Rush To Judgment
By Tony DiPasquale (10/16/03)
Rush Limbaugh shocked the political community this week when he admitted that he was addicted to prescription drugs. Some of the opposition, such as Alan Combs, have been quite supportive of Rush in his current predicament, others, like Ed Asner, have shown themselves for what the really are, partisans at any cost. While attacks from those on the “left-side” of the isle can be expected, how should those of us on the right respond?
First of all, it would be improper for ANY of us to comment on allegations of criminal wrongdoing by Rush at this time. Eventually, when more information surfaces, then, and only then, will an analysis of the entire situation be appropriate. Hopefully, many in the political arena will put their ambitions aside and wait until more is learned, rather than descending upon Rush, and his integrity, like a bunch of vultures on fresh road-kill.
Now to the point: Rush startled everyone when he informed his radio audience on Friday, October 10, that he would be taking a leave of absence from his golden EIB microphone at the end of the day’s broadcast in order to admit himself into a treatment center. The “Father of Conservative thought”, both fiscally and socially, was now causing many to question his integrity and honor. Well Rush fans, no such conflict is necessary.
According to Rush, following unsuccessful back surgery, prescription painkillers were prescribed to him. OxyContin, the drug Rush is allegedly addicted to, is a brand name of oxycodone, a drug used to alleviate mild to severe pain. Some are seemingly trying to equate this drug with the likes of illegal drugs, which serve no medicinal purposes. Even the United States Food and Drug Administration’s Center for Drug Evaluation & Research Taking distinguishes the two:
“OxyContin daily can result in physical dependence, a condition in which the body shows signs of narcotic withdrawal if the OxyContin is stopped suddenly. This is not the same thing as addiction, which represents a situation in which people obtain and take narcotics because of a psychological need, and not just to treat a legitimate painful condition.” (United States Food and Drug Administration)
So what does this say of Rush? It says that a society should not blame a patient who subsequently becomes dependant upon a doctor prescribed drug, as they would a person who chooses to use a drug for the purpose of getting “high”. Anyone of us, under similar circumstances, could find ourselves in much the same predicament as Rush.
Certainly, an argument can be made that it took a “scandal” to make Rush willing to confront his problem. The truth is, none of us know the extent with which Rush was trying to combat this problem prior to all of this publicity. He has stated that he has previously checked himself into medical facilities in attempt to break this dependency. Rush has never given us any reason to doubt his word; as such we have to believe that he has been attempting to defeat this addiction.
By Rush being forthright about his problem, and insisting that he is not a victim, he has come to solidify his conservative stance. Not once did Rush insinuate that he was a victim, a position that would have been at odds with a conservative ideology. Additionally, many conservatives scoff at the notion that drug addiction is a disease. A disease, as espoused by many conservatives, is a symptom or illness, beyond which the patient can control or had any part in causing. Whether it is Rush, or someone else, substance abuse is caused by an action on the part of the actor, and CAN be alleviated by discontinuing the use of the drug. Obviously this is easier said than done. Regardless, drug addiction cannot rise to the level of disease status, thus equating it with legitimate diseases such as diabetes, where the patient, despite his actions, cannot change his condition.
Still, there are the likes of Ed Asner, who want to defeat their opposition at all cost. They should be ashamed of themselves; both for their hypocrisy towards those addicted to drugs and for their failure to acknowledge the wrongdoing by people who share their political ideology. Even so, this incident is not the equivalent of Marion Barry’s buying cocaine, President Nixon’s covering up of Watergate, or President Clinton’s lying under oath. In all those circumstances, the conduct was illegal from the start; the same cannot be said of Rush.
With the strength and determination Rush has shown over his career, it is certain he will return an improved man. This does not make Rush a hero; he has already accomplished that with all that he has done for the conservative movement and talk radio. Instead, it only proves that he too, has his failings. Good luck Rush.
Cited sources
U.S. Food And Drug Administration: Center for Drug Evaluation & Research website: Retrieved October 12, 2003, from
http://www.fda.gov/cder/drug/infopage/oxycontin/oxycontin-qa.htm#addict
(Printer friendly version) Email: Tony DiPasquale
