The Noise

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

2 Pages V < 1 2  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Democrats View Battle Over Roberts as Futile, From the Washington Post
Acid Lennon
post Aug 16 2005, 03:09 PM
Post #26


Noise Board Poet Laureate
Group Icon

Group: Members - Platinum
Posts: 10,000
Joined: March 9 04
Member No.: 2,112



QUOTE(smcd @ Aug 16 2005, 02:35 PM)
QUOTE(InLameRockBand @ Aug 16 2005, 02:30 PM)
QUOTE(smcd @ Aug 16 2005, 02:27 PM)
QUOTE(Guest @ Aug 16 2005, 01:21 PM)
Lowest approval ratings I could find for Clinton was 51-52%. He hit an all time high of 73% just after impeachment.  rolleyes.gif
*




Is that why he never got more than 50% of the popular vote?? rolleyes.gif

What resources are you checking? Did you even pay attention to what was going on then??? rolleyes.gif
*



perot
*




Most of Perot's votes would have ended up in Bush 41's slate.

Either way, it doesn't matter, every Perot vote was a Not Clinton vote.
*



As well as a Not Bush vote.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Guest
post Aug 16 2005, 03:18 PM
Post #27


Unregistered









QUOTE(smcd @ Aug 16 2005, 03:06 PM)
QUOTE(Guest @ Aug 16 2005, 02:52 PM)
QUOTE(smcd @ Aug 16 2005, 01:29 PM)
QUOTE(Guest @ Aug 16 2005, 01:40 PM)
My bad - thought we were talking about 2nd terms here.

Go back to celebrating the demise of the Democrats.  laughing.gif
*




I celebrate this, with the witless help of the Democrats, every single day!! biggrin.gif biggrin.gif
*



It IS good to see that Bush has come up from being the most unpopular 2nd term-er since WW2 (March) to slightly more popular than Nixon.

Cheers! drunk.gif
*



I think you've been exposed as not knowing what you're talking about.

Keep on thinkin' those good thoughts, though... rolleyes.gif
*



What on earth are you talking about? I admit that I thought we were talking about 2nd terms (which we were in the first place) and somehow i'm EXPOSED? ohmy.gif
Simple mistake, not a BIG FAT DUBYA one!

Your man can't seem to take a job without fucking it up at some point. Keep watching.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
the other dave
post Aug 16 2005, 03:20 PM
Post #28



Group Icon

Group: Members - Basic
Posts: 16,147
Joined: May 31 04
Member No.: 2,867



QUOTE(smcd @ Aug 16 2005, 02:36 PM)
QUOTE(the other dave @ Aug 16 2005, 02:33 PM)
QUOTE(smcd @ Aug 16 2005, 12:44 PM)
QUOTE(Guest @ Aug 16 2005, 12:31 PM)



Exactly the reason the Democrat party is in the shit. Orgainizations like this.
*



Oh, and the Republicans aren't affiliated with groups of wackos? Check out these nutbags.

GOP Voting Wackos Who Support Terrorism
*



MoveOn.org has a lot more money and influence than Operation Rescue will ever have.
*



Thank the lord baby jesus for that!
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
plcmat
post Aug 16 2005, 03:44 PM
Post #29


Noise Board Sponsor
Group Icon

Group: Members - Bronze
Posts: 6,322
Joined: October 21 03
Member No.: 987



Guest quoted:

The memo from Roberts, now President Bush's nominee to the U.S. Supreme Court, was a response to a letter that the three women — one of whom was Olympia Snowe of Maine, now a U.S. senator — had sent to the administration. The women had said that the concept of "equal pay for equal work" had not sufficiently boosted women's wages because women were not in many of the same fields as men. The three were promoting the notion of equal pay for different jobs of comparable value, based on factors such as skills and responsibility.

In his memo to White House counsel Fred Fielding, Roberts said the women's letter "contends that more is required because women still earn only $0.60 for every $1 earned by men, ignoring the factors that explain that apparent disparity, such as seniority, the fact that many women frequently leave the work force for extended periods of time. ... I honestly find it troubling that three Republican representatives are so quick to embrace such a radical redistributive concept. Their slogan may as well be, 'From each according to his ability, to each according to her gender.' "


Is what Roberts wrote really all that untrue? Compare the number of Wall Street types, lawyers and doctors that are men vs women. That easily explains part of the wage gap.

For whatever reason, women also seem to be drawn away from hard core engineering jobs to more people oriented occupations such as marketing, diversity training, etc. with less potential for income growth. I've seen it happen numerous times throughout my career. Many women I've known haven't found pure engineering work interactive enough, and have gotten off the track.

Also, how do you compare skills and responsibility across careers? Sounds easy but it's not, and if the government did this, wouldn't that be akin to wage fixing (hence the reference to Communism).

Show me a salary comparison between men and women doing identical jobs with identical responsibility, and seniority, and then we'll have some useful data to work with here.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
smcd
post Aug 16 2005, 03:45 PM
Post #30


Noise Board Sponsor
Group Icon

Group: Members - Platinum
Posts: 35,524
Joined: March 13 04
Member No.: 2,180



QUOTE(Acid Lennon @ Aug 16 2005, 04:09 PM)
QUOTE(smcd @ Aug 16 2005, 02:35 PM)
QUOTE(InLameRockBand @ Aug 16 2005, 02:30 PM)
QUOTE(smcd @ Aug 16 2005, 02:27 PM)
QUOTE(Guest @ Aug 16 2005, 01:21 PM)
Lowest approval ratings I could find for Clinton was 51-52%. He hit an all time high of 73% just after impeachment.  rolleyes.gif
*




Is that why he never got more than 50% of the popular vote?? rolleyes.gif

What resources are you checking? Did you even pay attention to what was going on then??? rolleyes.gif
*



perot
*




Most of Perot's votes would have ended up in Bush 41's slate.

Either way, it doesn't matter, every Perot vote was a Not Clinton vote.
*



As well as a Not Bush vote.
*



True.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
EricDoberman
post Aug 16 2005, 03:47 PM
Post #31


Noise Board Sponsor
Group Icon

Group: Members - Platinum
Posts: 14,790
Joined: December 6 04
Member No.: 4,343



QUOTE(smcd @ Aug 16 2005, 04:45 PM)
QUOTE(Acid Lennon @ Aug 16 2005, 04:09 PM)
QUOTE(smcd @ Aug 16 2005, 02:35 PM)
QUOTE(InLameRockBand @ Aug 16 2005, 02:30 PM)
QUOTE(smcd @ Aug 16 2005, 02:27 PM)
QUOTE(Guest @ Aug 16 2005, 01:21 PM)
Lowest approval ratings I could find for Clinton was 51-52%. He hit an all time high of 73% just after impeachment.  rolleyes.gif
*




Is that why he never got more than 50% of the popular vote?? rolleyes.gif

What resources are you checking? Did you even pay attention to what was going on then??? rolleyes.gif
*



perot
*




Most of Perot's votes would have ended up in Bush 41's slate.

Either way, it doesn't matter, every Perot vote was a Not Clinton vote.
*



As well as a Not Bush vote.
*



True.
*



More like a "not sane" vote. Ditto for his Corvair bashing left wing counterpart in '00.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

2 Pages V < 1 2
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



- Lo-Fi Version Time is now: May 22nd 2013 - 12:28 PM