From IBD
Pay Equity: Barack Obama has criticized John McCain's actions in the case of Lilly Ledbetter, who sued for alleged pay discrimination. But if Obama supports equal pay for equal work, why doesn't he do it in his office?
snipIf all you used were data culled from the Report of the Secretary of the Senate, covering the six-month period ended March 31, 2008, you'd think McCain was the champion of Rosie the Riveter and Obama the heartless male chauvinist troglodyte.
Crunching the numbers, Obama's 28 male staffers were paid a total of $1,523,120 for an average salary of $54,397. Obama's 30 female employees divided $1,354,580 for a female average salary of $45,152. Obama's female staffers, on average, make just 83 cents to the dollar his male staffers make.
McCain's office, by contrast, is a feminist fantasy. McCain's 17 male staffers carve up $916,914 for an average salary of $53,936. His 25 female employees split $1,396,958 for average pay of $55,878. In McCain's office, a woman earns $1.04 for every buck a man makes.
Practice what you preach, Sen. Obama.
More....
2 comments:
The dems and libs never practice what they preach. Their biggest arguement for their existance is to promote egalitarianism (everyone has equal wealth).
Yet every last one of the high profile libs (examples: Al Gore, Ted Turner, Warren Buffett, the Google founders, Steve Jobs, Larry Ellison, The Kennedys, The Kerry's, most hollywood stars) happen to also be in the 99.999% percentile of the wealthiest people on the planet. If they really believed in true egalitarianism, they would cut through the red tape of having to win an election, and immediately forfeit their wealth to "those less fortunate". And I'm not talking about Buffett giving just $1B to charity (2% of his wealth). I'm talking about these people expressing the level that they think is a fair and attainable "equal" level for us all to exist at. In other words, how much of the wealth of "Joe The Plummer" needs to be "spread around" as Obama puts it. Whatever Joe the Plummer is left with, that is the level I would like to see the Al Gore, the Kennedys, and Hollywood drop themselves to.
You think we will ever see that? Never in a million years. That's because when socialists talk about spreading the wealth, they are talking about your wealth and mine. They are talking about speading wealth of the private sector, before it has a chance to pay salaries of actual workers. Instead redistribute it to pay for votes of people who are gullible enough to think that that governement is the answer to their "miserable existance" (lib's words non mine).
This is liberal thought at its core. All the rules about fairness go out the window if when are to actally be applied to themselves. It's 100% about power for them, and 0% about the little guy as they claim. This year is a little bit different in that the media is so deeply in bed with the Obama election campain, they will pay any price to get him elected (including their own dignity, respect, and credibility) that they overlook every single last glaring hypocrissy and conflict of interest that Obama has. And there are very very many. Gordon, you have done a fantastic job on this blog of pointing these out, but the tide of ignorance is just overwhelming this year I'm afraid.
That is why Obama will win. Couple that with the fact that the all the republicans apparently have lost their balls and spine (i.e. become liberals themselves), and have given us nothing to vote FOR, and this is just not our year.
It used to be good enough just to publish facts, and let the people decide. But this year the media have apparently decided that facts just won't do. Hard left opinion, gathered, marketed, packaged, labeled, and sold as fact is apparently is all we will be getting for the forseeable future.
Amen brother!
Post a Comment