you make incorrect inferences and make the debate about what was or was not said.

First of all, neither of us know what the judge did or didn't do.

You make a statement that there are a "helluva lot" of poor blacks in maximum security prisons for doing less than Limbaugh.

In other words you are saying that a large number of poor black first offenders are in prison for life for procuring drugs for self use? For purposes of consistency that would have to be under federal law or in Florida as whichever the case may be for Limbaugh. There are States with ridiculous zero tolerance laws that don't apply in this case.

Where do you get your stats? If this is true they shouldn't be there but more likely they are there for the drugs and many other priors. I agree that our drug laws need to be reviewed and revised but your perception of prisons filled with noble black souls guilty of no more than buying heroin one time borders on silly. You want to see me admit I am wrong? Prove to me that what you say is more than pure perception.

What is proof? Statistic from a reliable source that indicate the average sentence imposed on blacks (I'll give you rich or poor) for first offense drug procurement and/or possession with no other felonies involved.

What I am saying is that Limbaugh should be treated the same as any first offender. The fact that he has the ability to hire a good lawyer should not be held against him and the fact that some or many poor blacks don't have decent representation and get railroaded does not mean he should do hard time.

The fact that liberals have made this fairly talented disk jockey into the modern equivalent of Dracula should also be a non-factor.