Was giving women the vote a good idea?

[Bret L]

In Australia, the country took a definite leftward swing when female
suffrage was enacted.

In America, the effects were slightly more subtle, but the question
lingers. Are women capable of rejecting a promise of security for an
assurance of liberty? I don't know.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Apr 28, 6:25*am, Bret L > wrote:
> *I don't know.

See, Bratzi? It's not hard to admit that you're an idiot.

Keep it up!

[GeoSynch]

Bret L asked:

> In Australia, the country took a definite leftward swing when female
> suffrage was enacted.

> In America, the effects were slightly more subtle, but the question
> lingers. Are women capable of rejecting a promise of security for an
> assurance of liberty? I don't know.

Not according to John Lott:
http://johnrlott.tripod.com/op-eds/WashTimesWomensSuff112707.html

"Academics have long pondered why the government started growing precisely when
it did. The federal government, aside from periods of wartime, consumed about 2
percent to 3 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) up until World War I. It
was the first war that the government spending didn't go all the way back down
to its pre-war levels, and then, in the 1920s, non-military federal spending
began steadily climbing. President Franklin Delano Roosevelt's New Deal - often
viewed as the genesis of big government - really just continued an earlier
trend. What changed before Roosevelt came to power that explains the growth of
government? The answer is women's suffrage."

[Jenn[_2_]]

In article >,
"GeoSynch" > wrote:

> Bret L asked:
>
> > In Australia, the country took a definite leftward swing when female
> > suffrage was enacted.
>
> > In America, the effects were slightly more subtle, but the question
> > lingers. Are women capable of rejecting a promise of security for an
> > assurance of liberty? I don't know.
>
> Not according to John Lott:
> http://johnrlott.tripod.com/op-eds/WashTimesWomensSuff112707.html
>
> "Academics have long pondered why the government started growing precisely
> when
> it did. The federal government, aside from periods of wartime, consumed about
> 2
> percent to 3 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) up until World War I. It
> was the first war that the government spending didn't go all the way back
> down
> to its pre-war levels, and then, in the 1920s, non-military federal spending
> began steadily climbing. President Franklin Delano Roosevelt's New Deal -
> often
> viewed as the genesis of big government - really just continued an earlier
> trend. What changed before Roosevelt came to power that explains the growth
> of
> government? The answer is women's suffrage."

lol

[Boon[_2_]]

On Apr 28, 2:20*pm, Jenn > wrote:
> In article >,
>
>
>
>
>
> *"GeoSynch" > wrote:
> > Bret L asked:
>
> > > In Australia, the country took a definite leftward swing when female
> > > suffrage was enacted.
>
> > > In America, the effects were slightly more subtle, but the question
> > > lingers. Are women capable of rejecting a promise of security for an
> > > assurance of liberty? I don't know.
>
> > Not according to John Lott:
> >http://johnrlott.tripod.com/op-eds/WashTimesWomensSuff112707.html
>
> > "Academics have long pondered why the government started growing precisely
> > when
> > it did. The federal government, aside from periods of wartime, consumed about
> > 2
> > percent to 3 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) up until World War I. It
> > was the first war that the government spending didn't go all the way back
> > down
> > to its pre-war levels, and then, in the 1920s, non-military federal spending
> > began steadily climbing. President Franklin Delano Roosevelt's New Deal -
> > often
> > viewed as the genesis of big government - really just continued an earlier
> > trend. What changed before Roosevelt came to power that explains the growth
> > of
> > government? The answer is women's suffrage."
>
> lol

Don't be so tough on RAO's bachelors. They're having a hard enough
time figuring out why women won't go near them.

[[email protected]]

GeoSynch > wrote:
: What changed before Roosevelt came to power that explains the growth of
: government? The answer is women's suffrage."

None of the other things that happened around that time could have been the
cause? I suppose the Arizona Diamondbacks winning the pennant caused 9/11.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Apr 28, 6:11*pm, wrote:
> GeoSynch > wrote:
>
> : What changed before Roosevelt came to power that explains the growth of
> : government? The answer is women's suffrage."
>
> None of the other things that happened around that time could have been the
> cause? *I suppose the Arizona Diamondbacks winning the pennant caused 9/11.

Sorry, but what a superficial examination of history. The true answer
lies in a Kubrick movie which came out long before the diamondbacks
were a team.

Duh.

[Boon[_2_]]

On Apr 28, 7:14*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
> wrote:
> On Apr 28, 6:11*pm, wrote:
>
> > GeoSynch > wrote:
>
> > : What changed before Roosevelt came to power that explains the growth of
> > : government? The answer is women's suffrage."
>
> > None of the other things that happened around that time could have been the
> > cause? *I suppose the Arizona Diamondbacks winning the pennant caused 9/11.
>
> Sorry, but what a superficial examination of history. The true answer
> lies in a Kubrick movie which came out long before the diamondbacks
> were a team.
>
> Duh.

Of course! "I am Spartacus!" I always knew it was some sort of a code.