cannabisnews.com: Rush To Jail?





Rush To Jail?
Posted by CN Staff on October 11, 2003 at 21:52:39 PT
By Joel Miller
Source: WorldNetDaily
So Rush has publicly admitted he's "addicted to prescription pain medication," confirming details of a story broken by the National Enquirer last week. If he was true to his word, following his broadcast yesterday, the nation's top talker checked himself into a 30-day drug rehab program to shake his monkey. Beyond his personal support of the drug war, the most intriguing aspect of Rush's current problem is that, since Nixon declared war on "public enemy No. 1" in 1972, conservatives of various stripes have been the biggest boosters of the policy.
Working tirelessly to expand state and federal powers to go after dealers and users, right-wing drug warriors lobbied hard for strict sentences and tough penalties. If people wouldn't stop using drugs on their own, the government was going to force them. A drug-free America was the end, and zero tolerance was the means. But think about this, you who are conservatives and so vigorously support the war on drugs: Would you really like to see the legal thumbscrews tightened on Rush Limbaugh – a man admiringly thought of by millions as the leading conservative icon in this country – the way you so enthusiastically insist for other violators of the nation's drug laws? I have no clue how the current police investigation into Limbaugh's situation will turn out, but regardless of the legal facts of the case and given that he's confessed it himself, would you like to see Rush in jail? Would you feel a) terrible if he ended up behind bars; or b) proud that justice had been done, that yet another drug abuser was locked away from the society that he could so easily harm with his pernicious addiction? It's easy to forget that Justice is blind. But while that scarf is tied so tightly over her eyes, Justice weighs friends and coworkers, sons and daughters, husbands and wives in her scales. She weighs our heroes and icons, and she doesn't give a hoot about the circumstances of someone's illegal drug use or his ideology, only that he is breaking the law. The rule of law is a sword that cuts both ways, but if this sword whacks Rush, it will only prove that – despite his own support over the years – it shouldn't be swinging at all. What possible good could incarcerating Rush Limbaugh accomplish? Would his life, professional or personal, be better off? Would jail time help his show improve, or his newsletter get better? After 15 years of excellence, surpassing all expectations, proving himself to be the most skilled radio talent in history, it'd be hard to imagine. Consumers of Rush's entertaining and enlightening product have been more than well served over the years. I've been listening to Rush for almost half my life – not half my adult life, half my total life. Drugs didn't destroy his productive output. The same isn't true for what jail can do. Ask former Congressman James Traficant. What about his relationship with his family, friends and wife? Stopping Rush's addictive behavior might be a very positive thing in his personal life, but isn't that a matter best left decided among the immediate parties? Outsiders shouldn't step in and forcibly work to improve or salvage personal relationships with regard to finances or hygiene or character flaws. Why drugs? Taking drugs is a choice – just like making an investment or, for a more negative image, gambling. But as long as Rush isn't harming anyone with his decisions, then the government should stay out of it. Or, government should also step in and make sure hubby isn't poorly investing the family savings, that he flosses daily, and isn't so selfish. After all, pride and egotism (two things at least Rush's public persona isn't lacking) do far more damage to personal relationships than dope does. And note that it's covetousness, not drug use, that wraps up the Ten Commandments. Jealousy and envy are far more dangerous to society than funny cigarettes or little blue pills. So if it makes sense to go after drugs in the effort to save society, then it's equally sensible to send cops to round up all the envy-pushers on Madison Ave. and in the halls of Congress. Isn't it better to let Rush sort out this problem on his own – just as we let citizens deal with their own failings in other areas, leave him free to decide what needs fixing in his own life and take care of it? And if that's true for Rush, then it's true for others. Millions of Americans do use or have used illegal drugs. Many do so with no negative consequences in their lives; they don't beat their kids, they perform acceptably at work, and they forget their spouse's birthday with no more frequency than the rest of us. But those that do have negative consequences from abuse – what sense does it make to heap more problems on their situation by jailing them or otherwise entangling them in the legal system? They can lose their jobs, their public standing, sometimes their families. If they bring such calamity on themselves, that's unfortunate and tough. Life's full of bad news. But siccing the state on them to produce the same results is unconscionable. Using the government to bring ruin on someone's life when he is neither harming nor defrauding his neighbor is wrong – even if it is for his own good. Rush has admitted to having relapsed in his "recovery" from addiction. He said he checked himself in two times before this most recent trip. Clearly this is ample evidence that Rush's problem is too complex for the ham-fisted force of law to solve. Sometimes the state should just butt out of people's lives, and one of those times is when people are struggling with drugs.Joel Miller is senior editor of WND Books. His own company, Oakdown Books, recently published "Drinking With Calvin and Luther! A History of Alcohol in the Church." Source: WorldNetDaily (US Web)Author: Joel MillerPublished: October 11, 2003Copyright: 2003 WorldNetDaily.com Inc.Contact: letters worldnetdaily.comWebsite: http://www.worldnetdaily.com/Related Articles:Limbaugh, Tells of Pill Addictionhttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread17530.shtmlLimbaugh Goes Off Air To Battle Painkiller Habithttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread17529.shtmlLimbaugh: I'm Addicted To Painkillershttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread17528.shtml
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help




Comment #46 posted by timneoshredder on October 29, 2003 at 11:36:44 PT:
Conservative? Yep!
I agree. I'll qualify myself first. I'm a Ditto head. I like Rush - dont always agree with him, but I listen(ed)to him often. What's good for the goose is good for the gander... he broke the law, why treat him differently? Besides, just use his own words about what to do with drug offenders, and use it on him. Sorry Rush, this is tough love buddy! 
I keep telling my liberal smot poking friend - dont like it? Change the law! He hates Rush, who cares. Don't like the show, then dont listen. Damn I'm an enigma!
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #45 posted by rchandar on October 13, 2003 at 09:10:37 PT:
limbaugh to jail?
i say lock him up and make him as miserable and forlorn as possible...there was no "mercy" or "justice" for the hundreds of thousands of young, often poor men who deserved another chance. there should be no such corresponding mercy or justice for a multimillionaire who made his fame slandering drug users as being stupid misfits who were going to get what they deserved.lock him up. make him directly responsible for the 20-year tirade of lies and slander against basically ordinary human beings.legalize it.         --rchandar               
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #44 posted by gloovins on October 13, 2003 at 02:29:43 PT
more specific law FL schedules
 Lookie at j in schedule II 
CRIMES Chapter 893
DRUG ABUSE PREVENTION AND CONTROL View Entire Chapter 
 
893.03 Standards and schedules.--The substances enumerated in this section are controlled by this chapter. The controlled substances listed or to be listed in Schedules I, II, III, IV, and V are included by whatever official, common, usual, chemical, or trade name designated. The provisions of this section shall not be construed to include within any of the schedules contained in this section any excluded drugs listed within the purview of 21 C.F.R. s. 1308.22, styled "Excluded Substances"; 21 C.F.R. s. 1308.24, styled "Exempt Chemical Preparations"; 21 C.F.R. s. 1308.32, styled "Exempted Prescription Products"; or 21 C.F.R. s. 1308.34, styled "Exempt Anabolic Steroid Products." (1) SCHEDULE I.--A substance in Schedule I has a high potential for abuse and has no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States and in its use under medical supervision does not meet accepted safety standards. The following substances are controlled in Schedule I: (a) Unless specifically excepted or unless listed in another schedule, any of the following substances, including their isomers, esters, ethers, salts, and salts of isomers, esters, and ethers, whenever the existence of such isomers, esters, ethers, and salts is possible within the specific chemical designation: 1. Acetyl-alpha-methylfentanyl. 2. Acetylmethadol. 3. Allylprodine. 4. Alphacetylmethadol (except levo-alphacetylmethadol, also known as levo-alpha-acetylmethadol, levomethadyl acetate, or LAAM). 5. Alphamethadol. 6. Alpha-methylfentanyl (N-[1-(alpha-methyl-betaphenyl) ethyl-4-piperidyl] propionanilide; 1-(1-methyl-2-phenylethyl)-4-(N-propanilido) piperidine). 7. Alpha-methylthiofentanyl. 8. Alphameprodine. 9. Benzethidine. 10. Benzylfentanyl. 11. Betacetylmethadol. 12. Beta-hydroxyfentanyl. 13. Beta-hydroxy-3-methylfentanyl. 14. Betameprodine. 15. Betamethadol. 16. Betaprodine. 17. Clonitazene. 18. Dextromoramide. 19. Diampromide. 20. Diethylthiambutene. 21. Difenoxin. 22. Dimenoxadol. 23. Dimepheptanol. 24. Dimethylthiambutene. 25. Dioxaphetyl butyrate. 26. Dipipanone. 27. Ethylmethylthiambutene. 28. Etonitazene. 29. Etoxeridine. 30. Flunitrazepam. 31. Furethidine. 32. Hydroxypethidine. 33. Ketobemidone. 34. Levomoramide. 35. Levophenacylmorphan. 36. 1-Methyl-4-Phenyl-4-Propionoxypiperidine (MPPP). 37. 3-Methylfentanyl (N- 
[3-methyl-1-(2-phenylethyl)-4-piperidyl]-N-phenylpropanamide). 38. 3-Methylthiofentanyl. 39. 3, 4-Methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA). 40. Morpheridine. 41. Noracymethadol. 42. Norlevorphanol. 43. Normethadone. 44. Norpipanone. 45. Para-Fluorofentanyl. 46. Phenadoxone. 47. Phenampromide. 48. Phenomorphan. 49. Phenoperidine. 50. 1-(2-Phenylethyl)-4-Phenyl-4-Acetyloxypiperidine (PEPAP). 51. Piritramide. 52. Proheptazine. 53. Properidine. 54. Propiram. 55. Racemoramide. 56. Thenylfentanyl. 57. Thiofentanyl. 58. Tilidine. 59. Trimeperidine. (b) Unless specifically excepted or unless listed in another schedule, any of the following substances, their salts, isomers, and salts of isomers, whenever the existence of such salts, isomers, and salts of isomers is possible within the specific chemical designation: 1. Acetorphine. 2. Acetyldihydrocodeine. 3. Benzylmorphine. 4. Codeine methylbromide. 5. Codeine-N-Oxide. 6. Cyprenorphine. 7. Desomorphine. 8. Dihydromorphine. 9. Drotebanol. 10. Etorphine (except hydrochloride salt). 11. Heroin. 12. Hydromorphinol. 13. Methyldesorphine. 14. Methyldihydromorphine. 15. Monoacetylmorphine. 16. Morphine methylbromide. 17. Morphine methylsulfonate. 18. Morphine-N-Oxide. 19. Myrophine. 20. Nicocodine. 21. Nicomorphine. 22. Normorphine. 23. Pholcodine. 24. Thebacon. (c) Unless specifically excepted or unless listed in another schedule, any material, compound, mixture, or preparation which contains any quantity of the following hallucinogenic substances or which contains any of their salts, isomers, and salts of isomers, whenever the existence of such salts, isomers, and salts of isomers is possible within the specific chemical designation: 1. Alpha-ethyltryptamine. 2. 2-Amino-4-methyl-5-phenyl-2-oxazoline (4-methylaminorex). 3. 2-Amino-5-phenyl-2-oxazoline (Aminorex). 4. 4-Bromo-2,5-dimethoxyamphetamine. 5. 4-Bromo-2, 5-dimethoxyphenethylamine. 6. Bufotenine. 7. Cannabis. 8. Cathinone. 9. Diethyltryptamine. 10. 2,5-Dimethoxyamphetamine. 11. 2,5-Dimethoxy-4-ethylamphetamine (DOET). 12. Dimethyltryptamine. 13. N-Ethyl-1-phenylcyclohexylamine (PCE) (Ethylamine analog of phencyclidine). 14. N-Ethyl-3-piperidyl benzilate. 15. N-ethylamphetamine. 16. Fenethylline. 17. N-Hydroxy-3,4-methylenedioxyamphetamine. 18. Ibogaine. 19. Lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD). 20. Mescaline. 21. Methcathinone. 22. 5-Methoxy-3,4-methylenedioxyamphetamine. 23. 4-methoxyamphetamine. 24. 4-methoxymethamphetamine. 25. 4-Methyl-2,5-dimethoxyamphetamine. 26. 3,4-Methylenedioxy-N-ethylamphetamine. 27. 3,4-Methylenedioxyamphetamine. 28. N-Methyl-3-piperidyl benzilate. 29. N,N-dimethylamphetamine. 30. Parahexyl. 31. Peyote. 32. N-(1-Phenylcyclohexyl)-pyrrolidine (PCPY) (Pyrrolidine analog of phencyclidine). 33. Psilocybin. 34. Psilocyn. 35. Tetrahydrocannabinols. 36. 1-[1-(2-Thienyl)-cyclohexyl]-piperidine (TCP) (Thiophene analog of phencyclidine). 37. 3,4,5-Trimethoxyamphetamine. (d) Unless specifically excepted or unless listed in another schedule, any material, compound, mixture, or preparation which contains any quantity of the following substances, including any of its salts, isomers, optical isomers, salts of their isomers, and salts of these optical isomers whenever the existence of such isomers and salts is possible within the specific chemical designation: 1. 1,4-Butanediol. 2. Gamma-butyrolactone (GBL). 3. Gamma-hydroxybutyric acid (GHB). 4. Methaqualone. 5. Mecloqualone. (2) SCHEDULE II.--A substance in Schedule II has a high potential for abuse and has a currently accepted but severely restricted medical use in treatment in the United States, and abuse of the substance may lead to severe psychological or physical dependence. The following substances are controlled in Schedule II: (a) Unless specifically excepted or unless listed in another schedule, any of the following substances, whether produced directly or indirectly by extraction from substances of vegetable origin or independently by means of chemical synthesis: 1. Opium and any salt, compound, derivative, or preparation of opium, except nalmefene or isoquinoline alkaloids of opium, including, but not limited to the following: a. Raw opium. b. Opium extracts. c. Opium fluid extracts. d. Powdered opium. e. Granulated opium. f. Tincture of opium. g. Codeine. h. Ethylmorphine. i. Etorphine hydrochloride. j. Hydrocodone. k. Hydromorphone. l. Levo-alphacetylmethadol (also known as levo-alpha-acetylmethadol, levomethadyl acetate, or LAAM). m. Metopon (methyldihydromorphinone). n. Morphine. o. Oxycodone.
 bye bye Rush (yeah right, I forgot it's Ru$h so,..) May YOUR God be with you ...little typo fm earlier.....
 
 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #43 posted by gloovins on October 13, 2003 at 02:09:29 PT
the law 
The 2003 Florida Statutes
 
 Title XLVI
CRIMES Chapter 893
DRUG ABUSE PREVENTION AND CONTROL View Entire Chapter 
 
893.149 Unlawful possession of listed chemical.-- (1) It is unlawful for any person to knowingly or intentionally: (a) Possess a listed chemical with the intent to unlawfully manufacture a controlled substance; (b) Possess or distribute a listed chemical knowing, or having reasonable cause to believe, that the listed chemical will be used to unlawfully manufacture a controlled substance. (2) Any person who violates this section is guilty of a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084. History.--s. 5, ch. 91-279; s. 3, ch. 2003-15. Search Results for: "893.033 " (2 returns) Quick Links 
 Statutes Search Tips 
 
 1. View Statute
Score: 79.67%
 Abstract: --The chemicals listed in this section are included by whatever official, common, usual, chemical, or trade name designated. --The term "listed precursor chemical" means a chemical that may be used in manufacturing a controlled substance in violation of this chapter and is critical to the creation of the controlled substance, and such term includes any salt, optical isomer, or salt of an optical isomer, whenever the existence of such salt, optical isomer, or salt of optical isomer is possible... 
2. View Statute
Score: 77.42%
 Abstract: (4) "Controlled substance" means any substance named or described in Schedules I-V of s. Laws controlling the manufacture, distribution, preparation, dispensing, or administration of such substances are drug abuse laws. (7) "Distribute" means to deliver, other than by administering or dispensing, a controlled substance. So I presume schedules are the same, no? I dont know thought we got off topic (brownshirts?) but seriously I do believe since 9/11, our core, basic civil rights have been thrashed shredded and pretty much obliterated. Its sad but I still love what this country stands for: Life, Liberty and the persuit of happiness. May you God be with you... 
 
http://www.flsenate.gov/statutes/index.cfm?StatuteYear=2003&AppMode=Display_Resu
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #42 posted by gloovins on October 13, 2003 at 01:55:28 PT
the article
News Release
Governor Bush Touts Florida Law Enforcement For Staying Tough On Prescription Drugs Abuse
July 29, 2003 Continued over-prescribing and abuse of prescription drugs confirms the need for a rescription validation programGovernor Jeb Bush applauded Florida law enforcement's arrest today in Melbourne and the continued statewide effort to control prescription drug abuse. Interim Commissioner of the Florida Department of Law Enforcement (FDLE), Daryl McLaughlin; Director of the Office of Drug Control, Jim McDonough; and Secretary of the Department of Health (DOH), John Agwunobi held a press conference today to acknowledge the hard work of law enforcement and to discuss the importance of a prescription validation program. "Florida's law enforcement agencies and policy makers continue to demonstrate a commitment to reducing and preventing illegal prescription drug dispensing and abuse," Governor Bush said. "Florida needs to continue to be proactive and seek a permanent solution to prevent the alarming number of deaths associated with prescription drug abuse."The Melbourne Police Department, FDLE and the Drug Enforcement Administration, today arrested Dr. Sarfraz Mirza, owner and operator of the "We Care" pain clinic in Melbourne, along with many others implicated in the fraudulent prescription of drugs. The value of pills obtained by fraudulent prescription exceeds $500,000 and is in excess of 10,000 dosage units of 40 and 80-milligram pills of OxyContin. "FDLE, in partnership with local law enforcement, state and federal agencies have been aggressively tackling this issue, as evident in the numerous investigations and arrests in recent months," said FDLE interim Commissioner Daryl McLaughlin. "A centralized database with prescription information is the tool needed by investigators to work these cases effectively and efficiently."Of the 5,797 drug deaths in Florida in 2002, 3,324 or 57 percent of these deaths involved the use of pharmaceutical drugs. Also in 2002, oxycodone, hydrocodone, benzodiazepines, and methadone were involved in twice the number of deaths caused by cocaine and heroin combined. Diverted prescription drugs now constitute the fastest growing segment of the illicit drug market. "While law enforcement agencies are doing their job through investigations and arrests, these actions usually come after the fact, meaning lives have already been lost or put at risk by the illicit abuse of prescription drugs," said Jim McDonough, Director of the Florida Office of Drug Control. "We need to prevent the misuse and abuse of prescription drugs by addicts and medical professionals alike through a program that provides safety measures and holds all parties responsible. Prevention of the diversion of legal drugs must be the key.""As secretary of the Florida Department of Health, I strongly encourage the Florida Legislature to fund the creation of a prescription drug monitoring system," said DOH Secretary John O. Agwunobi, M.D., M.B.A. "Such a system will provide a direct benefit to public health by reducing the number of deaths due to the abuse of prescription medications." To alleviate the growing problem, the Office of Drug Control, the Department of Health, the Florida Department of Law Enforcement, other state agencies and members of the legislature have been working together to pass meaningful reform which would assist doctors and pharmacies in filling legitimate prescriptions and help law enforcement track criminal misuse of these drugs. Sponsored by Senator Mike Fasano and Representative Gail Harrell in the 2003 regular legislative session, the Prescription Validation Program, if passed, would give law enforcement the tools necessary to ensure patient safety and appropriateness of ordering.City of Melbourne Press Release--------------------------------------------------------------------------------For more information, contact:Jacob Dipietre
(850) 488-5394Al Dennis or Kristen Perezluha
FDLE Public Information Office
(850) 410-7001Ahh yes, have you heard of Wilma.....;) someone please call! hehe i love the net..
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #41 posted by gloovins on October 13, 2003 at 01:51:44 PT
Rush, a little article whilst in rehab..
Jeb a frined? Hope so there big guy..
http://www.fdle.state.fl.us/press_releases/20030729_Prescription_Drugs.html
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #40 posted by FoM on October 12, 2003 at 20:58:13 PT
ekim
I never talked to Peter on the phone but I did correspond with him a few times by e-mail. He was a nice man. I hope afterburner is ok. His e-mails came back to me not available. He went away on a vacation before so maybe he did again. I have a hard time remembering people if they haven't been here for a while. I think I overload and forget. I have afterburners address because I bought a summer of legalization t-shirt from him. If we don't hear from him soon I will write him a short letter. Maybe his computer crashed and he can't get it fixed. That's usually the most common reason I think.
Peter McWilliams Memorial Page
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #39 posted by ekim on October 12, 2003 at 20:41:05 PT
Back at you Fom 
i too hope afterburner and do you remember the the kid that was going over to England or somewhere gee FoM i bet you think of all the email handles like kids anyway. and when ej had me think of Todd i felt sick as i have only written him once and i think of Peter and how they put a tracking device on his rental and how he spent his last days --i was on the fone with him the day the feds brought back his pc i just happen to call one of maybe two calls -- he said stay on the line and listen to what goes on -- he was such a nice sounding person and to hear the agents and him was far out. it was like hearing the interaction of someone knowing the fedex man with thanks and please put it there and thank you very much and the dood closed and just that fast we were talking about how crazy everything is, i cryed when i heard he died. I have a correction on comment 25 Steven B. Duke from 1996 NR Feb 12 issue
 Mr.Duke is the Law of Science and Technology Professor at Yale Law School. He is co-author , with Albert C.Gross , of America's Longest War: Rethinking Our Tragic Crusade against Drugs ( Tarcher?Putnam. 1993) . Professor Duke pays special attention to the widespread assumption that legalization would bring on huge addiction. And ends by wondering why conservative politicians, with a single exception, are apparently indifferent to what is happening under our noses as a result of the unwon, and unwinnable, war on drugs.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #38 posted by goneposthole on October 12, 2003 at 19:47:35 PT
Leo 'Lion-hearted' Strauss the mouse
L E O  Funny he has such a name. Witness the debacle in Iraq, and you have the essence of the loyal followers of such a fool. Also, the pogrom against cannabis users is the neocons hearts desire, apparently.I did all of my reading in my more formative years some 30 years ago. I guess I need to reinvigorate my interest in books. My reading consisted of more psychological writings by Erik Eriksen, in particular, The Biography of Ghandi. Also, The Gulag Archipelago by Alexander Solzhenitsyn held my interest from cover to cover. Read it all, couldn't put it down. Finished it in record time. Tried to re-read it, but had to put it away for another day.I haven't read much since the seventies. Too much to do to keep bread, milk, and bacon on the table. Besides, I am too old to read anything anymore. I guess I missed the boat with a political hack such as Leo Strauss (political hack n : a politician who belongs to a small clique that controls a political party for private rather than public ends). Not missing much, probably.However, many thanks, Kaptinemo for your insightful, critical analysis and a heads up on what is taking place in American politics and foreign policy. American politics reeks more than a live skunk outside your kitchen screen door at 3:00 am on a hot summer's night. What is even more disturbing to me, in my humble opinion, is that these neocon modern day political hacks are probably waiting for the hippie crowd to die-off before implementing their grand plan of a new wierd odor. Killing a few now and then works into their nefarious scheme, too, I suppose.
The 'old hippie' is the modern day untermenschen in the eyes of the neocon. I would bet more money on that than Bill Bennett has lost in Vegas. With much glee, they tolerate a few of their own who are hooked on drugs. Must be some political gain from that, too. Of course, I could be all wrong. Carried away by my paranoia; if I am completely full of stuffing, then why are all of these historical changes in geopolitical thought taking place? There must a plan being implemented for the sweeping changes to enter onto the stage, no doubt. Far be it from me what they are, I just observe what is taking place after the fact. The plan is a 'need to know' basis only. I don't need to know, nor do I want to know. I just hope it can be stopped before it's too late. You don't go outside when the skunk is at the door; it's rabid.That's my four ha'pennies; for what it's worth.
Back to my kind bud. 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #37 posted by FoM on October 12, 2003 at 18:12:28 PT
Thanks kaptinemo
That's me. I took the poll and agreed with all of the questions.http://www.culturalcreatives.org/questionnaire.html
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #36 posted by kaptinemo on October 12, 2003 at 17:48:13 PT:
FoM, if you want to know 'what' you and almost all
cannabists, Libbers, freethinkers, Green Collar Workers etc. are, I would humbly suggest that you go to this site:http://www.culturalcreatives.org/I keep saying we cananbists possess a culture. Well, perhaps I should say that our predilections are part of a much larger culture...the one written about at that site.All who read and agree with the goals of cannabis 'liberation' are in essence demonstrating in a small part and way the attributes of this idea of a new culture arising from the soon-to-be-extinct Dominator culture presently in its' wild death throws. For, even though right now the Dominators seem to have the political process sewn up tight, in reality they have drawn a noose around their own necks by excluding some of the most creative and inventive people in the country from the process by marginalizing them politically and socially. A fire can't burn without oxygen...and you certainly can't breathe without it. But by demanding lockstep rigidity of thought, the Dominators have have done just that to themselves.I ask that everyone who reads this go have a look for yourself. See if you don't find yourself looking in a mirror when reading what's been put there and realizing that "Hey! They're talkin' 'bout ME!"
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #35 posted by FoM on October 12, 2003 at 17:21:09 PT
kaptinemo
That is a detailed explanation and thank you. I'm not well versed in history at all and I appreciate it. I look at how I want to live now and I just don't fit into a buy buy buy mode like they promote in commercials. I don't want an SUV. I don't want to move to a new home every few years to keep up with the Jones. I don't want to be rich but I do value many things and there isn't a price you can put on those values. I believe we need to learn to live and be happy with what we have and not spend our whole life chasing the american dream. That way of thinking isn't liked. 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #34 posted by Treeanna on October 12, 2003 at 16:56:07 PT
WOW! Very cool! :)
That is quite clever!Thanks so much :)The reason I have been posting about it here is because I promised FoM I would share when I found out ;)Now I think I will send the info to NORML! hahahah!
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #33 posted by kaptinemo on October 12, 2003 at 16:49:22 PT:
FoM, it comes down to a gentleman named Strauss
Leo Strauss, the godfather of neoconservatism.Strauss arrived in this country one step ahead of Nazi persecution, and sought to influence American politics in such a way that what he believed caused the downfall of Weimar Republic Germany - namely, 'liberalism' - would not bring down his adopted nation, the USA.To that end, he found many willing former Communists and Socialists who, being disgusted witht the Left for pandering to the former two philosophies given Soviet and Chinese butcheries, but lacking a definable ideology of their own, accepted his peculiar brand of 'conservatism'. One that spoke soft words of support for democratic principles, while reserving private contempt for them. A contempt shared by many of his acolytes. In a quasi-Nietszchean sense, only power mattered. Power to keep the Commie Liberal wolf from the door.Here's where the 1960's and 1970's come into play. Huge mass demonstrations against the Viet Nam War, to the neocons, were symptomatic of national rot, as they were seen as aiding and abetting their sworn enemies, the Left. Alternate lifestyles were deemed by them to be morally corruptive. Anything that successfully challenged authority, if not effectively punished, would lead to the dissolution of the 'natural' political order of the strong should rule, the weak should be glad they do, yes massah. Hence the turning of the word "Liberal" , which people like Vice President Hubert Humphrey was quite proud to call himself, into the almost-a-swear-word it is today.(Remember Nixon's tapes about his fulminationsa gainst the Shafer Commission's report recommending MJ be decriminalized? Remember the digs about the Jewish psychiatrists all seeming to be for relegaliztion, all assumed by Tricky Dick to be closet Commies? That's the ghostly voice of Strauss whispering in Tricky Dick's ear in the background you're hearing.)This why neocons are so down on the 1960's and '70's. What was for us a time of blossoming freedom was for them the death knell of the Republic. They had to do something...and do something they did. They held their noses and allied themselves with the Religious Right in a 'marriage of convenience', in which the neocons were able to hold their crude and crazy spouse at arms length for many years, preventing them from sharing real power with them...until this Administration.Of course, I'm reducing things a lot down to the bare essentials, but stripped of all the rhetoric, it's the same old game. I believe it was Jacques Villain who said it best: When you are in power, you are merciful, because that is your way. When I am in power, I am not, because that is my way."Given the kind of things happening in Texas with the redistricting fight, the fraudulent voting machines, thousands of minority voters illegally disenfranchised by Republican Kathleen Harris in Florida, the 'Brookes Brother's Riot' in Florida in 2000 that stopped the vote count by intimidation until the Supreme Court could unConstitutionally rule on the side of the Republicans (when so many of them are Republicans, themselves, mind you)...well, I could go on, but the picture is clear - as is the intent. Leo Strauss's adopted ideological children are carrying out their dead father's dream. And it's becoming a nightmare for the rest of us.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #32 posted by FoM on October 12, 2003 at 16:05:55 PT
A Comment
This is from a snipped source and I want to know why people shouldn't listen to 70s ideas. After all most of the 70s people are grandparents and have wisdom from their life's journey. They just want us removed from history. They don't like us and they wish we would just go away. We don't have anywhere to go."It would be regrettable if our Canadian neighbours continued down a path that relies on 1970s-era thinking on marijuana, rather than on what we have learned after 30-plus years of research and heart-wrenching addiction," Mr. Walters, the director of the White House's National Drug Control Policy Office, said in a statement.http://www.cannabisnews.com/news/thread17516.shtml#17
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #31 posted by kaptinemo on October 12, 2003 at 15:56:06 PT:
"The media is built on hypocrisy"
I see I have posted the following in the wrong place; I don't normally like to do this, but given the exchange between Buchanan, Drudge and Press, I feel it's still quite germane and worth repeating here:Many years ago, the late liberal commentator Carl Rowan, no friend of the Second Amendment and the use of hanguns for self defense by the *hoi polloi* such as you and I, was attacked by a seemingly deranged man in the back yard of his Washington DC home...and defended himself. 
With a handgun.That irony of this is obvious; I needn't say much more, except for this:I eagerly awaited the weekly Saturday night pundit show following that week's incident. I was hoping to see the exchange that pitted the supposed 'Conservative' James J. Kilpatrick and his 'Liberal' opponent Mr. Rowan.Mr. Kilpatrick had an excellent opportunity to roast Mr. Rowan over the fires of his own hypocrisy. Instead, it was "tea and sympathy" all around, as the other commentators followed Mr. Kilpatrick's lead and cooed their joy at Mr. Rowan's successful defense of himself with a handgun, his continued safety and good fortune.Not a word about his hypocritical stance on the Second Amendment...which he resumed after he probably believed the short attention span of his viewers would allow.Moral of the story? THE POLITICAL CLASS TAKES CARE OF ITS' OWN...FIRST AND FOREMOST. Although I had entertained some sneaking suspicions that the program, which I actually enjoyed at one time, might be rigged *a la* Punch-and Judy for the masses, I didn't wish to believe so. That night I received another 'oops-upside-the-head' concerning the world of 'realpolitik'. What does this have to do with "Rush"? Plenty. "Rush" is the 'low-brow' equivalent of the older, more distinguished Georgetown Brownstone layer of the political chattering class. He spreads the (diluted and annotated) word to the ideological stealth Brown Shirts of the Republican (and face it, some Dem) Party members to use as their 'talking points'. In short, he is as he always was...a mouthpiece. The megaphone of the party of Power and Privilge. With a Peak Envelope Power in the gigawatt range, for you Signal Corps people out there.A very useful one that will NOT be allowed the to suffer the same ignominious fate as awaits you or I at the clutches of Law Enforcement for the same felony. Hence this 'kid-glove' treatment.Because the heart of the WoSD is simple, basic hypocrisy, a hypocrisy that must be maintained at all costs, to include over-the-top rhetoric such as "Rush" has engaged in in the past, it is patently unrealistic to expect him to change the very means of gaining his livelihood.I needn't have predicted that his 'friends' would close ranks and stand behind him as they have; Ms. Coulter's holding forth on the matter is as predictable as sunrise. We already had the precedent with Mr. Rowan.Predictable. So predictable.Like I said: the political class takes care of it's own...no matter what. Just as they are taking care of "Rush", right now...That was going to be the end of it, but then I raed that exchange and couldn't help but add:And now? You have avowed "Liberal" Press taking up Limbaugh's fallen banner. "Empty your pockets!" he cries.It's not the media mavens pockets that are empty; it's their integrity reserves. "Conservative" and "Liberal" is just more Punch-and-Judy for the suckers. It really comes down to Statism or Freedom. 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #30 posted by E_Johnson on October 12, 2003 at 14:03:57 PT
Please also write Bryan Epis
Bryan James EpisPOW  09636-097TERMINAL ISL FCI 1299 SEASIDE AVENUE TERMINAL ISLAND, CA 90731
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #29 posted by E_Johnson on October 12, 2003 at 13:59:45 PT
How to write to Todd McCormick
Todd McCormickPOW 11071-112PHOENIX FCI 37900 N 45TH AVE DEPT 1680 PHOENIX , AZ 85029
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #28 posted by E_Johnson on October 12, 2003 at 13:54:55 PT
How to write to Tommy Chong
Thomas Kin ChongPOW 07798-068TAFT CI 1500 CADET ROAD TAFT , CA 93268 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #27 posted by FoM on October 12, 2003 at 13:54:35 PT
Thanks EJ
I really wanted to help but had no idea how to find the information. I appreciate it.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #26 posted by E_Johnson on October 12, 2003 at 13:52:02 PT
Treanna, here your info
I used the Bureau of Prions Inmate LOcator:http://www.bop.gov/inmate.html Inmate Register Number : 07798-068 Name : THOMAS B KIN CHONG Age :  65 Race :  WHITE Sex :  MALE Projected Release Date :  7/06/2004 Location :  TAFT CI  1500 CADET ROAD  TAFT , CA 93268 Phone Number :  (661)763-2510 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #25 posted by ekim on October 12, 2003 at 13:51:42 PT
National Review February 12 1996 vol.XLVIII,No.2
With the drug war morphing into the tearizem venue it is of utmost importance that National Review have a update to this Great issue. Suggestion for inclusion would be Gov. Garry Johnson and Gov. Bill Weld. as examples for Arnold at the upcoming debate between John Walters and Dennis Kucinich. National Review February 12 1996 vol.XLVIII,No.2
Cover story:
 The War on Drugs is Lost.
 Wm.F.Buckley Jr. reflecting on his own statement before the New York Bar Association on the War on Drugs. sought reactions from a group of men who had chosen, or been forced in the course of their duties, to reflect on this topic. Joining him in this symposium are drug-policy researcher Ethan A. Nadelmann, Baltimore Mayor Kurt Schmoke, former police chief Joseph D. McNamara, Judge Robert W. Sweet, psychiatrist Thomas Szasz,, and Professor Steven B. Duck. They differ among themselves (as do NRs editors) as to which aspects of the War on Drugs they find most disquieting, and how far they would go toward legalization. But they all agree: the War on Drugs has failed.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #24 posted by FoM on October 12, 2003 at 13:36:40 PT
Treeanna
I'm sorry I thought you meant an email. I don't know how to find information on how to send a letter to him in prison. I've done a few searches on the Net but haven't found any contact information. I only know where he is incarcerated but how to get a letter to him I just don't know. I wish I could help.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #23 posted by Treeanna on October 12, 2003 at 13:24:50 PT
Hmmm... maybe a misunderstanding
I am not talking about a "public email" for Tommy... I mean just the address for him to get "snail mail" at the prison.NORML promised some time ago to put it up on the website, just hasn't happened yet.Maybe some few would send him hatemail, but I doubt it, and even if they did, he would probably just laugh them off.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #22 posted by FoM on October 12, 2003 at 10:07:05 PT
Thanks Virgil!
I just finished posting the Newsweek article. Here it is! ‘I Am Addicted to Prescription Pain Medication’: http://www.cannabisnews.com/news/thread17537.shtml
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #21 posted by Petard on October 12, 2003 at 09:56:29 PT
Equality
Since Rush bought those pills illegally inside his own residence, and also used his car to facilitate purchases in the Denny's parking lot, WHY haven't the Feds or the Locals siezed his assets? If it was any "common" person they'd have already had their home and car seized for facilitating and/or participating in violaions of the drug laws. Where's the consistency? Take his mansion and his luxury vehicles as instruments in illegal activities and sell thenm at public auction like the law encroachment agents do to every person named Manuel, Leroy, Joe Blow, Guido, Billy Bob, and everyone else who's not a celebrity. C'mon Feds and Locals we know you read this site, do the right thing. Seize the assets of Rush Limbaugh for trafficking in illegal narcotics like you do everyone else's assets, or expose your hypocrisy to the light of the entire world. 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #20 posted by JR Bob Dobbs on October 12, 2003 at 09:41:51 PT
Free Todd McCormick
>>The effect, the opium lift, effect -- that's the danger of these addictions you actually can excel, as he did. Can you imagine how potent Rush Limbaugh would be -- off of the pills, if he's been this powerful on the pills?Drudge is assuming that Limbaugh would work better without pills. Does he think Charlie Parker's music would be better if he weren't a junkie, or that The Doors would be better with Jim Morrison as the ONDCP poster boy? I don't know. The pills may have been performance enhancing - if he was in pain, could he do the show? Anyway, it will be curious to compare the old Chemically Modified Rush with the forthcoming new Organic Rush...
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #19 posted by Virgil on October 12, 2003 at 09:41:40 PT
Newsweek cooks Rush for breakfast
MSNBC has a long article that cooks Rush and serves him up on a platter. It looks like the media will be serving Fried Icon all week.
God spoke from the burning Rush
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #18 posted by FoM on October 12, 2003 at 09:09:47 PT
Thanks gloovins!
How many pills did Rush Limbaugh need? Unbelievable! How is he alive! Does anyone know if Rush Limbaugh drank alcohol along with the pills?I remember when Karen Ann Quinlan supposedly took a small amount of valium and maybe beer and it put her in a coma and the drug war escalated. It sure shows the irony of drugs and how they work on different people.http://www.ascensionhealth.org/ethics/public/cases/case21.asp
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #17 posted by goneposthole on October 12, 2003 at 09:03:09 PT
send Rush a Tommy Chong Bong
and a 100 grams of Medical Cannabis. He would be eternally grateful. He doesn't realize how much it would help. While everyone is at this stage of the game, let's have clemency for harmless cannabis users or growers who are in the hoosegow, and release them.Time to end this ridiculous war on drugs.   
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #16 posted by gloovins on October 12, 2003 at 08:55:14 PT
more on Limbo
Limbaugh wanted to "go out with a bang" right before his last detox A desperate, drug-addicted Rush Limbaugh begged his dealer to score him a final, explosive dope cocktail just two weeks before he attempted to detox last year, a new report says 
*rest of story is below at link c'mon Feds, if tommy chong goes and then, Rush, nonethe less the "national treasure" calls him, he must go, yeah in country of justice, where money buys all --- Rush , sue the bitch Wilma in civil court for all the money she bilked out of you over the years, its your right! (I think) Any florida attnys out there know ? I mean am i the only one who thinks this is ludicris>
Limbaugh wanted to "go out wa bang..." 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #15 posted by FoM on October 12, 2003 at 08:50:25 PT
Just a Note
I've been looking for news to post but I just haven't found any that is better then this article from Joel Miller. I'll keep looking though and wanted to let you all know why I haven't posted any new news today.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #14 posted by Jose Melendez on October 12, 2003 at 08:35:08 PT
the Drudge Challenge: 'it's hypocrisy, stupid.'
DRUDGE: MEDIA BUSINESS BUILT ON HYPOCRISY
 FRIDAY, OCTOBER 10, 2003
 MSNBC's BUCHANAN & PRESS BILL PRESS: Welcome back. Earlier today in his "Drudge Report," Matt Drudge broke the news that on today's radio show Rush Limbaugh would admit he was addicted to painkillers. And Matt Drudge was right once again.  He joins us now by phone with the latest on this story -- Pat.  PAT BUCHANAN: Matt thanks for joining us. Can you tell us when was the last time that you talked to Rush?  MATT DRUDGE, THE DRUDGE REPORT: Talked to him? Well, actually that's a good question. It's been a while, but you know in this business we're in, with the Internet, I do a lot of instant messages, and all the rest. As you and I were instant messaging last night, Pat, about this great tragedy.  Which it is a great tragedy. Let me just say, you know, there is stress on this story that is not to be believed behind the scenes. The editor in chief of "The National Enquirer," David Perel, is in the hospital, in intensive care, critical, I've been told. Not directly related to this story, but the stress behind this story has pushed everybody to a reaction that is unbelievable and we wish David Perel well.  You know, he is, I believe, not someone who has gone after Rush Limbaugh based on a political belief. It could be argued "The Enquirer" does have interests that are tied to Democrats but, you know, they are equal opportunity -- look what they did to Jesse Jackson, look what they did to Clinton. I can't sit here on this broadcast today and say they went after Limbaugh on partisan reasons. They go after people to sell magazines -- and this thing has sold!  Ah, nobody knew, or nobody was willing to admit in the big media business how interesting, or how big Rush Limbaugh is in this country -- until this story broke! How he is the companion to millions, how he is America's top voice. This makes it all the more painful.  BUCHANAN: All right, Matt. Let me ask you without giving us any of your sources and I know you deal -- we deal by instant messaging and things like that.  Tell us your understanding from what you've heard from Rush, about Rush and from close friends of his what is Rush's physical condition would you say now. We know he's depending on these things but what is his physical condition and his frame of mind?  DRUDGE: You see it. You've been running on the network today the ditto cam -- what they call it, the feed of the man himself as he delivered the remarks today. Not only those remarks, which came at the end of his broadcast, I might add. He was able to do a full week of broadcasting under this intense media microscope this week. We don't know if Limbaugh is on these drugs, he's now saying he's going in. He said it was prescription drugs, we don't know if a doctor's been giving it to him, these days. I just want to note for this audience while "The Enquirer" did a heck of a job reporting this:  their trail did go cold a year ago or a little bit more than a year ago!  Very few people have come into contact with him this past week, Pat. The stress has been unbelievable not only on him but again the very people who have covered and reported the story.  PRESS: Matt, you mentioned that Rush has been able to go this entire week and continue to do his show and show no signs of stress but he's actually -- he's been able to perform a great job on his radio show for like the last five or six years while he's been taking all these pain killers. It's amazing he was able to do that. Did you have any inkling at all that he was taking these...  PRESS: Bill Press, one of the side effects is you actually -- you have a euphoria of excelling in your craft on these pills. The effect, the opium lift, effect -- that's the danger of these addictions you actually can excel, as he did. Can you imagine how potent Rush Limbaugh would be -- off of the pills, if he's been this powerful on the pills?  And I will just state this, because we're headed into quite a weekend of media bashing here, I know all is fair in media wars, but I challenge everybody in the media business listening this today to:  empty their pockets!  Empty their pockets!  We will be passing out jars and dishes and they can go to their respective washrooms during the commercial break -- and come out with the pills they're on! This story is very sensitive in a lot of ways and before all the big media bigwigs point their finger, they should really question their medicine cabinet.  PRESS: OK, I will take up your challenge and tell you that I am on none of those pills at all. But I want to ask you Matt about...  DRUDGE: Is your producer? Is your director? Is your cameraman? Is your, Girl Friday? This is the question.  PRESS: Matt. I want to ask you about Rush's statement today because it was very candid and very compelling that way. It was also kind of risky because in effect he admitted that he probably committed an illegal act, right?  DRUDGE: I guess it is clear to me he wasn't actually listening to a lawyer -- it was coming from a love of his audience, I believe, it was love from audience that has brought him to this pinnacle. You know we don't have a lot of heroes in this baby boom generation; saddly, it hasn't given us many heroes.  The ones that it has given us have been cracked and flawed. And the notion to me that Rush Limbaugh is not the perfect man and possibly a hypocrite when it comes to drugs is heartbreaking, but it's not the end.  It's not the end for sitting presidents when they do it; it's not the end of broadcasters, certainly, or actors or musicians when they do it. So we're seeing a lot of piling on.  Kerry last night bringing it into the presidential political realm I think will come back to haunt him.  Bill, your glee, saying:  let's go to the e-mails!  I don't necessarily want anyone's e-mails exposed -- well maybe through a grand jury process or a sitting president but not certainly a private citizen, working in the media.  PRESS: OK, Matt Drudge stay with us.  When we come back, is it possible that after all of this Rush Limbaugh might change his opinions about harsh treatment for anybody taking illegal drugs?  Matt Drudge back on BUCHANAN AND PRESS, MSNBC.  (COMMERCIAL BREAK)  BILL PRESS, HOST: And thank you, we're back now with Matt Drudge of "The Drudge Report" on BUCHANAN & PRESS.  So Matt, as you mentioned just a few moments ago last night on last night's debate out in Phoenix with the Democrats, John Kerry took a pot shot at Rush. Let's listen up.  (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)  JOHN KERRY, PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: There are two ways for you to have lower prescription drug costs: one is you could hire Rush Limbaugh's housekeeper or you could elect me president of the United States.  (END VIDEO CLIP)  PRESS: Now, good line for that audience, but do you think that was fair game or low blow, Matt?  DRUDGE: Well, it is red red meat... If I were running for president I would talk specifically about health care; I wouldn't be talking about a radio host who was suffering and may need specific health care themselves.  It's very confusing when they go in and start talking the personality game as they're asking us to vote. Rush Limbaugh is not on the ballot. Oh, how I wish he were, considering Arnold got elected with those nudes, and all these things, that are out there. Limbaugh probably could be elected president even in the condition he's in!  BUCHANAN: Matt, my inclination is to think if the folks are playing that Kerry bite when you hear this news about Rush Limbaugh it's going to come off as pretty cruel rather than funny. But let me ask you something. Now, six years ago apparently he's been this addiction a long time and we've heard from variety of sources that these OxyContins are associated with hearing loss. And my question is this, you know Rush if -- if something like this is actively and he must have known he must have talked to his doctor when he went to him about his hearing. He must have known these things were damaging his hearing his whole career his the king of talk radio, everything is on the line it suggests a really hellish addiction here does it not?  DRUDGE: You're hitting bull's-eyes, Pat. This is why these things are prescribed by doctors and not sold at our local Dennys or Amocos -- or wherever else we can buy them, in Palm Beach. It is a disturbing story in all directions, because, again, it is happening to such a beloved figure in this country Someone who has had so much success in this country. And if it happens to them, it can happen to us!  Now, he did perform for three months totally deaf, it should be noted, again, to separate the man from the broadcaster. I know that's hard to do, but his performance and his love of the craft, and the radio medium it's, you know, it's tantamount to an actor going on the stage everyday racked in pain or hooked on the pills! To me, it makes me want to reach out to him and say we love you Rush, we know you are going through terrible hell, but you're commitment to us, and to your beliefs -- you know, he is our voice. He is our brain, in so many respects; those of us who believe in less taxes and smaller government.  He has led the way, I refuse to think those beliefs are wrong because the man got into trouble along the way.  BUCHANAN: All right, let me ask about his core. As I told NBC tonight, I think Rush's true believers are going to stay with him these aren't' summertime soldiers, they don't expect sanctity but they do expect truth. And frankly, I think if Rush comes out and just lays it out the whole case the investigation the authorities I'll -- I think he'll do fine, but what is your feeling as a journalistic pro about whether he can come back and be the king of talk radio again?  DRUDGE: I've no doubt he is the Babe Ruth of talk radio. He could come back any time he wants. The problem is we want him clean; we want him strong, we want him new and improved -- and the best. And he can do it, if anybody can do it he can do it. If he can perform for three months, without hearing, on radio -- taking callers and everything else.  But it is a heartbreaking story because many of us, again, consider him family and I know it rips us. Because he is so clearly in pain. But the ability to do today's show knowing all this is swirling shows you he really is a pro, and a professional as far as this craft, the medium, goes.  PRESS: Matt Drudge just about out of time, I've got to jump in. You mentioned Rush believes. One of his beliefs he's stated over and over again as anybody into drugs, anybody into drug use anybody into drug sales, the harshest treatment send them up the river Rush says. After this experience do you think he might have a little softer more liberal attitude about people who get hooked on drugs?  DRUDGE: I think he is being sent up the river and I think we'll see him paddle back down.  On this, there's no law against being a hypocrite a few times in your life. And this industry is built on hypocrisy! Like I said I'm challenging the media tonight to empty their pockets!  PRESS: Thank you Matt Drudge, for the challenge, thank you for joining us here- snipped
drudgereport.com
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #13 posted by Virgil on October 12, 2003 at 08:34:17 PT
I have to say it
Last night SNL had a skit with a certain line it that just killed me. It did not involve the consumate media whore Rush, but I could not help but think of him when this line was said-- I'd call you a media whore but it would be an insult to whores.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #12 posted by FoM on October 12, 2003 at 08:21:30 PT
Prescription Drugs
Prescription drugs are drugs that a person has a legal prescription for from a family doctor. When a person gets more of those same drugs from sources other then their family doctor they become just plain old illegal narcotics. That's how I see the use of the word prescription.
Free Tommy Chong!!!
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #11 posted by Virgil on October 12, 2003 at 08:08:16 PT
Conversational currency
"addicted to prescription pain medication,"In a nation addicted to sports entertainment we see our language bent in its conversation. Where a woman will first ask of a man "Are you married?" a man probably ask "What do you do?" followed, if not preceded by, do you like sports? That is a mod form of spin. Of course, what he is asking references the watching of sports or sports entertainment. The inaccurate use of the word “prescription” to describe Rush’s black market activities is just spin. It does not get by an Inquiring mind. This will be the second time I say that the biggest aspect of this story is it breaks the silence. It gives us conversational currency as it breaks the soap opera and sports barriers that dominate casual exchanges of verbal conversation. So now we have our chance to branch on the above words of “prescription “ and “pain.” The door is open to speak of this centuries new aspirin being a cannabinoid and cannabinoids solving pain that even addictive and expensive opiates, synthetic and natural, cannot match. The time is now to talk it up.Cannabis Prohibition is a source of pain.Cannabis Prohibition is the source of pain and suffering. Regulated cannabis will cure that pain and end that suffering immediately. 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #10 posted by FoM on October 12, 2003 at 07:54:24 PT
Treeanna 
You're welcome. Maybe contact info will be available soon. It's very possible that his wife and family don't want e-mails. I can imagine those who dislike Tommy Chong could cause more hurt for the family if they had a public e-mail. I hope this makes sense. 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #9 posted by Treeanna on October 12, 2003 at 07:42:47 PT
Off topic to FoM
Just saw your note below about Tommy Chong and Taft Correctional. Thanks :)What I was on NORML about was that they said they were in communication with Tommy's wife regarding the address, and since they are profiteering in some respect hawking merchandise relating to his situation, it makes sense to me that he also receive moral/humanitarian support ;)The thing is that with prisons, you need to have the prisoner number (or bed assignment, etc) as part of the address. Just having the address of the institution is rarely enough :(Hopefully that info will be forthcoming soon!
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #8 posted by goneposthole on October 12, 2003 at 05:02:34 PT
lament of the dittohead
"Our beloved Rush has a drug problem, poor guy. He needs help. It happens to the best of us.""As for all those other shmucks who are the 'real' drug abusers, to hell with them. What have they ever done for anybody? They can rot in jail. Can't be without our Rush""Ditto" "Can you believe that Tommy Chong selling glass pipes?""Who would have ever thought that Tommy Chong would sell GLASS PIPES?""Good thing Rush wasn't selling them, too. He would be in big trouble with John Ashcroft?""He's lucky he was only using prescription medication." "Ditto"
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #7 posted by JR Bob Dobbs on October 12, 2003 at 03:58:06 PT
Free Tommy
Rush Limbaugh should be Tommy Chong's cellmate. There's your next Cheech and Chong movie right there...
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #6 posted by E_Johnson on October 12, 2003 at 01:53:01 PT
The Russian Drug War
In Russia the police are even more direct that in America when it comes to extracting their "value added" from the drug war:Drug Officers NabbedMOSCOW (MT) -- Internal affairs detectives have arrested five officers of the recently created federal anti-drug agency on suspicion of extortion, Interfax reported Thursday.The five officers of the anti-drug agency's Moscow branch tried to extort $10,000 from a Moscow businessman by threatening to open a criminal case against him for drug possession charges.The detectives tried to arrest the officers as they were accepting the bribe, but they managed to escape. The detectives tracked down the suspects and arrested them Monday, Interfax said.http://www.moscowtimes.ru/stories/2003/10/10/031.html
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #5 posted by global_warming on October 12, 2003 at 01:40:40 PT
Ask Tommy Chong
Ask Tommy Chong for his opinion, he's getting ready to settle in for 9 months.. and he didn't even have any drugs..
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #4 posted by Had Enough on October 12, 2003 at 00:53:25 PT
Good Stuff
Good piece by Mr. Miller. Thank You, and well done sir. The previous comments leave little more to be covered and many thanks to you too for your posts. I could only wish and hope that Rush and many others could see this. It might help him and the rest of society with this problem that many people have to deal with.God help us all, because we certainly need it.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #3 posted by Patrick on October 11, 2003 at 23:23:44 PT
Jail?
Powerful article. I agree that Rush doesn't need jail to beat his addiction. No one needs JAIL for smoking cannabis or shooting up heroin. JAIL is for people who do harm to others. I do hope that Rush has an epiphany while in rehab and becomes a spokesman for the end of prohibition. 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #2 posted by John Tyler on October 11, 2003 at 22:56:56 PT
Rush
I think the people who make comments here understand drugs and addiction better than the average person. From what I understand Rush came by his addiction from back surgery and inadequate pain control by his doctor. Most doctors are afraid of getting grief from the DEA over prescriptions, and pain control is a red flag for the DEA. So, Rush had to get his pain control on the sly, got addicted and lost his hearing too (from too many Vicodins). This is very sad for him. I really think that some people are more easily addicted than others. High powered people like Rush seem to be the most susceptible. I could feel more sorry for him if it were not for the fact that while he was popping his on pill by the thousands he was denigrating others with similar conditions, even advocating that they be sent to prison for their “criminal conduct”. Rush is an intelligent man. While he is in rehab., I hope he has the chance to reflect upon his own hypocrisy and shortsightedness in this area and to get a different perspective on the horror that is our country’s Drug War. As for his going to jail... one part of me would like that, to give him a taste of what he and his right wing pals have advocated for others but, as we all here know it would not benefit society or anyone in particular.  
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #1 posted by FoM on October 11, 2003 at 21:56:55 PT
Joel Miller
It's nice to see an article by him.
[ Post Comment ]


Post Comment