Rush gives up drugs — and logic

Rush gives up drugs — and logic
: Getaloada this fractured logic from Rush Limbaugh, when confronted on his show about his hypocrisy:

“It’s not hypocritical because my behavior doesn’t determine the value of right and wrong – nobody’s does,” Limbaugh told listeners….

“If I were to admit I’m a hypocrite, then I’m going to be disqualified from being able to say what I think is right and wrong.

“I’m not going to let anybody take that away from me,” he said.

“Whatever I did I did, but it doesn’t change what right and wrong are.”

Limbaugh told his estimated 15 million listeners that “some people” may be trying to brand him a hypocrite for political reasons.

“The liberals do the same thing with defense,” he said. “They try to say that people who didn’t serve in the military can’t talk about defense. People who wish to be exempt from any moral judgment [are] taking the occasion of my story to try to weaken the whole concept of right and wrong by taking shots at me,” Limbaugh said.

That makes NO FRIGGING SENSE! It pains me too much to parse it.

So let’s just get this straight, Rushy boy: You said that people engaging in the illegal traffic of drugs should go to jail no matter who they are, right?

And you apparently engaged in the illegal traffic of drugs (so your housekeeper says… and besides, why would you have to go to rehab if you didn’t buy more drugs than you should have?).

And you’re not in jail.

Seems you should have turned yourself in, no?

If you think drugs and wrong and you illegally trafficked in drugs then you are wrong, right?

Man, I have such a headache from all that advanced logic, I think I need a pain reliever.

: From the Letterman monologue: “Everyone is getting the cold or flu. Rush Limbaugh had his housekeeper go buy him some Nyquil.”

  • http://sethf.com/ Seth Finkelstein

    Hmmm … after thinking about it, this is actually pretty funny. I think it DOES parse out to something interestingly paradoxical,basically a version of “I always lie, I am lying now”.
    Something like: “If I were a hypocrite, that would mean my actions contradicted my words. So I couldn’t admit I were a hypocrite, because admitting it (words) would undermine my being it (actions)”.
    Akin to “Some people say I lie all the time. But if I lied all the time, I couldn’t admit it, because then admitting it would be telling the truth.”
    And a compulsive liar could indeed logically consistently make this meta-statement.
    Though I doubt he means it all in this way, it’s still amusing.

  • http://jimtreacher.com Jim Treacher

    Does he have to go through a metal detector to get into his studio? I don’t think I’d want to work anywhere within ricochet range.

  • button

    I thought he meant that his behavior doesn’t change the ideals of Right and Wrong.
    I don’t have a problem with that. I don’t understand your problem with it.
    People who haven’t served in the military can have opinions about many things, but they may not have much credibility about some aspects of military practices.

  • Jeremy

    Maybe he just doesn’t know what “hypocrite” means?
    Clearly, if he rants about illegal drugs and the people that use them, yet at the same time, takes them himself, he is a hypocrite.
    His behavior might not change what he considers right & wrong. But he clearly thinks that using drugs is wrong, and said so often, yet used them himself. That’s the very definition of hypocrisy.
    He just doesn’t want to admit he is one. So he’s trying to rationalize it.

  • Dennis Paul

    1.You have to go back to 1995 to find Rush’s ONE quote from his TV show about drug users going to jail and you can’t even paraphrase it correctly, let only provide the context of the quote.
    2.Who, besides you and the housekeeper, says he APPARENTLY engaged in illegal drug trafficking?
    3.“why would you have to go to rehab if you didn’t buy more drugs than you should have?”
    HUH? So, I guess you imply that a certain level of drug usage is OK? What level would that be?
    Personally, I think Rush’s statement makes perfect sense. The messenger of truth may be flawed but the truth does not change because of it.

  • http://starhawk.net Starhawk

    I thought traffic was what the middle man did not the end user?
    In this case it would be the housekeeper who was doing the trafficing.

  • http://tommangan.net/printsthechaff tom mangan

    Rush is an entertainer who always made his fortune by telling his listeners what they want to hear.(hardly orginal, it’s how all content finds an audience). Now he’s telling them they don’t need to consider him a hypocrite, and he’s right, they don’t. The voice on the radio is a media personality who shares the same name, but it’s not the same guy. This is one of the reasons we need to get over our preoccupation with celebs, because we identify almost totally with the public personna rather than the actual person, and the personna is invariably a fiction concocted to maximize income potential. I think I heard someone say this already: The people surprised there is a difference between the public Rush and the private one are the same ones who are surprised to learn pro wrestling is fixed.

  • http://youngcurmudgeon.typepad.com/blog Eric Deamer

    Pretty simple actually: Just because we can’t live up to our ideals of right and wrong doesn’t change what right and wrong themsleves are. That’s all.

  • http://tommangan.net/printsthechaff tom mangan

    Another simple possibility: people setting unreasonable standards of right and wrong.

  • http://www.buzzmachine.com Jeff Jarvis

    Tom, Eric:
    No, this is quite simple: Rush set his own standards and then failed to live up to them himself. That’s hypocrisy. Look it up in the dictionary, under ‘R.’

  • http://www.modempool.com/nucleardann/blogspace/blog.htm Dann

    Jeff-
    And being guilty of hypocrisy ought to cause everyone one it ignore everything Rush has to say from here on out, right?
    Remember that bit about all have fallen short of the glory of God? ‘All’ includes Rush.
    I still think that trying to bounce him off the air (or cut his listenership or otherwise damage his impact) is a sorry replacement for the better objective of finally having a rational and national conversation about our failed War on Drugs.
    -Regards

  • http://youngcurmudgeon.typepad.com Eric Deamer

    I’m not arguing that it’s not hypocrisy, merely that it doesn’t speak at all to the issue of whether or not his views on the drug war are wrong, which is what I think he’s trying to say. (I actually have no idea what his views on that subject are, other than what’s been reported here based on what was reported on Howard Stern. If they are as unyielding as you say, I would certainly disagree with them, but the fact that he himself has a drug problem would have no bearing on my disagreement whatsoever). To say that one must be perfect in order to argue for a certain stanard of behavior is ridiculous. That’s the logic of a teenager who says that because his parents probably did some wild things when they were teenagers their rules are invalid.

  • Puce

    lardie talktalk as pils goble ALL MAK EKSUSES

  • http://dubitoks.tripod.com cj

    I’m with Jeff on this one. If I understand his position correctly, it is that being a hypocrite LESSENS one’s credibility.
    It’s all well and good to say Rush was arguing “right” and that “right” has not changed (in a viewer’s perception).
    However, I don’t see how you can LOGICALLY say that Rush can on one hand condemn illegal drug usage and be a proponent of “throw the key away” and on the other hand take the tack that “his” situation is different. From what I’ve read (I don’t listen to him), he certainly didn’t argue for a case-by-case assessment of individual situations.
    Condemnation of hypocrisy is one of the few “duh’s” left to us. Please do not send it the way of political correctness.