"The values that so many of us hold dear are values that are under assault today. I never believed that in such a short period of time, the culture in America would go into utter collapse. If you told me just a few years ago that one day the President of the United States would use his precious time in the Oval Office to call people up simply to congratulate them for being gay, I would say, 'No, surely he'll call a veteran and thank them for their service, for losing a limb or a leg.' But even when Chris Kyle was murdered, his widow didn't get a phone call, but a gay football player who came out did."

Doll Is Mine wrote:Rubio's biggest problem is that neither side thinks he's authentic. The immigration flip flop fiasco will cost him.

drsmooth wrote:In a more interesting universe, former US Senator Bob Graham (D-FL)'s inquiries would result, somehow, in the internet appearance of a handful of the photos referenced in this article (this one from the NYPost may be more easily accessed for NYTimes non-subscribers) documenting 9/11 conspiracists' cars entering & leaving the mysterious Saudi family's Florida compound, presumably in the period before the event.

Imagine this inquiry, with its implications of tacit or explicit Bushco involvement in sheltering the subject Saudis, heating up during a '16 presidential campaign that were to feature both a Bush and a current Florida US Senator.

Modal Trigger
The Florida home Abdulaziz Al-Hijji left two weeks before 9/11.
Graham has been working with a 14-member group in Congress to urge President Obama to declassify 28 pages of the final report of his inquiry which were originally redacted, wholesale, by President George W. Bush.

“The 28 pages primarily relate to who financed 9/11, and they point a very strong finger at Saudi Arabia as being the principal financier,” he said, adding, “I am speaking of the kingdom,” or government, of Saudi Arabia, not just wealthy individual Saudi donors.

Sources who have read the censored Saudi section say it cites CIA and FBI case files that directly implicate officials of the Saudi Embassy in Washington and its consulate in Los Angeles in the attacks — which, if true, would make 9/11 not just an act of terrorism, but an act of war by a foreign government. The section allegedly identifies high-level Saudi officials and intelligence agents by name, and details their financial transactions and other dealings with the San Diego hijackers. It zeroes in on the Islamic Affairs Department of the Saudi Embassy, among other Saudi entities.

Monkeyboy wrote:

Modal Trigger
The Florida home Abdulaziz Al-Hijji left two weeks before 9/11.
Graham has been working with a 14-member group in Congress to urge President Obama to declassify 28 pages of the final report of his inquiry which were originally redacted, wholesale, by President George W. Bush.

I kind of assumed this all along based on who the hijackers were and where they were from. It really was an act of war. It's amazing that they successfully started a war with another country over this, leaving SA off without so much as a public condemnation. It has to be one of the all time slight of hands.

Women also tend to leave the workforce for periods to raise children, seek jobs that may have more flexible hours but lower pay, and choose careers that tend to have lower pay.

pacino wrote:that piece concluded there was a gender pay gap.

Soren wrote:

Women also tend to leave the workforce for periods to raise children, seek jobs that may have more flexible hours but lower pay, and choose careers that tend to have lower pay.

Is there any evidence of this other than the conjecture made by conservatives that women are purposefully seeking to earn less money? The June O'Neill study the article links to doesn't mention whether she was examining only quantitative data or if they did some qual interviews to understand why women are in the careers they are in.

pacino wrote:that piece concluded there was a gender pay gap.

Soren wrote:What was the GOP reason for not renewing the violence against women act? Can't remember, too lazy to google.

Werthless wrote:

Soren wrote:

Women also tend to leave the workforce for periods to raise children, seek jobs that may have more flexible hours but lower pay, and choose careers that tend to have lower pay.

Is there any evidence of this other than the conjecture made by conservatives that women are purposefully seeking to earn less money? The June O'Neill study the article links to doesn't mention whether she was examining only quantitative data or if they did some qual interviews to understand why women are in the careers they are in.

Women do not "seek jobs that earn less money," but just tend to pursue careers and courses of study that don't pay as well. Need more women petroleum engineers!

Gawker wrote:


A lot of people in the United States don't know anything about soon-to-be ex-senator Marco Rubio of Florida, which means he theoretically still has a chance to be president, the same way the Philadelphia Phillies can still theoretically win this year's pennant. It will not last, and it will never have been realistic.

Bucky wrote:

Werthless wrote:

Soren wrote:

Women also tend to leave the workforce for periods to raise children, seek jobs that may have more flexible hours but lower pay, and choose careers that tend to have lower pay.

Is there any evidence of this other than the conjecture made by conservatives that women are purposefully seeking to earn less money? The June O'Neill study the article links to doesn't mention whether she was examining only quantitative data or if they did some qual interviews to understand why women are in the careers they are in.

Women do not "seek jobs that earn less money," but just tend to pursue careers and courses of study that don't pay as well. Need more women petroleum engineers!

now answer the chicken/egg question here. Is it possible that those careers tend to pay less because women tend to populate the positions?