Rush Limbaugh was detained for about 3 1/2 hours at Palm Beach International Airport after authorities said they found a bottle of Viagra in his possession without a prescription.
To give Rush the benefit of the doubt, I'm sure he has a rock solid excuse for why he had a bunch of prescription drugs without his name on them in his possession and why he was transporting them into the country. Although, if he's using Viagra, doesn't that kind of make him a hypocrite for his rigid (i can't stop) stance against emergency contraception for women? I mean, he's all for a pill that allows him to subject women to his blubberous advances, but against the drugs that a woman might want to take when she wakes up next to him, full of regret (and probably roofies). In fact, Rush thinks that:
the most dangerous place you can be is between a liberal woman and her morning-after pill.
I tend to disagree. I think the most dangerous place you can be is between a balding, over-weight, impotent conservative and his boner medication. Or a ham.
Of course, this explains a lot. Like the turgid prose in this little segment from his show:
Classic example of the castrati, the new castrati. Jack Carter is -- has been castrated by the feminization of this culture since he grew up.
Castrated, eh? Methinks someone is projecting. Rush's current problems might also explain his steely hostility toward women. I'm sure after countless nights spent trying to get his "little soldier" to "stand up" and "go off to war," while some ditto-head groupie impatiently pops her gum and files her nails in his bed, Rush has determined that the problem must be with women, and not the fact that his "little solider," er, "soldier," apparently has decided to get a medical deferment to keep him out of "combat."
So, here's hoping that the authorities will hand down the kind of stiff (last one, promise) penalty that a repeat drug offender like Rush Limbaugh deserves. Like Rush himself says:
"Too many whites are getting away with drug use. The answer is to ... find the ones who are getting away with it, convict them, and send them up the river."
I mean, if he doesn’t stick by these kinds of statements, doesn’t that make the rest of his arguments seem kind of flaccid?