McCain....women don't deserve the same pay. Palin...duh..ok!
Posted by Kacey (+3154) 13 years ago
I posted this comment in another forum but think this deserves it's own thread.

Maybe McCain's hoping to save some of the national cash by getting a woman in the VP slot. After all, he doesn't think women deserve the same pay as men for the same job.

Why would any woman want to back a man who thinks women deserve less pay for the same job?

Maybe she's hoping he won't live long due to his advanced age and she can step in the Presidency slot.
Top
supporter
Posted by Rick Kuchynka (+4458) 13 years ago
A perfect analogy for Senator Hopenchange's "Just Words" candidacy.

http://www.cnsnews.com/Pu...rcID=31833
As noted, female staffers were paid less than men on average in Obama's office no matter which measure was used. Female staffers in McCain's office were paid more than men on average no matter which measure was used. Clinton provided an almost identical average pay to males and females paid over $23,000 per year, but paid proportionally more to males than females, when averages were calculated for her entire payroll.
...
Of the five people in Obama's Senate office who were paid $100,000 or more on an annual basis, only one--Obama's administrative manager--was a woman.

The average pay for the 33 men on Obama's staff who earned more than $23,000 per year was $59,207. The average pay for the 31 women on Obama's staff who earned more than $23,000 per year was $48,729.91. (The average pay for all 36 male employees on Obama's staff was $55,962; and the average pay for all 31 female employees was $48,729. The report indicated that Obama had only one paid intern during the period, who was a male.)
Top
Posted by Chuck Schott (+1291) 13 years ago
Rick,

Lets not be clouding the issue with things like facts and figures.
Top
Posted by LG (+202) 13 years ago
If they have a glass ceiling, what do we men have? That's right, a glass floor. Do you know how hard it is to concentrate on your job when you're constantly worried whether you've got gum or something on the bottom of your shoe? What if the breeding stock downstairs can see? Who will I procreate with then?

It's not like they'd stop complaining if they were on the glass floor and we had the glass ceiling. They'd complain that we're constantly looking up their skirts! They'd organize some kind of media fiasco, demanding the right to wear panties so we can't see their unflushable pink toilets. Women will always demand more, Presidential Candidates. I'm glad you've drawn your line in the sand.
Top
supporter
Posted by Richard Bonine, Jr (+15082) 13 years ago
Maybe McCain's hoping to save some of the national cash by getting a woman in the VP slot. After all, he doesn't think women deserve the same pay as men for the same job.

Why would any woman want to back a man who thinks women deserve less pay for the same job?


So which is it. You have stated that this women should be home spending more time with her children and in the next breath you are irritated that she is going to work for a guy who supposedly doesn't think women deserve the same pay as men for the same job. Seems like you are trying to have both sides of the issue here. If you are going to make that pig of an argument fly you need more flaps!
Top
Posted by shannon gamber (+20) 13 years ago
I don't care what people of Miles City think, the woman is just what our country has been looking for. Shes a person who has down to earth problems like other families . SHE IS ALSO FOR THE PEOPLE BEFORE GOV.POLITICS . SHES A FIGHTER AND I WILL VOTE FOR MCAIN&PALIN. I am in Alaska and have seen how the people here react and its all very positive. Get to know THE PEOPLE HERE IN ALASKA and you'll find out who Gov.Palin is!
Top
Posted by urcrackinmeup (+141) 13 years ago
I won't vote McCain/Palin this year because they are not pro-choice.
Top
Posted by Kyle L. Varnell (+3752) 13 years ago
I won't vote McCain/Palin this year because they are not pro-choice.

That's one of the reasons I will be voting for McCain/Palin.

Pro-Choice: Liberal Euphemism for legalized infant murder.
Top
supporter
Posted by Gunnar Emilsson (+17731) 13 years ago
Well, even if he won't visit Montana, you can't say McCain isn't trying his damnedest to win over the Montana vote.....
Top
Posted by shannon gamber (+20) 13 years ago
Palin went against her own party to get state refund checks to the people here in ALASKA. I'm pretty sure she'll do the same if voted into office as our vice president.BESIDES the NRA WON'T HAVE ANY PROBLEMS COMING OUT OF WASHINGTON DC.Watch out washington THE PEOPLE 'S VOICE WILL BE HEARD &YOUR POCKETS WILL FILL THE POCKETS OF THE WORKING WOMAN &MAN
Top
supporter
Posted by Gunnar Emilsson (+17731) 13 years ago
See, Howdy? Just because you are a sexist, you have aligned yourself with the cap lockers.

I hope you are happy.
Top
supporter
Posted by howdy (+4950) 13 years ago
While you might think Sexism is a funny topic, Gunnar, I do not and don't find your pictures funny either...A lot of very well qualified women have been deeply hurt over the years with sexism...If this is the new DNC, then I rightfully don't wish to belong to it any longer...and that my friend makes me very sad indeed..
Top
supporter
Posted by Gunnar Emilsson (+17731) 13 years ago
Your post is such a complete load of drivel and nonsense, howdy...where do I begin?

First, Hillary lost. Get over it.

Second, where do you get off on this that the Democratic party has turned "sexist" because Hillary lost? I do not see anything to suggest that this is the case. If one examines the issues that most women hold dear,e.g., freedom of choice, health care, equal pay and opportunity.....I think most women will score the Democrats over the Republicans.

Third, you call yourself a "liberal", yet you are willing to switch your vote to McSame because he nominates a poorly qualified ultraconservative woman to be his running mate. Puh-lease.....give me a friggin' break. You are basically a one-issue voter, like so many other crackpots out there.

I have more respect for the Ricks, Kyles, and Richards out there than you, for at least they stay on message. The core issues I care about are the economy, energy crisis, the war on terror, and the like. Say what you will about those whose core issues are gay marriage, birthin' babies, and guns, at least they are consistent. Their vote is not determined by the sexes of their candidates.

Finally, you find the images I post offensive? I am sure a lot of people do....and I am sure a lot find them funny. But me, the guy who is posting them, is just a mc.com doofus....I am not posting them on behalf of the DNC.
Top
supporter
Posted by howdy (+4950) 13 years ago
Since there are so many things in your last post that I disagree with, and I am not a person that insults others easily, I will just say......

whatever....

Forgot to add, that the last time you got mad at me for not supporting your candidate, Obama, you called me a racist....At least your argument has moved to issues now which is good at least....

[This message has been edited by howdy (edited 9/2/2008).]
Top
supporter
Posted by Richard Bonine, Jr (+15082) 13 years ago
Oh no... cellulite. Another reason she isn't qualified.

NICE picture Gunner. Don't you have a pit or something else to design?
Top
supporter
Posted by Rick Kuchynka (+4458) 13 years ago
Gunnar, you act like Barack isn't barkin' up the same tree.



Note, bolo tie, yet still no flag pin... subtle
Top
supporter
Posted by Richard Bonine, Jr (+15082) 13 years ago
*** Warning... colloquially PBR humor ahead**

Where is "Bodacious" or "Clayton's Pet" when you really need them.
Top
supporter
Posted by Gunnar Emilsson (+17731) 13 years ago
Forgot to add, that the last time you got mad at me for not supporting your candidate, Obama, you called me a racist....At least your argument has moved to issues now which is good at least....

I dunno where you got that from...not supporting your candidate, Obama....I remember distinctly, on June 3, 2008, voting for Hillary Clinton in the primary...BUT I GOT OVER IT.

I was still on the fence until Obama picked my guy, Biden, for a running mate. That definitely swung me on his side. McCain had one last chance to appeal for my vote....he could have picked Lieberman....but instead, he caved in to the
part of the Republican Party. (thanks Hal!)

Plus, I don't get mad at people on the internet...disappointed, yes, contemptous, yes,...but mad? Never. I leave that for Mr. Shipley.

Finally, I don't recall calling you a rascist. I will call you a religious bigot, though, for not supporting America's first Muslim candidate for president.
Top
supporter
Posted by howdy (+4950) 13 years ago
If that wasn't you that called me that, then I apologize, just can't remember the thread right now, but someone actually called me that and I thought it was you...lol about the wingnut emoticon...this has to be the most upside down election in my memory..I have never seen something so confusing and it is getting harder and harder to tell the dems from the repubs...Maybe there isn't a big difference after all but then again I find that hard to believe too...lol...Color me confused as heck...
Top
supporter
Posted by Bridgier (+9307) 13 years ago
I think it's pretty straightforward - if Rick grew breasts, would you vote for him?
Top
Posted by Kyle L. Varnell (+3752) 13 years ago
Would you Bridgier
Top
supporter
Posted by Bridgier (+9307) 13 years ago
Maybe. It all depends on how large they ended up being.
Top
supporter
Posted by Gunnar Emilsson (+17731) 13 years ago
Howdy's viewpoints were expressed best the other night by this news correspondent:

http://www.thedailyshow.c...nning-Mate
Top
supporter
Posted by howdy (+4950) 13 years ago
Howdy's viewpoints are best expressed by Howdy...has nothing to do with the body parts whatsoever, but has every thing to do with the treatment of someone based on those body parts...A person shouldn't be denegrated due to their body parts and to compare Hillary to Palin is silly. They couldnt be more different.
Top
moderator
founder
Posted by David Schott (+17509) 13 years ago
The fake photo Gunnar posted of Sarah Palin in a bikini and holding a rifle has earned a spot on Fox News' front page:



http://elections.foxnews....ts-a-fake/
Top
Posted by jessiker (+285) 13 years ago
Hmmm... can't help but wonder if, because this country does have a history of paying men better than women, and hiring men for better-paying jobs than women, maybe the higher paid people (note: men, typically) don't have more experience, and thus DESERVE the better pay? And couldn't it be said, then, that if these women don't have more experience, McCain paying the women in his campaign more than the men is sexist?
Top
supporter
sponsor
Posted by souix (+308) 13 years ago
Howdy,

If you vote McCain/Palin, McCain will be president. McCain did not support the Lilly Ledbetter legislation which would have changed the absurd Supreme Court ruling that said that Ledbetter had 180 days to file a claim against her employer, Goodyear tire, regardless that she did not know at the time that she was a victim of discrimination. The Supreme Court Justices who voted against Ledbetter were Scalia, Roberts, Thomas and Kennedy.
Top
supporter
sponsor
Posted by souix (+308) 13 years ago
Rick,

Statistics can be manipulated to say whatever you want.
The article also states "By one measure, however, women did do better in Obama's office than in McCain's. When the average salary was calculated for all people on the office payroll, including interns, Clinton paid women an average of $51,948, Obama paid women an average of $48,729, and McCain paid women an average of $47,898."
I find it troubling that McCain called his wife a c**t in public and thinks that rape jokes are funny.
Top
supporter
sponsor
Posted by souix (+308) 13 years ago
Shannon,

If you think McCain is going to fill your pockets, I have a bridge in Alaska that I want to sell you.
Top
supporter
Posted by Rick Kuchynka (+4458) 13 years ago
"By one measure, however, women did do better in Obama's office than in McCain's. When the average salary was calculated for all people on the office payroll, including interns, Clinton paid women an average of $51,948, Obama paid women an average of $48,729, and McCain paid women an average of $47,898."

That doesn't make any sense. The question is whether Obama pays his men a testosterone premium. Saying his women make more than McCain's doesn't really help. Especially since you're convoluting by counting interns against McCain, because Obama doesn't hire any (as Democrats have learned, they're more trouble than they're worth )

Anyway, by your logic, for example, on the Ledbetter case. All Goodyear should have to do is find some guy from some company anywhere that made less than Ledbetter. Would that "disprove" discrimination?

Now mind you, I don't really believe in this whole song and dance. McCain's approach is the right one. Find good women and put them in positions of authority. Pay them what they're worth. Obama's inner circle still seems to be a man's domain.

Anyway, we don't need yet another litigative bonanza thrown against our already strapped employers.

Then we wonder why they say, "Screw it, let's just ship 'em to China"
Not alot of EEOC complaints filed over there.

[This message has been edited by Rick Kuchynka (edited 9/10/2008).]
Top
Posted by Mark (+28) 13 years ago
Any other gun nuts notice that the gun in the above picture is just a pellet gun???

Automatic weapon my asssssssk me no more questions...
Top
supporter
Posted by Gunnar Emilsson (+17731) 13 years ago
Yes, it is a Crossman pellet gun, I believe.
Top
supporter
sponsor
Posted by souix (+308) 13 years ago
Rick,
I took the quote out of the same article that you posted. My point is that a lot of factors come into play and you cannot understand the makeup of each organizational without some comprehensive salary and job information.

Oh we are unquestionably more trouble, because we are more complex! Most guys would disagree that with you on the worth it part.

Ledbetter was in a supervisory position and received promotions during her career with Goodyear. That fact was not disputed. What was disputed was the window of time in which she was allowed to bring her suit.

.so is it your contention that when a company has unfair labor practice the women should just "buck up" and take it because of their poor "strapped employers"?

[This message has been edited by souix (edited 9/10/2008).]
Top
supporter
Posted by Buck Showalter (+4455) 13 years ago
What the hell is going on? Rick is suddenly the liberal who cares about equality in wages. What a load of bullshot.
Top
supporter
Posted by Buck Showalter (+4455) 13 years ago
Okay, Kyle's asking for this.

Pro-Choice: Liberal Euphemism for legalized infant murder.

Pro Life?

We own America's vaginas.
We're not the government, we're the Lord.
Make war, not love.

[This message has been edited by Buck Showalter (edited 9/11/2008).]
Top
supporter
Posted by Rick Kuchynka (+4458) 13 years ago
the liberal who cares about equality in wages

Liberals don't care any more than conservatives. We just differ on how to get there. McCain's campaign sets a good example.
Top
supporter
sponsor
Posted by souix (+308) 13 years ago
Rick,

Pray tell...what is the path that conservatives propose to take to obtain equal pay for women?
Top
Posted by GVC (+510) 13 years ago
The average pay for the 33 men on Obama's staff who earned more than $23,000 per year was $59,207. The average pay for the 31 women on Obama's staff who earned more than $23,000 per year was $48,729.91. (The average pay for all 36 male employees on Obama's staff was $55,962; and the average pay for all 31 female employees was $48,729.

What this doesn't take into account is that women still tend to work in positions that are traditionally paid less than those dominated by men. This is certainly an equality issue but one more problematic than the equal pay for equal work issue. Positions dominated by women - secretarial, elementary school teachers, nurses, etc. - are not valued by this society as much as work dominated by men - managers, college professors, doctors, etc. And when women do break into a male-dominated field, you see a trend downward in pay if women become the dominant sex. Bank tellers are a prime example. Formerly a good job and jumping off point for the ambitious man, it is now not much more than a clerk position which often pays little over minimum wage to start. Men used to dominate, now women do. I'm not making this up. I did a research paper on this very subject in law school. Things are better since 1986 but there's still some inequity.

GVC's wife

[This message has been edited by GVC (edited 9/12/2008).]
Top
supporter
Posted by Rick Kuchynka (+4458) 13 years ago
Positions dominated by women - secretarial, elementary school teachers, nurses, etc. - are not valued by this society as much as work dominated by men - managers, college professors, doctors, etc.

Every one of those is an example of the "dominated by men" professions requiring more education than the "dominated by women" professions. And even then, I'm not sure they apply anymore. Especially as far as doctors go. There are still problem employers for sure, but for the most part, from what I've seen if a woman chooses to go through the education required for any of the "men's" professions, they have just as much opportunity.

As for how to "fix" it. The problem is any incident anywhere will be used to argue the problem is endemic. Honestly, the problem is mostly correcting itself. Employers who reward successful women the same as they would men will outcompete those who don't. They'll draw the best female employees away from the competition. Lawsuits already work to weed out many of the blatent offenders, but a balance needs to be struck.

Removing the statute of limitations is a trial-lawyer's dream, and a bad idea. There's a good reason for those limits, because employers need protection as well. This may result in a few cases of discrimination not being punished as they should. But the litigative alternative results in fewer jobs for everyone, as employers throw in the towel, or outsource jobs where rights to sue over these things don't exist.

Also, companies now shouldn't be punished because of a cultural shift that really had nothing to do with them. The Channel 4 News team shouldn't be bankrupted over the decades-old actions of Ron Burgundy.

[This message has been edited by Rick Kuchynka (edited 9/13/2008).]
Top