Predicto Posted June 27, 2006 Share Posted June 27, 2006 Wow, you really think I was "hostile"? Argumentative, maybe, but there was no name-calling or anything of the kind. As opposed to one person who suggested that I was attached to RLs genitals.And I might suggest that you as a self-described "true-blue liberal" might not have the best perspective on who actually is liberal. Idealogues don't always have the most objective perspective. Of course, the same could be said about me. Fine, if "argumentative" makes you feel better, by all means use that. Oh, I have a pretty good idea of what is going on, despite my liberal blinders. Several of the people you have labeled as liberals have argued with me about enough topics over the years that I feel I have a rough handle on their views. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waterwagen Posted June 27, 2006 Share Posted June 27, 2006 Fine, if "argumentative" makes you feel better, by all means use that.Oh, I have a pretty good idea of what is going on, despite my liberal blinders. Several of the people you have labeled as liberals have argued with me about enough topics over the years that I feel I have a rough handle on their views. Maybe so. Then again, being on the far end of the spectrum makes everyone look like they are skewed in the other direction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted June 27, 2006 Share Posted June 27, 2006 Viagra threatens Limbaugh plea dealUnder the deal reached last month with prosecutors, Limbaugh was not to be arrested for any infraction for 18 months in exchange for authorities deferring a charge of "doctor shopping." http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/06/27/limbaugh.viagra.ap/index.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevenaa Posted June 27, 2006 Share Posted June 27, 2006 http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/06/27/limbaugh.viagra.ap/index.html "Limbaugh's doctor had prescribed the Viagra, but it was "labeled as being issued to the physician rather than Mr. Limbaugh for privacy purposes," Roy Black, Limbaugh's attorney, said in a statement." Ironic, isn't it. Have your doctor use his name to protect your privacy, only to have it blow up completely in your face. He will be the serious butt of many a late night talkshow. Again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted June 27, 2006 Share Posted June 27, 2006 "Limbaugh's doctor had prescribed the Viagra, but it was "labeled as being issued to the physician rather than Mr. Limbaugh for privacy purposes," Roy Black, Limbaugh's attorney, said in a statement."Ironic, isn't it. Have your doctor use his name to protect your privacy, only to have it blow up completely in your face. He will be the serious butt of many a late night talkshow. Again. Yeah lol that is ironic. I wonder if it's legal. Anyone know? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted June 27, 2006 Share Posted June 27, 2006 Maybe so. Then again, being on the far end of the spectrum makes everyone look like they are skewed in the other direction. Can't disagree with that. Of course, I'm not on the far end of the spectrum. All the rest of you are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waterwagen Posted June 27, 2006 Share Posted June 27, 2006 Can't disagree with that. Of course, I'm not on the far end of the spectrum. All the rest of you are. Same for me! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted June 27, 2006 Share Posted June 27, 2006 "Limbaugh's doctor had prescribed the Viagra, but it was "labeled as being issued to the physician rather than Mr. Limbaugh for privacy purposes," Roy Black, Limbaugh's attorney, said in a statement."Ironic, isn't it. Have your doctor use his name to protect your privacy, only to have it blow up completely in your face. He will be the serious butt of many a late night talkshow. Again. Next time he should get it from Ron Mexico. Seriously, I've heard it's common for celebrities to have "secret identities" for various reasons. Mel Gibson might not want the name on his credit card to be "Mel Gibson". If he sells a used car, he might not want his name on the title as "seller". (So, maybe he'll have an attorney sell the car.) I have no doubt, for example, that when Bill Shatner is doing a Trekkie convention, he doesn't register at the hotel under the name "Shatner". (Still doesn't mean it's not funny. Just not necessarily criminal.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted June 27, 2006 Share Posted June 27, 2006 Seriously, I've heard it's common for celebrities to have "secret identities" for various reasons. Mel Gibson might not want the name on his credit card to be "Mel Gibson". If he sells a used car, he might not want his name on the title as "seller". (So, maybe he'll have an attorney sell the car.) I have no doubt, for example, that when Bill Shatner is doing a Trekkie convention, he doesn't register at the hotel under the name "Shatner". (Still doesn't mean it's not funny. Just not necessarily criminal.) I'm no expert in this area, but I can see good reasons why the rule might be different for prescription drugs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan T. Posted June 27, 2006 Share Posted June 27, 2006 I'll even go so far as to point out that there's at least one scenario in which nothing illegal happened, here. Scenario: Rush goes to Dominica with Tom, Dick, and Harry. Dick's prescription accidentally wound up in Rush's luggage. In your scenario, it was inevitable that he ends up with Dick's Viagra. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Sick Posted June 27, 2006 Share Posted June 27, 2006 "Limbaugh's doctor had prescribed the Viagra, but it was "labeled as being issued to the physician rather than Mr. Limbaugh for privacy purposes," Roy Black, Limbaugh's attorney, said in a statement."Ironic, isn't it. Have your doctor use his name to protect your privacy, only to have it blow up completely in your face. He will be the serious butt of many a late night talkshow. Again. Isn't it ironic that the measures that allowed invasions of privacy, probably in the name of the war on terror, are the ones that made this action necessary? (Or it's just a coverup.) Nothing wrong with a little sex tourism down in the Dominican. Even drug addicts need a good release now and then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinz1972 Posted June 28, 2006 Share Posted June 28, 2006 Nice attitude. I haven't listened to Limbaugh in 10 years. Got tired of his schtick. On the other hand, you liberals sound as if you listen to him every day. ann coulter,is that you????? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Punani2 Posted June 28, 2006 Share Posted June 28, 2006 Yeah lol that is ironic. I wonder if it's legal. Anyone know? All they would have to do is check his medical records and see if his Dr. noted that he prescribed him the medication. On the legality of being prescribed a medication under a different name I'm not sure. he should have just used his own name like everyone else. If by chance, someone leaked that he was on Viagra it would be pretty easy to find out who it was and they would be facing criminal charges and prob a civil case by Limbaugh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thiebear Posted June 28, 2006 Share Posted June 28, 2006 Nothing wrong with a little sex tourism down in the Dominican. Someone has been perusing the "out there" liberal blogs.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chomerics Posted June 28, 2006 Share Posted June 28, 2006 As much as I dispise the man, there is nothing wrong with what he did, and eeven though it MAY be illegal (we still don't know) he has every right to carry viagra. i mean Physicians give out FREE samples of the drug, and it is not a controlled substance like prescription pain meds or narcotics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
webnarc Posted June 28, 2006 Share Posted June 28, 2006 As much as I dispise the man, there is nothing wrong with what he did, and eeven though it MAY be illegal (we still don't know) he has every right to carry viagra. i mean Physicians give out FREE samples of the drug, and it is not a controlled substance like prescription pain meds or narcotics. I don't mean to pump some blood into this dead wood, but Rush isn't married, so why does he need Viagra? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@DCGoldPants Posted June 28, 2006 Share Posted June 28, 2006 I think the bottom line is this. Did he violate the terms of his previous agreement? Yes or No? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted June 28, 2006 Share Posted June 28, 2006 I don't mean to pump some blood into this dead wood, . . . That's what the Viagra's for. (You asked for it.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TradeTheBeal! Posted June 28, 2006 Share Posted June 28, 2006 Rush went to the DR to engage in international prostitution. The Viagra was essential to Rush maximizing his vacation opportunities. He knew what he was doing and hhe got caught. Good thing he decided to leave the weed behind! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted June 28, 2006 Share Posted June 28, 2006 Rush went to the DR to engage in international prostitution. The Viagra was essential to Rush maximizing his vacation opportunities. He knew what he was doing and hhe got caught.Good thing he decided to leave the weed behind! Um, you got anything to support that claim? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Punani2 Posted June 28, 2006 Share Posted June 28, 2006 I don't mean to pump some blood into this dead wood, but Rush isn't married, so why does he need Viagra? I thought he just got married not to long ago? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TradeTheBeal! Posted June 28, 2006 Share Posted June 28, 2006 Um, you got anything to support that claim? Common Sense, intuition, and the "nod and wink" Limbaugh pulled yesterday when asked about it. I could be wrong but I don't think so. Time will tell. http://www.wired.com/news/ebiz/0,1272,44888,00.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waterwagen Posted July 5, 2006 Share Posted July 5, 2006 An interesting development for all the Limbaugh haters who jumped on him. http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/07/05/limbaugh.viagra.ap/index.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barney B Posted July 5, 2006 Share Posted July 5, 2006 In related news, Lucifer, the Prince of Darkness, has been acquitted of a citation he'd recently received for not keeping his dog, Cerberus, on a leash. "Look, of course I'm not guilty," said the unrepentant Beelzebub. "The dog has three heads, for crying out loud, and I had one of those heads properly leashed. What am I supposed to do, use three leashes on a three-headed dog? I might be the Lord of the Underworld, but I've only got two hands." A local magistrate agreed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinthemboys Posted July 5, 2006 Share Posted July 5, 2006 An interesting development for all the Limbaugh haters who jumped on him. http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/07/05/limbaugh.viagra.ap/index.html The funny thing is, libs could read this til their eyes fell out of their heads and it still wouldnt sink into their thick heads. They would all just remember " the time rush got caught with viagra". Its actually amusing to watch and listen to them....Its like a free comedy skit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.