Prog Blogs, Orgs & Alumni
Bank Slate
Betsy Devine
birch, finch, beech
Democracy for NH
Live Free or Die
Mike Caulfield
Miscellany Blue
Granite State Progress
Seacoast for Change
Still No Going Back
Susan the Bruce
Tomorrow's Progressives
Politicos & Punditry
The Burt Cohen Show
John Gregg
Krauss
Landrigan
Lawson
Pindell
Primary Monitor
Primary Wire
Scala
Schoenberg
Spiliotes
Welch
Campaigns, Et Alia.
Paul Hodes
Carol Shea-Porter
Ann McLane Kuster
John Lynch
Jennifer Daler
ActBlue Hampshire
NHDP
DCCC
DSCC
DNC
National
Balloon Juice
billmon
Congress Matters
DailyKos
Digby
Hold Fast
Eschaton
FiveThirtyEight
MyDD
The Next Hurrah
Open Left
Senate Guru
Swing State Project
Talking Points Memo
50 State Blog Network
Alabama
Arizona
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Florida
Georgia
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Missouri
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
The Paycheck Fairness Act, which would have updated the Equal Pay Act of 1963 by closing certain loopholes, and, among other things, require that employers be able to prove that wage discrepancies are not because of gender, died in the Senate today. Republicans, joined by blue dog Ben Nelson, voted against cloture, keeping the bill from the floor and from passage this session. It will be difficult to pass in the New Republican controlled US House next term.
"This was a missed opportunity to make history and jump-start real economic change for American women and their families," said AAUW [American Association of University Women] Executive Director Linda D. Hallman. "While the Senate's action is difficult to comprehend given the stark reality that most families depend on the paychecks of women, our effort to close the pay gap is far from over."
According to AAUW, on average, women still make only 77 cents for every dollar men earn. By some estimates women could lose between $500,000 and $1 million over a 40-year career. In higher-paying fields, such as law, the wage gap can result in even greater lifetime losses. AAUW said in a statement that their report, Behind the Pay Gap, controlled for factors known to affect earnings such as education and training, parenthood, and hours worked and found that college-educated women still earn less than men - despite the same major and occupation as their male counterparts.
This bill was an essential companion to the Lily Ledbetter Act that President Obama signed into law in January of 2009. Without it, according to Ledbetter herself,
"Giving women the Ledbetter Act without Paycheck Fairness is like giving them the nail without the hammer."
The Ledbetter Act gives more time to file discrimination suits. As stated above, this would have given women more protection regarding pay equity.
Opponents, including Republicans and the US Chamber of Commerce, have said in the past that they're concerned the bill would lead to more employees filing suits, which would be costly for employers to have to fight.
The majority of single parent households are headed by women. In order to remain in the middle class, households with two parents and couples without children depend on women's income. How can we allow Republicans to wrap themselves in the mantle of being pro-family, when this is clearly an act that harms families of all kinds?
http://kellyayottesenate.blogs...
http://seminal.firedoglake.com... Ayotte claims to be a protector of Women's interests but her tenure as a New Hampshire Attorney General tells quite a different story. She and her crew allowed for bad LE to run amok, assaulting and threatening men, women and children throughout the State of New Hampshire, and that's a FACT.
Well, Diaper Man Dave Vitter, Republican Senator from Louisiana, is at the center of yet another controversy involving women, this time regarding a former aide who was arrested for violence against a woman.
Furer was arrested for attacking a girlfriend with a knife in 2008, but Vitter nevertheless kept him on staff for two years until the altercation was publicized, at which point he was ousted, supposedly for failing to disclose unrelated DUI charges.
Then it came out that Furer was Vitter's "point man" on woman's issues. How interesting. Vitter denied this (bold and parentheses mine):
Vitter faced the press again -- this time in Alexandria, where reporters again asked him why Furer's portfolio included women's issues. According to Vitter, "he [Furer] handled issues including abortion issues, including several other issues, but not women's affairs."
This revealing comment, comes from a so-called "family values" hypocrite who impeached President Clinton over Monica Lewinsky, all the while cavorting with prostitutes who were forced to diaper him as part of his sex play. The other fetishes mentioned in the post linked to above can only be surmised.
We're talking about, among other things, Diaper Fetishism. That's right folks, according to a trusted inside source, Vitter was well known among other Canal Street Brothel patrons to like diapers as well as other bizarre "fetishes"
Here is a press release from Vitter's website.
U.S. Sen. David Vitter today announced that he plans to use every procedural tool under his senatorial rights to filibuster, "hold" or block the Freedom of Choice Act from moving forward in the Senate. FOCA has not yet been introduced in the 111th Congress, but U.S. Sen. Barbara Boxer authored a version of FOCA in the 110th Congress.
"The new make-up of this Democratic Congress and the Obama administration are much friendlier to abortion advocates," said Vitter. "I plan on making sure that the views of the many Americans who find this practice to be abhorrent are represented and to raise awareness about all the facts related to this expansive abortion legislation before it is quickly passed into law."
It is very telling about the real motives fueling many in the anti-choice movement. It has nothing to do with "saving babies", if that were its concern, US child and maternal health wouldn't be as bad as it is. The real motives in Vitter's case have to do with personal issues (I'll leave the diaper thing to Dr. Freud) and the desire to control women.
Well, it didn't take Rand Paul long to create a stir on the national stage. Not a day after winning the Republican primary for US Senate, he said he couldn't support the Civil Rights Acts of 1964, nor the Americans with Disabilities Act. One worrisome thing about his opposition to the ADA is that his objection is actually written as an exception in the law. So he is against something he obviously knows nothing about. That would include a lot of, uh-American history.
The hammer is, is that Paul is NOT a libertarian because he does not want to allow me control of my own body. No, he wants the STATE to control my body and that of every other woman in the US.
From Frank Rich's column (bold mine)
Though a social conservative who would outlaw all abortions, he believes the federal government should leave drug enforcement to the states.
Outlaw ALL abortions, including those necessary to save the life of the pregnant woman. Yeah, "Life Liberty and the Pusuit of Happiness" for men only.
I found this parenthetical tidbit from Rich interesting:
(He does vow to preserve Medicare payments, however; they contribute to his income as an ophthalmologist.)
Liberty is something for rich, white men, corporations and other such entities. Not for the rest of us. Paul is a hypocrite of the lowest kind.
GOP Senate hopefuls Bender and Lamontagne support Paul and his views. Where do Kelly Ayotte and Bill Binnie stand?
