In teh debate, Romney said he had binders with lists of extraordinary women, so that he could promote them to important public servise jobs when he was governor. An honorable thing, yes?

Not to feminists, who are claiming that the word is demeaning to, and objectifying to, women. I saw a feminist spokesman (sorry, spokeswoman) on the news tonight. With a straight face, she said that when Romney said "binders", it conjured up images of Arab shieks looking at a menu of women to select slaves for his harem. Honest, that's what she was comparing Mitt Romney to.

I guarantee you this woman likes Ted Kennedy and Bill Clinton, those guys aren't offensive to the feminist movement.

They have really, really jumped the shark here. They have no shame. None whatsoever.

This is what you do when 65% of the public says Romney would do a better job at handling the economy.

All Obama and the liberals can come up with the past 2 weeks is talking about Bigbird and Binders.
They certainly can't talk about their accomplishments or plan for another 4 years !
What's next weeks word after Monday's debate ? Vacation ???
This election is going to be a land slide victory for Ronmey.
Thankfully the working stiffs still outnumber the gimme crown & the corrupt unions in this country.
And Obama is going to overtake Jimmy Carter as the biggest presidential failure in my lifetime (48 years old)
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

All Obama and the liberals can come up with the past 2 weeks is talking about Bigbird and Binders.
They certainly can't talk about their accomplishments or plan for another 4 years !
What's next weeks word after Monday's debate ? Vacation ???
This election is going to be a land slide victory for Ronmey.
Thankfully the working stiffs still outnumber the gimme crown & the corrupt unions in this country.
And Obama is going to overtake Jimmy Carter as the biggest presidential failure in my lifetime (48 years old)
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

'What's next weeks word after Monday's debate ? Vacation ???"

LMAO. Yeah, only rich, white racists take vacations.

"This election is going to be a land slide victory for Ronmey."

Your lips to God's ears. Until last week, i didn't thing Romney had a very good chance. I'm starting to come around.

"And Obama is going to overtake Jimmy Carter as the biggest presidential failure in my lifetime "

Agreed. Jimmy Carter never looked so good.

Obama supporters are saying that the word "binders", meaning notebooks, is offensive to women. Unfreakinbelievable.

Jim - please stop the liberals this and liberals that. The horse is so beaten that even when/if you are right peiople skip it. Pretty please with sugar on top?

Its "Spokesperson"....

It's funny, the biggest petty person on the forum is crying.

Its "Spokesperson"....

and "Anchorlady" :)

My wife's reaction wasn't that it was overly sexist but rather just shows he's out of touch.

The binders of women comment was great in it's awkwardness, that's why it took off on the internet. Better was his remark that women need flexible hours at work so they can get home and cook...but not as catchy.

While I don't think Romney has little respect for women, these remarks certainly indicate where his mind is and for women who continue to believe in equality it's off putting.

-spence

Jim - please stop the liberals this and liberals that. The horse is so beaten that even when/if you are right peiople skip it. Pretty please with sugar on top?

He can't help himself. No matter how many times you ask and no matter how nice, he can't control his emotions.

, these remarks certainly indicate where his mind is -spence

might I refresh your memory with a list of "awkward" Obama remarks?:)

might I refresh your memory with a list of "awkward" Obama remarks?:)

Scott - please stop the empty this and empty that. The horse is so beaten that even when/if you are right peiople skip it. Pretty please with sugar on top?

-spence

My wife's reaction wasn't that it was overly sexist but rather just shows he's out of touch.

The binders of women comment was great in it's awkwardness, that's why it took off on the internet. Better was his remark that women need flexible hours at work so they can get home and cook...but not as catchy.

While I don't think Romney has little respect for women, these remarks certainly indicate where his mind is and for women who continue to believe in equality it's off putting.

-spence

I don't understand your point . Are you saying women think only with emotions? It's the words not the substance ?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

The Obama campaign is in panic mode. The polls are all trending towards Romney nationally and in many swing states. (See latest Gallup and Ramussen). Obama's rabid moonbat base and the rest of the Pajamahadeen are on full tilt right now. Add the fact that the next debate is on foregin policy which I am sure will be dominated by the Libya mess and Obama's wishy wash stance on support for Israel.... this race is going to get even hotter. As a Romney supporter I personally welcome their fixation on binders and bigbird.

The Obama campaign is in panic mode.
I think they were in panic mode after the first debate, but not now.

The last debate should be good. Likely it will be close but Obama has a chance for a decisive win. Unlike Romney, Obama has lived and led US foreign policy for the past 4 years with a list of notable successes.

Romney has to be careful with Libya, it's already blown up on him once because he didn't know the facts and the more info that comes out the more the Administration's story has been reinforced.

Israel? Are you kidding? Sorry we didn't give them a green light to bomb Iran and start a regional conflict, how foolish...

-spence

I think they were in panic mode after the first debate, but not now.

how foolish...yup

-spence

:rotf2::rotf2:

the Administration's story has been reinforced.

-spence

huh???

Scott - please stop the empty this and empty that. The horse is so beaten that even when/if you are right peiople skip it. Pretty please with sugar on top?

-spence


Spence - would you please refrain from being the apologist spokeswoman for the Obama campaign :rotf2: - Pretty please with sugar on top? :love:

Just another attempt to pander to women using a non issue and blowing it up. Kind of a joke if you ask me. If Romney had said a binder of resumes they would have found a way to make that into a big deal also. Kind of like the PBS deal. Maybe the liberal focus on these pretend issues is the reason why Romney has now pulled ahead
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

"empty" would be Spence's constant assertions which have no basis in fact or reality but serve to provide spin for his hero


you should sue him for IP Theft John...where's Lickwid when you need him?

Romney has to be careful with Libya, it's already blown up on him once because he didn't know the facts and the more info that comes out the more the Administration's story has been reinforced.

-spence

Sorry but did you miss Candy stating she was wrong when interviewed by Anderson Cooper post debate. The administrations story has many holes that still need to be filled. The fact is Obama had no idea what happened in Libya and used a bogus excuse blaming a citizen of the US for putting out a video on Islam. They toed that line for two weeks prior to facts being leaked(pure speculation)
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Jim - please stop the liberals this and liberals that. The horse is so beaten that even when/if you are right peiople skip it. Pretty please with sugar on top?

John, these people are all over the TV, saying that a notebook is sexist. The fact is, every single person saying that is of the same exact political persuasion. That's a fact.

I would never say that all liberals are bad people, nor would I say that all conservatives are good people. But the people who are saying that Romney is a sexist because he had a notebook, are desperate, pathetic, dishonest, and evil.

I think they were in panic mode after the first debate, but not now.

The last debate should be good. Likely it will be close but Obama has a chance for a decisive win. Unlike Romney, Obama has lived and led US foreign policy for the past 4 years with a list of notable successes.

Romney has to be careful with Libya, it's already blown up on him once because he didn't know the facts and the more info that comes out the more the Administration's story has been reinforced.

Israel? Are you kidding? Sorry we didn't give them a green light to bomb Iran and start a regional conflict, how foolish...

-spence

"Romney has to be careful with Libya"

No, he doesn't. He needs to club Obama with Libya as if Obama was a baby seal. And the fortunate thing for Romney is, he doesn't need to be a Biden-esque attack dog to pull that off. This is one of those rare cases where the facts speak for themselves.

"the more info that comes out the more the Administration's story has been reinforced"

Huh?????????????

The administration's story, for 2 weeks, was that there was no evidence that the attack was anything other than a spontaneous protest over the video. Obama said that, Jay Carney said that, and Ambassador Rice said that.

99% of the information that has come out, has spit directly in the face of that theory.

My wife's reaction wasn't that it was overly sexist but rather just shows he's out of touch.

The binders of women comment was great in it's awkwardness, that's why it took off on the internet. Better was his remark that women need flexible hours at work so they can get home and cook...but not as catchy.

While I don't think Romney has little respect for women, these remarks certainly indicate where his mind is and for women who continue to believe in equality it's off putting.

-spence

its funny, Romney you say it makes him look out of touch, and then you acknowledge that women need to leave early to care for their families. Sounds pretty "in touch" to me. In around 20 years in a professional office many women I know leave the office early to take of their families. Many women who reported to me had to. My wife leaves every day at 4:30 to pick up the kids. Now Im sure there are .0075% of women, say some new york liberal executive types whos kid is with the nanny and they dont get home each night until 9pm, but thats the exception. romneys comments may not make the feminists happy, but they're true.

But the people who are saying that Romney is a sexist because he had a notebook, are desperate, pathetic, dishonest, and evil.

I'm no Obama fan but I disagree with the above. I think they are passionate for how they see things (even if they are wrong). I don't view them as evil though as I think that is a far stretch. Just my opinion.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I'm no Obama fan but I disagree with the above. I think they are passionate for how they see things (even if they are wrong). I don't view them as evil though as I think that is a far stretch. Just my opinion.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

not obama piscator, but many of the far left hags are an evil bunch. Truly dispicable human beings. MSNBC for example

not obama piscator, but many of the far left hags are an evil bunch. Truly dispicable human beings. MSNBC for example

I would have to agree that our little Canadian friend Bill Maher and Rachel "I'm really a dude" Maddox fit the bill. I think it's a smaller handful though and only a very small % are evil (both sides have them)

I was in Chicago about 10 years ago and Maher (who is a small guy) came out of a club with two African American hookers. One on each arm. They were pushing 6' tall and here he is walked in the middle. He is a disgusting puke of a man. Wish I had smart phone back then to snap a picture.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I I was in Chicago about 10 years ago and Maher (who is a small guy) came out of a club with two African American hookers. One on each arm. They were pushing 6' tall and here he is walked in the middle. He is a disgusting puke of a man. Wish I had smart phone back then to snap a picture.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

actually now I have a little more respect for him! :biglaugh:

LOL, if Romney lost I can see the headlines now,
"Romney Loses the election by using the B Word."

Maybe "Reams of resumes would have won him the Election."

This is the most rediculous assault on women's intelligence I've ever seen.

I don't understand your point . Are you saying women think only with emotions? It's the words not the substance ?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Perfect quote by a guy from Italy while the misses and I were watching tv last night:
"If you say something and there are two ways that it could possibly be interpreted, women will always choose the one that pisses you off."

Women can blame evolution for being driven by emotion, as opposed to reason. They're wired that way.

It's science. Emotional Wiring Different in Men and Women | LiveScience (http://www.livescience.com/4085-emotional-wiring-men-women.html)

The fact is Obama had no idea what happened in Libya and used a bogus excuse blaming a citizen of the US for putting out a video on Islam. They toed that line for two weeks prior to facts being leaked(pure speculation)
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Yes, this is a 2 part problem. Clinton falling on the sword for the lack
of intelligence is one thing. She still hiding in Peru?
But the fact that the White House spokesmen continued to propagate the video
and put out false information about the Bengazi attack is another.

I'm no Obama fan but I disagree with the above. I think they are passionate for how they see things (even if they are wrong). I don't view them as evil though as I think that is a far stretch. Just my opinion.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Here is why I think you are wrong. They dion't really believe that the word 'binder' is sexist, no one is that irrational. But they are willing to go there and shriek that it's sexist, just to get their guy elected. It's unbelievably dishonest. If Obama said the same exact thing, he's be the greatest feminist since Susan B Anthony.

They don't believe what they are saying. But they are terrified and desperate.

Sorry but did you miss Candy stating she was wrong when interviewed by Anderson Cooper post debate.
No she didn't, she restated her assertion during the debate which was accurate. Obama did indeed refer to the attack as an act of terror and it also did take two weeks for the Administration to clearly state it was planned by insurgents and not purely spontaneous.

The administrations story has many holes that still need to be filled. The fact is Obama had no idea what happened in Libya and used a bogus excuse blaming a citizen of the US for putting out a video on Islam. They toed that line for two weeks prior to facts being leaked(pure speculation)
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Everything I've read indicates the initial reporting from the scene was that the attack was a response to the video. As the investigation began they appear to have collected evidence that more substantial arms were used signaling it was an attack coordinated by a local militia. There are still some who believe it might have been both...the conservative militia saw the staged outrage on 9/11 from the video and decided to attack.

The only big mistake I see in their story was that Rice wasn't briefed with the latest intel before she went on the Sunday talk shows. I believe they let it sit for a while after that to make sure they had a clearer picture. They certainly could have handled this better, but to claim vast conspiracy is just lame politics.

WYSIATI

-spence

No she didn't, she restated her assertion during the debate which was accurate. Obama did indeed refer to the attack as an act of terror and it also did take two weeks for the Administration to clearly state it was planned by insurgents and not purely spontaneous.


Everything I've read indicates the initial reporting from the scene was that the attack was a response to the video. As the investigation began they appear to have collected evidence that more substantial arms were used signaling it was an attack coordinated by a local militia. There are still some who believe it might have been both...the conservative militia saw the staged outrage on 9/11 from the video and decided to attack.

The only big mistake I see in their story was that Rice wasn't briefed with the latest intel before she went on the Sunday talk shows. I believe they let it sit for a while after that to make sure they had a clearer picture. They certainly could have handled this better, but to claim vast conspiracy is just lame politics.

WYSIATI

-spence

"Obama did indeed refer to the attack as an act of terror "

Please post where he specifically referred to the Bengazi attack as an act of terror in the Rose Garden speech. He made general statements about "acts of terror", and one could reasonably infer he was talking about that specific attack. But he most crtainly did not specifically call that attack an act of terror, not in the next day's Rose Garden speech.

"Everything I've read indicates the initial reporting from the scene was that the attack was a response to the video"

Then you need to re-think where you're getting your infornmation. You might want to cast the net wider than the Obama Fan Club newsletter.

"The only big mistake I see in their story was that Rice wasn't briefed with the latest intel before she went on the Sunday talk shows"

Days after the attack, Jay Carney said there was no evidence that it was anything other than a response to the video. Obama connected teh attack and the video on Letterman, and at the UN.

Spence, you're entitled to your own opinions. You are not entitled to yoru own facts.

I also want to know (as was asked in the debate, which Obama dodged completely) who rejected the request for additional security, and why? Read the transcript of how completely he refused to even come close to answering the question.

Please post where he specifically referred to the Bengazi attack as an act of terror in the Rose Garden speech. He made general statements about "acts of terror", and one could reasonably infer he was talking about that specific attack. But he most crtainly did not specifically call that attack an act of terror, not in the next day's Rose Garden speech.
Jim, Seriously?

4 Americans are killed and the President comes forth to make a public statement that “No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character, or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for.” He said it later that night and again the next day.

What else do you think he could have been talking about?

Then you need to re-think where you're getting your infornmation. You might want to cast the net wider than the Obama Fan Club newsletter.

There was a good write up in the NYTimes Monday, I guess they just made it all up.

To Libyans who witnessed the assault and know the attackers, there is little doubt what occurred: a well-known group of local Islamist militants struck the United States Mission without any warning or protest, and they did it in retaliation for the video. That is what the fighters said at the time, speaking emotionally of their anger at the video without mentioning Al Qaeda, Osama bin Laden or the terrorist strikes of 11 years earlier.

....The fighters said at the time that they were moved to act because of the video, which had first gained attention across the region after a protest in Egypt that day. The assailants approvingly recalled a 2006 assault by local Islamists that had destroyed an Italian diplomatic mission in Benghazi over a perceived insult to the prophet. In June the group staged a similar attack against the Tunisian Consulate over a different film, according to the Congressional testimony of the American security chief at the time, Eric A. Nordstrom.

Hey, just in case you didn't read what I just posted...here's the last sentence again...

The assailants approvingly recalled a 2006 assault by local Islamists that had destroyed an Italian diplomatic mission in Benghazi over a perceived insult to the prophet. In June the group staged a similar attack against the Tunisian Consulate over a different film, according to the Congressional testimony of the American security chief at the time, Eric A. Nordstrom.

And just to be sure we have our facts straight, here's the actual testimony from Rep. Issa's House Oversight investigation.

REP. RAUL LABRADOR (R-ID): I just have a quick question for Lieutenant Colonel Wood and Mr. Nordstrom. Given the information that you saw on TV and your knowledge of the situation in Libya, did you come to a conclusion as to whether this was a terrorist act or whether it was based on some film that was on the Internet?

[...]

NORDSTROM: The -- the first impression that I had was that it was going to be something similar to one of the brigades that we saw there, specifically the -- the brigade -- and it's been named in the press -- that came to my mind was Ansar al-Sharia.

It was a -- a unit or a group that Lieutenant Colonel Wood's personnel and I had -- had tracked for quite some time, we were concerned about. That specific group had been involved in a similar but obviously much smaller scale incident at the end of June involving the Tunisian consulate in Benghazi where they stormed that facility and it was in protest to what they claimed was an anti-Islamic film in Tunis. [House Oversight Committee hearing on consulate security in Benghazi, 10/11/12, via Nexis]

Go ahead, blast the American Security Chief as not having a clue. Perhaps you can even toss a few petty insults along the way...


Days after the attack, Jay Carney said there was no evidence that it was anything other than a response to the video. Obama connected teh attack and the video on Letterman, and at the UN.

And on Letterman he called them terrorists again...connected the attack to the video? See Congressional testimony from the House Oversight investigation.

I've conveniently copied it into this post above.

I also want to know (as was asked in the debate, which Obama dodged completely) who rejected the request for additional security, and why? Read the transcript of how completely he refused to even come close to answering the question.
As they say in political debates, if you're explaining you're losing.

-spence

Here is why I think you are wrong. They dion't really believe that the word 'binder' is sexist, no one is that irrational. But they are willing to go there and shriek that it's sexist, just to get their guy elected. It's unbelievably dishonest. If Obama said the same exact thing, he's be the greatest feminist since Susan B Anthony.

They don't believe what they are saying. But they are terrified and desperate.

Ok, I agree it is dishonest, I guess my point is I don't view them as Evil.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

The word binder isn't sexist, it's the commodification of the women you put in it that's mildly sexist.

I'd also like to note that I'm usually the one cooking dinner and nobody seems to care about my work schedule :huh:

-spence

Spence - would you please refrain from being the apologist spokeswoman for the Obama campaign :rotf2: - Pretty please with sugar on top? :love:

JohnR - would you please delete this forum so it can go back to the way it once was? if people want to argue, they can go to the "other place". This forum has become no better.

ps:

http://a.abcnews.com/images/Politics/ht_dirty_dancing_binder_ss_thg_121016_ssh.jpg

http://wp.patheos.com.s3.amazonaws.com/blogs/exploringourmatrix/files/2012/10/Jabbas-binders-full-of-women.jpg

http://crookedtimber.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/Romney-pic1.png

http://blogs.artinfo.com/artintheair/files/2012/10/romneybinders-2.jpg

http://7.mshcdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/binder-romney-debate.png

http://www.click2houston.com/image/view/-/17022144/medRes/2/-/maxh/360/maxw/640/-/arvnh1z/-/Romney-binders-full-of-women-jpg.jpg

You forgot the best one :hihi:

-spence

I saw that one but its been beaten into facebook and everywhere else.

Just to giggle again

http://www.click2houston.com/image/view/-/17022144/medRes/2/-/maxh/360/maxw/640/-/arvnh1z/-/Romney-binders-full-of-women-jpg.jpg

Can someone answer this question.
Prior to his presidency, has Obama ever been in positon to hire anyone? Serioulsy, has he?

Can someone answer this question.
Prior to his presidency, has Obama ever been in positon to hire anyone? Serioulsy, has he?

http://iroots.org/wp-content/uploads/2477759737_97b5ce7bc6_o.gif

this is for you jimmy:

http://bookmoo.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/ermahgerd-mitt-completely-wrong-flerp-flerps1.png

Ok, that last one is the best :hihi:

-spence

Spence et al,

You amaze me on how you can spin "binder" into some sexist comment...You know what he meant. He meant he had a list of many women that were eligible for his cabinet, so many the staff put them in a notebook. But the dems see everything for the political soundbites. Romney doesn't have a sexist attitude toward anyone and you now it. He is probably the kindest man that has done more for others (including women) as an individual than anyone who has ever ran for the office. Did you watch the RNC? Did you hear what others said he did to help them? I saw some of the political pundits who are strong dems who were moved from some of the testimony presented. Beyond giving 30% of his (serious )income to charities, he has really given a lot of his time for others. Far beyond what all dems have done combined who ran for office. He is a real humble gentleman because he does not boast about it. And further, he really does not want others to talk about it because he what he does for others is between him and them. He does not need to inform the public of his good deeds. The dems love this aspect because they have no one who measure up what they have done personally. It is not what he has done with his money.

Frankly the world would be a far better place if we had more people like him around.

Obama is nothing but a facade. He is just not the best man for the job. He doesn't have the background and his track record sucks and he has done jack squat for others on a personal level. Yes he is morally a decent man, far more a better man than Clinton but he is not the right man to turn america around economically. Handouts (or as he calls it "investments") to the poor will not cut it any longer.

These cute little attacks and social media memes are part and parcel with a desperate campaign.... it is slipping away from the annointed one and they know it.

These cute little attacks and social media memes are part and parcel with a desperate campaign.... it is slipping away from the annointed one and they know it.

http://serio.piiym.net/image/u-mad1.jpg

not mad, just disappointed and slightly amused. Like when a 5 yr old tells you a funny, creative lie

Spence et al,

You amaze me on how you can spin "binder" into some sexist comment...You know what he meant. He meant he had a list of many women that were eligible for his cabinet, so many the staff put them in a notebook. But the dems see everything for the political soundbites.
The reason the comment was memorable is that Romney, when trying to talk about the value to women actually spoke about them like a commodity.

Some people are obviously hypersensitive to this and for others it just sounded odd.

Hence my label of mildly sexist. Combined with his remark about getting home to cook dinner did make him sound a bit out of touch. I don't think he's a sexist person but likely a bit fuddy on matters of sex.

Personally I find the notion that he fabricated the story far more troubling.

-spence

[QUOTE=spence;964332]

Personally I find the notion that he fabricated story far more troubling.

-spence[/

You are killing me .....stop
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

You are killing me .....stop
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Don't you?

-spence

Don't you?

-spence

yes spence, some democrat nobody in MA is crying about it in the media but lets see what Romney's sideman (oops, side woman) as governor had to say about it.
who you going to believe???


Mitt Romney’s female ex-lieutenant governor took a swipe on Thursday at criticism of the GOP nominee’s comment during the debate that he had “binders full of women” while he was staffing up as governor of Massachusetts.

“I … think this is so ironic because it’s given us an opportunity to talk about one of the great strengths of Gov. Romney during his time in office, which was that he did want to bring women’s voices into government, that he did have half of the women in his top appointed positions, right there with him,” said Kerry Healey, the former lieutenant governor of Massachusetts who served with Romney.

Her comments came in the wake of an explosion, on Twitter and beyond, of memes and jokes jabbing Romney for his “binders” comment. But Healey, who was interviewed on Fox News’s “America’s Newsroom with Bill Hemmer and Martha MacCallum,” said she didn’t find Romney’s comments eyebrow-raising.

“I was the person he asked to be liaison to the group that had collected those résumés for us,” Healey said. “So I had spent hours poring over the résumés of the women contained in those binders. I knew exactly what he was talking about.”

yes spence, some democrat nobody in MA is crying about it in the media but lets see what Romney's sideman (oops, side woman) as governor had to say about it.
who you going to believe???
Actually, I believe she was with MassGAP and led the bi-partisan effort to promote qualified women regardless of which party was elected.

-spence

Just a note on MassGAP etc....

Women made up only 25 percent of the 64 new appointments Romney made. By the end of his term, the number of women in high-ranking positions was slightly lower than it was before Romney took office.

http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_mc0nnnevpJ1rj8amio1_400.jpg

http://cdn.memegenerator.net/instances/250x250/28493350.jpg

The reason the comment was memorable is that Romney, when trying to talk about the value to women actually spoke about them like a commodity.
"If you say something and there are two ways that it could possibly be interpreted, women will always choose the one that pisses you off."
This quote I posted earlier in the thread is even more relevant here...

This bs pedantic scrutiny of every word that comes out of the mouths of all public figures is getting rather ridiculous.

People think there's too much splitting of hairs with regards to word-choice in this Political Forum. Broaden that to the rest of the country analyzing word-choice as opposed to intention, and every single one of us would spend more of our days apologizing for using the wrong vocabulary as opposed to getting anything accomplish.

Every single person knows what Romney meant.

It's ridiculous when people do it to Romney and it's just as ridiculous when it'd done to Obama.

Spence gets P O'd because he has to do the dishes after working all day.....:) :)

This bs pedantic scrutiny of every word that comes out of the mouths of all public figures is getting rather ridiculous.

Although the reactions to bored kids (sorry, political campaigns aren't that good with photoshops) making ridiculous memes out of them are just too goddamn awesome. I've never seen such outrage. :rotf2:

http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i113/lazergunpewpew/stupid/Avatar-Achewood-GothicDance.gif

This bs pedantic scrutiny of every word that comes out of the mouths of all public figures is getting rather ridiculous.
I think you're missing the point...

Does Romney 'get' women who work? - CNN.com (http://www.cnn.com/2012/10/19/opinion/dolan-lawless-women-romney/index.html?hpt=hp_t2)

-spence

Spence - In my post, I suggested that one coule reasonably conclude that Obama was erferring to the Bengazi attack in the Rose Garden. It was the very next day, so there's no reason he was assuming to anything else. Fair enough?

HOWEVER. For the next 2 weeks, everything we heard from the administration (be it Obama, Jay Carney, or Ambassador Rice) were specific claims that it was not an act of terror. Soence, it is one thing to say "we aren't going to speculate until the facts are known" - that would be reasonable. But Obama and his team made several specific, affirmative statements, that there was "no evidence" that the attack was anything other than a spontaneous response to the video.

That's what they sais again, and again, and again. And we now know with a 100% certainty that's not true. All of the intelligence reports indicated that it certainly was an act of terror. Despite your claim that Ambassador Stevense contributed to his own death due to his "false sense of security", we now Know for for certain that Stevens expressed concern about the reduced security.

I'll concede Obama was referring to the attack (vaguely) as an act of terror in teh Rose Garden. However, in the next 2 weeks, he said that it wasn't an act of terror. We've seen videos of his saying it was a response to the video.

I'm not saying he changed his tune to dodge responsibility for the screw-up in security levels. But asking that, is a fair question. And when Obama was asked that question at the debate (who rejected requests for more security, and why), his answer was that the diplomats are heroes who do hard work.

Obama isn't doing anything to give this the appearance that it's not a cover up. This will hurt him dearly in the next debate.

As I have said repeatedly, I give Obama an 'A' for killing terrorists, I thinhk it's his best accomplishment. Thus, the foreign policy debate should have been the arena where he had the greatest advantage. He shot himself in the foot right before the debate, and opened the dooe to very valid (in fact, necessary) questions about whether or not anyone in his administration is on the ball when it comes to foreign policy.

When Ambassador Rice did the Sunday shows, and Obama was at the UN, everyone in the world knew it was a terrorist attack. But the administration specifically denied that.

You go ahead, and try making that wrong.

I think you're missing the point...

Does Romney 'get' women who work? - CNN.com (http://www.cnn.com/2012/10/19/opinion/dolan-lawless-women-romney/index.html?hpt=hp_t2)

-spence

that would be working WAY too hard to make an absurd point...:uhuh:

I think you're missing the point...

Does Romney 'get' women who work? - CNN.com (http://www.cnn.com/2012/10/19/opinion/dolan-lawless-women-romney/index.html?hpt=hp_t2)

-spence

Ask Jane Swift.......
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Much ado about nothing still. Makes the campaign and coverage of it look like a joke. That is what happens when people are desperate and exposed.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Much ado about nothing still. Makes the campaign and coverage of it look like a joke. That is what happens when people are desperate and exposed.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

funny how this is such a big deal but the Bengazi cover up....pfffft...not so much :uhuh: sure hope it doesn't come up on Monday

Much ado about nothing still. Makes the campaign and coverage of it look like a joke. That is what happens when people are desperate and exposed.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Those who cry 'desperate and exposed' are usually the most looking for more rocks to throw.

If its much ado about nothing, why keep bringing it up? Or even acknowledging it?

always brilliant....no, not you Lickwid:rotf2:


The Great Binder Blunder - National Review Online (http://www.nationalreview.com/blogs/print/331020)

always brilliant....no, not you Lickwid:rotf2:


The Great Binder Blunder - National Review Online (http://www.nationalreview.com/blogs/print/331020)

I know you're not from MA, but maybe you missed the part where his binder full of women ended with less women employed than before he came into office.

I know, grasping for straws, sure.


Too easy. :rotf2::rotf2::rotf2::rotf2::rotf2:

I know you're not from MA, but maybe you missed the part where his binder full of women ended with less women employed than before he came into office.

I know, grasping for straws, sure.


Too easy. :rotf2::rotf2::rotf2::rotf2::rotf2:

which means what? is it possible to seek qualified women and minorities to fill positions but in the end the most qualified applicant might not come form those categories, is there some quota that must be met?..in MA?

"Women made up only 25 percent of the 64 new appointments Romney made. By the end of his term, the number of women in high-ranking positions was slightly lower than it was before Romney took office."

is this somehow proof that he has a women problem of some sort?

yes...grasping for something....for sure...

which means what? is it possible to seek qualified women and minorities to fill positions but in the end the most qualified applicant might not come form those categories, is there some quota that must be met?..in MA?
So in one year qualified women hold 40%+ of positions then the number falls because of lack of qualified women...while at the same time women graduating college and earning law degrees is rising...and then after Romney the qualified women suddenly reappear?

That doesn't add up.

-spence

So in one year qualified women hold 40%+ of positions then the number falls because of lack of qualified women...while at the same time women graduating college and earning law degrees is rising...and then after Romney the qualified women suddenly reappear?

That doesn't add up.

-spence

ERMAHGERD
MERTH

So in one year qualified women hold 40%+ of positions then the number falls because of lack of qualified women...while at the same time women graduating college and earning law degrees is rising...and then after Romney the qualified women suddenly reappear?

That doesn't add up.

-spence

Romney appointed 14 women out of his first 33 senior-level appointments.....42 percent.

a UMass-Boston study found that the percentage of senior-level appointed positions held by women actually declined throughout the Romney administration, from 30.0% prior to his taking office, to 29.7% in July 2004, to 27.6% near the end of his term in November 2006.

shocking decline....




According to the Daily Mail, Romney ultimately hired four women for his 11 available cabinet positions. But one, Ellen Roy Herzfelder, only lasted around two years. Herzfelder was named the secretary of the Executive Office of Environmental Affairs but left in 2005 to spend more time with her children. She later became a senior policy adviser.

Jennifer David Carey served as Romney's secretary of Elder Affairs. She currently works as the senior director of training and education for the University of Massachusetts Medical School.

Kerry Healey, ultimately became Romney's lieutenant governor. She was praised for her cuts to the deficit and ultimately ran for governor herself. However, she and her fellow Republican nominee were defeated by Democrat Deval Patrick. She also has been appointed to executive committees by Hillary Clinton and Condoleezza Rice.

Jane Edmonds, is currently a professor at Northeastern University. She told the paper that she thinks her former boss would "make an excellent president," even though Edmonds herself is a Democrat. She worked under Romney as the Secretary of Workforce Defense.

In the engineering world...when women graduate college their starting salaries are always higher (by a substantial margin) then the equivalent male with the same gpa in the same field from the same school.

In the engineering world...when women graduate college their starting salaries are always higher (by a substantial margin) then the equivalent male with the same gpa in the same field from the same school.
That's because they represent a fraction of male candidates.

Supply and demand.

-spence

That's because they represent a fraction of male candidates.

Supply and demand.

-spence

HuH?

Why is it not equal work for equal pay? Gender should nothing to do with it!

HuH?

Why is it not equal work for equal pay? Gender should nothing to do with it!

You mentioned starting salary, if companies are seeking to balance their workforce that would naturally increase the initial rate.

That doesn't mean that female engineers really earn more on the job, I do believe their averages are still below men. Some of this is probably historical (i.e. more experienced men in the workforce) and some could be due to inequality.

-spence

You mentioned starting salary, if companies are seeking to balance their workforce that would naturally increase the initial rate.

That doesn't mean that female engineers really earn more on the job, I do believe their averages are still below men. Some of this is probably historical (i.e. more experienced men in the workforce) and some could be due to inequality.

-spence
The wage gap debate is a load of horse*&$t with data that is skewed to make women look like innocent victims while us men enjoy a society that rewards you for having a penis.

You'd do well to read this article (written by a woman) that was in Forbes this past April:
It's Time That We End the Equal Pay Myth - Forbes (http://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2012/04/16/its-time-that-we-end-the-equal-pay-myth/)

Here's the most important part that demonstrates the Sham of 'wage gap' arguments:
"The wage gap statistic, however, doesn’t compare two similarly situated co-workers of different sexes, working in the same industry, performing the same work, for the same number of hours a day. It merely reflects the median earnings of all men and women classified as full-time workers."

The wage gap debate is a load of horse*&$t with data that is skewed to make women look like innocent victims while us men enjoy a society that rewards you for having a penis.

You'd do well to read this article (written by a woman) that was in Forbes this past April:
It's Time That We End the Equal Pay Myth - Forbes (http://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2012/04/16/its-time-that-we-end-the-equal-pay-myth/)

Here's the most important part that demonstrates the Sham of 'wage gap' arguments:
"The wage gap statistic, however, doesn’t compare two similarly situated co-workers of different sexes, working in the same industry, performing the same work, for the same number of hours a day. It merely reflects the median earnings of all men and women classified as full-time workers."

Besides if women could do the work as well and they get paid less, who the hell would hire a man???:uhuh:

Call me a caveman but I don't care if women are paid less.
Women 20-40 years old more than likely will need maternity leave & on average will have 2 or 3 kids.
Kids get sick, one of the parents has to stay home with them. Usually that's the mother.
How can this not be a factor when a company hires employees and negotiates salary/pay.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Call me a caveman but I don't care if women are paid less.
Women 20-40 years old more than likely will need maternity leave & on average will have 2 or 3 kids.
Kids get sick, one of the parents has to stay home with them. Usually that's the mother.
How can this not be a factor when a company hires employees and negotiates salary/pay.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

It's 2012 Ron , the guys get maternity leave too
It's pathetic
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

The top companies offer maternity for both sexes,even when adopting.
They give benefits to gay couples
They even pay for fat camp for porkers
Fatsos cost a lot for employers,way more than any pregnant lady.
There are meetings involving top CEO's discussing how hard it is to employ obese sacks of shiite.
Using Ronnies logic,they should get paid less just for being jellybellies.

It's 2012 Ron , the guys get maternity leave too
It's pathetic
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Yeah, it's pathetic that I took a couple of weeks off when my son was born, and will again when my daughter is born to help my wife...

what a pussy I am I guess. should have stood in the waiting room with a cigar and then gone back to work :smash:

Using Ronnies logic,they should get paid less just for being jellybellies.
They absolutely should be paid less when compared to someone with an equal skill set. The obese (similarly to smokers) miss more days of work, contribute a significant amount to health care costs and are less productive than their thinner coworkers due to an significantly elevated risk of cardiovascular disease, diabetes and many other diseases that will directly affect job performance in many workplaces.

Yeah, it's pathetic that I took a couple of weeks off when my son was born, and will again when my daughter is born to help my wife...

what a pussy I am I guess. should have stood in the waiting room with a cigar and then gone back to work :smash:

It wasn't a personal assault Brian
Wow,,,touchy
Just saying our parents managed just fine as did my wife because I was self employed. I adjusted my schedule to help out but I couldn't afford to take 2 weeks .
A friend has a small company with 5 emoyees he was telling me that 3 of ther men will be out on maternity leave on the same 2 weeks
He was pissed and he didn't take time off because he couldn't when his kids were born
Not judging ....just saying
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

It seems personal when it is you, no? Just like your visceral reaction based on yours and your friends reaction. (my post might have seemed more angry, was supposed to be more snarky than anything...)

It seems personal when it is you, no? Just like your visceral reaction based on yours and your friends reaction. (my post might have seemed more angry, was supposed to be more snarky than anything...)

Everyone's situation is different ,that we can agree on
We can both probably agree on it's a matter of convenience not necessity in most cases
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

They absolutely should be paid less when compared to someone with an equal skill set. The obese (similarly to smokers) miss more days of work, contribute a significant amount to health care costs and are less productive than their thinner coworkers due to an significantly elevated risk of cardiovascular disease, diabetes and many other diseases that will directly affect job performance in many workplaces.

Bingo.

I agree, taxes should be (in part) calculated by our weight not just our income.
If you want to get the weight down and make america healthier, tax someone by the pound.

attached is a list of some of the largest, successful companies in america. Waa, waa, they're run by WOMEN! Thats right a WOMAN runs IBM. HP, PepsiCO.
WTF! So when that little girl (aka victim) whined about equal pay in the debate, one of the candidates should have said "sweetie, do you have clue how many major companies are run by women? You work hard and prove yourself and people will be fighting for you and will pay you what you're worth" End of f'in story.

America's top 10 female CEOs- MSN Money (http://money.msn.com/top-stocks/post.aspx?post=8d96cfde-8b74-4a20-8cfc-57d0eb48b527)

America's 10 Most Powerful Female CEOs | InvestorPlace (http://investorplace.com/2012/05/the-top-10-female-ceos/)

attached is a list of some of the largest, successful companies in america. Waa, waa, they're run by WOMEN! Thats right a WOMAN runs IBM. HP, PepsiCO.
WTF! So when that little girl (aka victim) whined about equal pay in the debate, one of the candidates should have said "sweetie, do you have clue how many major companies are run by women? You work hard and prove yourself and people will be fighting for you and will pay you what you're worth" End of f'in story.

America's top 10 female CEOs- MSN Money (http://money.msn.com/top-stocks/post.aspx?post=8d96cfde-8b74-4a20-8cfc-57d0eb48b527)

America's 10 Most Powerful Female CEOs | InvestorPlace (http://investorplace.com/2012/05/the-top-10-female-ceos/)

Or....sweetie... do you know who the Minority Leader of the House of Representatives is? SHE has a net worth of about 58 million dollars.

They absolutely should be paid less when compared to someone with an equal skill set. The obese (similarly to smokers) miss more days of work, contribute a significant amount to health care costs and are less productive than their thinner coworkers due to an significantly elevated risk of cardiovascular disease, diabetes and many other diseases that will directly affect job performance in many workplaces.

They should be paid the same....as long as they are performing to the same level required by the person/company hiring them then it shouldn't matter what their weight is, or what their sex is.

Maybe Their health insurance contributions should be higher if they have high risk factors (i.e. smokers, drinkers, obesity)...but their pay should be given to them strictly on their performance. They do their job, they get paid.....

If they miss more days of work then you can fire them or dock their pay......

I agree, taxes should be (in part) calculated by our weight not just our income.
If you want to get the weight down and make america healthier, tax someone by the pound.

Muscle weighs more than fat :)

"Romney doesn't get women who work" - CNN

(Possibly, but we know Clinton did, in more ways than one!)

Maybe if he called it a little black book? Surely that would be less offensive that binder?

All I see is more waste of time and money defending an idiot attack by idiots!

Maybe after we finish with Bigbird and Binders we can tackle truly important issues....like "Is bigfoot real?" or "What is the special sauce on a Big Mac made from?"

[QUOTE=FishermanTim;964850(Possibly, Maybe after we finish with Bigbird and Binders we can tackle truly important issues....like "Is bigfoot real?" or "What is the special sauce on a Big Mac made from?"[/QUOTE]

Or let's spend 2 more years trying to find out if Obama is really a Muslim:rotf2:

They should be paid the same....as long as they are performing to the same level required by the person/company hiring them then it shouldn't matter what their weight is, or what their sex is.

Maybe Their health insurance contributions should be higher if they have high risk factors (i.e. smokers, drinkers, obesity)...but their pay should be given to them strictly on their performance. They do their job, they get paid.....

If they miss more days of work then you can fire them or dock their pay......
Like I said above, smokers and the obese with the same skill set are statistically less productive than their healthier counterparts with the same skill set. There is a reason why many businesses (and health insurance companies) reimburse the costs of fitness club memberships - because it has been proven that people with an unhealthy lifestyle have a significantly higher costs of employment than their healthier coworkers.

"The most obese men take 5.9 more sick days a year; the most obese women, 9.4 days more. Obesity-related absenteeism costs employers as much as $6.4 billion a year, health economists led by Eric Finkelstein of Duke University calculated."
The costs of obesity cost us all | World of DTC Marketing.com (http://worldofdtcmarketing.com/the-costs-of-obesity-cost-us-all/cost-of-healthcare-in-the-u-s/)

The obese are a slow-walking, heavy-breathing ticking time bomb. Statistically, it's not a matter of *if* they are going to miss work or under-perform, it is a matter of *when*.

There's a reason Obamacare allows employers to charge their employees who smoke or are obese 30-50% more for health care.
Insight: Firms to charge smokers, obese more for healthcare | Reuters (http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/10/30/us-penalties-idUSTRE79T2S220111030)

But, like I said....if absenteeism is a problem...get rid of them or dock them pay.

I am 5'11" and weigh 210 pounds...I'm classified as obese. I have missed only 3 days in the past 3.75 years at my current position and 1 day in 7 years at my last company. ....thats 4 days in almost 11 years.

and I sit next to 2 guys that are in shape and younger than me......and they have both been out sick more then those 4 days..... just this year.

yet I should should get paid less than them for doing the same job because some chart says I'm overweight and statistics say I'm prone to being out more than them.

you shouldn't pay people on statistics....you should pay them on performance. If they can't perform....lose them....that simple.

And it IS a good idea to reimburse for health club memberships because if you are leading a healthy lifestyle as opposed to a non-healthy lifestyle and should be rewarded for that because it does help with the Health benefits within a company. Like I said as well...charge them more of a contribution to their health insurance if they meet certain risk factors.

But, like I said....if absenteeism is a problem...get rid of them or dock them pay.

I am 5'11" and weigh 210 pounds...I'm classified as obese. I have missed only 3 days in the past 3.75 years at my current position and 1 day in 7 years at my last company. ....thats 4 days in almost 11 years.

and I sit next to 2 guys that are in shape and younger than me......and they have both been out sick more then those 4 days..... just this year.

yet I should should get paid less than them for doing the same job because some chart says I'm overweight and statistics say I'm prone to being out more than them.

you shouldn't pay people on statistics....you should pay them on performance. If they can't perform....lose them....that simple.

And it IS a good idea to reimburse for health club memberships because if you are leading a healthy lifestyle as opposed to a non-healthy lifestyle and should be rewarded for that because it does help with the Health benefits within a company. Like I said as well...charge them more of a contribution to their health insurance if they meet certain risk factors.

"I am 5'11" and weigh 210 pounds"

(1) you are not obese
(2) your observations of yourself and a few co-workers do not make a statistically significant sample. I flip a coin, it comes up heads, can I conculde that the coin will never come up tails? Nope.

Obesity and smoking are very expensive to business. Smoking is a personhal choice, obesity is almost always a personal choice.

"I am 5'11" and weigh 210 pounds"

(1) you are not obese
(2) your observations of yourself and a few co-workers do not make a statistically significant sample. I flip a coin, it comes up heads, can I conculde that the coin will never come up tails? Nope.

Obesity and smoking are very expensive to business. Smoking is a personhal choice, obesity is almost always a personal choice.

Jim, dangerous terrirotry here and you sound very liberal. My personal choices are non of yours, the governmetns or my employers F'in business. fat, bald, smoker, eater, man, woman, etc. non of your business as long as I deliver.

Jim, dangerous terrirotry here and you sound very liberal. My personal choices are non of yours, the governmetns or my employers F'in business. fat, bald, smoker, eater, man, woman, etc. non of your business as long as I deliver.
You absolutely correct. However as a business owner, if I don't want to hire you because you're obese or a smoker and historical evidence has demonstrated that you're statistically likely to perform poorly, isn't that also my choice?

Isn't it also my choice to try and find the most affordable health care benefits for my employees and instill a surcharge on those that cause rates to be higher for people that make healthy choices in their lives? It's certainly your choice to find a new job if you don't like it.

As I stated above, smokers and the obese are ticking time bombs and copious amounts of data support that fact. With any statistically significant sample size, it is irrefutable that they cost employers more than their coworkers who live healthier lifestyles.

You absolutely correct. However as a business owner, if I don't want to hire you because you're obese or a smoker and historical evidence has demonstrated that you're statistically likely to perform poorly, isn't that also my choice?

Isn't it also my choice to try and find the most affordable health care benefits for my employees and instill a surcharge on those that cause rates to be higher for people that make healthy choices in their lives? It's certainly your choice to find a new job if you don't like it.

As I stated above, smokers and the obese are ticking time bombs and copious amounts of data support that fact. With any statistically significant sample size, it is irrefutable that they cost employers more than their coworkers who live healthier lifestyles.

I dont believe that smoking or obeseity (unless a handicap?) are protected classes.

"I am 5'11" and weigh 210 pounds"

(1) you are not obese

If I have anynthing more than a glass of water before the weigh in I am screwed

http://img.webmd.com/dtmcms/live/webmd/consumer_assets/site_images/media/medical/hw/h9991023.gif


(2) your observations of yourself and a few co-workers do not make a statistically significant sample. I flip a coin, it comes up heads, can I conculde that the coin will never come up tails? Nope.

Obesity and smoking are very expensive to business. Smoking is a personhal choice, obesity is almost always a personal choice.

I'm not saying that people shouldn't pay for their risky lifestyle choices...I'm saying if they are going to pay for them it should be tied to what they pay in health Insurance.....not what a company pays you to do your job.

I'm not saying that people shouldn't pay for their risky lifestyle choices...I'm saying if they are going to pay for them it should be tied to what they pay in health Insurance.....not what a company pays you to do your job.
And what I've been saying is that health care costs isn't the only problem. For companies, there is a very significant Productivity Cost that come with hiring people with unhealthy lifestyles.

From the link I posted earlier:
"The very obese lose one month of productive work per year, costing employers an average of $3,792 per very obese male worker and $3,037 per female."

This thread takes a page out of the democratic play book .
What was the original posters intent? :)
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

And what I've been saying is that health care costs isn't the only problem. For companies, there is a very significant Productivity Cost that come with hiring people with unhealthy lifestyles.

And Like RIJIMMY said...Then Don't Hire Them

From the link I posted earlier:
"The very obese lose one month of productive work per year, costing employers an average of $3,792 per very obese male worker and $3,037 per female."

And Like I said Fire them or Dock their pay for underperforming...

but if you hire 2 people to do the same job and they show up the same amount of time and are performing the same....you shouldn't be paying the Chubby guy less just because he's chubby.

Where does the Chub Persecution end? :hihi:

Jim, dangerous terrirotry here and you sound very liberal. My personal choices are non of yours, the governmetns or my employers F'in business. fat, bald, smoker, eater, man, woman, etc. non of your business as long as I deliver.

"as long as I deliver"

Thagt's my point. As a group, over time, the obese and smokers will (1) not be as productive as others, and (2) will cost the business tons of money in healthcare premiums.

I used to work as an actuary, pricing personal auto insurance. Take the group of drivers that are 18 year old boys, driving Ferraris, who have DUI convictions. The data says those are a very high risk group, so we charge them a ton for insurance. Yes, there are some exceptions...some of those kids may never have another claim. But as a group, they stink. So they all pay through the nose.

Nothing liberal about that. I'm saying that people face the consequences of the choices they make. That's about as anti-liberal as you can get.

If I have anynthing more than a glass of water before the weigh in I am screwed http://img.webmd.com/dtmcms/live/webmd/consumer_assets/site_images/media/medical/hw/h9991023.gif I'm not saying that people shouldn't pay for their risky lifestyle choices...I'm saying if they are going to pay for them it should be tied to what they pay in health Insurance.....not what a company pays you to do your job.

That height-weight chart is insane. You're pretty healthy.

"if they are going to pay for them it should be tied to what they pay in health Insurance.....not what a company pays you to do your job"

That's a very compelling argument. But if I own a business, can I choose not to hire people that are in a group that's likely (not certain) to be less productive? An interesting question.

That height-weight chart is insane. You're pretty healthy.

"if they are going to pay for them it should be tied to what they pay in health Insurance.....not what a company pays you to do your job"

That's a very compelling argument. But if I own a business, can I choose not to hire people that are in a group that's likely (not certain) to be less productive? An interesting question.
Such an interesting question that I already asked it.:cheers:

You absolutely correct. However as a business owner, if I don't want to hire you because you're obese or a smoker and historical evidence has demonstrated that you're statistically likely to perform poorly, isn't that also my choice?

Isn't it also my choice to try and find the most affordable health care benefits for my employees and instill a surcharge on those that cause rates to be higher for people that make healthy choices in their lives? It's certainly your choice to find a new job if you don't like it.

Such an interesting question that I already asked it.:cheers:

It was such a brilliant, probing question, I figured it was worth repeating.

Hope all is well.

According to that chart I'm a fatty.
AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!

Commence outrage and "left wing political attacks" comments.

http://8.mshcdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/horses-bayonets.jpeg

http://cdn.ph.upi.com/sv/i/UPI-4411350957932/2012/1/13509635124685/Obamas-horses-and-bayonets-moment-becomes-instant-meme-VIDEO.jpg