Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
December 11, 2017, 01:30:28 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
   Home   Help Login Register  
Pages: [1] 2 3   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Liberal War on Women  (Read 7360 times)
Dos Equis
Moderator
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 52191

I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)


« on: November 04, 2014, 08:43:15 AM »

Is it me or have there just been a number of incredibly inappropriate comments by liberals about conservative women? 

Harkin Apologizes after Ernst Calls Remarks Sexist
Monday, 03 Nov 2014

Retiring Iowa Democratic Sen. Tom Harkin apologized Monday for calling Republican Joni Ernst attractive, but "wrong for the state of Iowa."

Harkin, who has served in the Senate for 30 years and is supporting Democrat Bruce Braley to succeed him, made the remarks at a recent Democratic dinner. Video of the comments was posted on the Buzzfeed website Sunday.

"I don't care if she's as good looking as Taylor Swift or as nice as Mr. Rogers, but if she votes like (U.S. Rep.) Michele Bachmann, she's wrong for the state of Iowa," Harkin said.

Ernst decried the remark as sexist, saying: "he was talking about me being attractive and I was very offended by that, and again if I had been a male candidate, he wouldn't have made those statements." But referencing a Swift song, Ernst said she would "shake it off."

In a statement released Monday afternoon, Harkin said: "I shouldn't have said those things, I know that. I regret any time someone feels offended by what I have said. I am only human and I can make mistakes sometimes in how I say something. In fact, I have complimented her on running a very good campaign."

Braley's campaign manager Sarah Benzing said in a statement that "Bruce is glad that Senator Harkin made it clear today that he regrets making those comments and that he shouldn't have talked about the race that way."

Ernst, 44, a state lawmaker, and Braley, 57, a four-term congressman, have been locked in a tight race for months. Late polls show conflicting results, with one poll suggesting Ernst had pulled ahead, while several others showed a close matchup. Millions have poured into the state as Republicans drive for the six-seat gain they need to take the Senate.

Both candidates stumped for votes Monday. Ernst greeted voters at a bagel shop in Ankeny as part of a final 24-hour tour through the state, with stops overnight until she votes in her hometown of Red Oak on Tuesday.

Braley toured the state with Harkin on Monday, touting a weekend of aggressive voter outreach. Braley will accompany his mother when she votes in Brooklyn on Tuesday.

http://www.Newsmax.com/Politics/US-Senate-Iowa-Taylor/2014/11/03/id/604980/#ixzz3I7QczOew
Report to moderator   Logged
Dos Equis
Moderator
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 52191

I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)


« Reply #1 on: November 04, 2014, 08:54:18 AM »

NIKKI HALEY'S DEM OPPONENT: 'ESCORT WHORE OUT THE DOOR!'
by JOHN NOLTE  24 Oct 2014

While giving a get-out-the-vote speech at a Florence, South Carolina political event, Democrat gubernatorial candidate, State Senator Vincent Shaheen, told cheering fans of his opponent, sitting Republican governor Nikki Haley, "We are going to escort whore out the door." He then seemed to correct himself by exchanging the word "whore" with "her" while sharing knowing smiles and laughs with the Democrat crowd.
Shaheen lost to Haley in 2010. In their current rematch, the Real Clear Politics poll of polls has Haley ahead by more than 15 points.
Democrats have largely based their 2014 hopes on the party's support and respect for women.

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/10/24/nikki-haleys-dem-opponent-escort-whore-out-the-door

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e1SOfysMlvw" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e1SOfysMlvw</a>
Report to moderator   Logged
Archer77
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 14180

Team Shizzo


« Reply #2 on: November 04, 2014, 09:05:38 AM »

All the demagoguery from the left and right is so disgusting.  What a bunch of hypocritical fools.   But the proles eat it up even when they should know better.
Report to moderator   Logged

A
Dos Equis
Moderator
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 52191

I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)


« Reply #3 on: November 04, 2014, 09:19:49 AM »

All the demagoguery from the left and right is so disgusting.  What a bunch of hypocritical fools.   But the proles eat it up even when they should know better.

I agree.
Report to moderator   Logged
Dos Equis
Moderator
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 52191

I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)


« Reply #4 on: January 26, 2015, 11:35:18 AM »

They need to address their own party's war on women.

How the White House will use 'war on women' in 2015
BY BRIAN HUGHES | JANUARY 26, 2015

President Obama and his allies plan to ramp up their focus on the Republican "war on women," using the campaign-style approach to paint the new GOP majority as out of touch with the voters Democrats badly need to mobilize.

But the White House is tweaking its appeal to women, developing a more economic-centered pitch rather than devoting so much attention to social issues.

“It can’t just be abortion and birth control all the time,” a veteran Democratic pollster with close ties to the White House told the Washington Examiner.

“You have to give people a reason to vote for us, not just against the other side,” the female pollster added. “That’s why I think you’re seeing the White House frame it more in economic terms. I think that message appeals to even more women.”

The “war-on-women” attack proved disastrous for Democrats in November, most notably in a very winnable Senate contest in Colorado in which voters accused the party of pushing a single-issue platform.

Central to the newest effort is a heavy dose of messaging on equal pay, paid leave and greater access to child care, issues that received major play in Obama’s State of the Union address last week.

“It’s time we stop treating child care as a side issue, or as a women’s issue, and treat it like the national economic priority that it is for all of us,” Obama told lawmakers.

Directly challenging Republicans, he later added, “Congress still needs to pass a law that makes sure a woman is paid the same as a man for doing the same work. It’s 2015. It’s time.”

However, Obama is hardly guaranteed to get much traction from the plan. The White House still lacks an effective defense for why female staffers earn less money on average than their male counterparts at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave., analysts said.

Women at the White House make 88 cents for every dollar earned by a man, not all that different from the national average Obama so often highlights.

Those findings forced Obama spokesman Josh Earnest in July to admit, “I wouldn’t hold up the White House as the perfect example here.”

Critics argue that Obama’s message has another fatal flaw.

“Any woman who is a victim in this economy during the last six years is a victim of the Barack Obama economy,” said Republican pollster Kellyanne Conway. “Their own hand has brought any malady they are citing. They’re trying to run a challenger’s campaign as an incumbent.”

The White House isn’t dropping the issue of reproductive rights altogether — it recently issued a veto threat to a Republican bill banning abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy — but has put that message on the back burner.

Still, Republicans say the latest iteration of the White House attack won't work, noting their own efforts to pass legislation on worker training and flexibility, among other measures particularly appealing to women.

“It’s a strategy that failed in November, but for some reason, they’re going to double down,” said Doug Heye, former communications director of the Republican National Committee. “Republicans learned their lesson from dumb comments by dumb candidates in 2010 and 2012. Republicans are comfortable speaking about these issues."

Republicans fielded much-improved candidates in 2014, mostly avoiding nominees such as Todd Akin and Richard Mourdock, who embarrassed the party when wading into a discussion on rape.

The White House is now essentially taking a new page out of an old playbook to beat Republicans.

When asked by the Examiner whether Obama would continue to grill conservatives on their approach to women’s issues, a White House official replied simply, “You better believe it.”

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/how-the-white-house-will-use-war-on-women-in-2015/article/2559115
Report to moderator   Logged
JOHN MATRIX
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 13296


the Media is the Problem


« Reply #5 on: January 26, 2015, 02:17:10 PM »

didnt they find that the White House itself paid its women employees less??  Grin
Report to moderator   Logged
Straw Man
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 31950


one dwells in nirvana


« Reply #6 on: January 26, 2015, 02:48:17 PM »

They need to address their own party's war on women.

How the White House will use 'war on women' in 2015
BY BRIAN HUGHES | JANUARY 26, 2015

President Obama and his allies plan to ramp up their focus on the Republican "war on women," using the campaign-style approach to paint the new GOP majority as out of touch with the voters Democrats badly need to mobilize.

But the White House is tweaking its appeal to women, developing a more economic-centered pitch rather than devoting so much attention to social issues.

“It can’t just be abortion and birth control all the time,” a veteran Democratic pollster with close ties to the White House told the Washington Examiner.

“You have to give people a reason to vote for us, not just against the other side,” the female pollster added. “That’s why I think you’re seeing the White House frame it more in economic terms. I think that message appeals to even more women.”

The “war-on-women” attack proved disastrous for Democrats in November, most notably in a very winnable Senate contest in Colorado in which voters accused the party of pushing a single-issue platform.

Central to the newest effort is a heavy dose of messaging on equal pay, paid leave and greater access to child care, issues that received major play in Obama’s State of the Union address last week.

“It’s time we stop treating child care as a side issue, or as a women’s issue, and treat it like the national economic priority that it is for all of us,” Obama told lawmakers.

Directly challenging Republicans, he later added, “Congress still needs to pass a law that makes sure a woman is paid the same as a man for doing the same work. It’s 2015. It’s time.”

However, Obama is hardly guaranteed to get much traction from the plan. The White House still lacks an effective defense for why female staffers earn less money on average than their male counterparts at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave., analysts said.

Women at the White House make 88 cents for every dollar earned by a man, not all that different from the national average Obama so often highlights.

Those findings forced Obama spokesman Josh Earnest in July to admit, “I wouldn’t hold up the White House as the perfect example here.”

Critics argue that Obama’s message has another fatal flaw.

“Any woman who is a victim in this economy during the last six years is a victim of the Barack Obama economy,” said Republican pollster Kellyanne Conway. “Their own hand has brought any malady they are citing. They’re trying to run a challenger’s campaign as an incumbent.”

The White House isn’t dropping the issue of reproductive rights altogether — it recently issued a veto threat to a Republican bill banning abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy — but has put that message on the back burner.

Still, Republicans say the latest iteration of the White House attack won't work, noting their own efforts to pass legislation on worker training and flexibility, among other measures particularly appealing to women.

“It’s a strategy that failed in November, but for some reason, they’re going to double down,” said Doug Heye, former communications director of the Republican National Committee. “Republicans learned their lesson from dumb comments by dumb candidates in 2010 and 2012. Republicans are comfortable speaking about these issues."

Republicans fielded much-improved candidates in 2014, mostly avoiding nominees such as Todd Akin and Richard Mourdock, who embarrassed the party when wading into a discussion on rape.

The White House is now essentially taking a new page out of an old playbook to beat Republicans.

When asked by the Examiner whether Obama would continue to grill conservatives on their approach to women’s issues, a White House official replied simply, “You better believe it.”

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/how-the-white-house-will-use-war-on-women-in-2015/article/2559115

It is nice that you are so concerned about the Democratic Party. 

LOL - yeah a few stupid comments by a few people is somehow indicative of the entire party (unlike your party not supporting equal pay, limiting access to contraception and abortion, etc..)

Obama won in 2012 with the largest gender gap in history




* gender gap.JPG (61.43 KB, 706x592 - viewed 525 times.)
Report to moderator   Logged
bears
Getbig IV
****
Posts: 2196


« Reply #7 on: January 26, 2015, 02:50:32 PM »

the idea to pitch a campaign against the Republicans by saying that Republicans have a war on women is an incredibly stupid move by the Democrats.  Basically they are depending on the hope that all of the Democratic Congressman have done nothing untoward with women that will come out in the news.  

so.......good luck with that.
Report to moderator   Logged
Option D
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 17286


Kelly the Con Way


« Reply #8 on: January 26, 2015, 02:52:16 PM »

Is it me or have there just been a number of incredibly inappropriate comments by liberals about conservative women? 

So thats means theres a WAR on women?

Wowzers
Report to moderator   Logged
Dos Equis
Moderator
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 52191

I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)


« Reply #9 on: January 26, 2015, 02:54:18 PM »

So thats means theres a WAR on women?

Wowzers

Satire.  Kind of.
Report to moderator   Logged
Straw Man
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 31950


one dwells in nirvana


« Reply #10 on: January 26, 2015, 02:58:15 PM »

So thats means theres a WAR on women?

Wowzers

what do you expect from the mind of a guy that thinks this sign is part of a vast conspiracy to turn us all gender neutral



* bathroom sign.JPG (21.96 KB, 243x358 - viewed 363 times.)
Report to moderator   Logged
bears
Getbig IV
****
Posts: 2196


« Reply #11 on: January 26, 2015, 03:03:43 PM »

It is nice that you are so concerned about the Democratic Party. 

LOL - yeah a few stupid comments by a few people is somehow indicative of the entire party (unlike your party not supporting equal pay, limiting access to contraception and abortion, etc..)

Obama won in 2012 with the largest gender gap in history




the supporting equal pay movement has been proven to be stupid by both Democrats and Republicans.  
Report to moderator   Logged
Straw Man
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 31950


one dwells in nirvana


« Reply #12 on: January 26, 2015, 03:05:50 PM »

the supporting equal pay movement has been proven to be stupid by both Democrats and Republicans.  

interesting

"proven" you say

so why didn't you post the proof along with you statement
Report to moderator   Logged
bears
Getbig IV
****
Posts: 2196


« Reply #13 on: January 26, 2015, 03:33:37 PM »

interesting

"proven" you say

so why didn't you post the proof along with you statement

Basically here's how it went (tell me where i'm wrong):



Obama admin cries out for equal pay for women saying that the disparity is unfair and that women make 77 cents on the dollar to men....liberals swoon.

analysts who conduct studies on it explain that there are a number of reasons why women make less, (i.e. more women working part time, women choosing lower paying fields, especially in fields like medicine, women choosing less hazardous jobs, women leaving work force for child birth, etc.)

liberals call these people liars, sexist, and bigots.  

then conservatives take a look at the Obama administration and discover that women in the Obama administration only make 88 cents on the dollar and call Obama a hypocrite.

liberal analysts explain that there are a number of reasons why women make less, (i.e. more women working part time, women choosing lower paying fields, women choosing less hazardous jobs, women leaving work force for child birth, etc.)

liberals laugh at these stupid conservatives for not taking into account all of the relevant facts.

that is how I remember it.  so was the Obama administration lying?  I know you're not allowed to say that they were but I figured i'd ask.
Report to moderator   Logged
bears
Getbig IV
****
Posts: 2196


« Reply #14 on: January 26, 2015, 03:34:25 PM »

http://consad.com/content/reports/Gender%20Wage%20Gap%20Final%20Report.pdf
Report to moderator   Logged
bears
Getbig IV
****
Posts: 2196


« Reply #15 on: January 26, 2015, 03:39:22 PM »

http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2012/10/04/gender-wage-gap-may-be-smaller-than-many-think/
Report to moderator   Logged
Straw Man
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 31950


one dwells in nirvana


« Reply #16 on: January 26, 2015, 03:41:24 PM »

Basically here's how it went (tell me where i'm wrong):



Obama admin cries out for equal pay for women saying that the disparity is unfair and that women make 77 cents on the dollar to men....liberals swoon.

analysts who conduct studies on it explain that there are a number of reasons why women make less, (i.e. more women working part time, women choosing lower paying fields, women choosing less hazardous jobs, especially in fields like medicine, women leaving work force for child birth, etc.)

liberals call these people liars, sexist, and bigots. 

then conservatives take a look at the Obama administration and discover that women in the Obama administration only make 88 cents on the dollar and call Obama a hypocrite.

liberal analysts explain that there are a number of reasons why women make less, (i.e. more women working part time, women choosing lower paying fields, women choosing less hazardous jobs, women leaving work force for child birth, etc.)

liberals laugh at these stupid conservatives for not taking into account all of the relevant facts.

that is how I remember it.  so was the Obama administration lying?  I know you're not allowed to say that they were but I figured i'd ask.

you said "proven to be stupid" so just show that proof (be precise or change your statement)

btw- just so that we're on the same page.  I'm not suggesting everyone should be paid equally all the time.   There are obvious difference in experience, job performance,  tenure, etc.. but if all else is equal and the man is paid more because of the claim he has a family to support or some other horseshit then that is discriminatory.

Anyway, if Repubs really want to pretend the Dems have a war on woman I would love to see them make that an issue in 2016

btw - save you links. 

If there is some part of the link you want me to see then cut it and paste it along with the link
Report to moderator   Logged
bears
Getbig IV
****
Posts: 2196


« Reply #17 on: January 26, 2015, 03:55:10 PM »

you said "proven to be stupid" so just show that proof (be precise or change your statement)

btw- just so that we're on the same page.  I'm not suggesting everyone should be paid equally all the time.   There are obvious difference in experience, job performance,  tenure, etc.. but if all else is equal and the man is paid more because of the claim he has a family to support or some other horseshit then that is discriminatory.

Anyway, if Repubs really want to pretend the Dems have a war on woman I would love to see them make that an issue in 2016

btw - save you links.  

If there is some part of the link you want me to see then cut it and paste it along with the link

This brings us to our larger point: Broad comparisons are inherently problematic. As the BLS points out: “Users should note that the comparisons of earnings in this report are on a broad level and do not control for many factors that may be significant in explaining earnings differences.”

 Indeed, economists at the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis surveyed economic literature and concluded that “research suggests that the actual gender wage gap (when female workers are compared with male workers who have similar characteristics) is much lower than the raw wage gap.” They cited one survey, prepared for the Labor Department, which concluded that when such differences are accounted for, much of the hourly wage gap dwindled, to about 5 cents on the dollar. (UPDATE: Our colleagues at WonkBlog calculate that the gap narrows to 91 cents for every dollar “if you control for life choices.”)

Not only did the White House pick the statistic that makes the wage gap look the worst, but then officials further tweaked the numbers to make the situation for African Americans and Hispanics look even more dire.  The BLS, for instance, says the pay gap is relatively small for black and Hispanic women (94 cents and 91 cents, respectively) but the numbers used by the White House compare their wages against the wages of white men.  Black and Hispanic men generally earn less than white men, so the White House comparison makes the pay gap even larger, even though the factors for that gap between minority women and white men may have little to do with gender.

 Administration officials, who insisted on anonymity and would not allow direct quotes, defended their use of the data. They said the Census figures give a more complete picture of women’s contribution to household finances. They also said it made much more sense to compare black and Hispanic women to white men, because those wages represent the standard that all workers should aspire to. The officials said the administration has never argued that wage discrimination is 100 percent the cause of the gap, and that previous documents issued by the White House have made it clear that the comparisons were being made to white men.

it's called cherry picking information.  politicians do this.....all the time.

please don't forget that when the Obama administration was accused of the same exact thing, they used the same exact argument against the conservative media who was accusing them.  so if you don't believe these facts than your beef should extend to the Obama administration.

my opinion?  its a fucking non issue.  its used for political posturing and you're getting sucked into it. 
Report to moderator   Logged
Straw Man
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 31950


one dwells in nirvana


« Reply #18 on: January 26, 2015, 04:08:37 PM »

This brings us to our larger point: Broad comparisons are inherently problematic. As the BLS points out: “Users should note that the comparisons of earnings in this report are on a broad level and do not control for many factors that may be significant in explaining earnings differences.”

 Indeed, economists at the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis surveyed economic literature and concluded that “research suggests that the actual gender wage gap (when female workers are compared with male workers who have similar characteristics) is much lower than the raw wage gap.” They cited one survey, prepared for the Labor Department, which concluded that when such differences are accounted for, much of the hourly wage gap dwindled, to about 5 cents on the dollar. (UPDATE: Our colleagues at WonkBlog calculate that the gap narrows to 91 cents for every dollar “if you control for life choices.”)

Not only did the White House pick the statistic that makes the wage gap look the worst, but then officials further tweaked the numbers to make the situation for African Americans and Hispanics look even more dire.  The BLS, for instance, says the pay gap is relatively small for black and Hispanic women (94 cents and 91 cents, respectively) but the numbers used by the White House compare their wages against the wages of white men.  Black and Hispanic men generally earn less than white men, so the White House comparison makes the pay gap even larger, even though the factors for that gap between minority women and white men may have little to do with gender.

 Administration officials, who insisted on anonymity and would not allow direct quotes, defended their use of the data. They said the Census figures give a more complete picture of women’s contribution to household finances. They also said it made much more sense to compare black and Hispanic women to white men, because those wages represent the standard that all workers should aspire to. The officials said the administration has never argued that wage discrimination is 100 percent the cause of the gap, and that previous documents issued by the White House have made it clear that the comparisons were being made to white men.

it's called cherry picking information.  politicians do this.....all the time.

please don't forget that when the Obama administration was accused of the same exact thing, they used the same exact argument against the conservative media who was accusing them.  so if you don't believe these facts than your beef should extend to the Obama administration.

my opinion?  its a fucking non issue.  its used for political posturing and you're getting sucked into it. 


Given the other issues of the day I'd say only getting paid 91% of a male colleague is not that big of deal

I'm sure that is what you would tell your wife or daughter
Report to moderator   Logged
JOHN MATRIX
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 13296


the Media is the Problem


« Reply #19 on: January 27, 2015, 07:25:35 AM »

Basically here's how it went (tell me where i'm wrong):



Obama admin cries out for equal pay for women saying that the disparity is unfair and that women make 77 cents on the dollar to men....liberals swoon.

analysts who conduct studies on it explain that there are a number of reasons why women make less, (i.e. more women working part time, women choosing lower paying fields, especially in fields like medicine, women choosing less hazardous jobs, women leaving work force for child birth, etc.)

liberals call these people liars, sexist, and bigots.  

then conservatives take a look at the Obama administration and discover that women in the Obama administration only make 88 cents on the dollar and call Obama a hypocrite.

liberal analysts explain that there are a number of reasons why women make less, (i.e. more women working part time, women choosing lower paying fields, women choosing less hazardous jobs, women leaving work force for child birth, etc.)

liberals laugh at these stupid conservatives for not taking into account all of the relevant facts.

that is how I remember it.  so was the Obama administration lying?  I know you're not allowed to say that they were but I figured i'd ask.

owned...end thread Grin
Report to moderator   Logged
JOHN MATRIX
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 13296


the Media is the Problem


« Reply #20 on: January 27, 2015, 07:27:41 AM »

bear utterly destroying strawpajamaboy here Grin
Report to moderator   Logged
Straw Man
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 31950


one dwells in nirvana


« Reply #21 on: January 27, 2015, 08:57:49 AM »

bear utterly destroying strawpajamaboy here Grin

absolutely

Didn't I already agree that women earning on average ~ 91 cents on the dollar of what a man would earn (all else being equal) is no big deal

That's what everyone here would tell their wives and daughters....right?
Report to moderator   Logged
Soul Crusher
Competitors
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 17500


Doesnt lie about lifting.


« Reply #22 on: January 27, 2015, 08:58:35 AM »

A liberal war on women is a war on Straw Lurker and Andregetspissedon
Report to moderator   Logged
andreisdaman
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 16378



« Reply #23 on: January 27, 2015, 09:13:43 AM »

All the demagoguery from the left and right is so disgusting.  What a bunch of hypocritical fools.   But the proles eat it up even when they should know better.

thought you were in rehab?
Report to moderator   Logged
andreisdaman
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 16378



« Reply #24 on: January 27, 2015, 09:14:43 AM »

the idea to pitch a campaign against the Republicans by saying that Republicans have a war on women is an incredibly stupid move by the Democrats.  Basically they are depending on the hope that all of the Democratic Congressman have done nothing untoward with women that will come out in the news.  

so.......good luck with that.

actualy the war on woman thing is prety accurate
Report to moderator   Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Theme created by Egad Community. Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!