February 26, 2004, 9:15 a.m.
Limbaugh Law
Hypocrisy in the defense of liberalism is no vice.

You have to hand it to the Palm Beach Post. It doesn't let either principle or consistency get in the way of its own zeal to punish a conservative for his views. And not just any conservative: Rush Limbaugh. Sadly, many conservatives are either unaware of what's occurring, or don't care enough to speak against it.

First, a little background information. The state attorney in Palm Beach County, Democrat Barry Krischer, has spent more than a year and hundreds thousands of dollars trying — without success — to find a criminal charge to bring against Rush. Rush has made no secret that he was addicted to prescription medication. And he has sought rehabilitation, which continues to this day. If Rush had been a Democrat state judge or Democrat state senator in Florida, he would have been applauded for his courage in confronting his problem, as two such officials were, and that would have been that.

But in his zeal to silence Rush, Krischer has pursued a scorched-earth strategy against Limbaugh. Krischer's office has leaked false stories to the news media charging Rush with money laundering, with being part of a drug ring, and now, with doctor-shopping. It also released confidential communications with Rush's lawyer, Roy Black. Although the papers show that Black rejected any suggestion that Rush plead to any offense, the release of the communications was an extraordinary breach of ethical conduct. And to make matters worse, Krischer and his staff actually created a false record claiming that after consulting with the Florida Bar and the attorney general's office, they were advised that they must release the confidential letters. (This prompted Landmark Legal Foundation to file an ethics complaint against Krischer and his top counsel with the Florida Bar.)

Enter the Palm Beach Post editorial page. It has been Krischer's biggest and most blatant cheerleader in his crusade against Rush. When Krischer's office circumvented the lawful subpoena process and seized Rush's personal medical records without warning, the Post (on Dec. 19) had nothing but praise for the prosecutor's outrageous actions. "Belittling the police and prosecutors...might play well inside the talk-show host's small broadcast booth and in the bunkers that a fair number of his paranoid anti-government adherents inhabit," the Post said. "Such descriptions, however, have no place in the real world of courts and serious issues such as drug abuse."

This perverse law-and-order mentality was nowhere to be found, however, when the same Post editorial board denounced the Patriot Act which empowers federal law enforcement to (among other things) obtain and review medical records of suspected terrorists and terrorist supporters. Such measures in the war on terror were "heavy-handed intrusions of privacy" that victimized "innocent Americans, particularly Muslims...." The Post (on April 15, 2002) described the Patriot Act as an "assault on the Constitution," and it attacked the Justice Department for trying "to avoid constitutional checks and balances."

In another editorial (Dec. 26, 2002), the Post attacked other provisions in the Patriot Act on the same premise. "Conservatives and liberals fear heavy-handed intrusions of privacy and worse abuses from the unprecedented surveillance powers now at the executive branch's discretion: home searches, medical-record inspections, electronic surveillance, secret detentions. There are well-founded concerns about the impact on innocent Americans, particularly Muslims...."

And railing against anti-espionage wiretapping, the editorial writers have said (Nov. 20, 2002): "The government might be able to catch more criminals if it can, in essence, disregard the Fourth Amendment prohibition on unreasonable searches. But along the way, the government also will spy on more innocent people."

Apparently, to the Palm Beach Post, Rush Limbaugh and his views are more dangerous than terrorists who seek to sneak into our country and unleash mass destruction. And, so, they cheer Krischer — who is up for reelection — and his tactics. It seems that at the Post's editorial page, hypocrisy in the defense of liberalism is no vice.

— Mark R. Levin is president of the Landmark Legal Foundation.