Post Comment Preview Comment
To reply to a Comment: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to.
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page:  « First  ‹ Previous  3 4 5 6 7  Next ›  Last »  (51 total)
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jimpager
01:43 PM on 06/05/2012
So if the Mittster won't support equal pay for women, then he is against women which is what Dems have been saying all along. Its amazing to me he can get some women to look right in the camera and advocate his anti-women positions.
03:07 PM on 06/05/2012
Hard to believe isn't it !
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
kathy smelser
03:19 PM on 06/05/2012
Ann is to busy counting cars for the new elevator ...
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jimpager
04:49 PM on 06/05/2012
Takes your breath away doesn't it?  An elevator for cars so they can be sheltered better than all poor kids and most middle class kids get sheltered.
01:41 PM on 06/05/2012
Romney whats to separate the men from the women so that the women can be low balled they would also like to Isolate the white from all others to only give jobs to other good old boys Romneys wife has never worked a day in her life, yes she had kids all females have kids but many of them work with kids this is unknown in the Romney house so ir is confusing for him Only ask him questions he can answer like who is your favorite Nazi?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
booyahcah29
01:38 PM on 06/05/2012
Man, I find it hard to believe this race will be close. Who knows...so much time between now and then. I think Obama will crush him in the debates, which will help him. Still, people never wanted Obama in office and are looking for any excuse to out him.
photo
jafsie
Fighting for the rights of the already-born
03:10 PM on 06/05/2012
"...people never wanted Obama in office and are looking for any excuse to out him."

You mean TEA-People, not "people".
07:42 PM on 06/05/2012
It will be close because Obama doesn't know how to be President, and Romney was a successful Businessman and Governor, who is way more qualified, and smarter.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
01:37 PM on 06/05/2012
Mittens stands by what he says...silence.

What a bold stand.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
DenverRight
Hic Sunt Dracones
01:36 PM on 06/05/2012
Some bills are just poorly written, dare I say a violation of American jurisprudential principles.

This bill would "require EMPLOYERS to demonstrate that any salary differences between men and woman in the same job are NOT gender-related."

In other words, the employer would be considered guilty of discrimination for any paycheck differences, until they proved their INNOCENCE.

Does anyone else see the obvious assault on our legal system? What happened to "innocent until proven guilty"?!

This bill must be rewritten, or discarded.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Laurie Prather
Helping Ted Nugent meet his destiny, vote by vote
02:46 PM on 06/05/2012
If employers don't discriminate, what do they have to worry about? If they do discriminate, they should be worried
07:45 PM on 06/05/2012
They have to worry about the extra time and expense of "Proving" their innocence to the Feds, which are an incredible easy organization to work with.

Besides, pay discrimination is already on the books, this bill is redundant, and wastes companies time and resources.
photo
jafsie
Fighting for the rights of the already-born
03:14 PM on 06/05/2012
Where is the "burden" in having to give a valid reason -- one that doesn't include "because she doesn't have a penis and he does" -- why two clerks doing the exact same job aren't being paid exactly the same salary? I'll tell you what the "burden" is -- there IS NO VALID REASON!
01:34 PM on 06/05/2012
I would like to know more about Scott Brown's position that this bill would be a burden to small business. That makes no sense, it's more dog whistling. If a woman is doing the same job, she should be paid the same. No burden Scott, no job losses, so stop spouting talking points. Willard won't take a position on this because he can't risk opening his mouth, if he is for it, he loses the right wing, if he is against, he loses the women. The upside here is if he says nothing now, he won't have to lie about what he said later..
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
too young but old enough
I already know how this is going to turn out...
02:13 PM on 06/05/2012
I definitely think that women should be entitled to equal pay, but it is pretty easy to see what kind of 'edge cases' could cause problems for small business owners.

Consider a business with 15-20 employees, including a couple of managers. The first manager has been with the company for 10 years, and his pay has steadily increased over his time with the business. The second manager has not been with the company as long, but she performed so well that she was promoted quickly and steadily. Her pay may not be as much as his, but the business owner could attribute that difference in pay to the years of loyalty shown by the man.

Under the proposed law, she could take him to court because of the pay disparity. She wouldn't be very likely to win, but it would be an extreme case that puts extra burden (financial and legal) on that small business. Obviously, this is an extreme case, but I think it is the type of case that people like Scott Brown would cite in defense of their position.

That said, with all things being equal, a woman should be paid the same as her male counterpart.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Laurie Prather
Helping Ted Nugent meet his destiny, vote by vote
02:38 PM on 06/05/2012
The time difference between the two employee will be sufficient to explain the gap.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
DenverRight
Hic Sunt Dracones
02:13 PM on 06/05/2012
I don't know what Scott Brown meant, but if the Paycheck Fairness Act "requires EMPLOYERS to to demonstrate that any salary differences between men and woman in the same job are not gender-related," then that places the burden of proof on the defendant (the employer), not the prosecuting employee.

Aren't we presumed innocent until proven guilty? Who needs to PROVE their innocence?

THERE'S the burden, it seems to me.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Bret Alan Cebulla
Aime-Toi
06:08 PM on 06/05/2012
It's not the same thing as a criminal charge you fool.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
amwa
01:30 PM on 06/05/2012
No backbone mittens, what does this wannabe stand for, does anyone know?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Gary Strawley
02:19 PM on 06/05/2012
He stands against everyone that is not rich!
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
amwa
01:19 PM on 06/06/2012
That is true and I hope everyone gets that message.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jmaia37
01:28 PM on 06/05/2012
"concerns about hampering job growth. Sen. Scott Brown (R-Mass.), for one, signaled Monday night that he won't support it because he thinks it may burden small businesses" I was once given a THREE CENTS an hour raise because the men needed it more for their families. Never mind that I had 2 small children. When I soon accepted a better job, they had to hire two people to take my place. I guess that is job growth.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
02:14 PM on 06/05/2012
You were lucky to get the 3 cent raise and you have the audacity to complain about it?

My cup of sarcasm overunneth.
07:48 PM on 06/05/2012
That's capitalism, if you don't like where you're at, go somewhere else. Nobody is pointing a gun at women's heads making them work at discriminary companies, go somewhere else and sue them.
01:25 PM on 06/05/2012
Warren Farrell, three-time board of directors member of the National Organization for Women New York City, exhaustively debunks the wage gap myth in his book "Why Men Earn More." Farrell documents occupations requiring bachelor's degrees in which women's starting salaries actually exceed men's. Female investment bankers and dieticians, for example, can expect to earn 116 percent to 130 percent of their male counterparts' salaries.

The real reason than men tend to out-earn women is the choices they make. Men are far more likely to take unpleasant and dangerous jobs, what Farrell calls the "death and exposure professions." For example, firefighting, truck driving, mining and logging -- to name just a few high-risk jobs -- are all more than 95 percent male. Conversely, low risk jobs like secretarial work and childcare are more than 95 percent female.

Farrell points out that in California, prison guards can earn $70,000 per year plus full medical benefits and retire after thirty years with a hefty retirement package. But it takes little imagination to figure out why California still has a difficult time staffing its prisons, and it goes without saying that most prison guards are male. Says Farrell, "As with most jobs, there's an inverse relationship between fulfillment and pay."
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
01:53 PM on 06/05/2012
So, 2004 is your date of birth?

That would make you 8...sounds about right for your mental maturity.
02:30 PM on 06/05/2012
I notice how you are avoiding the question LOL
07:49 PM on 06/05/2012
Hahaha, no response?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Laurie Prather
Helping Ted Nugent meet his destiny, vote by vote
02:39 PM on 06/05/2012
COMPLETE rubbish. Try to explain why male accountants earn more than females, the females who have never taken time off to have a child. Just try.
03:17 PM on 06/05/2012
Show me the scientific study that shows us their is a pay gap
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
DenverRight
Hic Sunt Dracones
01:24 PM on 06/05/2012
Did I read this bill CORRECTLY?!

"The bill would require employers to demonstrate that any salary differences between men and woman doing the same work are not gender-related. "

Would the Equal Pay Act actually force the employer to PROVE that paycheck differences are NOT discriminatory?!

It used to be the obligation of the prosecution to prove their case, that a workplace condition WAS discriminatory. NOW, this bill would assume the defendant (employer) was GUILTY of discrimination, and he would have to demonstrate his innocence!

That new rule would turn American jurisprudence on its head. WHO WOULD VOTE FOR THAT GARBAGE?!
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Laurie Prather
Helping Ted Nugent meet his destiny, vote by vote
02:41 PM on 06/05/2012
If employers don't discriminate, what do they have to worry about. If they do discriminate, you are right to be worried.

I can see why you are upset, all the cards would have to be on the table. Cheating on women's paychecks would be forced to be stopped.
05:44 PM on 06/06/2012
I bet you'll be happy when employers hire less women because they don't want to deal with the hassle regarding this legislation.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
gjohnso627
A happy dem
01:17 PM on 06/05/2012
Where ismy comments? Are you slugs consoring comments again?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ronniesbrain
man is the only animal that blushes, or needs to.
01:14 PM on 06/05/2012
If things continue as they have been, Mitt Romney will be the first person who ran for president and never once allowed himself to be pinned down on any issue.......oh wait he does have one position he is sticking to....bigger tax breaks for the already wealthy.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
chriss0114
the meanderings of a madman
01:11 PM on 06/05/2012
"Governor Romney supports pay equity for women."

In Rmoney-speak, that means less pay for the same work as well as "get back in the kitchen and make me a sandwich!"
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Gary Strawley
02:24 PM on 06/05/2012
YES he wnats to lower everyone pay checks!!
07:51 PM on 06/05/2012
No, he doesn't want to lower everyone's pay checks, then he would be like Obama.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
outraged in Alabama
Converted independent
01:10 PM on 06/05/2012
Of course Romney isn't in favor of this bill. He is for big business and if they could get away with child labor they would support that also. Anything to cut costs for busnesses is good according to the GOP. If busnesses cause pollution that hurts you and I so what as long as we make a profit. If we pay a slave wage so what as long as we make a profit. If we can get the minimum wage repealed so what as long as we make a bigger profit. And don't forget we need to give the rich a bigger tax break and expand the base and make sure that even the poor pay fed taxes along with wgae taxes and state taxes. Is this the picture of America that you want? Well thats what you will get if you elect Republicans.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
SETexasLib
TryingToBeGood,ButRelyingOnMercy
01:06 PM on 06/05/2012
As usual, Mitt is everywhere and nowhere on all issues, depending on the way the wind is blowing.
He has done some good things in his life and now must distance himself from them because of the company he has started to associate with.

But the biggiest problem with Mitt is that no one, either Democrat or Republican,knows what they will be voting for if they pull the lever in his favor in November. If he should win, no one knows who would show up for the inaguration.
02:00 PM on 06/05/2012
the Koch bros. have not told Mitt what HIS position is yet.