( ( ( ( ( (( BLACK MAGIC in progress )) ) ) ) ) )
Posted on 05/08/2012 12:52:59 PM PDT by Mich1193
I think he’s an imbecile. That’s what I think.
The real question is if the natural state of women is being subservient to and unequal to men.
If they are then natural law keeping them from the vote would be justified.
For myself I hold that the natural state of women is being free and equal.
Thus any laws keeping them from the vote would be a violation of natural law.
Here’s the direct link to the video so nobody needs to visit that blog:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NeFhA_sL38c&feature=player_embedded
Duck and cover!
I do believe that it’s established fact (I could be wrong) that no female vote, means no Obama, no Clinton, no Carter, no Kennedy, etc.
no it wasn’t. giving 18 year olds, unless they are serving in the military, was a dumb idea.
maybe welfare folks shouldn’t be allowed to vote
Christian right version of the American taliban.
Christian right version of the American taliban.
I would have no problem with a woman or anyone else that owned property having the vote.
/johnny
Regards,
GtG
Give me a break....
(A receptionist at Melvin’s publishing firm a fan of Melvin’s work, but he is not as charming as she thinks he’ll be.)
Woman:”How do you write women so well?”
Melvin: “I think of a man and I take away reason and accountability.”
-As Good As It Gets (1997)
My 98% of the heated political debates I get into are with men.
My proposal:
1. No person on any kind of aid from the govenment (including medicare) can vote. All persons should be able to reject any aid.
2. No employee of the government, excepting soldiers, should be allowed to vote for elections regarding that tier of government. (i.e., federal employees can’t vote in federal elections, and state employees can’t vote in state elections).
Single/Divorced women vote for ‘rats in huge numbers.
The latest poll shows “single” women support 0bama at a 59 to 29 percent rate.
Married women support Romney by a less wide margin.
If they are then natural law keeping them from the vote would be justified.
For myself I hold that the natural state of women is being free and equal.
Thus any laws keeping them from the vote would be a violation of natural law.
I look at it without need to resort to gender, race or class. I argue that those who contribute should have the vote, and those who do not should not.
Representation without taxation is just as odious as Taxation without Representation.
I had a real estate agent visit my front porch this morning.
To make conversation, I stated at one point in time that the USA gave individuals a lot of freedom.
The real estate agent responded that she thought sometimes people were given too much freedom.
Needless to say, she left my front porch with a double earful of legal and comparative government information and opinion.
But I fear there are way too many just like her for it to make any significant impact.
As a woman, I agree with your post.
Ask a hundred people, get a hundred answers - and all different.
Myself, I think it’s a mistake to allow the vote to anyone receiving a paycheck from the government.
So..no senior citizen older than 65 can vote? Good luck with that and you do know many senior citizens are on FR if not a good percentage?
.The loons are out on this thread....
Women elected Barack Hussein Obama.
Women are much more eager to vote for socialist/collectivist government programs than men are.
They screwed up when they gave anyone but landowners the vote
You are exactly right. No skin in the game, no vote.
“They screwed up when they gave anyone but landowners the vote.
I would have no problem with a woman or anyone else that owned property having the vote.”
####
This.
No Representation without Taxation.
this line of thought is a little too burqua-esque for me
Gin!
[ The real question is if the natural state of women is being subservient to and unequal to men.
If they are then natural law keeping them from the vote would be justified.
For myself I hold that the natural state of women is being free and equal.
Thus any laws keeping them from the vote would be a violation of natural law. ]
I think voting while receiving government handouts is a violation of ethics in terms of a “conflict of interest”.
I also think that tax payers should be able to “vote with their pocketbooks” in that besides a simple flat tax there should be a sheet that allows you to determine what percentage of the money you give to the government goes to what department. So if I wanted to give all my money in taxes to the Dept of Defense and tell everyone else they get a big fat zero of my money then so be it. Also this would be a “pay as you go system”.
Ideally I would rather have the federal government fed by tariffs and no national income or sales tax.
No, the biggest mistake was giving the vote to emotional people.
Found this wiki.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women%27s_suffrage_in_the_United_States
It has been argued that without women’s suffrage, the Republicans would have swept every election but one between 1968 and 1974. Another result of Women’s suffrage is the steady rise of government spending between the 1920’s and the present, as women are more risk averse than men and support “safety net” type income distribution and social welfare programs such as Medicare, Social Security, and public education.
This came about in direct contradiction to what was expected by some writers prior to the passage of women’s suffrage. In fact, it was stated by one opponent to suffrage that women voters would be “thriftier and less wasteful than men.”
maybe welfare folks shouldn’t be allowed to vote
Yes, the 26th amendment, and the last three words of the 24th amendment were both wrongheaded and stupid.
As you have mentioned, the 26th should have applied ONLY to those in the armed services. The worthless ratbastard hippies should not have been allowed to vote.
I think both amendments should be repealed in lieu of an Amendment that requires the paying of taxes in order to vote. It is long past time for our nation to be guided by those of us who pay the bills.
Oh, yeah...America was solid 'Taliban country' before 1920.
Interesting to note that without the female vote; I would have NEVER seen a democrat in the White House over the course of my entire lifetime.
Give me a break....
Give me a break, indeed. I, too, question the wisdom of giving children the vote when I see teachers telling their 18 or soon-to-be 18 yo charges that it is important they vote in the upcoming school levy, and without their vote, education-as-we-know-it will soon disappear. Bussing them to the polling place just adds to the problem.
[ They screwed up when they gave anyone but landowners the vote.
I would have no problem with a woman or anyone else that owned property having the vote.
/johnny ]
I would just be happy removing the government leeches from the roles under “confict of interest” rules.
( ( ( ( ( (( BLACK MAGIC in progress )) ) ) ) ) )
Haven’t listened to him in years. I don’t remember anything wrong...I remember liking him.
But he sounds like he’s on drugs now, slurring, etc.
It’s painful to watch.
I don’t remember having that impression before.
I think he might be physically ill, and the meds he’s taking are messin with his mind.
(Ok, so I paraphrased a bit!) :)
Taxpayers, veterans and landowners should get a weighted ballot. Perhaps veterans given a ballot worth 2X for one example. Everyone should vote but some voters are more important than others. IMO anyway.
Bingo. Jefferson knew what he was talking about...
Plus spending at sustainable and reasonable levels.
The margin of women who vote for socialists/nanny state IS scary, so why don't we discuss it?
Heck, from what I hear about the "Life of Julia" statist propaganda piece from the Big Zero, it begs the question...what idiots are they progagandizing that would buy into that and would it be better if those (regardless of gender) who have a stake in the public trough, be restricted from voting?
That, combined with 5 points of voter fraud.
ANN COULTER reasons it this way:
“If we took away women’s right to vote, we’d never have to worry about another Democrat president. It’s kind of a pipe dream, it’s a personal fantasy of mine, but I don’t think it’s going to happen. And it is a good way of making the point that women are voting so stupidly, at least single women.”
I didn’t read the article, but thought I’d repeat what I’ve posted in the past quite often when a thread like this warrants the post.
My wife believes that women shouldn’t have the vote simply because as she states of the absolutely stupid reasons they vote for. Mostly emotional, impulsive.
Records indicate the women’s vote successfully sicced upon our society Carter, Clinton, and Obama to name a few.
I don’t argue with her.
“The problem with mankind is that men are lunatics and women are idiots.” - Rebecca West
“The women got the vote and the nation got Harding.” - anon
Anne Coulter made more or less the same point. Votes for women means big government and income redistribution.
????
Funny statistic. That's a long time ago now, and I believe women were more Republican back then. What about more recent elections?
The problem with these kinds of hypotheticals is that changing one factor means other factors change. Without women's suffrage the more liberal party would behave differently and make more of an appeal to men, rather than to part of the population that couldn't vote. Government policy might be different, but it's hard to imagine Republicans winning every election and Democrats not doing anything about it because they were committed to winning votes that weren't being cast.
When women began voting nationally, the large majority of woman voters were married and voted pretty much as their husbands did. But in the last thirty to forty years or so, with more unmarried women and more women reliant on Big Brother, there has been a noticeable "gender gap" in the presidential vote, with women significantly more likely to vote Democrat.
If I'm not mistaken, no Democrat in a presidential race has won the men's vote since Lyndon Johnson! So it's reasonable to think that the country would have been spared quite a number of left-leaning policies had it not been for the Nineteenth Amendment.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.