Posted on 10/17/2012 8:11:36 AM PDT by Skeez
Did anyone else raise an eyebrow during Romney's response the following Question? Q: In what new ways do you intend to rectify the inequalities in the workplace, specifically regarding females making only 72 percent of what their male counterparts earn?
MR. ROMNEY:
And I brought us whole binders full of — of women. I was proud of the fact that after I staffed (I heard "stuffed") my cabinet and my senior staff that the University of New York in Albany did a survey of all 50 states and concluded that mine had more women in senior leadership positions than any other state in America.
because I recognized that if you're going to have women in the workforce, that sometimes they need to be more flexible. [end transcript] Maybe it's the fact that my fiance' has been away for a few weeks, but those two comments perked up my ears a bit and had me worried what he was going to say next and if the media was going to draw attention to it.
...shoot... sorry for the poor html formatting there. I looked better in the preview.
Too bad Gov. romney didn’t ask 0dumbo about the huge disparities in his WH staff pay
If anything comes to this it will be another Big Bird cling-on moment for the Libs. A usless question that when the facts are actually looked into make Ibama look like the one in the all boys club.
We frequently hear that women earn less in the same jobs as men do.
It is against the law to pay women less for doing the same job as a man.
This question is better directed to the president. Since the president and Eric Holder have all the legal tools at their disposal to deal with this discrimination, if it still is really happening, what is the Obama administration doing about this?
And, does this liberal college girl hold the Obama administration accountable for their failure to enforce federal laws in this area??? If this is really a problem in our society, it is not because we don’t have laws on the books addressing it.
Yeah, you’re right, it was a “gotcha” question and he DID do a political tapdance to get through it.
So what would YOU have done?
I was actually pretty pleased with the way he did NOT get all PC through the assault weapon ban gotcha. And I was mostly pleased with the way he mostly did not pander to the left on the immigration question.
So personally, I’ll spot him the glass ceiling crapola.
How are you supposed to answer a question with a false premise?
That question reeks of Democrat activist.
He was saying companies have to be flexible, not women. Which in itself admits the pay gap issue is BS, since the solution is to treat women specially. I don’t know what to say about the “stuffed” in your head.
It was a stupid question so it doesn’t matter anyway. Obama was so off his game that he didn’t even bring up the “war on women” right away.
Binders? Binders? Really? One could take it to mean enslavement, or in the true business oriented sense a folder/collection of candidates.
With all the harm and dishonor Obama has brought to this country. With all the bowing and scraping and genuflecting this President has willingly given to numerous dictators, potentates and tyrants his last four years. With the ridiculous rules of engagement he’s hamstrung our soldier sons and daughters with in enemy territory. With all the lies, deceit and inaction about our economy, our future, the future of our sons, daughters and grandchildren???????
With all of this you are ‘curious’ about the context/connotation of what Romney said about trying to get women in an increased roll in his state government, you have some kind of doubt?
I am offended. Your priorities are direly misplaced.
Exactly. Women don’t get paid 28% less, they work 28% less. In this PC and litigious age, what company would survive the discovery that females were paid deliberately less. Pure BS.
Well, there was two ways to address that question. He could have tried to convey himself as an equal opportunity employer and by doing so, give credit to the 72 cents on the dollar statistic.
He chose to contrast himself vs unnamed others that discriminate against women.
On the other hand, he could have explained the truth behind the 72 cents on the dollar statistic. He could have pointed to maternal leave and difference in risk tolerance among men and women.
There were many times in the debate last night Romney could have made the argument that group identity politics serves no one and leads to resentment, division and poorly placed policies. He could have said what was good for men is good for women and likewise whites, blacks, latinos, gays, or any other group the Democrats like to victimize.
However, my point was that I picked up on some sexual innuendo in his language that gave me pause. I’m mostly noticeably referring to “binders full of women” and “more flexible”. I also misheard him once. I thought he said “stuffed” his cabinet with women.
It was a Bull$hit liberal question asked by DNC moron.
The real question is....Why did you ask it here?
He was probably going to say “binders of resumes” or some such thing, relating to his hiring of women.
The good thing, however, was it gave an opening for a lot of (Bill) Clinton jokes...”Hmmm, did he say he has whole binders full of women????” Talk about a little black book!
This was a STUPID question and the very premise is false. THIS woman and her DAUGHTER, sitting and watching the debate, groaned in unison when this dope stood up and asked the question. I would have been happier if Romney had taken the truth about this myth home to the little idiot instead of trying to pander to it.
Just wondering...does anyone know if this moron works for Crowley?
“Binders” = “truckloads”.
I don’t ‘get’ the twitter reaction. Probably some snickery jibe at women? But me and twits never see eye to eye.
What would be a twit’s synonym for “lots”?
| All I can say is that anyone who brings up the tired old "72%" trope is NOT an undecided voter. That question reeks of Democrat activist. |
Which exactly why that old Crow picked such a doofus question. It looked to me like both Obama and Romney "rolled their eyes" at that question, but they used it to further their agendas.
“”Binders? Binders? Really? in the true business oriented sense a folder/collection of candidates.”
Lucky women are in a binder , on a shelf in some company’s Human Resource Dept. The ones that object to being in a binder are in the Food Stamp line.
Men choose to work the dangerous, uncomfortable, and/or dirty jobs, in order to get more pay. Men work the jobs that have them on the road and away from home, in order to get more pay. Men work the heavy overtime, in order to get more pay. And feminists then complain that median pay for men happens to be higher than median pay for women?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.