A Response

Stephen;

This is an open letter.

I appreciate your letter and the explanation as to why you've removed me from the list of Blogging Tories. I'd be lying if I said that I wasn't somewhat shocked by your decision. I do understand that the Blogging Tories is a private organization and that the decision is yours to make. I respect that.

Now, as to your letter:

You claim that I was removed for the action of "trolling". I prefer to call it picking a fight. There are far too many people like Dylan claiming to be conservative when, in fact, they are not. They are responsible for the watering down of what once was solid conservative policy. I am simply showing these individuals for what they really are. It should be noted that I've used this same tactic to expose those form the extreme left for the past seven months without a complaint from your organization. I have to question why you bring the issue up now.

You stated that you were displeased with my post on Rosa Parks. I have to question what exactly it is about historical accuracy that causes you concern. Do you have a problem with being exposed to the truth Stephen?

You also stated your concern with my use of the word "fag". I'd like to place my use of that word in context for you:

"Alright, lets get something clear here. If the homosexual community in general
and Lund in particular are going to refer to people like me (who feel that
homosexuaity is wrong, that it's destructive, that it has no place in our
schools and that we have a right to say as much publicly) as homophobic and
liken us to individuals associated with Naziism, I'm going to refer to him as a
fag (a word they use to refer to themselves) and liken them to pedophiles. It's
only fair."

As is clearly seen, I didn't call anyone a fag. I threatened to use the term if he continued to refer to conservatives as homophobes and equate us to Nazis. I honestly expected that someone of your intelligence and stature would have picked up on that.

Your next comment was in regards to the upcoming election and the potential impact that I may have on media coverage. If I understand it correctly, you're saying that an election campaign isn't the place to put conservative ideas out to the people. Well, I remember a certain politician saying that "an election campaign wasn't the place to discuss issues" and she was crucified for it. You're saying the same thing she did Stephen.

I could rant on but I won't. You've made your position clear.

I do have to say though that I'm both sorry and disappointed. Sorry and disappointed that the Blogging Tories would sell out truth in order to remain politically correct with the aims of grabbing a few soft votes. I'm sorry and disappointed that I thought better of you. It's people like you Stephen that keep this country as messed up as it is.

Regards;
Richard Evans