TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- My Challenge ... You Liberals vs Rush Limbaugh - Have What It Takes?
Pages (6): « 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 »

^^^It's pretty clear from the agreement that he's not guilty of anything under the law (once he finishes the treatment period).

So using his own words against him holds no water here. He's not guilty. This agreement isn't an admission of guilt. In fact, like I said; It exonorates him.

Thanks again for proving me right tonight two times in a row on two different topics in two different threads, OCC, lol.

quote:

Originally posted by donnybrasco ^^^It's pretty clear from the agreement that he's not guilty of anything under the law (once he finishes the treatment period). So using his own words against him holds no water here. He's not guilty. This agreement isn't an admission of guilt. In fact, like I said; It exonorates him. Thanks again for proving me right tonight two times in a row on two different topics in two different threads, OCC, lol.

Thanks again for evading both arguments twice in a row. Dude ... he's a felony drug user ... he's a goddamn addict:

quote:

Limbaugh admits addiction to pain medication Saturday, October 11, 2003 Posted: 0252 GMT (10:52 AM HKT) Source: National Household Survey on Drug Abuse (CNN) -- Rush Limbaugh announced on his radio program Friday that he is addicted to pain medication and that he is checking himself into a treatment center immediately. "You know I have always tried to be honest with you and open about my life," the conservative commentator said in a statement on his nationally syndicated radio show. "I need to tell you today that part of what you have heard and read is correct. I am addicted to prescription pain medication." Law enforcement sources said last week that Limbaugh's name had come up during an investigation into a black market drug ring in Palm Beach County, Florida. The sources said that authorities were looking into the illegal sale of the prescription drugs OxyContin and hydrocodone. Limbaugh, who has a residence in Palm Beach County, was named by sources as a possible buyer. He was not the focus of the investigation, according to the sources. The radio talk show host said he first became addicted to painkillers "some years ago," following spinal surgery. However, he added, "the surgery was unsuccessful and I continued to have severe pain in my lower back and also in my neck due to herniated discs. I am still experiencing that pain." He had tried to break his dependence in the past and has checked himself into medical facilities twice before, he said. Limbaugh said that he is "not making any excuses" and that he is "no role model." "I refuse to let anyone think I am doing something great here, when there are people you never hear about, who face long odds and never resort to such escapes. They are the role models," he said. He would not provide details of his current problem, citing the ongoing investigation. "At the present time, the authorities are conducting an investigation, and I have been asked to limit my public comments until this investigation is complete." Sources said the investigation began nine months ago when Wilma Cline, a former housekeeper at Limbaugh's oceanfront Palm Beach mansion, approached authorities. "I will only say that the stories you have read and heard contain inaccuracies and distortions, which I will clear up when I am free to speak about them," he said. Limbaugh has not been charged with any crime. Earlier this month, Limbaugh resigned from his position as football commentator on ESPN after making remarks that critics considered racist. Limbaugh said he left the show "Sunday NFL Countdown" to protect the network from the uproar caused by his statement that Philadelphia Eagles quarterback Donovan McNabb was overrated because the media wanted to see a black quarterback succeed. He did not apologize for the comments and does not consider them to be racist remarks, merely an observation of the media's reaction to McNabb's success. The revelation about Limbaugh's possible addiction to OxyContin appeared the same week he resigned from ESPN. In the statement read by Limbaugh Friday, he did not name the pain medication he said he's addicted to. Dr. Drew Pinsky, an addiction specialist in Pasadena, California, told CNN that if Limbaugh is addicted to OxyContin, "We're really talking about opiate addiction. The withdrawal is miserable and painful and it takes a long time to recover." The disease is insidious, Pinksy said. "It's a progressive disease, and when it progresses, the house of cards falls." Still, he said, "I've seen miracle recoveries." Limbaugh is one of the most recognized talk show hosts in the nation and also one of the most controversial. In 2001, he signed a nine-year contract with Premiere Radio Networks, which syndicates his show to nearly 600 stations, for a total salary package reported to exceed $200 million. It is estimated that nearly 20 million people listen to Limbaugh's show daily. Also in 2001, Limbaugh learned he had a hearing problem. He was diagnosed in May and told his listeners in October that he was almost entirely deaf as a result of an autoimmune inner-ear disease. He said he had lost 100 percent hearing in his left ear and 80 percent in his right ear. He successfully had a cochlear implant placed in his left ear to restore his hearing. He announced in January 2002 that he could hear his own radio show "for the first time in nearly four months via a medical marvel." Until then, he relied solely on a TelePrompTer and his staff's assistance to understand his callers.

Are you saying conservative ideaology only matters when it can legally skirt the law?? What the fuck kind of conservative are you??? Why don't you tell me the principles that are at stake and how rush is adhering to these principles?? Please answer ANY of my questions. In all of your responses you've answered nothing, been so goddamned vague, and you've explained nothing to us at all. It's rediculous. Oh yea ... "lol" as you so eloquentely put it

quote:

Originally posted by occrider Are you saying conservative ideaology only matters when it can legally skirt the law?? What the fuck kind of conservative are you??? Why don't you tell me the principles that are at stake and how rush is adhering to these principles?? Please answer ANY of my questions. In all of your responses you've answered nothing, been so goddamned vague, and you've explained nothing to us at all. It's rediculous. Oh yea ... "lol" as you so eloquentely put it

It seems like political principles always yield to self interst for a lot of people on both liberal and conservatives agendas.

Re: My Challenge ... You Liberals vs Rush Limbaugh - Have What It Takes?

quote:

Originally posted by tiesto14 Here are some good topics u guys love: 1. Wiretaps 2. WMD 3. Oil 4. Iran

Well, I sure do have strong opinions on moral and political matters that could be phrased so that they would include one or more of these four words, but how on Earth would I know what kind of debate I would enter if I came on the show and blurted "oil!"? The limited supply, and why Bush should be lynched for not waking up to the realities until now? The evidence for and against the hypothesis that Bush went to war over oil? If so, whether it was a good idea? If you want someone to argue with Rush, you need to establish cearly which of Rush's views that you want attacked. This is way to vague a challenge.

If you drummed up a clear cut challenge, involving a proposition that I could actually support (i.e. gays should be allowed to marry/remove all benefits for married couples, the ratification of the kyoto protocol), maybe I would have taken your offer. However, I do fear that the language barrier would be my downfall - sometimes I need time to formulate correct sentences/pronounce things correctly. Unless I'm drunk, that is.

This thread is almost as bad as the Pres. doing his little for us/against us act with policy. I realize why you guys want someone to debat Rush instead of yourselves. You can't even think for long enough to realize that your logic of, "do this or you're just another liberal puss," is totally flawed.

For example, I'd get on and debate Rush, but I have something called a job. This job requires me to do work, so I can get paid and provide for my family. Therefore, I can't sit next to the phone for 4 hours on the busiest day of my work week waiting in anticipation of maybe getting a chance to talk to Rush when chances are his engineer would instead open the mic to people that would rather spend ten minutes kissing his ass than tearing him a new ass. Find me a political talk radio show that isn't structured in a way to make the host sound like a badass, and I'll show you a radio broadcaster that wants to fail.

Besides, if I really wanted to waste a couple hours of my day debating about politics with people like Rush, I could do it on here without having to sit on hold for 4 hours and wait to see if I'm the lucky caller. Oh wait a tick, I already do that!

That's early Saturday morning my time, which means that the chances of me being either incredibly drunk or sleeping when his show airs are going to be pretty close to 100%. Tell you what though, Tiesto14, if you want to post of transcript of Rush's that you believe is beyond the powers of us forum liberals to debunk, please post it here and I'd be more than happy to post my arguments against it - perhaps we can even email it to him and see if he actually replies. If he really is the bastion of rational discourse that you suppose him to be, however, then his arguments should stand up to textual scrutiny as well as they stand up to verbal scrutiny though, right?

quote:

Originally posted by donnybrasco I think Pay Pal has a Buyer Protection Policy that would cover you. So much for that theory.

Hm, and how exactly does that work? I've never used pay pal before.

Btw, I don't know what Rush's opinions on Iran are, but I suppose he wants the US forces to go in there, with what I pretty much agree should be done. As for the other issues, like WMD or Kyoto protocol or something similar, I really have no problem calling as long as I'll be sure I'll get something for it.

quote:

Originally posted by occrider Thanks again for evading both arguments twice in a row. Dude ... he's a felony drug user ... he's a goddamn addict:

"Limbaugh has not been charged with any crime."

He's an addict, but he's certainly not a felon. You're confusing the two.

So he's not living up to his ideology? Wow, the guy has surgeries that leave him in pain, so he gets addicted to the pain killers. Like we've NEVER seen this happen in America before. It's not like he was taking the stuff for thrills.

OCC: I wish you'd stop masquerading as a "Conservative", hop on the Democrat's Jack-Ass and embrace your left-leaning views. I don't know why you kid yourself.

And I love the excuses that keep popping up in this thread as to why people won't call. "Well, I'd call, but............" LOL. TFF!!

quote:

Originally posted by DrUg_Tit0 Hm, and how exactly does that work? I've never used pay pal before.

I've never had to use the Pay Pal Buyer Protection either, and I'm sure it would probably be one of the more interesting claims that they ever had should there ever be a problem, but basically, it would all come down to proof;

Tiesto would pay up front to anyone who agreed to do the show and to the day the call is to be placed. Then if you didn't, I believe he could dispute it as the "Buyer" of your service (service being your call to Rush). As the "Seller" of your service, it would be on you to record the program with proof that you had called. I'd say post here the day before the call in, tell us the topic you're going to speak on, the name you're going to use (doesn't have to be your real name), then DO NOT edit that post! This will be proof later for Tiesto and everyone else that you did in fact call in as you said you would, and you thus won't be able to claim someone else's call as your own.

This could all be written down on paper and signed by the "Seller" as further proof for Pay Pal, should there ever be a dispute. I'd also suggest that Tiesto be a good sport and allow you a window of several days or even a week to make the call, seeing as how I'm sure it can be difficult to get on the show sometimes.

If, at the end of the week, the Seller could not get on the show, it's a simple matter of charging the money back to Tiesto's Pay Pal account .

Hmm..and do I need a credit card for that or can they send money to a home address?

quote:

Originally posted by DrUg_Tit0 Hmm..and do I need a credit card for that or can they send money to a home address?

it's a wire transfer to your account....you would need at least a debit card.

quote:

Originally posted by donnybrasco "Limbaugh has not been charged with any crime." He's an addict, but he's certainly not a felon. You're confusing the two.

Possesion in this instance constitutes a felony. The only, and I stress the only part, reason why that didn't happen is because he confessed and used his position to skirt any legal action. It's kind of sad that a normal everyday person like us being caught in the same situation wouldn't have this option, yet he did.

quote:

Originally posted by DrUg_Tit0 Hmm..and do I need a credit card for that or can they send money to a home address?

You can set up a Pay Pal using just your bank account and have money sent there. That's how I do almost all my transactions. I don't know if a CC is required as a secondary source for making transfers, but I'm pretty sure it's not.

You seriously considering taking up the challenge DT?

quote:

Originally posted by WM2 Possesion in this instance constitutes a felony. The only, and I stress the only part, reason why that didn't happen is because he confessed and used his position to skirt any legal action. It's kind of sad that a normal everyday person like us being caught in the same situation wouldn't have this option, yet he did.

No, it's more like the D.A. didn't have enough evidence to make a sure-thing solid conviction, so he struck a deal.

Still makes the man innocent in the eyes of the law. Plea Bargains happen every day. You don't have to be special.

You must have very little knowledge of the legal system making claims like that.

Plea bargaining requires one to admit fault in return for reduced sentencing in order to avert a legal battle. Your precious leader admitted fault in order to get a slap on the wrist. If the DA didn't have enough proof, why did Rush admit fault instead of going to trial and fighting these charges?

In short, he is considered by the law as to have committed a crime, yet since he admitted to it instead of challenging it at trial he recieved a lesser sentence. He's still guilty. The fact that he admitted to it himself kind of makes it obvious.

quote:

Originally posted by donnybrasco You can set up a Pay Pal using just your bank account and have money sent there. That's how I do almost all my transactions. I don't know if a CC is required as a secondary source for making transfers, but I'm pretty sure it's not. You seriously considering taking up the challenge DT?

Well..wouldn't you for a 100$? I'm just concerned if Rush would let me come on air or not since I probably won't be the only person calling...

Setting up a Pay Pal account is pretty easy. It will take a few days though for your address to be verified before you can start using it.

And I think you can get on Rush, you just have to be strong in your convictions on the tpoic for which you wish to speak, and be sure that you sound energetic and don't talk to slow or sound scatter-brained when you're speaking to the screeners. You have to impress them.

WOOHOO!

Tiesto may have a challenger!

quote:

Originally posted by donnybrasco Tiesto may have a challenger!

nah he wont do it.

quote:

Originally posted by donnybrasco "Limbaugh has not been charged with any crime."

Right ... and OJ Simpson was acquitted for murder ... and it's ok for kids to be around Michael Jackson alone ... because you and I both know that our legal system is completely flawless . Read between the lines, Limbaugh does not have to be charged with a crime to be a drug user. HE ADMITTED TO BEING A DRUG USER. Please explain to us how his own words, where he said our country is too soft on drug users, does not apply to him??

quote:

He's an addict, but he's certainly not a felon. You're confusing the two.

Are you saying he acquired the drugs he was addicted to legally? Are you saying that when he was imbibing in prescription drugs that he had a prescription? In Rush's perfect world where our society wasn't so soft on drug users he would be convicted and sent to jail.

quote:

So he's not living up to his ideology? Wow, the guy has surgeries that leave him in pain, so he gets addicted to the pain killers. Like we've NEVER seen this happen in America before. It's not like he was taking the stuff for thrills.

Oh boo fucking hoo. Like Rush gives a shit about the poor black kid who gets addicted to crack early on in life and lives a life of crime to support his drug habit. Wow, rich white guy has surgery, decides he likes the pain pills he's taking so much that he continues to take them after he doesn't need them anymore. I'm just crying up a river for him here. Damn straight he's not living up to his ideology. His ideology is that drug users should go to jail. His ideology is that our country is too soft on drug users ... white drug users no less. Is there any doubt that he's not living up to his ideology?

quote:

OCC: I wish you'd stop masquerading as a "Conservative", hop on the Democrat's Jack-Ass and embrace your left-leaning views. I don't know why you kid yourself.

I'm not a "conservative" according to the definition of a conservative today. I was a conservative according to the definition of one in the 90's. My political philosophy hasn't changed ... I can't help it if the Republicans have shifted to the democratic platform of big government growth and nation building. If my views are what's left than nearly every republican in the 90's was left according to your definition.

I'm not reading between any lines. I'm telling you that it doesn't look to me like they have enough evidence to even bring charges (un-like OJ and Michael Jackson, or even Robert Blake)...that's a loooooong way from these other more severe cases you're comparing him to where charges were at least brought.

As for his hard-line stance on durg-users, I don't happen to agree with it, but I think there's a difference between getting hooked on pain medication because you are in physical pain versus getting high because you like to smoke crack.

If the DA wasn't bringing charges against him he wouldn't have admitted fault. There would be no reason for it. Any legal council would tell you the same.

quote:

Originally posted by WM2 If the DA wasn't bringing charges against him he wouldn't have admitted fault. There would be no reason for it. Any legal council would tell you the same.

He didn't admit fault. In fact, he plead not guilty, right?

Wrong. Unless I live in an alternate universe, Rush not only admitted fault, he did so during a broadcast on his own show.

Fault of being an Addict, not of being legaly guilty, according to the quotes OCC put up. He also said he'd have more to say about the issue and some distortions that are being put forth when he was allowed to (later).

I think you do live on Krypton after-all.

How can you be an addict, but not be legally guilty when the addict part requires possession and possession alone in this instance is a felony? He can call it whatever he wants, use his influence to save as much of his reputation as he wants, and cloud his responsibility in the matter to his listeners as much as he wants, but he's still an addict and in this case you can't be an addict without the pills. Having the pills is a felony.

You keep skirting the fact that he is indeed guilty, and when is this "later" time going to happen. This was three years ago, so does later mean never? If he's so innocent and misjudged why didn't he just come clean and lay it all bare to be examined?

Because it looks to me like he has to complete this agreement first which requires a period of re-hab and check-ups.

I'm assuming that once that period is over, and he is no longer bound by any agreements, he can speak out on the matter.

So you're making the assumption that part of his plea bargain(which again proves his guilt like I demonstrated earlier)requires him to keep his mouth shut on the entire issue, and that as soon as his rehab is complete he'll come clean. Call me a skeptic, but I don't buy it. He's not going to talk because he knows he fucked up and in the hypocritical destroyed reputation way.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.