Why is it that if you support the proposed mandate in Frankfort prohibiting law-abiding Kentuckians from purchasing a box of Sudafed without a prescription that you can saw whatever you want, quote whatever misleading facts you want and enjoy having your claims go largely unchallenged by the (Louisville) Courier-Journal and Lexington Herald-Leader?
Why is it that if you oppose the prescription mandate, you are considered a drug-company shill, all of your data is questioned vociferously and you are basically put on trial and cross-examined, as opponents were when they were finally allowed to address the Senate Judiciary Committee on Jan. 19 — a full week after supporters of liberty and freedom were not even allowed to speak?
Related posts:
- Pseudo claims about Ky’s pseudoephedrine policy: Common-sense approach can’t effectively stop ‘smurfing’
- Citizens, tell your state representatives, senators: ‘Just say no’ to meth bill
- Meth plan would exacerbate prescription drug abuse crisis
- TEA party lawmakers’ votes on meth bill will speak louder than words
- “Our NAEP scores are in question” AND HOW!
