It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by sirCyco
inadvertantly gets hooked on once-needed pain killers.
ha....thats a joke...OC is a hardcore drug that can be crushed and SHOT UP...nobody gets "inadvertantly" addicted to anything unless they allow them selves to...thats pathetic!
Originally posted by jezebel
As far as prescription drug addictions being different from illegal drug addiction, you couldn't be farther from the truth.
Not to be an ass, but I don't care where you've worked. I've watched some old high school friends of mine fall of the radar and become addicted to crack and powder. I've seen what they do for their habits, and I see how they live. My wife was once addicted to pain killers and not once did we live in the projects or live like slobs. Nor was she not able to hold a job or perform like a normal, upstanding member of society.
Please tell me how being addicted to pain killers and being a crackhead are so similar.
Rush was addicted for so many years, and his wife didn't even have total knowledge of it. If he was a "junkie," like the all-knowing Colonel states, I'd bet my life savings that his wife would have know immediately.
In conclusion, there is a vast difference between a "junkie" and someone addicted to pain killers. And the initiation of pain killers vs. the initiation of smoking a rock is the biggest difference.
Originally posted by kramtronix
My wife was once addicted to pain killers and not once did we live in the projects or live like slobs. Nor was she not able to hold a job or perform like a normal, upstanding member of society.
Please tell me how being addicted to pain killers and being a crackhead are so similar.
In conclusion, there is a vast difference between a "junkie" and someone addicted to pain killers. And the initiation of pain killers vs. the initiation of smoking a rock is the biggest difference.
Originally posted by Bout Time
Originally posted by astrocreep
My point is, be careful who you paint as a villian because tomorrow, your side may be under attack for the same or worse. While we're all taking our "pot shots" at Rush, we might leave a couple of outs for the next time Old Jesse gets into something or Al Gore's son is pulled over under the influence of coc aine. Hey, kids will experiment, won't they?
That's the problem with the view of debate/issues, as seen by the Right.
While there has been a relentless attack on all figures of the Left by Rush Limbaugh, and particular to the drug addiction issue as seen by his quotes while during his junkie phase that I had posted earlier in the thread, we are to now take a metered stance on the amount of worthy ridicule thrown at Rush because we "might-someday-it-could-happen" have an addict among us?
STRAW MAN ARGUMENT!
(*Note to Mods: due to the high frequency of Right Wing Straw Man Arguments, can we get an icon of a scarecrow ? It'll save typing! )
On Kids: tell me that the Middle to Left did NOT treat those Druken Putas called the Bush twins, or the Frebase Kid who took after Uncle Monkey, Nicolle Bush, with kid gloves?
Go back to 1998 & tell me with a straight face that Rush/Hannity/Farwell et al, would NOT have piled on heavy if Chelsea was half the PUTA that the Bush Twins are?
Originally posted by astrocreep
In the end, I think we're going to find that they're really not that different.
Originally posted by kramtronix
Some of you are astonishingly naive and it's obvious that there are some candy asses on here who have never had the misfortune of knowing someone addicted to street drugs.
Anyone who has seen their old friends pawn their family's jewelry or sell their car for $100 to get a fix would know what I'm talking about. And I've never seen a damn pill head do any of those things.
FACT: The difference is huge.
Originally posted by Colonel
I wonder how he feels knowing that MAJOR drug dealing and money laundering where taking place on ABC property by established public figures.
Originally posted by kramtronix
Jezebel, I respect your opinion and your long-winded posts, but you're still wrong. All of you who think there isn't massive divide between the two types drug abusers are all wrong. And unless you find me a damn crackhead who maintains a life of wealth or even a NORMAL life, you'll never convince me otherwise.
While your at it, come up with some case studies comparing the lives of those who are addicted to pain killers to the lives of those who are smoking rocks, meth or shooting "H" into their arms.
They have as much in common as cigarettes do to coffee - Very, very little.
Originally posted by kramtronix
Jezebel, I respect your opinion and your long-winded posts, but you're still wrong. All of you who think there isn't massive divide between the two types drug abusers are all wrong. And unless you find me a damn crackhead who maintains a life of wealth or even a NORMAL life, you'll never convince me otherwise.
While your at it, come up with some case studies comparing the lives of those who are addicted to pain killers to the lives of those who are smoking rocks, meth or shooting "H" into their arms.
They have as much in common as cigarettes do to coffee - Very, very little.
Originally posted by kramtronix
Good readings, Jez. However, I failed to see any statements in there from hard drug users (crack, meth or heroin) who lived like Rush. And I know why... They don't exist. People addicted to hard drugs hit rock bottom almost 99% of the time. And on the flipside, painkiller addicts may hit rock bottom 10% of the time. And I think that is a stretch.