What does 'explian' mean? Can you please explain the meaning to me? Thanks....

hey genius, thanks for completely ignoring the whole treating women unfairly thing and attacking my typo. I take it you can not "expian" it

And your proof of this unsubstantiated claim is?

And what did they pay the intern who swiped recipes from the 'net to post as Cindy McCain's "favorites"?

um this unsubstantiated? what the heck is wrong with you check out the data calculated from the Report of the Secretary of the Senate, which covered the six-month period ending Sept. 30, 2007.

I know you don't believe it, how could your barack do such a thing. check it lib. you can google it, you call them, heck you can just read above, but whatever you, you should probably rethink your positions supporting a man that pays women less because they are woman.

Oh and the woman who made the 100 K was administrative manager. Yeah the only woman he paid over 100 K was a sec. Maybe thats just where he thinks they should be.

Nooneisabove...please explian how the report from the secretary of the senate is unsubstantiated? I would love to hear it.....

I think you abd your female hating candidate just got punked.....

http://clintondems.com/2008...

check this out my clinton democrats

make sure to read the whole thing its great, I cant believe a senator would actually do this to hard working wemon. Im sure that took some good judgement....

Yeah, those ugly Democratic womenhttp://www.hissandpop.com/c...>http://www.hissandpop.com/c... width="95" alt="" />

Obama recently voted for legislation that would help women get higher pay.  McBush opposed it--but didn't show up for the vote.  Like he opposed better benefits for Iraq veterans. 

We know McBush's position on women.  Or at least Vicki Iseman does.

Superdouche.....I would challenge the stuff you post, but you still think we have a two party system.  You are living with in the false left-right paradigm. Unplug yourself, then talk to me. Both parties are controlled by the same people (creatures).  Our next president will be a "democrat", the sheeple need to be pacified. Over 80% of the country is now anti war. A large majority of that 80% don't understand the bigger picture, so they blame the republicans....hence the democrat being selected as our next president in 2008. The sheep are easily pacified by our masters. So after the next war & terror attack, the Dems will be blamed for it & a Republican will rule again. Eventually a one world government will be the solution. We are already seeing the one world system take shape. Another thing in the cards is a manufactured terror attack on U.S. soil, which could easily suspend the 2008 elections. Hell....maybe McCain will become the next puppet? Things are crazy right now. Either way....WE THE PEOPLE are screwed.

Not to mention, the economy is crashing rapidly. Good  luck everyone, I hope you are preparing.

Once again BS posts crap he himself doesn't understand, in misspelled and ungrammatical pidgin.  

And he wants to be taken seriously?

Why patronize him anyway? He has been proved time and again to be grossly misinformed. That's why I have relegated him to "ignore status."

It`s entertainment....

Yeah Maggie, just like those cheap forms of entertainment known as FOX News & CNN.

Fox had a really good story once.....CNN is propaganda in the states,,, completely different from CNN international...

BS typed, badly, as usual:

"um this unsubstantiated? what the heck is wrong with you check out the data calculated from the Report of the Secretary of the Senate, which covered the six-month period ending Sept. 30, 2007."

And yet, you provide no links, no references, nothing, until I ask for it. And even then, you don't actually post a link to help back up your opinion. An unsubstantiated statement like that is nothing but opinion.

He continues:

"I know you don't believe it, how could your barack do such a thing. check it lib. you can google it, you call them, heck you can just read above, but whatever you, you should probably rethink your positions supporting a man that pays women less because they are woman."

Notwithstanding your grammatical, spelling and punctuational challenges, I still haven't seen any proof that your claim is true.

"Oh and the woman who made the 100 K was administrative manager. Yeah the only woman he paid over 100 K was a sec. Maybe thats just where he thinks they should be.

Nooneisabove...please explian how the report from the secretary of the senate is unsubstantiated? I would love to hear it.....

I think you abd your female hating candidate just got punked....."

And now, who's denigrating a woman by referring to her title of 'administrative manager' is a secretary? And, if you're so big on women's rights, how can you seriously then claim Republican women are better looking than Democratic women?

I will check out the report from the Secretary of the Senate, though it's common courtesy online to provide a link.

Well, having looked at some of the material you seem to be citing, BS, I find this is just more typical hot air right-wing blather. Jump to a conclusion and then try to make the facts fit, or if there aren't any, make it up.

I cannot find any references anywhere to job duties and responsibilities in the material you cited, nor levels of experience, nor any of the other myriad factors that can affect pay levels.

Just pulling averages doesn't mean a whole heckuva lot. Right now I can say the average temperature in Bakersfield in June is 85 degrees and the numbers pretty well support it. It's also nearly meaningless.

The only source for this is the rightwing CNS news web site.

And they don't provide any of the details on how they came up with the figures or where the raw data can be found. And since BS obviously won't know what I'm talking about, averages are not raw data.

An interesting website, www.legistorm.com, posts about all the financial info you could ever want about legislators, their staffs, and the like. They caution: "Congressional staff salaries shown are the amount paid in the period shown. They are not annual salaries. Because bonuses may be included here and other payments may not be (most notably with aides working for multiple offices or for a political campaign committee), please use caution in extrapolating annual salaries from the figures shown here."
 

And TSM is correct: this all seems to stem from one (questionable) "news" service.

Another BS blog post collapses under scrutiny. Well, we do give you points for trying.

Oh, and that clintondems.com website you point to? I highly doubt that site has anything to do with either the Cinton campaign or the Democratic party. The domain was registered and the site is hosted out of Scottsdale. As in...Arizona. Imagine that.

Also, BS, you make the claim that Obama's campaign pays women less, but the McCain pays more. Then the data being cited refers to Senate staff. These are not necessarily the same thing, but why should I even hope to expect anything approaching accuracy from you?

Geez Supe. You've gotta be Obama's best friend in Kern County. You really like to throw stuff out there that is ridiculous in nature. There are plenty of issues that you can go after Barrack about, experience, your perception of a more socialized government, taxes, defense, or any of the other issues that always crop up, but women's rights?

McCain turned his former wife in for a new model, hows that for women's rights? 

Here's what he thinks about this one of many women's issues in which he hurt them.

McCain Opposed Equal Pay Bill for Women, Said They ‘Need Education and Training’ Instead. McCain skipped a vote on the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act that would ensure women have the opportunity to recover back pay for discrimination once they discover it. If he had been there to vote, he said he would have voted against it and that women “need education and training” rather than an equal pay bill. The bill addressed a recent Supreme Court decision that said Steelworker Lilly Ledbetter could not recover back pay for 19 years of discrimination at Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. because she had not discovered the unequal pay until she retired. The bill would amend the 1964 Civil Rights Act to allow employees to file charges of pay discrimination within 180 days of the last received paycheck affected by the discrimination. [Source: aflcio.org; H.R. 2831, Vote 110, 4/23/08; Associated Press, 4/28/08]

Show me the voting record on women's rights of Barrack, betcha don't. I mean, isn't that what counts, how you voted, not what some partisan website had to say about what you really meant.

BS - honestly.. you should do yourself a favor and be open to learning how to accurately do research before you open you mouth, or in this case, type anything out and press "Submit Comment."