Obama's war on women

Walker, your remarks about women who favor democratic policies was incredibly sexist. You call me a little girl for criticizing you for this, yet it is you who is making the petty and disparaging remarks.

 

Are you drinking...that makes no sense. I tend to doubt I was in nursery school when you were here.

 

I never called you a little girl, I said my girls aren't using their jacks. Not the same thing.

 

No it is the same thing as you are clearly implying that I'm a little girl, or at the very least a child. You are being reported.

 

Typical...just like a democrat to completely turn around what I say. Do what you want.

 

From your own public profile page:

"coolest in the world, 3 daughters, all girls, 9 year old twins and a 7 year old" Maybe someone close to you has daughters who are not girls.... I dunno why else you would feel the need to tell us that your three daughters were all girls. Maybe you just work for the Department of Redundancy Department and it comes naturally.

I was in Norfolk first in the early 70's ('73-'77 on Farragut). How old were you then?

 

They are now 10 and 8...it's none of your business of course, but my wife and I married a bit later than most people as we had ongoing careers. I got out of the Army in 1968...you do the math smart guy!

 

...The only candidate that really had a war against women recently dropped out of the race. These school yard tactics of "You have a war on women...No, you have a war on women...No, you have..." are a little embarassing to decent logic-driven Americans. Can we move on, please?

 

so... you don't think it is a bit odd to say that you have three daughters, all girls? Don't you find that an odd thing to say?

I have two sons... both boys? doesn't that sound silly? What ELSE would they be?

and gosh... you did start late. you're probably older than I am! geezer.

 

That's right I am older and wiser and lot less crass. I wasn't aware that you were my English teacher and I would be careful if you are going to attempt be an English teacher for everyone, it could end up biting you

Now, anything else or can we move on?.

 

Nice try ...

 

older, it would appear... wiser, doubtful.... less crass, well one would expect you to say so.

Sure...we can move on. I can't spend a lot of time right now because I need to go walk my two dogs, both canines, and then take my wife, a lovely, feminine, female woman, out to lunch.

 

So he can't attract any women with merit, experience and vision. You do know what AFFIRMATIVE action is suppose to mean? What's his problem he can't find any?

Yes it's been ongoing from the get-go.

 

Post you numbers then

"According to the 2011 annual report on White House staff, female employees earned a median annual salary of $60,000, which was about 18 percent less than the median salary for male employees ($71,000).

Calculating the median salary for each gender required some assumptions to be made based on the employee names. When unclear, every effort was taken to determine the appropriate gender.

The Obama campaign on Wednesday lashed out at presumptive GOP nominee Mitt Romney for his failure to immediately endorse the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Restoration Act, a controversial law enacted in 2009 that made it easier to file discrimination lawsuits.

President Obama has frequently criticized the gender pay gap, such as the one that exists in White House.

“Paycheck discrimination hurts families who lose out on badly needed income,” he said in a July 2010 statement. “And with so many families depending on women’s wages, it hurts the American economy as a whole.”"

 

I know exactly what affirmative action is supposed to mean. It means that your workforce is supposed to closely resemble the community from which it originates. At the highest levels of government, I want the absolute very best of the best of the best... and if more of the most senior members of his administration are men, so be it. That would not be different from any other presidential administration since George Washington. Again... from your limited data, you want to deduce that women are paid less in the Obama White House staff than men are... and that is flawed logic. You have no idea what men and women of similar or identical job descriptions and responsibilities are paid.

so this supposed tell-all book that was supposedly quoted in your earlier post hasn't made it to market yet? now that's what I call a reliable source. A book three years in the writing that somehow never materializes. Why don't you shut your pie hole, crawl back under your rock and come on back out when the book is published and vetted. mmmmkay?

 

Nope, see you stick with debating things about your own country. It means you are suppose to take AFFIRMATIVE ACTION to ensure you do not deny minorities employment.

Hmmmm so women are usually the best of the best, men are better than their best? That's not what Obama says on the campaign trial. His first act in office was the sign the equity pay act decrying how women in the workplace only make 81% of what men do, his WH is worse, he had the same problem in his Senate office.

Yes we do no what they make and the positions they hold, their pay is dictated by law. What we see is he has fewer women and they are are not equally represented in the highest positions, the occupy the lower positions.

Didn't take him three years to write it, the story he was relating occured in 2009 and been in publication since last September, do you ever bother to go look things up yourself? Your post might not look so silly. And it wasn't a tell-all book. Suskind is a respect political writer.

 

you need to take affirmative actions to ensure that your workforce resembles the community from which it is derived.

you have not proven that women in the white house working in positions equal to their male counterparts are making less than them. Get back to me when you can prove that assertion. Right now... it is merely another of your opinions that you try to pawn off as fact.

still not proof that men make more for equal work than women do in the White House. Sorry.

oh really? Why don't you go argue that point with the Washington Post, smart guy?

"Ron Suskind, the author of a new White House tell-all that has the Obama administration in vigorous push-back mode"

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...book-on-today/2011/09/20/gIQANu6thK_blog.html

 

Doesn't even have to be the community. But it does mean you take AFFIRMATIVE action. So when Obama goes out on the stump and decries that women in the workplace make less than men, while in his own White House the desparity is even greater, he doesn't have a leg to stand on.

Which was not the claim, they are not been afforded the higher paying jobs.

OH no it is fact as backed up by the links which are not MY opinion.

Yes really, tell-all books are consider those written by the person who was a part of what they are telling all about, he never worked there, his book is a historical perspective of the Obama administration. Else every historical book is a tell-all book.

 

sure he does as long as he can show that he took affirmative action to make his staff reflective of the community from which it was drawn, he is totally covered.

perhaps no women who were as qualified as the final male recipient ever applied for the jobs. Nowhere does affirmative action require you to hire LESS qualified applicants.

you have posted NOTHING that shows that women in the same organizational position make less than male counterparts in the Obama White House.

Lie I said... take it up with the Washington Post. They called it a tell-all book. I merely echoed their comments.

 

No he doesn't, it's called lead by example.

Affirmative action. Perhaps that is why in the general workforce women make less than men, your excuse can apply to every business not just the WH yet it is Obama who is demanding this inequality be ended. He should start with his own hiring practices where he has been criticized for years.

It urges you to FIND them through AFFIRMATIVE action and if your workforce shows a disparate outcome then the feds can step in and sue you.

The REPORTS I linked show overall they make less are not represented in equally in the higher paying jobs thus the pay disparity.

It was one reporters blog, a reporter who has a history of left leanings. Tell alls are written by people who are doing the telling.

Here is the REAL Washington Post Revies

"http://www.washingtonpost.com/entertainment/books/confidence-men-wall-street-washington-and-the-education-of-a-president-by-ron-suskind/2011/09/23/gIQAHV80qK_story.html

And the Amazon review, neither call it a "tell-all" book. You don't know much about Suskind do you.

"Publication Date: September 20, 2011

The hidden history of Wall Street and the White House comes down to a single, powerful, quintessentially American concept: confidence. Both centers of power, tapping brazen innovations over the past three decades, learned how to manufacture it.

Until August 2007, when that confidence finally began to crumble.

In this gripping and brilliantly reported book, Ron Suskind tells the story of what happened next, as Wall Street struggled to save itself while a man with little experience and soaring rhetoric emerged from obscurity to usher in “a new era of responsibility.” It is a story that follows the journey of Barack Obama, who rose as the country fell, and offers the first full portrait of his tumultuous presidency.

Wall Street found that straying from long-standing principles of transparency, accountability, and fair dealing opened a path to stunning profits. Obama’s determination to reverse that trend was essential to his ascendance, especially when Wall Street collapsed during the fall of an election year and the two candidates could audition for the presidency by responding to a national crisis. But as he stood on the stage in Grant Park, a shudder went through Barack Obama. He would now have to command Washington, tame New York, and rescue the economy in the first real management job of his life.

The new president surrounded himself with a team of seasoned players—like Rahm Emanuel, Larry Summers, and Tim Geithner—who had served a different president in a different time. As the nation’s crises deepened, Obama’s deputies often ignored the president’s decisions—“to protect him from himself”—while they fought to seize control of a rudderless White House. Bitter disputes—between men and women, policy and politics—ruled the day. The result was an administration that found itself overtaken by events as, year to year, Obama struggled to grow into the world’s toughest job and, in desperation, take control of his own administration.

Pulitzer Prize–winning journalist Ron Suskind introduces readers to an ensemble cast, from the titans of high finance to a new generation of reformers, from petulant congressmen and acerbic lobbyists to a tight circle of White House advisers—and, ultimately, to the president himself, as you’ve never before seen him. Based on hundreds of interviews and filled with piercing insights and startling disclosures, Confidence Men brings into focus the collusion and conflict between the nation’s two capitals—New York and Washington, one of private gain, the other of public purpose—in defining confidence and, thereby, charting America’s future."
http://www.amazon.com/Confidence-Men-Washington-Education-President/dp/0061429252

Take it up with Amazon.

 

and you have no idea what effort his team expended in convincing qualified women to apply for administration positions.

As I said... when it comes to the running of this nation, I want the president to make his decisions based upon merit, and not on plumbing.

no. it requires that you fully document your EFFORTS to find them... and if those efforts are deemed sufficient, the feds will not care if your workforce does not contain an exactly equal reflection of the community from which it is drawn

Exactly. Nowhere in your reports does it show that women are being paid less than men for the same level of work in the Obama White House. Any overall pay disparity between men and women in that staff is due to men having been selected for higher ranking positions

you say tomato, I say toMAHto...

actually, my kids gave me "Price of Loyalty" a few years back for Christmas... LOVED it.

why would I? I don't tend to get wrapped around the axle with meaningless BS like you do.

 

Disparate outcome, are you asserting that men are more qualified than women? Obama has no idea what effort all business goes through yet believes that a law is necessary to bring them into equality.

So you would have opposed the Lilly Ledbetter law he signed into effect and Affirmative Action requirements?

Disparate outcomes are proof you did not.

Again I don't have to, the reports clearly show women are not hired into the higher paying jobs. AND the statement of the woman who worked their previously that Obama does not care about seeking equality in his staff.

You say, the newspaper, I say the blogger who wrote it.

Hey if you want to state the equal pay in the workplace is meaningless BS have at it.

 

I am merely suggesting that, for whatever reason, the Obama administration team found the most qualified candidates for many of the higher positions to be male. Neither you nor I know the level of qualification of any of the women who were denied those positions. And affirmative action is a great program that does indeed force businesses to look beyond their pre-conceived notions and actually see who is really out in their communities with talents they could use

not at all.

They absolutely do not prove any such thing. this is yet another in an incredibly long line of instances where you attempt to pass off your opinion as fact.

If you don't have to prove that women are being paid less than men for the same work, how then can you state that women are paid less? YOu have no proof that the administration did not bend over backwards to attract female employees other than hearsay from disgruntled former employees.

as always... you have your opinion, and I have mine. The difference being, of course, that I always state mine in the form of an opinion where you routinely falsely state yours as if it were fact.

I have never said, nor implied any such thing. I think equal pay in the workforce is absolutely essential.

However, that does not mean that the woman who takes the orders at the drive through window at MacDonald's should be paid the same as the man who manages five different MacDonald's franchises. It means that the woman taking orders should not be paid less than a man taking orders simply because of her gender.

 

And as the manager it is his job to find and attract females in order to help iron out the pay gap he is railing against.

Here your own newspaper over there is reporting it just as I have here.

Women paid significantly less in Obama White House than their male counterparts

By Meghan Keneally

PUBLISHED: 18:25 EST, 11 April 2012 | UPDATED: 10:23 EST, 12 April 2012

Comments (22)
Share


All of President Barack Obama's employees may not be treated equally in the White House, as recently released financial records show that female employees earn significantly less than their male counterparts.

Using the 2011 annual report of White House staff salaries that was submitted to Congress, an $11,000 difference is clear between the median female employee salary and the median male employee salary.

This news comes on top of continued criticism- of both President Obama and prior presidents- that women are underrepresented in the White House.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ntly-Obama-White-House-male-counterparts.html

 

two points:

what are you talking about my newspaper over there??? MY hometown newspaper is in Spanish.

next. "median salary" does not mean that women are paid less for the same job. nice try.