McCain rebuts Obama ad on equal pay

I am sorry but what the heck does pay scale in the Senators office have to do with their voting record for equal pay for Women? I wonder if the author of this article even checked out the facts to see if what the McCain spokesman said is even true. Given McCain's track record of out right lies for a campaign I have no doubt this is just another packaged lie that the media will run with no fact check.

MomsRising.org recently took McCain to task , over his voting record regarding equal pay and opportunity in the work place for women, delivering thousands of resumes to his office.

McCain appears to continue to rely on ignorance and lies for a campaign.

Thanks for reprinting McCain lies, some kind of reporter you are.

Obama's record does speak for itself. He had an opportunity to further break the glass ceiling for women via his VP selection. Instead he picks an old white guy who is entrenched in Washington, DC do-nothing politics. He had an opportunity to at least pick someone who garnered 18 Million (MILLION) votes and he dismissed her as if she was the kitchen help.

Obama is all fluff and no substance.

I'm John McCain...and I approve this LIE

In the article titled "McCain Rebuts Obama Ad on Equal Pay", the author, Foon Rhee, states that "John McCain's campaign reacted today with specific figures to rebut a TV ad from Democratic rival Barack Obama on equal pay for women."

I continued reading expecting to see a rebuttal (with specific figures) of the claim made by the Obama ad that, and I quote from the article, "... women make on average 77 cents on the dollar compared to men, and accuses McCain of voting against an equal pay law."

I saw no rebuttal of this claim in the article, only a silly counter claim that Women in McCain's Senate Office earn more than women in Obama's office. The author even points out that there are more highly-placed women in McCain's office than in Obama's, which explains the higher salary and certainly doesn't prove that the women in Obama's office receive less pay for equal work - which is the subject of the bill that McCain voted against.

Reporters need to write the truth and not obfuscate the discussion on real issues in an attempt to seem to give two parties fair treatment.

There us an ad coming out, the grand finaly of all ads..

The story about the heartless divorce of John Mccain from his wife who had an accident before he returned as POW. She is left on the beach to rot away while he clings to presidential bid. He does not allow kids from the previous marriage to be interviewed.

The accident disfigured his former wife slightly, instead of caring and loving her, he took the low road -divorced her with almost nothing and married rich Cindy.

it is a hollywood movie about the true story about John mccain.

If he destroyed her life from her beauty, JOHN MCCAIN WILL DESTROY AMERICA
Now we even hear about him inventing something he did not know about.

If John Mccain wins, THE GLORY DAYS OF AMERICA IS O-V-E-R

He will not hesistate to launch that red button for his bloodline conquest and thirst for war like a warmonger, his father and his grandfather!

If women were concerned about addressing the issue of equal pay for equal work, Hillary Clinton would have been the Democratic nominee not Obama. The bill introduced in April of this year was just another "rush" attempt by the Democrats to bring up a complicated issue without any real solutions for publicity purposes only. The bill the Democrats are talking about sought to counteract a Supreme Court decision limiting how long workers can wait before suing for pay discrimination.

It is named for Lilly Ledbetter, a supervisor at the Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.'s plant in Gadsden, Ala., who sued for pay discrimination just before retiring after a 19-year career there. By the time she retired, Ledbetter made $6,500 less than the lowest-paid male supervisor and claimed earlier decisions by supervisors kept her from making more. The Supreme Court voted 5-4 to throw out her complaint, saying she had waited too long to sue.

McCain, although he did not vote, does bring up some interesting points. 1.) Women usually enter career fields that tend to pay less. That has to change! Provide women with benefits to update and expand their education and skills. 2.)Women tend to temporarily drop out of the work force to take care of children, aging parent(s), ill family member, and so forth. Employers need to keeping workers by providing more flexible schedules. It makes sense to keep these workers in the workplace instead of incurring the tremendous cost of training someone new. Government has a role and needs to make sure workers are protected and Government (federal, state, & municipal) needs to address the issue of childcare (or lack there of) in this country. 3.) Women do not tend to negotiate salaries as aggressively as men. Waiting 19 years to say anything about your salary is just an example. Women need to be more informed going into a salary negotiation (there are several sites that provide salary ranges for different fields and positions). Maybe, there should be more transparency about salaries within society. Also, assertiveness training should part of education especially for girls.Women are usually taught not to rock the boat, to be nice, not to ask too many questions. That has to change!

If women were concerned about addressing the issue of equal pay for equal work, Hillary Clinton would have been the Democratic nominee not Obama. The bill introduced in April of this year was just another "rush" attempt by the Democrats to bring up a complicated issue without any real solutions for publicity purposes only. The bill the Democrats are talking about sought to counteract a Supreme Court decision limiting how long workers can wait before suing for pay discrimination.

It is named for Lilly Ledbetter, a supervisor at the Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.'s plant in Gadsden, Ala., who sued for pay discrimination just before retiring after a 19-year career there. By the time she retired, Ledbetter made $6,500 less than the lowest-paid male supervisor and claimed earlier decisions by supervisors kept her from making more. The Supreme Court voted 5-4 to throw out her complaint, saying she had waited too long to sue.

McCain, although he did not vote, does bring up some interesting points. 1.) Women usually enter career fields that tend to pay less. That has to change! Provide women with benefits to update and expand their education and skills. 2.)Women tend to temporarily drop out of the work force to take care of children, aging parent(s), ill family member, and so forth. Employers need to keeping workers by providing more flexible schedules. It makes sense to keep these workers in the workplace instead of incurring the tremendous cost of training someone new. Government has a role and needs to make sure workers are protected and Government (federal, state, & municipal) needs to address the issue of childcare (or lack there of) in this country. 3.) Women do not tend to negotiate salaries as aggressively as men. Waiting 19 years to say anything about your salary is just an example. Women need to be more informed going into a salary negotiation (there are several sites that provide salary ranges for different fields and positions). Maybe, there should be more transparency about salaries within society. Also, assertiveness training should part of education especially for girls.Women are usually taught not to rock the boat, to be nice, not to ask too many questions. That has to change!

Has anyone asked about the longevity of women in McCain's office?

Obviously, if people have been in DC a long time (26 years vs. 2 years) they would have had 26 years of merit increases (or been fired).

Yes, anyone can logically assume that Senator McCain's DC staff is more highly paid than Senator Obama's. So what does that prove? NOTHING other than Senator McCain cannot or will not address the issues. Claiming his staff is paid more is a rediculous little argument avoiding the issue.

JT0109 - It is nice to see a comment with some substance and rationale behind it. You seem to be the only one who understands what the purpose of this bill actually was. This was a bill "to counteract a Supreme Court decision limiting how long workers can wait before suing for pay discrimination". It was NOT a bill granting "Equal Pay to Women" - but that is exactly what the media is spinning it out to be, with headlines like "McCain Opposes Equal Pay for Women".

You people are letting the media guide you around by the nose.

And, Why, you might ask does Senator McCain have more women in higher positions? Senator Obama could easily have filled his staff with women in the higher ranking positions. And, it is true, Obama tossed Hillary under the bus while McCain did find a woman to run with. And from all I can see he treats her with respect.

Take a look at the composition of women in McCain's employ and Obama's

Obama Top five highest paid one woman
McCain Top Five highest paid three women

Obama Top Twenty Highest Paid 7 women
McCain Top Twenty Highest Paid 13 women

So, in this case the proof is in the puddin'
Or Practice what you preach might be the line.

Thank you JT0109 for exposing the reality of the bill. It is so sad that so many in our country are unaware that there actually is a law in place that provides for equal pay for women. The law has been in place since 1963!
McCain is not opposed to equal pay for women and he has said as much on numerous occasions. He simply opposed the fact that we should allow litigation to occur 19 years after the fact. Can you imagine how many ridiculous lawsuits would evolve it we could go back 5, 10, 20, 30 years...oh yes, when I was 16 (30 years ago) and worked at the snack stand at my community pool....I just discovered that I made $.20 an hour less than the guy I worked with...so now I want the government to let me sue....that would be ridiculous!
Now what is really frightening is Obama's comments to Bill O'Reilly, where he stated that those of us earning a good living need to help out the poor waitresses.
Wait a minute, I was a waitress once - during the summers I was in college. I chose not to have a career as a waitress, I chose education. Robin Hood Obama, let's take money from those who have worked hard to achieve beyond the norm and give it to those who choose not to get an education. Doesn't this fundamentally challege the "American Dream". With this Obama contradicts his own success story of a boy who came from nothing, now running for President.
This is America, if you get an education, work hard, you can achieve anything.
Let's stop those who feel just because they live in America, they are "entitled' to equal everything with no effort!

Democrats are trying to elect an extremely liberal socialist. Obama has stated several times that he wants to significantly raise taxes on the wealthy and cut taxes on the poor and middle class, which means that he feels that those who contribute to society and become successful should be forced BY THE GOVERNMENT to support those who do NOT contribute to society. THAT IS SOCIALISM. This punishes people for success while rewarding people for doing nothing. There will be no motivation to become successful, and any smart company will go overseas taking their jobs with them.
Okay, now tell me again how Obama plans to IMPROVE THE ECONOMY? By punishing success and rewarding those who won't help themselves?

What amazes me is how this christian moral majority crowd are the first ones to say "I have mine , screw all y'all". I'm no bible scholar but I did go to church and I seem to remember Christ being quoted as saying"what you do for the least of these you do for me". I think they are equating religion with morals. Two entirely different things, folks. They like to call it socialism when it means helping the less fortunate. They call it deregulation when it is helping the corporate overlords.

Free Country, Free Choice. I would rather have the option of deciding to who, for what and how I want to offer my charity. It is my money, time or whatever, I should decide how I want to distribute it. I would just as soon the government stayed out of it. Personal Responsibility. That means that I do what I need to for me, and then I DECIDE how I want to help others. Because people do not want the Government handling Giving to Others, do not mean it will not be given. In fact, I would guess that if the government stayed out we as a people would give more generously of our money and selves than we do now. And we would do it in a more satisfying way. If our leaders want to send money to Georgia, or some other foreign soil, then let them do it on their own, with their money. My efforts would be directed at homeless and needy in the USA first. It is totally unfair to say that the only way we can be charitable is through our government in we will decide for you fashion. Government has its place, but that is not to make our decisions for us on a daily basis. We need to take back our responsibilities.

How wonderful, a newspaper that knows the difference between 'rebut' and 'refute'!

So the issue might become, why does old fogy McCain who has been hiring for decades have more women in higher positions than young hip Obama who has been hiring for only a couple of years and knew that sexism might be an issue?

Attrition?

Equal pay is already a right under previous legisiation; the current deadline for filing is 180 days. McCain's point is that there needs to be some reasonable deadline; employers should not be sued about something that happened 20 years ago. Did McCain acually vote against the new bill, or just vote 'present'? :-)

Here is more detail from an article elsewhere about the same report.

"Women occupy seven of the top 10 highest-paid positions on McCain's staff, and five of the top 10 highest-paid positions on Obama's staff."
Obama's staff: 30 women to 27 men
McCain's staff: 26 women to 16 men
www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=35972

Obama has consistantly showed sexism in his campaign, besides the likable enough and sweetie comment, He said occasionally Hillary's claws come out, and PERIODICALLY, when Hillary's FEELING DOWN she attacks me. He states Michelle won't be involved in policy like Hillary was but will concentrate on being a Mom. Michelle said of Hillary; "she can't even run her own house, how can she run the whitehouse".
These are just a few examples of many.
But the bottom line, was Obama passed over the woman w/ 18million votes, according to Biden, the most qualified candidate (more qualified than Obama) for VP.
His actions and words exemplify his attitude towards women.

It makes sense that overall McCain's staff might be paid more than Obama's. However the point is the difference between men and women's pay within each staff.

I have yet to see detail comparing the same rankings at each staff, which is what we would need. It would be hard to get an exact comparison because of age, experience, and other variables.

However the data we do have, shows that McCain overall treats his women better than Obama does: McCain hires more of them and gives them more authoriity. (Or gives them better pay for comparable authority.)

I do think that a politcian's personal choices here are a good indication of what we may expect of his official policies. Senate bills are typically complicated; what we get in a soundbyte may give a misleading impression (as here, with people talking about the Leadbetter bill 'giving' a right to equal pay). Also there is behind the scenes bargaining. McCain's and Obama's personal choices with their staff show where their hearts are, which indicates whether one or the other will do the best he can in each complicated political issue.

What's obvious is that Obama is not ready for prime time. He blundered twice:
by not making sure his own staff (freshly hired) had a better gender ratio than McCain's (bulit up over years), and
by drawing attention to the situation by comparing McCain's staff to an Old Boyz Club when the fact is just the opposite!

Of course, the majority of you are responding to this without checking out the data that shows that McCain is paying his female staffers more than his male staffers - but as typical, don't let the facts get in the way of your opinion...

How can you oppose his vote on this issue without reading the wording of the bill he voted against?

How did the bill specifically address the issue. Did it allow for negotions on salary by employees, did it allow for production bonuses. How did it address time with the company. There are many factors that affect what an individual, male or female, makes.

I personally oppose gender as a basis for salary; however, if a law did not allow me to individually negotiate my salary as part of a contract with my employer I would oppose it. I don't know how you could ensure equal pay and allow for salary negotions. Each individual, male and female, will have different incomes.

The problem with the voting public is it is all about sound bites. It should be about issues. I am actively looking for the actual wording of the law itself so I can make an opinion on this issue and not base my opinion on a random TV spot.

If the 77 cents meme were true, really true, how could any man find a job when an employer could hire a woman to do the exact same job with the same efficiency for so much less? I have yet to hear a convincing refutation of this fundamental economic fact of life.

The truth is men work longer hours in dirtier and more dangerous jobs or in professions that don't allow easily picking up where you left off if you take time off to have kids. Try leaving computer programming for a year and see if you're still competitive when you return.

Equally qualified women working in the same jobs as men for the same hours actually make a penny or two more than men when you compare apples to apples. The entire 77 cent premise is spurious. Populist and emotionally satisfying as it may be, it is a hegemonic lie.

MOST OF YOU COMMENTERS ARE STUPID
FIRSTLY WE NEED MCCAIN TO WIN! NOT OBAMA! DID YOU EVEN KNOW HE MAY NOT EVEN BE AN AMERICAN? HE HAS NO RECORD OF BIRTH IN AMERICA. MAJORITY OF DEMOCRATS HAVE TAKEN OVER CONGRESS FOR THE LAST TWO YEARS PROMISING TO END THE WAR AND CHANGE EVERYTHING THE SAME CHANGE OBAMA SAID IN HIS SPEECHES! 2 AND HALF YEARS LATER AND NO CHANGE? NAME ONE THING OBAMA HAS DONE FOR OUR COUNTRY? CANT NAME ANY? NEITHER CAN I. DEMOCRATS RAN THE COUNTRY FOR 2 AND HALF YEARS!!!!! NO CHANGE!!! NO CHANGE WITH OBAMA . HE WANTS TO RAISE TAXES ON BIG COMPANYS. 90 PERCENT OF TAXES PAID TODAY ARE FROM 6 PERCENT OF THE POPULATION WWHICH WOULD BE RICH PEOPLE THAT HE WANTS TO TAX HIGHER. LOOK HOW MANY COMPANYS ARE CLOSING!BECAUSE THEY CANT KEEP UP AND PAY THERE DUES. FREE HEALTH CARE? WHAT THE FUCK! IS HE CRAZY? LETS GO FOR 50 PERCENT TAXES???

Mccain and the GOP has counted on lies forever. I hope people demand to know what, who and where Mccains politic are. The only thing Mccain has to say is how bad Obama is. Please get the fact right GOP and stop treating this election with some much disrespect. No more GOP Mccain or Bush

I don't know for certain, but could it be that McCains women are paid "on average" slightly more because "on average" could include Palin? Of course if you tied her into the "average" the women may get paid equal. Take her out...if she is included and see where women stand. Lies, cover-ups, and more lies. Will it ever end?

I don't know for certain, but could it be that McCains women are paid "on average" slightly more because "on average" could include Palin? Of course if you tied her into the "average" the women may get paid equal. Take her out...if she is included and see where women stand. Lies, cover-ups, and more lies. Will it ever end?

It is a known fact that republicans pay more than democrates; and, that is because republicans are wiser and know how to invest their money. Democracts on the otherhand, are always waiting in line with their hand out wanting more and more; almost like two year olds who are watching TV and everything they see on the commercials, they want. What do I tell my 2 years old grandson who says, "I want this and that", I tell him sure, soon as you get a job. That was the old fashion way, the way people became independent and self producting. Now we want those individuals who have worked hard to foot the bill. Why should they?