www.townhall.com/columnists/anncoulter/ac20031016.shtml
With half his brain tied behind his back Ann Coulter archive October 16, 2003 Print Send So liberals have finally found a drug addict they dont like. And unlike the Lackawanna Six those high-spirited young lads innocently seeking adventure in an al-Qaida training camp in Afghanistan liberals could find no excuses for Rush Limbaugh. After years of the mainstream media assuring us that Rush was a has-been, a nobody, yesterdays news the Rush painkiller story was front-page news last week. The airwaves and print media were on red alert with Rushs admission that, after an unsuccessful spinal operation a few years ago, he became addicted to powerful prescription painkillers. Rush Limbaughs misfortune is apparently a bigger story than his nearly $300 million radio contract signed two years ago. The New York Times didnt take notice of Rushs $300 million radio contract, but a few weeks later, put Bill Clintons comparatively measly $10 million book contract on its front page. Meanwhile, in the past week alone, LexisNexis has accumulated more than 50 documents with the words Rush Limbaugh and hypocrisy. That should make up for the 12 documents on his $300 million radio contract. The reason any conservatives failing is always major news is that it allows liberals to engage in their very favorite taunt: Hypocrisy! Inasmuch as liberals have no morals, they can sit back and criticize other people for failing to meet the standards that liberals simply renounce. By openly admitting to being philanderers, draft dodgers, liars, weasels and cowards, liberals avoid ever being hypocrites. At least Rush wasnt walking into church carrying a 10-pound Bible before rushing back to the Oval Office for sodomy with Monica Lewinsky. He wasnt enforcing absurd sexual harassment guidelines while dropping his pants in front of a half-dozen subordinates. Evidently, Clinton wasnt a hypocrite because no one was supposed to take seriously the notion that he respected women or believed in God. Indeed, Rush hasnt had much to say about drugs at all since that spinal operation. The Rush Limbaugh quote that has been endlessly recited in the last week to prove Rushs rank hypocrisy is this, made eight years ago: Drug use, some might say, is destroying this country. And we have laws against selling drugs, pushing drugs, using drugs, importing drugs.
And so if people are violating the law by doing drugs, they ought to be accused and they ought to be convicted and they ought to be sent up. What precisely are liberals proposing that Rush should have said to avoid their indignant squeals of hypocrisy? Announce his support for the wide and legal availability of a prescription painkiller that may have caused him to go deaf and nearly ruined his career and wrecked his life? Or is it simply that Rush should not have become addicted to painkillers in the first place? When a conservative can be the biggest thing in talk radio, earning $30 million a year and attracting 20 million devoted listeners every week all while addicted to drugs Ill admit liberals have reason to believe that conservatives are some sort of super-race, incorruptible by original sin. In liberals worldview, any conservative who is not Jesus Christ is ipso facto a hypocrite for not publicly embracing dissolute behavior the way liberals do. There is a fundamental difference between taking any drug legal, illegal, prescription, protected by the 21st Amendment or banned by Michael Bloomberg for kicks and taking a painkiller for pain . While slamming Rush, Harvard Law professor Alan Dershowitz recently told Wolf Blitzer, Generally, people who illegally buy prescription drugs are not prosecuted, whereas people who illegally buy cocaine and heroin are prosecuted. I havent checked with any Harvard Law professors, but Im pretty sure that, generally, adulterous drunks who drive off bridges and kill girls are prosecuted. Ah, but Teddy Kennedy supports adultery and public drunkenness so at least you cant call him a hypocrite! I have a rule about not feeling sorry for people worth $300 million, but Im feeling sentimental. Evan Thomas wrote a cover story on Rush for Newsweek this week that was so vicious it read like conservative satire. Thomas called Rush a schlub, socially ill at ease, an Elmer Gantry, an actor whose act has won over, or fooled, a lot of people. He compared Rush to the phony TV evangelist Jim Bakker and recommended that Rush start to make a virtue out of honesty. Liberals can lie under oath in legal proceedings and its a personal matter. Conservatives must scream their every failing from the rooftops or they are liars. As is standard procedure for profiles of conservatives, Newsweek gathered quotes on Rush from liberals, ex-wives and dumped dates. Covering himself, Thomas ruefully remarked that its hard to find many people who really know him. But I guess Newsweek didnt have room for the quotes I promptly sent back to the Newsweek researchers. I could have even corrected Newsweeks absurd account of how Rush met his current wife. Its kind of cute, too: She was a fan who began arguing with him about something he said on air. Thomas also made the astute observation that Rush Limbaugh has always had far more followers than friends. Needless to say, this floored those of us who were shocked to discover that Rush does not have 20 million friends. This week, Rush proved his motto: He really can beat liberals with half his brain tied behind his back.
|
http://csua.com/feed/