitute. Not to avoid claims he pressured his former
housekeeper to illegally procure large amounts prescription painkillers for
him. He was speaking at a broadcasting convention, so he couldn't make his
show. He's expected back today.
The accusations against Limbaugh are, of course, just accusations. This
week's National Enquirer lays out a lot of details, including copies of
emails allegedly sent between Limbaugh and his housekeeper. I don't know
how much of it is true. Limbaugh's web site failed to offer a clear denial
of charges that he used OxyContin and a couple other drugs. Instead, a
statement on the web site said was not contacted by government officials
about any investigation, but he would cooperate if approached.
I'll definitely be listening to today's show. In my drug policy reform
fantasy world, I will hear him say that people have a right to deal with
pain on their own terms; that while drug use can be dangerous, it should
not be prosecuted or persecuted even if the use is not authorized by the
government. And then he'll expose the drug war for the boondoggle that it is.
Back in the real world, though, I wouldn't bet on it, even if a wild-eyed
William Bennett offered one-hundred to one odds. I'm not expecting any
major statements on drugs or drug abuse from Limbaugh. He apparently hasn't
said much publicly about drugs in recent years.
The Enquirer, however, does offer several offensive Limbaugh quotes on
drugs from 1993, the year U.S. Surgeon General Jocelyn Elders suggested
support for legalizing drugs.
"By legalizing drugs, all you're going to do is define further deviance
downward," he said. "We have a duty to pass our values to our descendents.
Values that will maintain the standards of behavior and ensure the
survivability of the American way of life. And drugs are no different. You
end up destroying more than yourself."
Beyond several similar statements from the same year, the Enquirer didn't
dig up much else about Limbaugh's position on drugs. Another publication
found the same sort of thoughts from Limbaugh in 1995 -
http://www.cannabisnews.com/news/thread17457.shtml
Back in 1998, Limbaugh touched on drug policy, but his tone was different.
He used his show to criticize government lawsuits against tobacco companies.
"It seems to me that what is missing in the drug fight is legalization," he
said on his show. "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. License the Cali 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."
While many saw that as an optimistic sign of a change in position, others
heard sarcastic contempt for the tobacco settlements. After that show,
DrugSense sent out a Focus Alert urging drug policy reform supporters to
contact Limbaugh and encourage him to speak out unequivocally against the
drug war. Scores of messages were sent, we listened, but the subject didn't
come up again.
It's understandable for Limbaugh to have felt like he couldn't say much at
that time - the same year his housekeeper alleged that he began receiving
drugs from her.
People who use drugs in ways contrary to government regulations have been
largely neutralized in the debate about drug policy. While there are some
brave exceptions, not a lot of people are willing to stand up and openly
identify themselves as lawbreakers. And, when they are caught, the standard
pattern is to renounce drugs in an effort to appease authorities, whether
the drug user believes the renunciations or not.
This is one of the main reasons that the drug war plods along its
destructive path - the central constituency affected by the laws are afraid
to speak out. Celebrities, no matter how blustery, can't be expected to act
much differently.
But, Limbaugh, with his massive audience, has a wonderful opportunity today
to enlighten his listeners from his own personal experience. He's got the
perfect forum. I hope he finds his voice and speaks honestly.
Stephen Young is an editor with DrugSense Weekly -
www.drugsense.org/current.htm and author of Maximizing Harm -
www.maximizingharm.com
Rush Limbaugh thrives on controversy. His words are calculated to arouse
reactions. That's his job, and if popularity is any indication, he's quite
good at it.
I'm not a regular Limbaugh listener, though I've heard his show. I was
dying to hear it yesterday, Thursday, the day the headlines broke. But
alas, he had a substitute. Not to avoid claims he pressured his former
housekeeper to illegally procure large amounts prescription painkillers for
him. He was speaking at a broadcasting convention, so he couldn't make his
show. He's expected back today.
The accusations against Limbaugh are, of course, just accusations. This
week's National Enquirer lays out a lot of details, including copies of
emails allegedly sent between Limbaugh and his housekeeper. I don't know
how much of it is true. Limbaugh's web site failed to offer a clear denial
of charges that he used OxyContin and a couple other drugs. Instead, a
statement on the web site said was not contacted by government officials
about any investigation, but he would cooperate if approached.
I'll definitely be listening to today's show. In my drug policy reform
fantasy world, I will hear him say that people have a right to deal with
pain on their own terms; that while drug use can be dangerous, it should
not be prosecuted or persecuted even if the use is not authorized by the
government. And then he'll expose the drug war for the boondoggle that it is.
Back in the real world, though, I wouldn't bet on it, even if a wild-eyed
William Bennett offered one-hundred to one odds. I'm not expecting any
major statements on drugs or drug abuse from Limbaugh. He apparently hasn't
said much publicly about drugs in recent years.
The Enquirer, however, does offer several offensive Limbaugh quotes on
drugs from 1993, the year U.S. Surgeon General Jocelyn Elders suggested
support for legalizing drugs.
"By legalizing drugs, all you're going to do is define further deviance
downward," he said. "We have a duty to pass our values to our descendents.
Values that will maintain the standards of behavior and ensure the
survivability of the American way of life. And drugs are no different. You
end up destroying more than yourself."
Beyond several similar statements from the same year, the Enquirer didn't
dig up much else about Limbaugh's position on drugs. Another publication
found the same sort of thoughts from Limbaugh in 1995 -
http://www.cannabisnews.com/news/thread17457.shtml
Back in 1998, Limbaugh touched on drug policy, but his tone was different.
He used his show to criticize government lawsuits against tobacco companies.
"It seems to me that what is missing in the drug fight is legalization," he
said on his show. "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. License the Cali 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."
While many saw that as an optimistic sign of a change in position, others
heard sarcastic contempt for the tobacco settlements. After that show,
DrugSense sent out a Focus Alert urging drug policy reform supporters to
contact Limbaugh and encourage him to speak out unequivocally against the
drug war. Scores of messages were sent, we listened, but the subject didn't
come up again.
It's understandable for Limbaugh to have felt like he couldn't say much at
that time - the same year his housekeeper alleged that he began receiving
drugs from her.
People who use drugs in ways contrary to government regulations have been
largely neutralized in the debate about drug policy. While there are some
brave exceptions, not a lot of people are willing to stand up and openly
identify themselves as lawbreakers. And, when they are caught, the standard
pattern is to renounce drugs in an effort to appease authorities, whether
the drug user believes the renunciations or not.
This is one of the main reasons that the drug war plods along its
destructive path - the central constituency affected by the laws are afraid
to speak out. Celebrities, no matter how blustery, can't be expected to act
much differently.
But, Limbaugh, with his massive audience, has a wonderful opportunity today
to enlighten his listeners from his own personal experience. He's got the
perfect forum. I hope he finds his voice and speaks honestly.
Stephen Young is an editor with DrugSense Weekly -
www.drugsense.org/current.htm and author of Maximizing Harm -
www.maximizingharm.com
Member Comments |
No member comments available...