The Presidential Debates

Maybe, maybe not, but McCain has consistently voted against women's rights and equal pay.

jag

My first point: Did you know in the UK, feminist lobbyist push to have a law installed that forced employers "not to ask" if a female applicant would have child soon? Sounds good on paper right? To protect the privacy of women. Except - as I mentioned before - all this did was now is cause UK businesses not to interview young women (or a lot less) to statistically avoid getting someone mat leave right after hiring them. Some women watchdogs realized this was actually hurting women then helping. Does going against something like this from the precept make you sexist? My entire point is, women can hurt other women with good intents.

Two: I am ignorant of McCain's record on women''s rights and equal pay. But the closest one to memory is the Ledbetter Act. I refer to Diana Furchtgott-Roth

The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act would create an extraordinary new set of rights for plaintiffs in employment disputes. For the first time, employers would typically face no time limits on when suits may be filed, a legal status generally reserved for crimes such as murder.

This would be a radical change from present law because employees could argue that their current compensation flows from discriminatory decisions made years back. An employee could even sue a previous employer whom she left many years ago. This would generate massive lawsuits against current and former employers.

Mr. Obama's statement that women are paid 77% of what men earn comes from outdated Census Bureau calculations that compare full-time median annual earnings of all women with those of all men. This is a spurious comparison. It does not take into account differences in education, job responsibility, years worked for an employer, occupation, hours worked in a year, and time in the workforce.

Lower pay can reflect decisions — by men and women — about field of study, occupation, and time in the workforce. Those who don't finish high school earn less. College graduates who major in humanities rather than the sciences typically have lower incomes, and more women than men choose humanities majors. Many women take time out of the workforce to stay home with children, or choose jobs with shorter hours.


An economics professor at Baruch College, June O'Neill, analyzed data for men and women on demographics, education, work experience, children, and scores on the Armed Forces Qualification Test. When such differences are accounted for, men and women earn about the same.

When Mrs. Palin became governor, she did not receive 77% of her predecessor Frank Murkowski's salary. She knows better than anyone that it takes skill and perseverance to get to the top of the career ladder. Ratcheting up litigation is no substitute.

Now you get tons of potential lawsuits, maybe some have merit, but quite a few won't. What do you think will happen now once business realizes this potential problem? They will stop hiring young women. Some of them will end up wasting their money on legal fees on false accusations (like we need that now in the current climate). Now the false accusers (women) are hurting the women with legitimate problems. You know "the boy who cried wolf?". Does this make me sexist for pointing this problem out? No - I am saying sometimes legislation like this could end up HURTING women.
 
Last edited:
Yep. Totally agree. Joe the Plumber is just another distraction tactic (or is it a strategy? :hehe: ) away from the real issues. His entire campaign has been built around this trivial kind of crap. He obviously thought he had some sort of ace up his sleeve with the whole Joe the Plumber thing last night; the look on his face the first time he brought it up said that quite loudly. However it didn't really pan out well for him and he kept harping on it and it ultimately backfired on him. He is definitely trying to rally his base, but that's not going to be enough to get him elected. I think he did a lot in that debate last night to scare away undecided and/or independent voters, quite honestly.

jag

Maybe he has given up on trying to sway undecideds, moderates, and independents? I don't know. Maybe he thinks that there are still enough numbers within the Republican base to win the election? (Despite every trend and credible source of polling data to the contrary.) :huh:

You sound an AWFUL lot like John McCain right now.

"If he had just conceded to my request to have town hall meetings, none of that would ever have happened!"

Only instead, it's:

"If John McCain hadn't mentioned him repeatedly in the debate, I wouldn't HAVE to dig up completely irrelevant dirt on Joe the Plumber!"

Just tell me: what the hell difference does it make whether or not Joe is a licensed plumber? Are you ****ing kidding me?

I was so happy that John McCain made that ridiculous statement in front of a large audience. He couldn't have looked more foolish. Not to mention, it completely blew a gaping hole through his 'I'm not negative, HE IS!!' argument.
 
Now you get tons of potential lawsuits, maybe some have merit, but quite a few won't. What do you think will happen now once business realizes this potential problem? They will stop hiring young women. Some of them will end up wasting their money on legal fees on false accusations (like we need that now in the current climate). Now the false accusers (women) are hurting the women with legitimate problems. You know "the boy who cried wolf?". Does this make me sexist for pointing this problem out? No - I am saying sometimes legislation like this could end up HURTING women.

Garbage. Utter garbage.

"let's not pass a bill which would make women equal as men in the workplace, because a few people may file false lawsuits!"

So, I take it you would be in favor of banning guns nationwide, because a few bad people use them as a device to kill people with? :huh:
 
I was so happy that John McCain made that ridiculous statement in front of a large audience. He couldn't have looked more foolish. Not to mention, it completely blew a gaping hole through his 'I'm not negative, HE IS!!' argument.
He's said it so many times, and every single time it sounds more and more childish. I mean what the hell, John?

"You didn't do what I wanted, so I HAD to resort to personal attacks." He's essentially admitting how desperate he is/was. That's not something I ever used to imagine John McCain would do. :csad:
 
Garbage. Utter garbage.

"let's not pass a bill which would make women equal as men in the workplace, because a few people may file false lawsuits!"

So, I take it you would be in favor of banning guns nationwide, because a few bad people use them as a device to kill people with? :huh:
Hey they did it in the UK? Why not here? You know what the statistics on false accusations are? You ever have a friend or relative a victim of false accusations? Come on man.
 
Garbage. Utter garbage.

"let's not pass a bill which would make women equal as men in the workplace, because a few people may file false lawsuits!"

So, I take it you would be in favor of banning guns nationwide, because a few bad people use them as a device to kill people with? :huh:

McCain's voting record on women's issues is absolutely abysmal.

http://www.johnmccainrecord.com/women/

http://www.barackoblogger.com/2008/06/john-mccains-record-on-womens-issues.html

http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.jsp?articleId=281474977465631

It goes on and on an on. Alternatively, Biden has one of the best records on women's issues, both in his voting and the legislation and clauses he has authored and championed, possibly in history.

jag
 
He's said it so many times, and every single time it sounds more and more childish. I mean what the hell, John?

"You didn't do what I wanted, so I HAD to resort to personal attacks." He's essentially admitting how desperate he is/was. That's not something I ever used to imagine John McCain would do. :csad:

Desperation is an ugly ugly thing.
 
So...then what? Instead of equalizing the pay/work load, nothing happens and the problem just magically disappears?
It is equalized if you control the variables. Refer to Ms. Furchtgott-Roth's article. I am saying there are groups misleading other women into rallying these Acts to push another agenda across like that lawsuit issue. These little additions end up hurting women. That's my point, and my other contention is, why is it even exclusive to women anyways? There might actually be guys with legitimate concerns..

But hey, whether some of you disagree with me or not, it boils down to this: when the economy tanks they will cut down on the hiring of women in most private businesses. Mat leave is a huge issue, but it is politically incorrect to bring this up. That my point as of right now. This will hurt women MORE then anything, especially younger ones.
 
I think McCain owned Obama for like the first 20-30 minutes particularily when he said "I am not President Bush. You want to run against president Bush you should've ran 4 years ago"....I was literally like: DAYYYYYUMMM!! haha

But then when the host started talking about negative campaigning, McCain got a little too caught up and Obama stole the 'ownageness' from him and won the rest of the debate. This was McCain's best debate yet but I think Obama won by a slight margin...however they both were very close to a draw, imo.


The one thing that pissed me off however is how McCain kept saying "You don't raise people's taxes during times of crisis blah blah blah"....no matter how many time Obama says he is only raising tax rates to 20% for singles earning MORE than 200K a year and families earning MORE than 250K a year.....if people are voting for McCain JUST because of a jump from a 15% tax rate to a 20% tax rate when they are earning over 250K a year than...wow!!!...you are VERY greedy bastard :o
 
I think McCain owned Obama for like the first 20-30 minutes particularily when he said "I am not President Bush. You want to run against president Bush you should've ran 4 years ago"....I was literally like: DAYYYYYUMMM!! haha

That's the best thing McCain has said to Obama all campaign long.
 
I think McCain owned Obama for like the first 20-30 minutes particularily when he said "I am not President Bush. You want to run against president Bush you should've ran 4 years ago"....I was literally like: DAYYYYYUMMM!! haha

But then when the host started talking about negative campaigning, McCain got a little too caught up and Obama stole the 'ownageness' from him and won the rest of the debate. This was McCain's best debate yet but I think Obama won by a slight margin...however they both were very close to a draw, imo.


The one thing that pissed me off however is how McCain kept saying "You don't raise people's taxes during times of crisis blah blah blah"....no matter how many time Obama says he is only raising tax rates to 20% for singles earning MORE than 200K a year and families earning MORE than 250K a year.....if people are voting for McCain JUST because of a jump from a 15% tax rate to a 20% tax rate when they are earning over 250K a year than...wow!!!...you are VERY greedy bastard :o

They look at the hole in the doughnut as opposed to the doughnut as a whole.
 
That's the best thing McCain has said to Obama all campaign long.

But then it was ruined by his defense of the hate-filled comments at his rallies and the dismissive attitude he took towards the 'mother's health' argument to abortion. (His body language, tone, and overall demeanor, I believe, now goes without saying.)
 
So it turns out Joe the Plumber was likely a McCain campaign plant. He has no plumber's license and as of 2006 he was only making $40,000. So he's actually going to get a tax cut under Obama.
 
That's the best thing McCain has said to Obama all campaign long.

The problem was... Obama then gave credible reasons for mistaking McCain for Bush.... Old and white. :hehe:

But seriously, he did give good reasons.
 
ATTENTION: I AM EDITING THIS POST BECAUSE APPARENTLY IT IS WORTH HANDING OUT INFRACTIONS TO PEOPLE FOR QUOTING POSTS CONTAINING JOKE GIFS THAT SHOW SENATOR MCCAIN "HUMPING" SENATOR OBAMA AT THE FINAL PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE BUT IT IS NOT WORTH THE TROUBLE OF ACTUALLY REMOVING THE OFFENDING PICTURES FROM THE BOARDS EVEN THOUGH YOU ARE HANDING OUT INFRACTIONS AND APPARENTLY PROBATIONARY BANS FOR POSTING OR EVEN QUOTING SAID OFFENDING PICTURE. IT IS MY ASSUMPTION THAT ANY SUCH IMAGE THAT IS SO OFFENSIVE THAT IT NECESSITATES THESE KINDS OF ACTIONS IS NOT WELCOME ON THESE BOARDS, SO I WILL GLADLY REMOVE MY QUOTE OF SAID OFFENSIVE IMAGE SINCE THE MOD WHO WAS OFFENDED BY SAID PICTURE DIDN'T DEEM IT WORTH THEIR TIME TO ACTUALLY REMOVE THE OFFENSIVE IMAGES THEY WERE HANDING OUT INFRACTIONS FOR IN THE FIRST PLACE. YOU ARE WELCOME.

jag
 
Last edited:
You ever have a friend or relative a victim of false accusations? Come on man.

One of my friends' relatives was sued for what appeared to be a false accusation, but the case was dropped before it went to court. Other than that... no.

As for the businesses... the courts will decide which cases are worth looking at, and cases which may seem false will be dropped. It happens in a wide variety of cases, I don't see why it would be different here.

Every time we try to advance civil rights in this country, people always use the "what if they sue???/??!!1!1one!1!" line. Tough. Maybe if we achieved this fair pay system years ago (you know, when the Equal Rights Amendment was floating around), we wouldn't have this problem.
 
So it turns out Joe the Plumber was likely a McCain campaign plant. He has no plumber's license and as of 2006 he was only making $40,000. So he's actually going to get a tax cut under Obama.

This is just getting better and better.
 
Also, apparently a close relative of Joe the Plumber is the son-in-law of Charles Keating. Talk about guilt by association. LOL.
 
It's a small world afterall.

It's one of the most dubious plants I've seen yet the media is running with it. It's pathetic. They should do their jobs. This guy was in no way an unbiased "Joe Schmoe" asking Obama a question.
 
It's one of the most dubious plants I've seen yet the media is running with it. It's pathetic. They should do their jobs. This guy was in no way an unbiased "Joe Schmoe" asking Obama a question.

Yes, but the fact that John McCain was so visibly proud to mention this man at the debate (with everything NOW coming out) it makes him look like an idiot.
 
Yes, but the fact that John McCain was so visibly proud to mention this man at the debate (with everything NOW coming out) it makes him look like an idiot.

Yes. Just read another fun fact. There was a lien filed against him for $1200 in unpaid taxes from January of 2007.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"