"At one point I specifically recall asking my secretary to bring the binder into my office. So I did, factually beyond all doubt, ask for the study".

drsmooth wrote:The net effect of Romney's bizarre digression, on the dozen or so of us who attempted to follow it, is to demonstrate he is not half the business magus he & his hangers on try to paint him as.

Bucky wrote:http://blog.thephoenix.com/BLOGS/talkingpolitics/archive/2012/10/16/mind-the-binder.aspx

"At one point I specifically recall asking my secretary to bring the binder into my office, but it has to wait until the next day because I let her go home to deal with her womanly imperatives of childrearing and cooking. So I did, factually beyond all doubt, ask for the study".

Patch wrote:Sources tell Patch that a section of Airy Street has been blocked off after a suspicious package was found at the headquarters of the Montgomery County Democratic Committee. We hope to have more information for you later.

The scene was cleared 40 minutes later when police identified the suspicious item as a Job Application.

Bucky wrote:

td11 wrote:

What actually happened was that in 2002 -- prior to the election, not even knowing yet whether it would be a Republican or Democratic administration -- a bipartisan group of women in Massachusetts formed MassGAP to address the problem of few women in senior leadership positions in state government. There were more than 40 organizations involved with the Massachusetts Women's Political Caucus (also bipartisan) as the lead sponsor.

They did the research and put together the binder full of women qualified for all the different cabinet positions, agency heads, and authorities and commissions. They presented this binder to Governor Romney when he was elected.

I have written about this before, in various contexts; tonight I've checked with several people directly involved in the MassGAP effort who confirm that this history as I've just presented it is correct -- and that Romney's claim tonight, that he asked for such a study, is false.

http://blog.thephoenix.com/BLOGS/talkin ... inder.aspx

"At one point I specifically recall asking my secretary to bring the binder into my office. So I did, factually beyond all doubt, ask for the study".

Doll Is Mine wrote:Vulture capilatists know a thing or two about other people's pensions.

TomatoPie wrote:Analyzing the substance of the debate is fun for political geeks, but did anyone expect an honest exchange? The candidates are trying to sway independent voters(aka, Dems who voted for Obama in 2008 but need foreplay to get back for another go). God knows, if you haven't made up your mind by now, you may decide by the timbre of his voice, the cut of his jib, or how your Cap'N'Crunch is settling in your belly. So defending moms and blaming China and pussyfooting around real issues is the strategy for both. Owe-bama won this debate on style points, for anyone who was still watching as RMoney let him skate on the Libya embassy scandal and turn embrassment into a moment of patriotic pride and personal accountability. Not a KO win like Mittens scored in the first debate, but even without the help of the East German judges, Obama bested his opponent. Gallup has Mitt up 6 points, but Intrade still has Obama at 66-34 over Mitt.

Grotewold wrote:

Doll Is Mine wrote:Vulture capilatists know a thing or two about other people's pensions.

jerseyhoya wrote:

philliesphhan wrote:

Werthless wrote:

drsmooth wrote:Make no mistake Moz - I'm not disagreeing with W on the pay gap data. Pressed, he wouldn't insist there is NO gap - just that it isn't as large as often asserted.

My issue was with his "biological imperative" nonsense.

I wouldn't call it an imperative. I would say that men, on average, will have different priorities than women when it comes to childraising. The average man works 6 hours per week more than a woman. A Rochester Institute study found that money is the primary motivator in their job for 76% of men and only 29% of women. Again, these aren't wrong or right; it's a matter of choices, and more men than women make decisions that lead to higher pay, like entering dangerous professions such as oil-drilling, or jobs that require a ton of travel such as consulting. And spending all your time trying to "correct" these decisions is a fruitless endeavor. And throwing out 72% as evidence that there needs to be special corrective action taken by the President of the United States is... not good.

Take lawyers at nice law firms. They make the same amount of money when they get hired. They get evaluated based on billable hours, a quantifiable measure of performance that makes it difficult to discriminate (and what law firm is going to open themselves open to discrimination lawsuits). And yet, many firms struggle to develop women partners, even from their top performers. Why do so many women not become partners? Because they leave before even getting to the point where they're being evaluated for partner. Why? They sometimes want a family before they are 40, and raising a family is tough while working 50+ hours per week. It is especially hard to retain these partner-candidate women when there are perfectly well paying jobs in the corporate world for 72% of the pay, and much better quality of life.

(psst, none of that shit is biology)
I mean FFS, I'm sure we all have relatives still alive whose mothers ONLY purpose according to society was to make babies and cook and clean. It's not biology; it was forced by society.

What in Werthless's post does your response refute? Presumably something with the psst and the FFS being involved, but I'm having a hard time picking it out.

Also what do you think the federal government's role ought to be in correcting the issue as you understand it?

Werthless wrote:Is it unfair that men feel more of a biological imperative to work 80 hour weeks to be the provider, and that women often feel an imperative to spend more time with their family? Maybe, maybe not.

Bucky wrote:

"At one point I specifically recall asking my secretary to bring the binder into my office. So I did, factually beyond all doubt, ask for the study".