War on Women

[O Really]

mike is a liberal and a Catholic, not a con. He sparred with both atheists and with cons that said he could not be a "Real Christian"™.

Yeah, that's the problem with defining Christianity, there are no entrance or eligibility requirements to be a "Real Christian"™. According to their own theology, the requirements are not quantifiable, but are based on faith and belief and "being saved," maybe plus some fairly simple rituals. Comes down to, you're a Christian if you think and say you are.

[Leo Lyons]

"Ah, so," as Charlie Chan used to say. Still, it's a damn shame there seem to be no intelligent conservatives.

"Intelligence" is in the mind of the one reading the post. Inasmuch as Conservatives and Liberals rarely see eye-to-eye, each could claim the lack of intelligence of each mindset. Therefore, the conclusion would be that's it's a "damn shame" there seems to be no intelligence where liberal and conservative die-hards are involved; even if the conversation was about fishing.

[O Really]

"Ah, so," as Charlie Chan used to say. Still, it's a damn shame there seem to be no intelligent conservatives.

"Intelligence" is in the mind of the one reading the post. Inasmuch as Conservatives and Liberals rarely see eye-to-eye, each could claim the lack of intelligence of each mindset. Therefore, the conclusion would be that's it's a "damn shame" there seems to be no intelligence where liberal and conservative die-hards are involved; even if the conversation was about fishing.

"Intelligence" could be used that way - we refer to each other as "idiots" despite most of us not really being intellectually deficient. But I'm talking about applying intellectual ability to understanding a topic and arriving at logical conclusions. Taking the facts as they are known and been evidenced, no intelligent person could rationally arrive at the conclusion that Obama is a Kenyan socialist. No intelligent person could find it reasonable to vote against their own personal interest and/or the interests of their constituents simply because the President of the other party favors it. That sort of stuff goes way beyond rational partisan or ideological differences. An intelligent person will say, "I understand your position, but I disagree, and here's why." That's what you would have heard from Buckley, for example. That's not what you hear from those currently calling themselves "conservatives."

[Stinger]

"Ah, so," as Charlie Chan used to say. Still, it's a damn shame there seem to be no intelligent conservatives.

"Intelligence" is in the mind of the one reading the post. Inasmuch as Conservatives and Liberals rarely see eye-to-eye, each could claim the lack of intelligence of each mindset. Therefore, the conclusion would be that's it's a "damn shame" there seems to be no intelligence where liberal and conservative die-hards are involved; even if the conversation was about fishing.

"Intelligence" could be used that way - we refer to each other as "idiots" despite most of us not really being intellectually deficient. But I'm talking about applying intellectual ability to understanding a topic and arriving at logical conclusions. Taking the facts as they are known and been evidenced, no intelligent person could rationally arrive at the conclusion that Obama is a Kenyan socialist. No intelligent person could find it reasonable to vote against their own personal interest and/or the interests of their constituents simply because the President of the other party favors it. That sort of stuff goes way beyond rational partisan or ideological differences. An intelligent person will say, "I understand your position, but I disagree, and here's why." That's what you would have heard from Buckley, for example. That's not what you hear from those currently calling themselves "conservatives."

And stupid is when you complain about Obama and Reverend Wright in one breath and then claim Obama is a Muslim the next breath. Holding two antithetical opinions to be equally valid illogical and irrational.

Or just plain fucking stupid.

[Stinger]

Greta Van Susteren On Colleagues: “Have These Men Lost Their Minds?”





Faux Noise - Too stupid for Faux Noise.

I'm sorry, but how dumb are these women? They've been "breadwinning" right along with these Troglodytes for years. Were they expecting something intelligent, rational, sensitive, and remotely modern from these twits?

[Dryer Vent]

The Lou Dobbs clip makes me sick. And, I'm surprised that Kelly got so "liberal" and stood her ground.

My son is an attorney, and his wife is the primary breadwinner - a corporate executive for a Fortune 500 company. It sure hasn't affected their lives, and I'm sure their kid will grow up to be extremely well balanced and probably smart as a whip.

[O Really]

Texas abortion bill blocked by Senator Wendy Davis filibuster

Yep, pard, there was a nasty showdown in Austin back in '13. When all the shootin' was done, the blonde was the last woman standin'.

That was magnificent, wasn't it?

[O Really]

Prediction (guess): the Supreme Court will decline the case, leaving the school on the losing side of the Appeals Court decision. Yay. I don't know why school administrators never learn. Must be union.

[Boatrocker]

. . . I don't know why school administrators never learn . . . .

Those who can, teach. Those who can't, go into administration. I believe, fervently and whole-heartedly, in the Dilbert Principle.

[Boatrocker]

Fla. teacher suspended for forcing 4th-grader to participate in Pledge of Allegiance

Florida. Again. Are they importing nutjobs from Texass?

[rstrong]

Florida. Again. Are they importing nutjobs from Texass?

We used to export a lot of our Quebec nutjobs to Florida, but after the recession they want their nutjobs made in America. We're thinking of lodging a protest under NAFTA arbitration.

[rstrong]

Too bad Texas wasn't as picky about Canada's Ted Cruz.

In 2008 it was (probable) Canadian Sarah Palin.
In 2013 it's Canadian Ted Cruz.
I'm taking bets on where the Tea Party will run Canadian Rob Ford in 2016.

[rstrong]

Hobby Lobby's Hypocrisy: The Company's Retirement Plan Invests in Contraception Manufacturers

Being a corporation - a person - this could be just the start.

[neoplacebo]

Law = corporation = person. I wonder what gender these corporations will adopt? I suspect they will be androgynous...It keeps me up at night but also makes me feel secure in my current armistice in effect between myself and women.

[rstrong]

"I refuse to believe that corporations are people until Texas executes one."

[Boatrocker]

"I refuse to believe that corporations are people until Texas executes one."

[rstrong]

As fellow North Carolinians, we urge you to support the Paycheck Fairness Act in the Senate. It is imperative for the future of our state and the success of our families that women share an equal economic footing with men.

Careful there. Pay equality - "Equal pay for equal work" is obviously a good thing.

But watch out for pay equity - "Equal pay for work of equal value", or "comparable worth" in American terms.

The Canadian government and some of the provincial governments have this. The idea is that there aren't say, many female hydro line workers, but hydro line workers are paid more than female-dominated data entry operator positions. So they're declared to be work of equal value, and the data entry operators get a raise.

The result that something like 30,000 men got raises - because they were doing the exact same jobs as women whose jobs were declared equal value to *different* jobs that men were doing.

And yes, our government workers were already getting paid far more on average, and getting far better benefits and pensions, than us mere mortals.

[rstrong]

How do Canadian women feel about the total result?

That depends on whether they're civil servants, or mere taxpayers.

[rstrong]

I've heard at least two women describing it with four letter words. They were of course NOT civil servants, just people who had to pay for the farce. As tax payers, it took money out of their pockets, while doing nothing for equality.

Those female civil servants were ALREADY getting equal pay to men. That's why the men doing the exact same jobs had to get raises, when the women got raises because someone doing a completely different job got paid more.

[rstrong]

"two women" is not a very broad sample.

Yes it is, for a programmer.

Are you saying that all female civil servants were ALREADY getting equal pay to men and that only male civil servants got raises? Who pushed for the law, then?

Something like 30,000 men got raises - because they were doing the exact same jobs as women whose jobs were declared equal value to *different* jobs that men were doing. So yes, those women WERE getting equal pay to men.

Who pushed for the law, then?

I'm guessing a government employees' union that wanted to raise the pay for members, male and female alike. There was nothing to lose - for the civil servants. The tax payers don't count.