[Rhodes22-list] Politics: States Rights

Sat Nov 4 14:11:30 EST 2006

Bill,

     HA!  Finally, on something we completely agree!  I have argued this
with my conservative acquaintances time and again.  You're right about Bush,
but every recent administration has done it in their own interests.  The
Bill of Rights binds the FEDERAL Government.  The Constitution lays out the
FEDERAL rules.  The 10th Amendment lays out the exceptions.  Otherwise, why
do the states need their own constitutions?  Each state is sovereign bound
by the Federal Government for national interests where it is laid out in the
Constitution.

Philip

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	rhodes22-list-bounces at rhodes22.org
[mailto:rhodes22-list-bounces at rhodes22.org]  On Behalf Of Bill Effros
Sent:	Saturday, November 04, 2006 10:56 AM
To:	The Rhodes 22 mail list
Subject:	[Rhodes22-list] Politics:  States Rights

Yes, it was a States Rights issue, and many states that allowed women to
vote by state statute opposed the constitutional amendment.

I don't even know how to deal with the concept of States Rights.  You
can't be for it when it favors your issues and against it when it favors
the issues of others.

George Bush rode into office on a States Rights platform, but when he
got the ability to pass national legislation he did not hesitate to
overrule States Rights.

Clarence Thomas (of all people) has been a consistent advocate of States
Rights.  He cast the deciding vote on the Eminent Domain case, saying
that it was up to the States to pass legislation on how they could apply
the concept of Eminent Domain within their borders.  A principled stand.

Bill Effros

Philip wrote:
> Some of that was based upon the Constitution leaving the pattern, method
and
> execution of voting to the states.
>
> Philip
>
>
>  -----Original Message-----
> From: 	rhodes22-list-bounces at rhodes22.org
> [mailto:rhodes22-list-bounces at rhodes22.org]  On Behalf Of Bill Effros
> Sent:	Saturday, November 04, 2006 12:49 AM
> To:	The Rhodes 22 mail list
> Subject:	Re: [Rhodes22-list] Political Humor: "I Did Not Have Sex With
> ThatMan"
>
> Actually, many women could vote in many states, but not all, at the time
> of the 19th amendment.  The constitutional amendment unequivocally
> extended the vote to all women.
>
> I used the word "let" on purpose.  I just wanted to see if you were
> paying attention.  It's a male thing.
>
> Bill Effros
>
> L. Sailor wrote:
>
>>> males over 21 were the only people allowed to vote,
>>>
>>>
>> and a very large >number of them had to vote to create
>> the 19th Amendment
>>
>> Absolutely true...and you know that they did not do so
>> without  considerable pressure from the distaff
>> side...(we know how to make you hurt....!!...'^)
>>
>>  'Let' is the wrong word..it implies a
>> willingness..and there were many men who were
>> willing(and many who were not..)...but perhaps
>> 'granted' (nope..too subservient)...allowed (nope..too
>> patronizing....)
>>
>> Maybe the right word will come while I sleep...
>>
>> Jump in anyone with your own ...
>>
>> elle
>>
>> --- Joseph Hadzima <josef508 at yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> Before I and in my $0.02 I'll put on my asbestos
>>> suit.
>>>
>>> Now Elle, at that time, males over 21 were the only
>>> people
>>> allowed to vote, and a very large number of them had
>>> to
>>> vote to create the 19th Amendment, agrees with the
>>> phrase
>>> that "they let them have the vote".   If women at
>>> that time
>>> held a revolution/revolt and created a new
>>> government which
>>> included voting right for woman, then that phrase
>>> would be
>>> FALSE, and it would be true that no man gave, or
>>> allowed
>>> them to have anything.
>>>
>>> I in no way wish to imply that the Suffrage movement
>>> was
>>> anything less that HERoic!  I am also convinced that
>>> those
>>> civil actions were the catalyst for a majority of
>>> men with
>>> voting rights to pass the 19th Amendment.
>>>
>>> See women may need to express their wishes (sometime
>>> more
>>> than once, maybe a little louder) in a strong
>>> argument and
>>> men are perfectly able to understand (eventually)
>>> and do
>>> the right thing!
>>>
>>> I let my wife vote (I drive us both to the polling
>>> center
>>> rather than disable her car), even when she tells me
>>> she's
>>> voting for the other candidate!  :-)
>>>
>>> It is a wonderful accomplishment that most of the 27
>>> amendments (though only 26 are in force) can be
>>> created
>>> through civil actions, and education of our brothers
>>> &
>>> sisters.  A pretty good record except for the ones
>>> which
>>> required a nasty war between the states.
>>>
>>> sorry I just had to split hairs tonight - had too
>>> many
>>> split for me at work, and I have too many
>>> miss-firing
>>> neuron - Hey Rummy how about a drink over here!
>>>
>>>
>>> only a few more days and then the END of the
>>> campaign ads
>>> on TV!!!!!!   Praise the Lord (and pass the
>>> ammunition)!
>>>
>>> remember to vote early & vote often!
>>>
>>> I'm goon put down my wine now and shutdown the
>>> putter.
>>>
>>> play nice!
>>>
>>> joe/hadz.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --- "L. Sailor" <watermusic38 at yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Gee, thanks for the primer.
>>>>
>>>> So now you're hiding behind the amendment, rather
>>>>
>>>>
>>> than
>>>
>>>
>>>> accepting the responsibility for the patronizing
>>>>
>>>>
>>> "we
>>>
>>>
>>>> LET them vote."
>>>>
>>>> If I remember history (yeah..his..story), there
>>>>
>>>>
>>> wasn't
>>>
>>>
>>>> a lot of letting but a lot of weeping & wailing &
>>>> gnashing of teeth...(and that was the men,...)
>>>>
>>>> (Probably a lot of kvetching, too...;^)
>>>>
>>>> elle
>>>>
>>>> --- Bill Effros <bill at effros.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>     "Amendment XIX"
>>>>>
>>>>> "The right of citizens of the United States to
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>> vote
>>>
>>>
>>>>> shall not be denied
>>>>> or abridged by the United States or by any State
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>> on
>>>
>>>
>>>>> account of sex."
>>>>>
>>>>> Bill Effros
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> L. Sailor wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>> We lost that battle when we let them vote.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Did he really SAY that???
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Let me look at it again....
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We lost that battle when we let them vote.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes..he REALLY said that...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1). How ignorant.
>>>>>> 2). The AUDACITY
>>>>>>
>>>>>> YOU LET us VOTE?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think not.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> elle
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>> === message truncated ===
>>>
>>> __________________________________________________
>>> Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help?
>>> www.rhodes22.org/list
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
____________________________________________________________________________
> ______________
>
>> Check out the New Yahoo! Mail - Fire up a more powerful email and get
>>
> things done faster.
>
>> (http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/mailbeta)
>>
>> __________________________________________________
>> Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list
>>
>>
>>
> __________________________________________________
> Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list
>
> __________________________________________________
> Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list
>
>
__________________________________________________
Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list