Speaking at the sixth annual Women in The World Summit, Hillary Clinton used euphemisms like “reproductive rights” and “reproductive health” — which of course, includes abortion — and said “deep-seated cultural codes, religious beliefs and structural biases have to be changed” for the sake of giving “access” to women for “reproductive health care.”
Those deep-seated religious beliefs of yours need to be changed, at least according to Ms. Clinton.
According to a Washington Post story, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said Thursday that, not only did Jonathan Gruber not play a significant role in drafting Obamacare, but that she doesn’t even “know who he is.”
Pelosi on Gruber: “I don’t know who he is. He didn’t help write our bill.” According to the Washington Post, Pelosi mentioned Gruber and his work in November 2009, at the height of the Obamacare debate.
Here’s the transcript published by the Washington Post, via Nexis:
Q: As you know, the Republicans released their health- care bill this week. And I wanted to get your comment on the bill, and specifically on the CBO analysis that it would cost significantly less than the Democratic plan and that it would lower premiums.
PELOSI: Let me just say this. Anything you need to know about the difference between the Democratic bill and the Republican bill is that the Republicans do not end the health insurance companies’ discrimination against people with preexisting conditions. They let that stand. That’s scandalous, the fact that it exists. I don’t understand why they have not heard the American people, who have said preexisting conditions should not be a source of discrimination.
And secondly, the Republican plan ensures about 3 million more people than now, and ours does 36 million people. So that’s a very big difference in that.
We’re not finished getting all of our reports back from CBO, but we’ll have a side by side to compare. But our bill brings down rates. I don’t know if you have seen Jonathan Gruber of MIT’s analysis of what the comparison is to the status quo versus what will happen in our bill for those who seek insurance within the exchange. And our bill takes down those costs, even some now, and much less preventing the upward spiral.
So again, we’re confident about what we set out to do in the bill: middle class affordability, security for our seniors, and accountability to our children.
In trying to distance herself from Gruber, Pelosi’s spokesperson Drew Hammill told the Post that the minority leader meant that she didn’t know Gruber personally. He posted this statement via Twitter to clarify the comment.
Mr. Gruber, who has been touted as a leading architect of ObamaCare, according to Pelosi and Hammill, played no role in drafting th bill
Apparently “the stupidity of the American voter” is something the Democrats are clinging to, somewhat like conservative cling to their guns and Bibles.
The Democrats, and Barack Obama, are pathological liars that want women to believe they are victims.
Our beloved President, the uniter, Barack Obama, and his Democrat minions are back at again. Today’s division: pay inequality based on gender.
“Today,” he said, “women make up about half our workforce. But they still make 77 cents for every dollar a man earns. That is wrong, and in 2014, it’s an embarrassment.”
The President knows the 23-cent gender pay gap mostly the difference between the average earnings of all men and women working full-time. The faulty statistic does not account for differences in occupations, job tenure, hours worked per week, or a host of other factors. When all relevant factors are taken into consideration, when one actually compares apples to apples, the wage gap narrows: female employees earn about 5% less than their male counterparts.
Even Council of Economic Advisers member Betsey Stevenson was backpedaling from the 77-cents-on-the dollar lie:
As reported by the Washington Examiner:
“If I said 77 cents was equal pay for equal work, then I completely misspoke,” Stevenson said. “So let me just apologize and say that I certainly wouldn’t have meant to say that.”
Oh, I’m sorry, I guess when Stevenson said “we see it when men and women are working side by side doing identical work” — that was an accident?
“Seventy-seven cents captures the annual earnings of full-time, full-year women divided by the annual earnings of full-time, full-year men,” Stevenson clarified. “There are a lot of things that go into that 77-cents figure, there are a lot of things that contribute and no one’s trying to say that it’s all about discrimination, but I don’t think there’s a better figure.”
No one’s trying to blame discrimination? Isn’t that what the entire Paycheck Fairness Act and Equal Pay Day are based on?
I can attest that women are partly to blame for this pay disparity.
For example, there was a position open in my company and I had budgeted $60,000 for this position. Two candidates with equal credentials, one male, one female, were finalists. They both have a good idea that the position should pay in the $55-$65K range. When asked what salary they expect, the woman indicated she is expecting $55K; the man said he’d like to make $63K. That’s better than a 12% difference in pay.
Of course, I offered the position to the female candidate. She was pleasantly surprised she was going to make $2,000 more than for what she asked.
Not only am I saving $3,000 per year, I have an incredibly happy new team member that is willing to give extra effort to “earn” her good fortune. My guess is that she’ll be with the team for a long time.
Had I hired the male candidate for $60,000, he might have taken the job, been displeased that he did not get what he desired, and probably would have been on the lookout for a better paying job the day he started.
This is not an infrequent scenario. Generally speaking, women ask for less money that men. This is true even when the female candidate is more qualified than her male competition.
The Democrats are using the wrongly-sourced 23-cent gender pay gap to engrain even more victimhood status upon women. Without the Democrat paternalistic oversight, these hapless creatures will surely be ravaged by the GOPs imaginary war on women. Compounding the issue is a press that is all-to-willing to amplify the falsehood to an electorate that is too distracted to learn the truth.
In an attempt not to be portrayed as cruel, heartless and misogynistic, the spineless wonders of the GOP will do some sort of compromise pandering in a futile attempt to gain a few female votes.
Recent Comments