English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Could it be because the Kennedy's never take responsibility for their actions. Aren't they being held to a different standard than the rest of us?

2007-03-16 23:01:22 · 8 answers · asked by mamadixie 7 in Politics & Government Politics

8 answers

The difference is one is a radio talk show host, who's job it is to entertain people.
The other one is a U.S. congressman, who's job it is to pass laws, help determine foreign policy, and represent the people of his district.

There's no comparison really.
The fact that libs are silent on Kennedy's addictions and DUI speaks volumes. Regarding the Kennedy family issue: It wouldn't matter who the abuser was- as long as he's a liberal Democrat. Then, he'll get a free pass.

2007-03-17 00:14:07 · answer #1 · answered by charbatch 4 · 0 1

No, it is not basically a "double" time-honored; it rather is a "triple" time-honored: one for conservatives, one for liberals, and one for Kennedys--they are able to by no ability do any incorrect! Why might Patrick Kennedy even think of of resigning? His father, Ted, is a assassin and has by no ability paid for that. Daddy became there, partying, whilst his nephew or cousin or whoever raped the lady in Miami, yet have been given away untarnished. Daddy knew approximately the different cousin who murdered the neighbor lady 2 many years in the past and did no longer do something approximately that. Daddy taught Patrick a thank you to be an addict and a under the impact of alcohol and the thank you to think of he became above the regulation!!! the place is daddy in all of this? Has he stated something or long gone to be via his son's part? Or did he go away his son interior the proverbial gutter like he left Patrick's mom after ruining her existence and turning her right into a under the impact of alcohol besides? Patrick discovered his father's classes nicely!

2016-10-18 21:57:09 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

Let's get the story straight. He had had a problem in December 2005 with oxycodin. He went to rehab for that then and beat it .He was suffering from depression and one thing with any addict, they can substitute other substances for the ones that had been on before. He had a problem with prescription medication, Ambien, which has now had documented proof that it has caused the following:-
sleep driving
sleep eating
sleep walking

Also Patrick Kennedy did not sit on his a*s pontificating that drug addicts were basically lower than pond scum and should go to jail, yet when Rush Dimbulb was found out for doctor shopping and the amount of oxycodin he was on, he said, " Oh but not me!". He also said it was the liberal media's fault as if the media forced him to pop the pills.

Limbaugh's admission of drug addiction exposed him as a hypocrite as evidenced several statements from the 1990s were found, in particular, on October 5, 1995:

"There's nothing good about drug use. We know it. It destroys individuals. It destroys families. Drug use destroys societies. Drug use, some might say, is destroying this country. And we have laws against selling drugs, pushing drugs, using drugs, importing drugs. And the laws are good because we know what happens to people in societies and neighborhoods which become consumed by them. And so if people are violating the law by doing drugs, they ought to be accused and they ought to be convicted and they ought to be sent up."

2007-03-17 00:07:53 · answer #3 · answered by thequeenreigns 7 · 0 1

To answer your question, people make a big deal out of Rush being a drug addict because this makes him a hypocrite. He preaches among other things that people should take responsibility for their actions, and he has disparaged drug addicts in the past while pontificating on all matters moral. Kennedy, while wrong to abuse drugs (if he did), does not get on the radio everyday to millions of people and tell them that it is wrong to use drugs. I hope you can see the difference.

2007-03-16 23:35:52 · answer #4 · answered by CelticPixie 4 · 0 3

No there is a big difference in admitting you have a problem and seeking out treatment as apposed to those who criticize those who are brave enough to come forward while hiding their own dirty secret, much like Gingrich NOW admitting he was having an affair while trying to have Clinton impeached for his.

2007-03-16 23:43:31 · answer #5 · answered by Cherry_Blossom 5 · 0 1

There is not much talk about Patrick Kennedy because, unlike Rush Limbaugh who has an audience of millions, Patrick Kennedy is a relatively obscure congressman from Rhode Island. Kennedy did admit his problem, while Rush denied his.

2007-03-16 23:08:11 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2 5

Old news, Limbaugh is a demagogue sweety, Kennedy is a politician. Think liberal, think BIG.

2007-03-16 23:05:03 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1 3

Hop in a car with Teddy and have a long talk. I hear Chappaquiddick is nice this time of year.

2007-03-16 23:08:55 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 3 2

fedest.com, questions and answers