<p>Sorry kluge, but despite some wise words on your part in the Duke thread, you are officially off my “dream team”.</p>
<p>“Perhaps I missed something (but I don’t think so) as I recall Rush pleaded NOT GUILTY to that charge and it has never been proven in court. So, how does the good, non-politically-motivated doctor arrive at that conclusion?”</p>
<p>fundingfather, you must not have been listening to the national news over the past 24 hours. These are the EXACT charges that Rush Limbaugh was convicted of in court on Friday! The thousands of prescriptions by multiple doctors is incontrovertible evidence, whether he confesses or not. No political agenda here. Just facts. Rush Limbaugh is a drug addict who illegally (not allegedly illegally…he was convicted) obtained Oxycontin in the manner described. What makes him a sleazeball is that refused to seek treatment for his addiction until he got caught and it became clear to him that he had been “outed” and would have to face consequences. If he had not been caught, he’d still be seeking Oxycontin illegally. I don’t give a flip if he’s a Democrat or a Republican or a purple people eater. He’s a public figure who persists in his holier-than-thou public persona. He’s an addict who got caught. Plain and simple. He has NEVER displayed remorse. He hasn’t learned. If he hadn’t gotten caught, he’d still be scarfing down narcotics like Ghirardelli chocolate.</p>
<p>I actually don’t believe the Enquirer story as written. 30,000 synthetic opiate pills in a year works out to 2,500 a month, or 45 a day. That’s way too much, way above what we see among addicted individuals (though I can remember one or two…) I presume at that volume, he would have been injecting himself so often he’d look like a pin cushion, unless he was dealing (or “sharing”). But he’d more likely be dead.</p>
<p>The 2,000 painkillers over 6 months cited in the AP story is more “reasonable”. Still, it works out to more than 10 a day - depending on dosage of course, I know very, very few synthetic opiate addicts with that kind of tolerance for opiates taken orally. But if he was injecting twice or maybe three times a day, it sems more within the realm of possibility, again, unless he was ‘sharing’.</p>
<p>He has a long row to hoe, and I hope he gets the help he needs - at that volume and tolerance, this could be very difficult to shake.</p>
<p>I thought RL lost his hearing because of Pdrugs and that he went to rehab after his announcement of hearing loss. This being 5-7 years ago? That makes 2nd round?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I believe it must have been you who was not listening to the national news - or at least not paying attention to the details. Limbaugh was not “convicted” of anything. He was arrested, pleaded innocent and will never go on trial as long as he keeps his nose clean for 18 months. Was he guilty? Neither you nor I know that and it looks like we may never know.</p>
<p>So, will Rush change his tune…and say that his fellow addicts deserve rehab just like him?</p>
<p>Please, he was guilty…the drug is got is very regulated, yet somehow he got enough pills to feed his habit.</p>
<p>I read the news and can see the spin</p>
<p>
Like I said, Liberals can’t read. </p>
<p>A conviction means a judge or jury makes a finding of guilt. There is no finding of guilt by anyone at this point and, thus, no conviction of anything.</p>
<p>Again, here is part of Roy Black’s statement,
</p>
<p>There is no proof of doctor shopping. How do I know this? Because if such proof existed the prosecutor would not have settled. He had a lot of Democrat mouths to feed and would not have given up the ship unless he had to.</p>
<p>razorsharp, you are amusing. You think Liberals (I am not, by the way) can’t read. Clearly you are incapable of examining evidence in a scientific way and drawing factual conclusions. Thousands of presciptions from multiple pharmacies (copies obtained by prosecutors) paid for out of pocket by Rush Limbaugh himself for Oxycontin and Lorcet (the paper trail doesn’t lie) written by multiple physicians whose records of Mr. Limbaugh’s visits reflect no knowledge of prescriptions written by other physicians for the same drugs (and, apparently, some denials by Mr. Limbaugh that he had received any such prescriptions from other physicians) are plenty of objective evidence for rational observers. Mr. Limbaugh is just lucky he’s in the Florida court system who maintains a track record of sentencing/case handling in line with what he got in this case.</p>
<p>Just because Mr. Limbaugh refuses to admit his guilt doesn’t mean that he is not guilty. He’s like the little boy who’s been caught in the kitchen with chocolate smeared all over his face who tells his parent “Mommy, I didn’t get into the cookie jar! Really, I didn’t”. The missing cookies and the dirty face tell the story.</p>
<p>
You used the words “he was convicted”. How about just admitting you were wrong and try to restore what little crediblity you have left. </p>
<p>Most liberals think they are mainstream. I am not surprised you would denying being one.</p>
<p>He’s in denial, like tens of thousands of other drug-addicted individuals. It doesn’t serve his interests for us to be as well.</p>
<p>I doubt he accepted 18 months of treatment (and agreed to pay for it) for a disease he doesn’t have. By the way, the data indicates that folks who are forced into treatment (as opposed to going voluntarily) end up doing just as well as the volunteers. Usually it is because, at treatment entry, they can’t think straight anyway, so the concept of “free choice” becomes very muddled.</p>
<p>razorsharp, unlike you, I admit that my words were incorrect. But my incorrect words have nothing to do with the correctness that Rush Limbaugh is not only a drug addict, but broke the law. Both you and he appear to be in denial. But the rest of us know that De Nile is really a river in Egypt (thank you, Judge Judy). This will be the last of my comments about this. The facts speak for themselves in this case.</p>
<p>
Are you sure about that?</p>
<p>
That’s from an October 2003 report. That’s right, 2003.</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.cnn.com/2003/SHOWBIZ/10/10/rush.limbaugh/[/url]”>http://www.cnn.com/2003/SHOWBIZ/10/10/rush.limbaugh/</a></p>
<p>
Unfortunately for you, you cannot point to any incorrect statement of fact made by me in this thread. Thank you for admitting your words were incorrect.</p>
<p>"Are you sure about that?</p>
<p>Quote:
“I need to tell you today that part of what you have heard and read is correct. I am addicted to prescription pain medication.”</p>
<p>That’s from an October 2003 report. That’s right, 2003."</p>
<p>Yes, I am sure. His doctor didn’t prescribe him enough to become addicted. The period of the charge was from late 2001-early 2002. He is addicted in late 2003. So for a period of 18 months or longer, he obtained massive amounts of drugs illicitly.</p>
<p>Rush will never be indicted nor convicted. Libs can’t read and they believe what they want to believe. The prosecution over-reached on this case and the gov’t broke the law when they confiscated his med records. There are fed laws prohibiting such.</p>
<p>Mini: The statement you made was that Rush IS in denial. You did not say he WAS in denial. If he admitted in 2003 that he was addicted to prescription drugs, he cannot currently be in denial.</p>
<p>Everything I have read from Rush indicates he knows he was addicted to prescription drugs and knows that he will have to spend the rest of his life addressing that addiction. Part of solving a problem is first admitting you have one. He has admitted that and has taken every appropriate step necessary to continue with solving the problem. Apparently that is not good enough for you because you don’t like his politics.</p>
<p>Actually, razorsharp there’s no way to know if Limbaugh is still in denial or not. Having dealt with a fair number of addicts over the years, I’ve learned never to take their (apparently sincere) statements that they realize the problem and are dealing with it at face value. The essence of addiction is dishonesty. To actually come to grips with addiction the addict has to understand the fact that he has been lying to everyone for long time - lying to others and lying to himself.</p>
<p>I have no way of knowing if Limbaugh has come to that realization or not.</p>
<p>He IS in denial if he says he obtained those scrips without the doctor shopping he is charged with, and which resulted in the conditions of his diversion. The amounts we are talking about are WAY above what any single doctor would prescribe (even for dying cancer patients.)</p>
<p>“Black said his client and authorities reached a settlement on a single count charge of doctor shopping filed Friday by the State Attorney will be dismissed in 18 months.”</p>
<p>Accepting to pay $30,000 and 18 months of court supervision (by the state, for a conservative!) is a pretty stiff price to pay for an offense that never happened.</p>
<p>“Accepting to pay $30,000 and 18 months of court supervision (by the state, for a conservative!) is a pretty stiff price to pay for an offense that never happened.”</p>
<p>Mini, your in one of your sarcastic moods again, right? Rush could spend $30,000 every week for next 18 months and never know that it was gone. $30K to him is like a $20 parking ticket to you or me. Why wouldn’t he agree to pay that even if he firmly believed in his innocense? Going through a highly public court case driven by a politically motivated prosecutor holds far more risk to his wealth and reputation than a mere $30K.</p>
<p>
The prosecutor wanted to put Rush in prison for a long time. Court supervision is merely a minor nusiance designed to make sure he continues his existing ongoing treatment. $30,000 may be a lot of money to you and me, but it isn’t to Rush Limbaugh. He recently donated $250,000 for research regarding Leukemia and Lymphoma. $30,000 is peanuts to Rush and very likely to be well below what it cost the taxpayers to fund the prosecutor’s obsession with Rush.</p>