Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Sam Hill
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/opinion/2002681961_rams14.html

LMAO...Just exactly why would someone have spent so many posts defending a twit like Bruce Ramsey?

Well, I guess if they were really into drugs they might want to defend a fellow of like mind...lol

http://www.november.org/stayinfo/breaking3/NewStrategy.html

I only posted two links of the 148,000 that came up for Bruce Ramsey/drugs, but I think you get the picture, and you hit the nail on the head very early on in this thread.
292 posted on 06/18/2006 9:23:15 PM PDT by Beagle8U (Liberals get up every morning and eat a big box of STUPID for breakfast)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 277 | View Replies ]


To: Beagle8U
I only posted two links of the 148,000 that came up for Bruce Ramsey/drugs

Since you are apparently stupid enough to believe that Bruce Ramsey has written 148,000 articles supporting drug legalization, I doubt any attempt to correct your ignorance will help, but the number of Google hits for "bruce ramsey" and drugs is 832. Some of those are commentaries on articles Ramsey has written, some are tables of contents in which links to articles by Ramsey on other subjects appear on the same page as links to articles on drugs by other authors, some are references to other people named Bruce Ramsey, some do not appear to be related at all, two point back to this thread, and five others are links to FR that are not drug prohibition related. You also may be interested in the link posted in #283, an article by Ramsey in which he says "All libertarians were for Peter McWilliams' right to smoke marijuana to keep from vomiting up his anti-AIDS drugs, and were outraged when he died following the government's stupid rules. But when they oppose all drug laws with the term 'prohibition,' thereby making an analogy to liquor prohibition, they imply the existence of a safe use. And for some prohibited drugs there is no safe use. But libertarians argue as if chemistry and biology were irrelevant, which would imply that it would be okay to sell any drug that did anything. Is that a defensible position?"

As for my defense of Ramsey, it was based entirely on the article I posted in #13. I've only read a little by the man, and was actually unaware of his opposition to the way drug use is currently being fought. Not that it supports your argumentum ad hominem, as his position does not appear to be the same as mine.

Still, I doubt this is going to have any effect on you, since you are apparently capable of believing that Bruce Ramsey has written 148,000 articles on this subject.

293 posted on 06/19/2006 2:44:54 AM PDT by JTN ("I came here to kick ass and chew bubble gum. And I'm all out of bubble gum.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 292 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson