The-Hogs.net - Washington Football Discussion, Redskins to Commanders Era

Leading from the "rear" just doesn't work bro. This prez has NO CLUE

Alexander the Great - first on the field of battle, last to get wounds prepped
Hannibal - great mind, great leader, great politician
Cyrus the Great - created the first of our modern day postal service, led with fairness
George Washington and Abraham Lincoln - led country out of its darkest hours

What has Barry done? crickets:crickets

Deadskins wrote:

DarthMonk wrote:I think nationally it's 28% less for the same job.

So Barry is outperforming the market in this area? Then CT is paying him a complement? That doesn't sound right.

Only a liberal could come up with that Hussein discriminates less then average is a "compliment"...

DarthMonk wrote:

Countertrey wrote:Women in the Obama White House make 18% less than their male counterparts.

Fair to women... smh...

Does this mean 2 people do the same job and the woman makes less? Or does it mean if you simply compute an average regardless of job tiltle the women average 18% less? Also, who set the rates?

I think nationally it's 28% less for the same job.

Just asking.

It's funny how all of a sudden the right questions start being asked when the liberals are the ones being questioned. Yet in the same statement you don't question the stat you like.

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

Deadskins wrote:

DarthMonk wrote:I think nationally it's 28% less for the same job.

So Barry is outperforming the market in this area? Then CT is paying him a complement? That doesn't sound right.

Only a liberal could come up with that Hussein discriminates less then average is a "compliment"...

And only a conservative could take that comment seriously.

Deadskins wrote:

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

Deadskins wrote:

DarthMonk wrote:I think nationally it's 28% less for the same job.

So Barry is outperforming the market in this area? Then CT is paying him a complement? That doesn't sound right.

Only a liberal could come up with that Hussein discriminates less then average is a "compliment"...

And only a conservative could take that comment seriously.

You'd have to ask one. Only a liberal would assume a snarky reply to their snarky post is serious.

The "women are paid less" argument is a straw man at best and the libs know it.

You can show women make less in any career field, and with any employer you want. This is not due to discrimination on the part of the employer as much as it is on societal norms.

Showing the Obama White House pays it's women less is par for the course. He started that argument. He set himself up to look like a hypocrite.

As an employer, I can tell you I don't intentionally pay my women less for the same job than I do the men, but even if you look at my books you'll see that women make less than men. Why? Seniority of the male employees, the women take more time off and at the end of the day, my position skews the pay scale to the men.

The only way I can make it "equal" is to pay a woman more than me, for doing less than me. Then pay the other women MORE than I pay the men who have been there longer, and then pay them even if they don't come to work.

That is not equal, and would get me sued, but it makes a great rally point to say that I pay my women less as if it is somehow all my fault.

Half my management staff is female. My current assistant manager is a man. He replaced a woman and is making less than she did (only because she was in the position longer than he has been currently). He has been there longer than both the women combined who are both making more in their positions than he did when he held them, but at the end of the day, the intentionally misleading stat would be that I pay my women less.

Bob 0119 wrote:Half my management staff is female

My business has grown staff 450% in the last two years and revenue by almost 500%. It's a combo of organic growth and acquisitions. I hire the best man for the job. Currently, my senior staff are all women. Funny how we're doing so well, and yet I'm convinced God hates me.

With what we've done swimming upstream, I'm eager to find out what we can do when the one guy who seriously needs to be on the unemployment line is finally there...

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

Bob 0119 wrote:Half my management staff is female

My business has grown staff 450% in the last two years and revenue by almost 500%. It's a combo of organic growth and acquisitions. I hire the best man for the job. Currently, my senior staff are all women. Funny how we're doing so well, and yet I'm convinced God hates me.

With what we've done swimming upstream, I'm eager to find out what we can do when the one guy who seriously needs to be on the unemployment line is finally there...

I wish we were doing as well. My staff has actually been reduced and current increases in expenses are making it hard for me to grow. I'm terrified of what four more years of this guy will do to us.

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

Bob 0119 wrote:Half my management staff is female

My business has grown staff 450% in the last two years and revenue by almost 500%. It's a combo of organic growth and acquisitions. I hire the best man for the job. Currently, my senior staff are all women. Funny how we're doing so well, and yet I'm convinced God hates me.

With what we've done swimming upstream, I'm eager to find out what we can do when the one guy who seriously needs to be on the unemployment line is finally there...

BINGO.....Nobama needs to be on the unemployment line

tribeofjudah wrote:

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

Bob 0119 wrote:Half my management staff is female

My business has grown staff 450% in the last two years and revenue by almost 500%. It's a combo of organic growth and acquisitions. I hire the best man for the job. Currently, my senior staff are all women. Funny how we're doing so well, and yet I'm convinced God hates me.

With what we've done swimming upstream, I'm eager to find out what we can do when the one guy who seriously needs to be on the unemployment line is finally there...

BINGO.....Nobama needs to be on the unemployment line

When someone doesn't do the job, you gotta let em go, eh tribe?

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

tribeofjudah wrote:

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

Bob 0119 wrote:Half my management staff is female

My business has grown staff 450% in the last two years and revenue by almost 500%. It's a combo of organic growth and acquisitions. I hire the best man for the job. Currently, my senior staff are all women. Funny how we're doing so well, and yet I'm convinced God hates me.

With what we've done swimming upstream, I'm eager to find out what we can do when the one guy who seriously needs to be on the unemployment line is finally there...

BINGO.....Nobama needs to be on the unemployment line

When someone doesn't do the job, you gotta let em go, eh tribe?

Divorce, lay-off, separation, FIRED, IMPEACHED.....call it what you want. Barry has to go....!!!

This prez and his office are ALL COWARDS. Why didn't they send military help to the Consulate in Bengazhi...???

There was an all out FIRE FIGHT. Our ex-SEALS were fighting hard. One had a Laser Beam on the enemy, waiting for Air Strike.

ExSEAL Woods asked for HELP 3 TIMES..... all 3 were denied.

NO HELP CAME
Ex-SEALS were told to "stand down" and NOT join the fight.

THN brothers who served in the Military ---WHAT SAY YOU...???

FReakin' BUNCH OF COWARDS....THIS OFFICE IS....!!!

I am not a war monger - I am in Defense of our Good and Honorable NAME.

Down with NoBama - kick him out. Commander in Chief...??? I THINK NOT

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

DarthMonk wrote:

Countertrey wrote:Women in the Obama White House make 18% less than their male counterparts.

Fair to women... smh...

Does this mean 2 people do the same job and the woman makes less? Or does it mean if you simply compute an average regardless of job tiltle the women average 18% less? Also, who set the rates?

I think nationally it's 28% less for the same job.

Just asking.

It's funny how all of a sudden the right questions start being asked when the liberals are the ones being questioned. Yet in the same statement you don't question the stat you like.

You're funny. You and your nonsense. Marxist!

Everything I found shows in White House same job means same pay. May not be true but that's all I found. I looked too.

Countertrey wrote:Monk, Gallup has it 51-45... slip sliding away...

Irrelevant. A much better source has it 50.3 to 48.6 Obama with college going his way 295 to 243 and a probability of winning of over 74%.

The single most likely outcome remains 330-228.

Ohio is key. Obama's chances there are about 76% to 24%. If he somehow loses Ohio Obama's chances of winning drop to about 50% while Romney's almost disappear (if Romney loses Ohio).

Like it or not, Romney's post-1st-debate momentum has stopped and reversed. His best chance remains rain and "voter fraud" chicanery.

DarthMonk

As someone who's voting for Obama I'll admit I like Romney more now than I did a month ago. Nevertheless, his momentum has stopped AND reversed and this hurt him:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GK3ORgw-h_4

DarthMonk wrote:

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

DarthMonk wrote:

Countertrey wrote:Women in the Obama White House make 18% less than their male counterparts.

Fair to women... smh...

Does this mean 2 people do the same job and the woman makes less? Or does it mean if you simply compute an average regardless of job tiltle the women average 18% less? Also, who set the rates?

I think nationally it's 28% less for the same job.

Just asking.

It's funny how all of a sudden the right questions start being asked when the liberals are the ones being questioned. Yet in the same statement you don't question the stat you like.

You're funny. You and your nonsense. Marxist!

Everything I found shows in White House same job means same pay. May not be true but that's all I found. I looked too.

"I" am funny? One of my favorite liberalisms is that liberals think that not getting or addressing a point is caused by their great intelligence. You repeated the point that was my point. Now, try reading the two statements in yellow and think about them. What are you questioning, what are you assuming the truth of?

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

DarthMonk wrote:

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

DarthMonk wrote:

Countertrey wrote:Women in the Obama White House make 18% less than their male counterparts.

Fair to women... smh...

Does this mean 2 people do the same job and the woman makes less? Or does it mean if you simply compute an average regardless of job tiltle the women average 18% less? Also, who set the rates?

I think nationally it's 28% less for the same job.

Just asking.

It's funny how all of a sudden the right questions start being asked when the liberals are the ones being questioned. Yet in the same statement you don't question the stat you like.

You're funny. You and your nonsense. Marxist!

Everything I found shows in White House same job means same pay. May not be true but that's all I found. I looked too.

"I" am funny? One of my favorite liberalisms is that liberals think that not getting or addressing a point is caused by their great intelligence. You repeated the point that was my point. Now, try reading the two statements in yellow and think about them. What are you questioning, what are you assuming the truth of?

Proving my point again. What a worthless post (yours). Later.

*yawn*...

Respect to the president for cutting his campaign rally short to get back to DC and oversee the emergency response situation for Sandy.

Ok, ya'll can carry on now.

langleyparkjoe wrote:Respect to the president for cutting his campaign rally short to get back to DC and oversee the emergency response situation for Sandy

I'm not knocking him for it, but there wasn't another choice politically as either party criticizes the other for not doing that. And yet of course he's done nothing as there's nothing for him to do. It's a total non-event.

DarthMonk wrote:

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

DarthMonk wrote:

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

DarthMonk wrote:

Countertrey wrote:Women in the Obama White House make 18% less than their male counterparts.

Fair to women... smh...

Does this mean 2 people do the same job and the woman makes less? Or does it mean if you simply compute an average regardless of job tiltle the women average 18% less? Also, who set the rates?

I think nationally it's 28% less for the same job.

Just asking.

It's funny how all of a sudden the right questions start being asked when the liberals are the ones being questioned. Yet in the same statement you don't question the stat you like.

You're funny. You and your nonsense. Marxist!

Everything I found shows in White House same job means same pay. May not be true but that's all I found. I looked too.

"I" am funny? One of my favorite liberalisms is that liberals think that not getting or addressing a point is caused by their great intelligence. You repeated the point that was my point. Now, try reading the two statements in yellow and think about them. What are you questioning, what are you assuming the truth of?

Proving my point again. What a worthless post (yours). Later.

You proved mine again, you still say you don't even get it, which means you're not qualified to say if my point was "worthless" or not. You have to get the point to make that determination. Actually it's a spot on point, but to get that, you have to get my point too.

Is the election being held in this thread?

People ... you get too excited. It is only POLITICS. They are ALL bad. You might argue that some are worse than others and that is fine.

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

langleyparkjoe wrote:Respect to the president for cutting his campaign rally short to get back to DC and oversee the emergency response situation for Sandy

I'm not knocking him for it, but there wasn't another choice politically as either party criticizes the other for not doing that. And yet of course he's done nothing as there's nothing for him to do. It's a total non-event.

Probably, but no matter who the president was that wouldn't change my comment. I don't just comment based on dislike/like for a president (not saying you or others have said that)

langleyparkjoe wrote:

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

langleyparkjoe wrote:Respect to the president for cutting his campaign rally short to get back to DC and oversee the emergency response situation for Sandy

I'm not knocking him for it, but there wasn't another choice politically as either party criticizes the other for not doing that. And yet of course he's done nothing as there's nothing for him to do. It's a total non-event.

Probably, but no matter who the president was that wouldn't change my comment. I don't just comment based on dislike/like for a president (not saying you or others have said that)

Fair enough langley, and I know you well enough to believe that's true

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

DarthMonk wrote:

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

DarthMonk wrote:

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

DarthMonk wrote:

Countertrey wrote:Women in the Obama White House make 18% less than their male counterparts.

Fair to women... smh...

Does this mean 2 people do the same job and the woman makes less? Or does it mean if you simply compute an average regardless of job tiltle the women average 18% less? Also, who set the rates?

I think nationally it's 28% less for the same job.

Just asking.

It's funny how all of a sudden the right questions start being asked when the liberals are the ones being questioned. Yet in the same statement you don't question the stat you like.

You're funny. You and your nonsense. Marxist!

Everything I found shows in White House same job means same pay. May not be true but that's all I found. I looked too.

"I" am funny? One of my favorite liberalisms is that liberals think that not getting or addressing a point is caused by their great intelligence. You repeated the point that was my point. Now, try reading the two statements in yellow and think about them. What are you questioning, what are you assuming the truth of?

Proving my point again. What a worthless post (yours). Later.

You proved mine again, you still say you don't even get it, which means you're not qualified to say if my point was "worthless" or not. You have to get the point to make that determination. Actually it's a spot on point, but to get that, you have to get my point too.

Right.

I question everything and assume nothing. I do research and say what I think. I could be wrong. I just questioned myself. I did not assume the 28% less is right. I said I think it is. Do some research if you think it's wrong. I am pretty sure the original statement (which I certainly questioned) was not about the same job but welcome anyone to show me it is. If it is, I'm cool with that. Check the blue you seemingly ignored.

A guy, me, asks a simple question about the meaning of a stat - same job or average? then mentions something he thinks - national average for same job (mentioned by a questioner in a Town Hall debate btw) - and you try to put me in some sort of contradiction or inconsistency that doesn't exist. Then I clarify things in a later post after doing research and all you can do is spout the usual crap and say my unwillingness to explain what needs no explaining (and that I actually already explained!) proves your point. Good one.

Some of your posts sound intelligent. The last few don't. You make some good arguments about conservatism proceeding from principles instead from a desired end. That's a good argument to run with. Too bad most Republicans don't live up to that. That makes them closet liberals.

You are barking up the wrong tree in this particular "argument." It seems you simply want to disagree with me regardless. I am not arguing for the rightness of voting for Obama in this thread. I am simply making predictions and responding to a few posts here and there.

Latest update:

POP = 50.4 to 48.5 Obama

COLLEGE = 299 to 239 Obama

SINGLE MOST LIKELY OUTCOME = 330 to 208 Obama

Interesting Stat: Regardless of the poll there are some states that ALL POLLS have Obama ahead in. Those states give Obama 271 electors. 270 wins.

Romney can win but he'll have to take at least one state where EVERY POLL IN THE NATION has Obama ahead.

DarthMonk

I find the 538 Poll most interesting. It is here:
http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/

This poll averages ss many single polls as they can find, factors in "state fundamentals" , allows for some polls to lean Democratic; others lean Republican.

Latest combined and averaged polls show President Obama with about 1.5% lead in the popular voted.

State polls, which deliver electoral votes project the President to win about 300 electors; 270 wins.