Skip to comments.Hayworth takes his best shot at McCain in new TV ad
Posted on 07/23/2010 11:02:16 AM PDT by pissant
click here to read article
Hey, there you go!
Absolutely. Not to mention his repulsive leftwing Reform Institute.
I wasn’t alive in 1920 (although you act as if you were), but I’m not too sure that “America functioned just fine” before then. That’s merely recognizing that the problems America faced during that period cannot be swept under a rug, especially by some proto-Neanderthal who doesn’t think that women should be allowed to vote.
You support the ERA too?
[pissant shakes his cane in the air]
I’ll take that as a yes. Thank God the wonderful Phyllis Schlafly led the fight to kill it.
Wrong again, old man.
Oh, so you don’t support the ERA? Why you are an unelightened neanderthal not wanting women’s equality etched into the constitution. Hells bells, even such GOP luminaries as Howard Baker and Dick Nixon. It had a real shot at passing too. But Schlafly and a few neanderthals lobbied very successfully, to the point where even some states that initially passed it rescinded it.
That’s what funny about you: I remind you that the Founders allowed for constitutional amendments, and you think that makes me favor the ERA. Your brain is logic-free.
I asked you and you didn’t answer. Now I know you don’t. SO there is some discernment you have regarding “rights” and “equality” and gender bias, etc. and for what purposes an amendment to the constitution should be used for. Next thing you know, you’ll be wanting women to be forbidden from driving.
Funny, this is just like me and my opinion of the 19th (and other) amendments.
John McCain deserves to be re-elected Senator as much as Jeffrey Damler deserves to be named “Chef of the Century”.
No, it is not. I haven’t even read the text of the ERA, so I am not “discerning” or distinguishing anything. You just wish I was in order to support your argument.
OK. So you are ignorant about the ERA, which came within a whisker to becoming part of our constitution. All the RINOs at the time (and all the dems of course) were singing its praises.
Thank GOD for the neanderthals like Schlafly, Goldwater, and RONALD REAGAN!!
Did you know that only 8 US senators voted against it (one was a dem)? That support for the ERA was in the GOP platform? (Reagan changed that).
And did you know it has been re-introduced in Congress?
The PC claptrappers are alive and well. Just as they were in the 1970s and the early part of the last century.
Much like being strongly in favor of the 2nd Amendment does not make me in favor of Prohibition. Your inability to recognize the above stems from your logical failure--"some Amendments are bad therefore other Amendments are bad." In your case, you feel that the 19th Amendment is bad because the 18th is bad. One has nothing to do with the other.
a little late to make a difference.
what could hayworth do for a ten point shift into his favor?
vote democrat because republicans will starve children by taking unemployment.
(just end it already, give everyone unemployment even if they have a job.)
I’ll try one more time - please read it slowly. Try to comprehend.
The only relationship between the 18A and 19A that I mentioned was that I used the 18A as ANOTHER example of a bad amendment. There is NO CAUSAL relationship between the two. No ‘If then therefore’ relationship; no AND or exclusive OR operators.
Just a simple example to blow away your flawed logic that since Amendments were allowed by the Founders, that future Amendments would therefore be beneficial.
Obviously, not all are. And the ERA, which nearly became one - which you are ignorant about - was just more PC claptrap, like the 19A.
Except for the fact that the above was never my argument, and that it is a tortuous fabrication on your part, it is an example of something. I submit, idiocy.