RH>>> The hypocrisy is on BOTH sides of the issue.

 ML>> one might see it that way when one doesn't know what can be done...
 ML>> i'm personally aware of what medical board investigators can and
 ML>> cannot do... i'm also personally aware of what they can look at and
 ML>> where they can gather that info from... when it comes to drugs,
 ML>> especially controlled drugs, the field is not the same as the one
 ML>> that a pregnant person is playing on... they are very seperate and
 ML>> distinct... trust me...

 RH> There's no reason to "trust" you.  If anything, your comments
 RH> above are more than enough to NOT trust much that you say.

fine, that's your perogative... your loss, too >

 RH> There is a world of difference between a medical board
 RH> investigation and the local state/county attorney.

ummm... you seem to forget that the attorneys can ask the medical board to
look into things... you also seem to not know that the medical board can
look into things on their own... as well, the medical board can also have
their own "trials" or hearings and revoke a doctor's priveledges
to practise... additionally, this information can be made available to the
courts for more "official" trials and hearings...

 RH> Either there is privacy or there isn't. The "privacy" found in
 RH> Roe v. Wade is simply a patient seeing a doctor and getting a
 RH> professional medical opinion.  Limbaugh was seeing a doctor for
 RH> a professional medical opinion.  The reasons for seeing a
 RH> medical professional has no bearing on the nature of the
 RH> professional relationship.

no, limbaugh was seeing doctors for getting controlled drugs... what he did
broke the law, period, end of statement...

 RH> The doctor could have and should have asked Limbaugh if he was
 RH> taking other medications.  Limbaugh should have answered
 RH> truthfully. That's not what we're discussing here.  If Limbaugh
 RH> lied and the doctor believed that he was being lied to, he
 RH> should have taken the appropiate actions to protect his
 RH> professional integerity.

right... so limbaugh lied and the doctor believe that he was telling the
truth... possibly... that will come out in the medical board's
investigation if there is one... likely there will be if there hasn't been
one already...

the medical board works closely with the DEA, BTW:

 RH> The county attorney in Florida is on a fishing expedition to
 RH> find some "crime" to pin on Limbaugh.  I'm sure that such a
 RH> find will thrill many people.  What should worry everyone is
 RH> that an elected official is using her position of trust to
 RH> invade a citizen's privacy for political gain.

seems to me that an elected official is using their position to stop,
prevent and punish someone for a crime they committed and admitted to on
public radio...

 RH> It's way too easy to forget that what happens to the rich and
 RH> powerful is small potatoes to what can happen to the poor.

no kidding... the rich and famous aren't stuffed away to be totally
forgotten about like poor no-name individuals...

 RH> If, I say again, if you do believe in equal protection under
 RH> the law, you should be rooting for Limbaugh on principle
 RH> alone.  You may "feel good" to see Limbaugh squirm, but you
 RH> should also want him to "win" against the big brother that
 RH> you worry about.

no, limbaugh broke the law and admitted it... for that he should be
punished... period... if i did the same thing, then i would also expect to
be punished for it... its one thing to do something illegal... its another
to stand up and take one's punishment for the illegal action...

)\/(ark