The more things change, the more they stay the same.
Tuesday, September 02, 2014
94 years ago the 19th Amendment giving women the right to vote was ratified. These are some of the arguments used against it.
The more things change, the more they stay the same.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
And 6 years ago (August 30, 2008); John McCain made the official announcement and unleashed that bitch on the USA. I went back and read the announcement article and got sick all over again.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/08/29/palin.republican.vp.candidate/
Sounds like the same arguments the Republicans are using against women today. I am sure abolishing the 19th amendment on their secret agenda
ReplyDeleteRepublican Party taking women back at least 100 years
Women get out and vote this November!!!
Amen. Women must get out and vote down the Koch agenda. I'm certain there is an ALEC law that will somehow take away our vote. Now is the time. We have to vote every time and vote Democratic. Democrats are not perfect, but at least Dems are working for the people. And our President has more than earned two years of a Congress that spends time on legislation instead of obstruction. Plus, I want to see the look on Boehner's face when he has to turn that gavel back over to Nancy. Not to mention watching Grimes take the oath of office while McConnell stays home expecting calls from Fox News.
DeleteShe described herself Friday as "commander in chief of the Alaska National Guard" and noted that her oldest son, Track, is a U.S. soldier scheduled to deploy soon to Iraq. (8/30/2008)
ReplyDeleteNice try, Gryphen, if that's even your real name, which I've heard rumors it is not!
ReplyDeleteMore typical libtard hypocrisy from your defunct blog that no one even reads! First, you're all "oh, look at me! I'm a feminist!" and then you come out with this twaddle in favor of women suffering! What's next, public stoning of trollops and strumpets, also too?
Oh, and by the way, mister smart guy, there happens to be an "E" in suff-E-rage!!
Educashun. You should try it some time...
I feel sorry for you. smh
Remember:
Beldar trolls so you don't have to!
Accept no substitute
Google it.
Delete"suffrage"
It is undeniably SUFFRAGE, at least, for those simply open to the most basic research.
"Sufferage" is NOT a word, other than being made up to be used in error for the actual word: SUFFRAGE.
"Educashun. You should try it some time..."
Beldar is joking. How can you not see that?
Delete@5:55
DeleteIf the person is new to IM, then I can understand how he/she MIGHT get confused by his humor, although I have to admit it is a bit of a stretch.
On the other hand, if they are NOT new to IM, there is literally NO excuse for reading Beldar and NOT seeing he is always sarcastic..
Oh. Sorry. There IS one more possibility. 4:46 could be a freaking ignorant troll who likes to try to stir the pot.
Ah yes, during the past ninety-four years, the United States has been under the dreaded "petticoat rule"! As if!
ReplyDeleteJust to be clear. The amendment did not GIVE anything. It acknowledged an existing right that women ALWAYS had but were denied. Remember "all men are created equal" was a deliberate denial of a universal truth that "all PEOPLE are created equal".
ReplyDeleteMy grandmother did mention more than once that she never forgot that black men could vote when she could not. I pointed that out once in my history class (1967) and watched my teacher just rant about how I had the "WRONG attitude, young lady" as if I wasn't supposed to notice such a thing.
Women were voting in Wyoming for a half century before the amendment.
ReplyDeleteand from wiki
"To make the point that women were interested in partisan politics and would be effective public officials, in the 19th century two women ran for the presidency: Victoria Woodhull in 1872, and Belva Lockwood in 1884 and 1888. Neither was permitted under the law to vote, but nothing in the law prevented them from running for office. Each woman pointed to this irony in her campaigning."
Voting was a big improvement. It came after many other struggles, though. For example by 1860, In New York, Indiana, Maine, Missouri, and Ohio, women's property rights had expanded to allow married women to keep their own wages.
ReplyDeleteOr how about this for how far we have come?
After her husband horsewhipped and beat her, one woman took her plea for divorce to the North Carolina Supreme Court in 1862. The Chief Justice denied her, stating, "The law gives the husband power to use such a degree of force necessary to make the wife behave and know her place."
I wish a few of these idiots could have seen Geraldine Ferraro, and now Hillary possibly running for the office of POTUS. Things HAVE changed, but not much if you consider the make up of the GOP vs that of the Democratic Party.
ReplyDelete