ramey317

Challenge Mail

Subject: Republicans

Bartcop, I have been browsing through you page for awhile now. I am a
Republican, and proud. I do not agree with many of my Republican
politicians. I do not agree with all of their positions. But I do know
this; I have yet to meet a single Republican that hates, as you say we do.
I am sure some do, as do some Democrats, Christians (although I would doubt
their faith), atheists, agnostics, etc..

Often times what happens is we simply misunderstand each other. For
example, do Republicans hate blacks (not one of my students wants to be
called African American) because we reject affirmative action as a solution
to a problem, real or perceived. Of course not. We just disagree on the
solutions. My problem with the left is that you assign motives to my heart
that do not exist.

If you want to have a civil disagreement then you pick the issue you say we
hate on and I will illustrate my position. If you do, I PROMISE not to
insult you if you do the same.

Robert Ramey

Robert, I can be very nice.
When people start with, "you nigger-loving cock-sucking faggot,"
I tend to launch, but you've been very polite, so I will be.

In your third sentence, you said you don't agree with many GOP politicians.
If you're going to argue their case, you'll have to assume their baggage.
I suppose that's acceptable.
We can't have much of a debate if you and I agree.

By taking their case, you also take on the religious baggage, because
they claim denouncing gays is something "the Bible commands."
That's what they say when asked,"Why can't you just leave them alone?"

If you take away the Bible, what's the reason for hating gays?
And let's get past the "love the sinner, hate the sin," facade.
The word "hate" doesn't have to be anywhere unless the GOP insists.
(Of course, this is all done in Christ's name...)

I submit that Republicans hate blacks, gays, Democrats, the poor etc.
Your party is not content to live and let live.
When your party leads the fight to kill Affirmative Action programs,
black enrollment drops to near zero.

You can claim you see AA as a "fairness" issue, but we don't believe you.
("You" being the GOP, not Robert Ramey.)
We see the GOP staying up late at night, trying to figure new and creative
ways to keep blacks from getting an education.
We see the GOP staying up late and not to prevent "quota" hiring practices.

From our point of view, you deny blacks an education, you deny them a job,
and you want to cut off their welfare check.

So what often happens?
They turn to crime and the law & order GOP is ready to lock them up.
I submit if they had the education you denied them, if they had the job you denied them,
they wouldn't need the welfare check and they wouldn't be involved in crime.

Yet your side continues to block their progress at every turn.

When the GOP wants to raise money, they attack AA (blacks)
When the GOP wants to raise money, they attack anti-family forces. (gays)
When the GOP wants to raise money, they attack freeloaders. (the poor)

But you say you've never seen the hate?

If the GOP is for less government, why not prove it?
Why not let the gays alone, let the blacks alone, etc?

We reject affirmative action as a solution to a problem, real or perceived.
We just disagree on the solutions. My problem with the left is that you assign
motives to my heart that do not exist.

But it seems to me, your solution is to end AA without a substitute.
If we merely disagreed on a solution, we'd have different plans.
But "your" plan involves blocking blacks from getting in schools.
What motive would you suggest we assign to that plan?

This is a lot more rambling than I wanted it to be.
If we were in a bar kicking this around, it would make more sense, maybe.

At least we have a basic place from which to continue.
Let me ask this:

Why can't your side just leave the gays alone?
Why can't your side stop blocking black education and black employment?
Why can't your side stop using Jesus as the reason for your action that seems
to be nothing more than disguising the hatred?

And as long as you're explaining things, maybe you could explain impeachment?
Your side drew up impeachment plans BEFORE anyone ever heard on Monica.
Now we know Monica was Clinton's only "crime."

You didn't see that partisan witchhunt as hate-driven?
(Be sure to answer that in your reply - I probably should've started with
impeachment, because it was nothing but raw hate.)

Since we won the cold war, the GOP has lost their boogeyman.
Highly-paid whores like Rush and Dr Laura are looking for minute differences
between us to exploit, often with religious overtones, because NOTHING
inflames like religion, then they get $20,000,00 a year to poor gas on those fires.

Tell me, where would Rush and Laura be without liberals to rail against?
Rush would be unemployed and Laura would have a very small practice.

I wish my case wasn't so scatterred,
but I get excited when I hear the word "debate."

If you're html savvy, maybe you could send your reply as an html file.
That way you could use colors to distinguish your words from mine.

Looking forward to your reply.