In article ,
"Michael Mckelvy" wrote:

"MiNE 109" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Michael Mckelvy" wrote:

"Bruce J. Richman" wrote in message
...
Dave Weil wrote:


On Sun, 9 Nov 2003 10:57:35 -0800, "Michael Mckelvy"
wrote:

Where, o where, have the Hypocrisy Police gone?

snip

Typical of McKelvy disregard of facts to spread his propaganda.

Not propaganda, an alternate, more objecticve point of view.

There's a good point in there about Democratic presidential candidates
acquiescing to the establishment policy on drugs. However, to downplay
Rush's problems by portraying his views on drug crimes and criminals as
an isolated "off-the-cuff" remark is not quite objective, let alone the
"social libertine" name-calling.

The problem is that Rush has never spoken out about sending people to jail
for addiction to presciption drugs. He's only commented on those who use
drugs soley for recreation.

It's a wonder how he kept up the golf game in the face of pain so strong
he had to go to illegal means to procur treatment. Still, so long as
it's not only for recreation...

Calling the candidates hypocrits for
not supporting recreational use of marijuana despite their collective
youthful experimentation doesn't stick.

Let's see how cut and paste works in a non-Microsoft product:

http://www.dailynews.com/Stories/0,1...754022,00.html

Where, o where, have the Hypocrisy Police gone?

Last month, they were out in full force, roundly condemning talk-radio
giant Rush Limbaugh after his announcement that he was addicted to
prescription painkillers. But now, with three Democratic presidential
candidates all but begging for their condemnation, the defenders of
drug-policy consistency are nowhere to be seen...

snip

The formatting has survived a couple of generations now.