“But in a span of very few years, we also got the direct election of Senators, another amendment to allow a federal income tax, and the creation of the Federal Reserve.”
Men alone voted for these Amendments, right?
What a waste of time, this divisive talk is — what happened a hundred years ago, happened. Wouldn’t it be better to reverse these or at least get control of the Fed rather than divide conservative women from conservative men?
You said: “Wouldn’t it be better to reverse these or at least get control of the Fed rather than divide conservative women from conservative men?”
I think though that more liberal women are with conservative men and are masquerading as conservatives.
And those women just might so put their fellows t-——— in a lock box with their twists of logic that maybe they won’t bother voting in exasperation.
So, yes, I think we DO need to divide some liberal-masquerading-as-conservative (or just unenlightened) women from conservative men.
In all seriousness, my mom and sis voting for the conservative candidate I tell them to vote for is not the issue. :-)
My business partner said something that was completely un-PC a while back. It’s heresy to libs. Others have brought it up in this thread.
He pointed out that the founding fathers only gave the right to vote to landowners and tax payers (blah, blah, they were white men, yadda yadda...cue ACLU and ACORN outrage).
I dismissed it out of hand as outrageous. Than I thought about it.
He and the founders were right.
If you don’t pay taxes and have no skin in the game, why should you get to vote?
This is how we end up with inner city Democratic machines bribing homeless crack addicts, welfare mothers by the busload with a reward of Big Macs and a pack of smokes to vote the dem party line like the card said.