McCain puts his money where his mouth is vis women's pay

[Greg the dogsitter]

billb,

I'm not sure what you're saying regarding the topic at hand. Do you mean that Obama is legally obligated to hire more women?

[JoeH]

billb wrote:
I could be wrong, But I'm fairly certain that The Equal Opportunity Act of 1965 and affirmitive action would apply to both candidates.
Everyone involved purposefully has thier books open to different pages for no other reason than they've all got nothing, because that's what they're all claiming in the end. Nothing.
They're both looking like complete idiots.

Can we just get back to specifically what either of them intends to change ?
(besides whatever they have to say to garner another vote ?)

Unless there has been a change in the last few years, I believe Congress exempted themselves from having to follow both acts. Plus a number of other ones as well over the years. But many members do make some attempt to follow at least the spirit of the law.

[kanesa]

"The Right News, Right Now"

Well, this is obviously an non-partisan, unbiased article.

[Greg the dogsitter]

In all fairness, they do include the stuff about the staff demographics in the article. However, the headline itself makes such a leap that it fools some into drawing false conclusions.

[martin]

It's a parody site, right?

This CNSNews.com "source" of your is an "alternative news source that would cover stories that are subject to the bias of omission and report on other news subject to bias by commission."

Translate: the current media is not telling me what I want to hear because of horrible, mean, liberal media tendencies. Listen to cnsnews.com because it is the truth!

Do you really believe it? Probably, you do. Sigh...

[Lux Interior]

Do congresspeople get to set their lackey's wages?

I would have thought that each one gets to hire X staffers and each position would be paid based on the employees GS level.

So no accusing Obama of saying, "You're a man, I'm going to pay you more!"

And no crediting McCain with, "You're a woman, I'm going to pay you more!"

[Sam3]

martin wrote:
It's a parody site, right?

This CNSNews.com "source" of your is an "alternative news source that would cover stories that are subject to the bias of omission and report on other news subject to bias by commission."

Translate: the current media is not telling me what I want to hear because of horrible, mean, liberal media tendencies. Listen to cnsnews.com because it is the truth!

Do you really believe it? Probably, you do. Sigh...

Is this really any different that Democracy Now! ?

WHY INDEPENDENT MEDIA ?



But the last two decades have seen unprecedented corporate media consolidation. The U.S. media was already fairly homogeneous in the early 1980s: some fifty media conglomerates dominated all media outlets, including television, radio, newspapers, magazines, music, publishing and film. In the year 2000, just six corporations dominated the U.S. media.

In addition, corporate media outlets in the U.S. are legally responsible to their shareholders to maximize profits.

And U.S. “public” media outlets accept funding from major corporations, as well as from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which has attempted in the past to exert political and editorial influence on public news producers.