[GladesGuru]

The Founders were quite aware that women have a strong tendency to vote for that which promises to help their children. As such, any scoundrel that promised them something seen as beneficial to their child rearing would get their vote.

They were correct.

Whether their assumption that male property owners would be more likely to judge their actions and those of others by the standard of the Constitution is really the issue.

Recent history suggests their fears were all too accurate.

Remove government from areas such as charity and Fedzilla’s bastard farming to create supportive voters goes away, perhaps the best option I can suggest.

Anyone got ideas on this subject?

[Tax-chick]

Your post entirely failed to make the connection between women voters and Judge Andrew Napolitano's column.

The Founders were quite aware that women have a strong tendency to vote for that which promises to help their children.

Can you provide some specific quotes in support of this statement?