Rep. Barney Frank Lays The Smackdown

[wittynickname]

Originally Posted by HOZ

No offense....but any woman that works for a company that pays men more for being men gets what she deserves.

Not to go too far off track: So when men fight for their rights and freedoms, they're brave and honorable.

But a woman who expects the same rights should just back down and try to find a new job?

Also this has been a nationwide problem for decades. This isn't one company that was underpaying women for the same work as the higher paid men--this has been a problem with the majority of the corporations/businesses in the US, hence the reason that there was actual legislation needed to stop the practice of it.

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally Posted by Vulcan

You're the one who began to make it personal with this



Look, my first point is that universal health care is a good thing. If any disagree, it's not worth my discussing it.

I can see why some electors might be against it because
a. they are happy as is and have a good plan,
b. they see a raise in taxes or
c. they are misinformed.
From what I've seen and heard, I think it's mostly c. misinformed.

The only reasons I can see the legislature is against it is
a. they are happy as is and so don't give a crap.

b. they are trying to protect their taxpaying voters from higher taxes. (If anyone actually believes this, somewhere there is a Brooklyn Bridge for sale.)

c. they are beholden to private health care providers and the health care companies are beholden to Wall Street and rely on them for election funds.

I pick c. they are being paid off by private health care in one way or another.

http://blogs.pitch.com/plog/2009/08/...tributions.php

How is that personal? You've made it clear for years that you believe conservative politicians and Republicans (which aren't always the same thing) are the scum of the earth, corrupt and evil in some cases. My pointing that out is personal?

I find your choices to be myopic. You've picked the worst possible motivations for the bad guys and made the good guys immune to the same.

Your posts speak for themselves.

[Vulcan]

Originally Posted by mikey_the_redneck

Award winning journalist from Australia John Pilger recently says Obama is a corporate marketing creation in this 5 minute clip......interesting take.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C62KA...E39445&index=0

Good link. Anyone who thinks Obama is this great social reformer without ties to Wall street is mistaken. Still, even with him being a marketing creation he's a huge upgrade from Bush with his intelligence and willingness to tackle some of the hard issues.

[Vulcan]

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

How is that personal? You've made it clear for years that you believe conservative politicians and Republicans (which aren't always the same thing) are the scum of the earth, corrupt and evil in some cases. My pointing that out is personal?

I find your choices to be myopic. You've picked the worst possible motivations for the bad guys and made the good guys immune to the same.

Your posts speak for themselves.

So by me saying 90% of politicians are corrupt, it must be that 90% of politicians are Republican or Conservative. Your logic continues to amaze me.

are you still searching for WMDs or have you finally admitted they don't exist and Bush lied? I think your lose over the Iraq war argument is colouring your opinions.

[wittynickname]

If you want some fantastic discussion/debate about this whole health care/death panel issue, go check out the interview (all four parts) that Jon Stewart had with Betsy McCaughey.

http://www.thedailyshow.com/


It would be nice if the "real" journalists in this country were anywhere near as bold as Jon Stewart, and asked real questions.

He makes some excellent points and some great arguments. I want to bear children to that man. And I don't even want children.

Edit: I'm still not actually finished watching the last part, and this woman, my God. This woman is the reason this country is in shambles.

No one is saying "KILL THE OLD PEOPLE."

But clearly, these same people don't give a damn what happens to anyone under the age of 65.

[mikey_the_redneck]

Originally Posted by Vulcan

Good link. Anyone who thinks Obama is this great social reformer without ties to Wall street is mistaken. Still, even with him being a marketing creation he's a huge upgrade from Bush with his intelligence and willingness to tackle some of the hard issues.

Goldman-Sachs is Obamas' biggest campaign contributer......

[mikey_the_redneck]

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

Why are you confused?

He promised to end the wars, not end them immediately. He's doing what is required to make that possible. Pretty straight forward.

He has been quoted as saying he will pull troops from Iraq "immediately".....the guy is a liar, and a good one. Some (including military personnel) say the U.S. presence in Iraq/Afghanistan will continue for 10-15 more years......putting America in even more debt that it cannot get out of.

[wittynickname]

Originally Posted by mikey_the_redneck

He has been quoted as saying he will pull troops from Iraq "immediately".....the guy is a liar, and a good one. Some (including military personnel) say the U.S. presence in Iraq/Afghanistan will continue for 10-15 more years......putting America in even more debt that it cannot get out of.

Since when is it a shocking revelation that a politician lied?

Was it not President Bush who claimed "MISSION ACCOMPLISHED" in regards to Iraq SIX YEARS AGO?

So basically, by pointing out an exaggeration in his campaign promises, you've uncovered the amazing news that Obama is no better or worse than any other politician. They all lie to get themselves elected. This isn't news.

You can't just pull troops out of Iraq immediately. Anyone who voted for Obama based on that is an idiot and would've voted for anyone with pretty words and shiny posters.

[Vulcan]

Originally Posted by wittynickname

If you want some fantastic discussion/debate about this whole health care/death panel issue, go check out the interview (all four parts) that Jon Stewart had with Betsy McCaughey.

http://www.thedailyshow.com/


It would be nice if the "real" journalists in this country were anywhere near as bold as Jon Stewart, and asked real questions.

He makes some excellent points and some great arguments. I want to bear children to that man. And I don't even want children.

Edit: I'm still not actually finished watching the last part, and this woman, my God. This woman is the reason this country is in shambles.

No one is saying "KILL THE OLD PEOPLE."

But clearly, these same people don't give a damn what happens to anyone under the age of 65.

Bill Maher has been hitting the opponents to health care pretty hard too.

[wittynickname]

Originally Posted by Vulcan

Bill Maher has been hitting the opponents to health care pretty hard too.

General mainstream media just isn't doing it. The opponents have a strong voice from Fox News, but the people supporting health care reform (as a whole, not necessarily this exact wording of the legislation) don't really have a voice in the mainstream media, because the MSNBCs, the CNNs don't have the cajones to ask the tough questions.

[mikey_the_redneck]

Originally Posted by wittynickname

You can't just pull troops out of Iraq immediately. Anyone who voted for Obama based on that is an idiot and would've voted for anyone with pretty words and shiny posters.

EVERYONE who voted for Obama succumbed to "pretty words and shiny posters".
You are right though, you can't just pull troops out of Iraq immediately because who would be watching over the oil fields?

[wittynickname]

Originally Posted by mikey_the_redneck

EVERYONE who voted for Obama succumbed to "pretty words and shiny posters".
You are right though, you can't just pull troops out of Iraq immediately because who would be watching over the oil fields?

Not really.

There are many people who voted for him because, frankly, he was the lesser of two evils. The idea of him in office was less frightening than the idea of McCain and Palin running the show.

Just because people voted for him doesn't mean that they were all in full support of everything he said, nor did they "succumb" to the whole "Change" and "Hope" spiel. I have a friend who has been a staunch Republican her entire life, but she just refused to vote for McCain, and voted for Obama because she felt that while he wasn't perfect, he was the better option.

Sometimes it isn't about the hype, it's about making the choice that seems less terrifying.

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally Posted by Vulcan

So by me saying 90% of politicians are corrupt, it must be that 90% of politicians are Republican or Conservative. Your logic continues to amaze me..

Amazing. You're going to have to correlate that for me. I don't see where I said anything close to that at all. Nor do I see where my logic implies it.

Originally Posted by Vulcan

are you still searching for WMDs or have you finally admitted they don't exist and Bush lied? I think your lose over the Iraq war argument is colouring your opinions.

You are unbelievable. I have said this on 100 different occasions.

Saddam had DOCUMENTED WMD's.
Saddam expelled inspectors before all of those WMD's could be destroyed.
It is/was reasonable to believe he still had some....and he probably did.

If Bush was lying he could've planted something.

It's not rocket science.

I've always stood by the 17 UN security council resolutions that were ignored by Hussein as justification for the invasion.

The post invasion plan was horrible, if one even existed. I won't deny that.

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally Posted by mikey_the_redneck

He has been quoted as saying he will pull troops from Iraq "immediately".....the guy is a liar, and a good one. Some (including military personnel) say the U.S. presence in Iraq/Afghanistan will continue for 10-15 more years......putting America in even more debt that it cannot get out of.

Link? I've never heard/seen him say that. As far as I am aware, Dennis Kucinich was the only Presidential candidate to advocate immediate and unconditional withdrawal.

Sorry, but I'm not taking your word for it.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

Why are you confused?

He promised to end the wars, not end them immediately. He's doing what is required to make that possible. Pretty straight forward.

But you have to realize that not everyone will see it that way.

For those people who voted on him because he promised to bring home the troops, and now he's just letting things progress as he SHOULD.....they suddenly have a problem with it.

I also think he's done a great job with Iraq. In fact, because the media isn't really covering it anymore, we don't get any news, but things are going really well over there.

Which is probably the reason we don't hear anything.

[Vulcan]

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

Amazing. You're going to have to correlate that for me. I don't see where I said anything close to that at all. Nor do I see where my logic implies it.




You are unbelievable. I have said this on 100 different occasions.

Saddam had DOCUMENTED WMD's.
Saddam expelled inspectors before all of those WMD's could be destroyed.
It is/was reasonable to believe he still had some....and he probably did.

If Bush was lying he could've planted something.

It's not rocket science.

I've always stood by the 17 UN security council resolutions that were ignored by Hussein as justification for the invasion.

The post invasion plan was horrible, if one even existed. I won't deny that.

You said among other things

How is that personal? You've made it clear for years that you believe conservative politicians and Republicans (which aren't always the same thing) are the scum of the earth, corrupt and evil in some cases. My pointing that out is personal?

you really like saying what you think I've said, don't you. I've never said that and it's got to the point that you just hear what you want to hear, so I'm wasting my time.
I don't like Bush and know he's a lying liar but that hardly encompasses all conservative politicians in all cases. The rest of your post, is just wow.

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally Posted by Vulcan

You said among other things



you really like saying what you think I've said, don't you. I've never said that and it's got to the point that you just hear what you want to hear, so I'm wasting my time.
I don't like Bush and know he's a lying liar but that hardly encompasses all conservative politicians in all cases. The rest of your post, is just wow.

I have no idea what you're talking about at this point. You've taken something I said, applied it to something you said that I wasn't referring to, and then drawn conclusions based on it.

I don't even know how you could get to that point.

[Vulcan]

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

I have no idea what you're talking about at this point. You've taken something I said, applied it to something you said that I wasn't referring to, and then drawn conclusions based on it.

I don't even know how you could get to that point.

Here's how it is. When I refer to your posts, I quote you. When you refer to my posts, you often don't quote, you just make up crap.

[HOZ]

Originally Posted by wittynickname

Not to go too far off track: So when men fight for their rights and freedoms, they're brave and honorable.

But a woman who expects the same rights should just back down and try to find a new job?

Also this has been a nationwide problem for decades. This isn't one company that was underpaying women for the same work as the higher paid men--this has been a problem with the majority of the corporations/businesses in the US, hence the reason that there was actual legislation needed to stop the practice of it.

Pure feminist mythology which I am sure is backed up by statistics. Lies, damn lies and then there are feminist stats.

For example: If there are prejudices in Universities against women in science, they are remarkably subtle. The prejudices against men are institutionalized and overt. Concerning institutional restrictions against any speech the feminists don't like: these restrictions are massive, overpowering, and virtually 100% intimidating. On the rare occasion such speech is uttered by a professor in a prominent university, it tends to be national news.

For companies.....

Any "successful" company will tell you, they don't care whether the sexual organs are dangling or not. They will negotiate a contract for the best of the company. I will make it more succinct. If a woman works for a company that pay according to whether you are a male then they are idiots. Plenty of other companies out there.

The reason we have the national inequalities is......
1. What degrees do most women come out of University with?
Answer: Most women come out with Liberal Arts degress which jobs simply do not pay as much.

None of these stats break it down. MBA women versus MBA men. And such.

[wittynickname]

Originally Posted by HOZ

Pure feminist mythology which I am sure is backed up by statistics. Lies, damn lies and then there are feminist stats.

It's 2 in the damn morning here, and I have to be awake for work in less than 5 hours, so I'm going to make this quick.

I don't want to derail the thread (which is actually having some interesting conversation about an interesting topic) by going into detail--but I will say, for the record, that I'm about the farthest thing from a feminist. It isn't about just female rights, it's about equal rights. I don't care if you're male, female, black, white, old, young, gay or straight--if all American people are supposed to be equal, they should be treated equally. Period, end of story.

That legislature ensures that at least men and women are on an even playing field. Change for the positive. That was all I was saying, and I really have no desire to get into a feminism/anti-feminism debate, because I genuinely don't care about it. It was an example, and nothing more.

I'd added a lot more here, but on second thought, it's a can of worms that I just have no desire to open, so we'll just pretend that was never here.