Rachel Maddow Rocked Meet the Press

[Sarah G]

i'm surprised that republican men get laid.

I am not surprised that Democratic women don't.

really? that isn't what rushbo said.

Yes.

And Foster Friess talking about women putting Bayer asprin between their knees. These guys are clueless.

 

[BDBoop]

You have to admit Rachel knows how to make love to a woman...

Leftists are consumed with hate; it makes them come off rude.

So how do you define calling a woman 'skank' several times in one post? Surely not 'polite?'

 

[Provocateur]

Rachel Maddow Makes History and Triumphs over the War On Women

Rachel Maddow was correct. The interruption by Castellanos was significant, because Republicans don’t want to talk about the war on women. They have adopted the same position towards the rights of women that they long ago adopted towards issues like poverty and racism. It doesn’t exist. Castellanos was trying to muddy the waters with funny math designed to deny the fact that women earn less than men. Women who work full time earn 77% of what men do. Until today, that fact was not in dispute.

Castellanos tried to use different factors to claim that the wage gap doesn’t exist, but even when all factors are taken into account, 41% of the wage gap is unexplained. This means that when a man and a woman the same background, doing the same job, working the same hours, women still make less money than men.

For Alex Castellanos the argument was matter of political strategy. His goal was to make some people believe that there is cause for question on the existence of the pay gap. (You may also recognize this strategy as the exact same course the right has pursued on climate change).

Castellanos’s behavior towards Maddow proved that the Republican Party has declared war on women. By watching the video, you can see his condescending tone directed at Maddow. When he said that he appreciated her passion, but that she was wrong, he was trying to portray her as an irrational woman who was being guided by her emotions.

That's what I've been talking about. THAT is what we're up against.

I never pegged you as a useful tool.

 

[BDBoop]

Rachel Maddow Makes History and Triumphs over the War On Women

Rachel Maddow was correct. The interruption by Castellanos was significant, because Republicans don’t want to talk about the war on women. They have adopted the same position towards the rights of women that they long ago adopted towards issues like poverty and racism. It doesn’t exist. Castellanos was trying to muddy the waters with funny math designed to deny the fact that women earn less than men. Women who work full time earn 77% of what men do. Until today, that fact was not in dispute.

Castellanos tried to use different factors to claim that the wage gap doesn’t exist, but even when all factors are taken into account, 41% of the wage gap is unexplained. This means that when a man and a woman the same background, doing the same job, working the same hours, women still make less money than men.

For Alex Castellanos the argument was matter of political strategy. His goal was to make some people believe that there is cause for question on the existence of the pay gap. (You may also recognize this strategy as the exact same course the right has pursued on climate change).

Castellanos’s behavior towards Maddow proved that the Republican Party has declared war on women. By watching the video, you can see his condescending tone directed at Maddow. When he said that he appreciated her passion, but that she was wrong, he was trying to portray her as an irrational woman who was being guided by her emotions.

That's what I've been talking about. THAT is what we're up against.

I never pegged you as a useful tool.

I'm sooooo hurt. Norly.

 

[Synthaholic]

She's Hannity of the Left. And I've watched more of her than Hannity. She, and Hannity, shouldn't be on MTP. Both are bombastic partisans.

This is the kind of statement I would expect from Stephanie or Willow Tree. You know - mindless, uneducated, hyper-partisan, nonfactual, and frankly, moronic.

Everything Rachel reports is backed up by facts. And when she makes a mistake, she not only discloses it, she makes a big deal of disclosing it, in a segment called "Department Of Corrections".

If you believe she has lied, or been mistaken in her facts, then show us. You won't, because you can't.

Please post any evidence that Hannity has EVER corrected something he has stated. Hell, he still says that Obama was the most Liberal member of the Senate, which is clearly an intentional lie.

If everything she says is backed up by facts you should have any trouble proving that Lily Ledbetter did not know about the discrimination for years before she filed the suit. The only snag you will have in proving that is that Ledbatter admitted in a disposition that she knew about the difference in pay in 1992, which was 6 years before she filed suit with the EEOC.

White House Distorts Ledbetter v. Goodyear Ruling, in Backing Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act

I await your outstanding ability to find facts that do not exist to prove that Maddow never lies.







Alternatively, you could just admit that Maddow and, by extension, you are both hacks.

Funny how your link repeatedly makes that claim, yet every link within says "page not found".

 

[Quantum Windbag]

That's a lie.



That's a lie.



Well, which is it? Doesn't matter. They are both lies.



That's a lie.



Strawman.

That's a lie.

Again - which is it? You seem to want to, on the one hand, claim that something is a fact, then turn around and say "And if it isn't a fact, then XYZ...". Unfortunately, your attempts at ass-covering fail with both.

This article is a lie?

Young women aged between 22 and 29 are now being paid more on average per hour than their male counterparts.

An end to the male role as breadwinner? The 20-something women who earn more than men | Mail Online

I am breathlessly awaiting your providing actual evidence to refute the study used here.

Or you could admit you are simply a hack.

The "facts" that you claimed were indeed lies. For instance:

Please provide your proof that Ledbetter knew for years that she was being underpaid.

And now you want to move the goalpost by limiting your "facts" to a narrow age group of 7 years.

Already did.

I notice you didn't actually address the specific point I made here, which is that younger women are getting paid more than men in their age group. Care to explain why there is an all out war on women that forces women to accept lower pay if it isn't happening in the youngest, most dynamic, part of the work force? How can we asshole sexists pigs win if younger men are not getting paid more than younger women?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

This is the kind of statement I would expect from Stephanie or Willow Tree. You know - mindless, uneducated, hyper-partisan, nonfactual, and frankly, moronic.

Everything Rachel reports is backed up by facts. And when she makes a mistake, she not only discloses it, she makes a big deal of disclosing it, in a segment called "Department Of Corrections".

If you believe she has lied, or been mistaken in her facts, then show us. You won't, because you can't.

Please post any evidence that Hannity has EVER corrected something he has stated. Hell, he still says that Obama was the most Liberal member of the Senate, which is clearly an intentional lie.

If everything she says is backed up by facts you should have any trouble proving that Lily Ledbetter did not know about the discrimination for years before she filed the suit. The only snag you will have in proving that is that Ledbatter admitted in a disposition that she knew about the difference in pay in 1992, which was 6 years before she filed suit with the EEOC.

White House Distorts Ledbetter v. Goodyear Ruling, in Backing Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act

I await your outstanding ability to find facts that do not exist to prove that Maddow never lies.







Alternatively, you could just admit that Maddow and, by extension, you are both hacks.

Funny how your link repeatedly makes that claim, yet every link within says "page not found".

Like I said, you should be able to dig up the SCOTUS decision that disproves she knew about the pay. Unless, that is, Maddow is lying. I will make it easier for you, here is the decision.

LEDBETTER v. GOODYEAR TIRE & RUBBER CO.

The court ruled that, because she was aware of the discrimination in the past, and the law specifically limited the filing of a case until 180 days after the discovery of said discrimination, the case should be dismissed because it was not brought within the statue of limitations.

Like I have said repeatedly, feel free to link to any proof that this is not true, and that it does not prove Maddow is a hack. She is not basing this on research, she is basing it solely on Ledbetters testimony before Congress, which was not sworn, so she, apparently, felt no compunction about lying.

 

[Stephanie]

I have to laugh at how the left talk with great admiration for this Maddow talking head..or any of their talking heads for that matter..

yet she is still on a cable channel that has it's rating in the TOILET.

and they accuse the right of being obsessed with and forming their political views from Rush..

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I have to laugh at how the left talk with great admiration for this Maddow talking head..or any of their talking heads for that matter..

yet she is still on a cable channel that has it's rating in the TOILET.

and they accuse the right of being obsessed with and forming their political views from Rush..

Give them a break, their are so few progressives that can actually talk without getting confused they always worship the ones who manage it.

 

[mudwhistle]

Apparently because Sarah G is watching.

I understand the attraction, though. Sarah G. is 20% of Maddow's viewing public - it gives her a lot of pull with the show.

That stuff will rot her brain.


Here's a gift for Sarah G next Halloween.

She can use this to make her Jackalanterns......

Just print it out and start cutting.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Give them a break, their are so few progressives that can actually talk without getting confused they always worship the ones who manage it.

So, you're saying that leftism is a symptom of mental retardation?

 

[Sarah G]

Apparently because Sarah G is watching.

I understand the attraction, though. Sarah G. is 20% of Maddow's viewing public - it gives her a lot of pull with the show.

That stuff will rot her brain.


Here's a gift for Sarah G next Halloween.

She can use this to make her Jackalanterns......

Just print it out and start cutting.

Maybe we will use that, I was thinking of inviting her over to the Tavern to help us mix drinks for the Democratic October Surprise celebration.

 

[Sarah G]

Give them a break, their are so few progressives that can actually talk without getting confused they always worship the ones who manage it.

So, you're saying that leftism is a symptom of mental retardation?

I don't think you two want to go there.

 

[Toro]

This is the kind of statement I would expect from Stephanie or Willow Tree. You know - mindless, uneducated, hyper-partisan, nonfactual, and frankly, moronic.

Everything Rachel reports is backed up by facts. And when she makes a mistake, she not only discloses it, she makes a big deal of disclosing it, in a segment called "Department Of Corrections".

If you believe she has lied, or been mistaken in her facts, then show us. You won't, because you can't.

Please post any evidence that Hannity has EVER corrected something he has stated. Hell, he still says that Obama was the most Liberal member of the Senate, which is clearly an intentional lie.

Right. That's no different than Maddow repeatedly talking about the Republican War on Women.

Are you willing to bet your avatar that I can find Hannity correcting himself?

I'm not claiming that he has never corrected himself (although I would be shocked if you could find him correcting a negative statement about a Democrat and stating that he was wrong, and apologizing for it).

My point is that, even though he knows that they are blatant lies, he continues to repeat his favorite talking points like the one I cited. Even political novices know that there are more Liberal Senators than Obama. But he repeats it to this day.

And Maddow keeps repeating the "women get paid 77% of men." That's fundamentally dishonest when she uses it in the War on Women meme without qualifying it. Adjust it for education and time in the workforce and most of that difference goes away. Adjust it for age and it pretty much disappears. It perfectly demonstrates the adage about three types of lies - lies, damn lies and statistics. Is Hannity worse? Maybe, I don't know, but if so, that's a Pyrrhic victory on your part. My point all along is that partisan ideologues will lie, bend the truth and distort reality to promote their agenda. In that, Maddow is no different than Hannity or Coulter or Limbaugh. Maybe she's less so, but fundamentally, there is little difference.

 

[Jroc]

i'm surprised that republican men get laid.

they do... but it costs them.

 

[BDBoop]

http://bls.gov/news.release/pdf/wkyeng.pdf

Usual weekly earnings of full-time workers varied by age. Among both men and women,
median weekly earnings tend to be higher in the older age groups. Men between the ages of 45
to 54 had median weekly earnings of $998, about the same as the median for men age 55 to 64
($992). Usual weekly earnings were highest for women age 35 to 64; weekly earnings were - 2 -
$756 for women age 35 to 44, $748 for women age 45 to 54, and $779 for women age 55 to 64.
Workers age 16 to 24 had the lowest median weekly earnings, at $448. (See table 3.)
 Among the major occupational groups, persons employed full time in management,
professional, and related occupations had the highest median weekly earnings—$1,309 for men
and $959 for women. Men and women employed in service jobs earned the least, $563 and
$450, respectively. (See table 4.)
 By educational attainment, full-time workers age 25 and over without a high school diploma
had median weekly earnings of $450, compared with $653 for high school graduates (no
college) and $1,158 for those holding at least a bachelor's degree. Among college graduates
with advanced degrees (professional or master's degree and above), the highest earning 10
percent of male workers made $3,366 or more per week, compared with $2,284 or more for
their female counterparts. (See table 5.)

 

[Political Junky]

George Will comes to mind off the top of my head.

Walter Williams, Thomas Sowell...

I'd love to see Madcow go toe to toe with Ann Coulter.

Me too.

 

[BDBoop]

George Will comes to mind off the top of my head.

Walter Williams, Thomas Sowell...

I'd love to see Madcow go toe to toe with Ann Coulter.

Me too.

Absolutely. I wonder if it'd be as much fun as it was when Franken proved her to be a lying liar who lies?

 

[Trajan]

http://bls.gov/news.release/pdf/wkyeng.pdf

Usual weekly earnings of full-time workers varied by age. Among both men and women,
median weekly earnings tend to be higher in the older age groups. Men between the ages of 45
to 54 had median weekly earnings of $998, about the same as the median for men age 55 to 64
($992). Usual weekly earnings were highest for women age 35 to 64; weekly earnings were - 2 -
$756 for women age 35 to 44, $748 for women age 45 to 54, and $779 for women age 55 to 64.
Workers age 16 to 24 had the lowest median weekly earnings, at $448. (See table 3.)
 Among the major occupational groups, persons employed full time in management,
professional, and related occupations had the highest median weekly earnings—$1,309 for men
and $959 for women. Men and women employed in service jobs earned the least, $563 and
$450, respectively. (See table 4.)
 By educational attainment, full-time workers age 25 and over without a high school diploma
had median weekly earnings of $450, compared with $653 for high school graduates (no
college) and $1,158 for those holding at least a bachelor's degree. Among college graduates
with advanced degrees (professional or master's degree and above), the highest earning 10
percent of male workers made $3,366 or more per week, compared with $2,284 or more for
their female counterparts. (See table 5.)

and ?

 

[Stephanie]

I was going to say Coulter and Madcow would have a cat fight, but I'm not sure what to call it...