• Menu
  • Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Before Header

  • About Us
  • Lexicon
  • Contact Us
  • Our Store
  • ↑
  • ↓
  • ←
  • →

Balloon Juice

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

When I decide to be condescending, you won’t have to dream up a fantasy about it.

Speaking of republicans, is there a way for a political party to declare intellectual bankruptcy?

fuckem (in honor of the late great efgoldman)

Usually wrong but never in doubt

Red lights blinking on democracy’s dashboard

Incompetence, fear, or corruption? why not all three?

The GOP couldn’t organize an orgy in a whorehouse with a fist full of 50s.

rich, arrogant assholes who equate luck with genius

Do not shrug your shoulders and accept the normalization of untruths.

… riddled with inexplicable and elementary errors of law and fact

🎶 Those boots were made for mockin’ 🎵

Tick tock motherfuckers!

Some judge needs to shut this circus down soon.

Just because you believe it, that doesn’t make it true.

if you can’t see it, then you are useless in the fight to stop it.

Reality always lies in wait for … Democrats.

Let me eat cake. The rest of you could stand to lose some weight, frankly.

Our job is not to persuade republicans but to defeat them.

When do we start airlifting the women and children out of Texas?

If you’re pissed about Biden’s speech, he was talking about you.

This blog will pay for itself.

New McCarthy, same old McCarthyism.

Their freedom requires your slavery.

Too often we confuse noise with substance. too often we confuse setbacks with defeat.

Mobile Menu

  • Winnable House Races
  • Donate with Venmo, Zelle & PayPal
  • Site Feedback
  • War in Ukraine
  • Submit Photos to On the Road
  • Politics
  • On The Road
  • Open Threads
  • Topics
  • Balloon Juice 2023 Pet Calendar (coming soon)
  • COVID-19 Coronavirus
  • Authors
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Lexicon
  • Our Store
  • Politics
  • Open Threads
  • War in Ukraine
  • Garden Chats
  • On The Road
  • 2021-22 Fundraising!
You are here: Home / Don’t Go Away Mad, Just Go Away

Don’t Go Away Mad, Just Go Away

by $8 blue check mistermix|  April 30, 20129:12 am| 81 Comments

This post is in: Democratic Stupidity

FacebookTweetEmail

Apparently, Rachel Maddow really served Cathy McMorris Rodgers and Alex Castellanos on Meet the Press yesterday but I made the mistake of hitting play at the start of the video and caught this:

DAVID GREGORY: […] And Hillary Rosen, here you are. This issue is not going away. And neither are you.

HILARY ROSEN: Neither am I. […]

DAVID GREGORY: I do want to remind people about your comments about Ann Romney that started quite a debate. Watch.
(videotape)

Rosen is the exemplar for this observation (by an interesting guy):

One must beware of anyone who is stupid and diligent — he must not be entrusted with any responsibility because he will always cause only mischief.

Update: Here’s the meat of what Rachel had to say, minus the useless Hilary Rosen part:

FacebookTweetEmail
Previous Post: « In the Blink of a Young Man’s Eye
Next Post: the art of the impossible »

Reader Interactions

81Comments

  1. 1.

    nastybrutishntall

    April 30, 2012 at 9:26 am

    stupid and diligent: the illest villain.

  2. 2.

    Schlemizel

    April 30, 2012 at 9:31 am

    Ignorant and arrogant is a worse combination and it seems to be more prevalent amongst the talking heads

  3. 3.

    gogol's wife

    April 30, 2012 at 9:33 am

    Great quotation.

  4. 4.

    Chris

    April 30, 2012 at 9:33 am

    Never heard that quote. It’s a good one.

  5. 5.

    A Humble Lurker

    April 30, 2012 at 9:34 am

    Rachel was fun to watch. The other four, not so much. And by not so much, I mean it was like a hot salted poke[r in my eye every time one of them opened their mouths.

  6. 6.

    Ash Can

    April 30, 2012 at 9:34 am

    No, David, you useless idiot, it won’t go away, as long as you and all the mindless talkers like you insist upon covering it instead of real news stories.

  7. 7.

    low-tech cyclist

    April 30, 2012 at 9:37 am

    Much as I hate to defend IP strangulation lobbyist Hilary Rosen, she was actually right on target in her observation a few weeks back that started this particular fire: that Mitt Romney is relying on Ann Romney for his information about what matters to women in this election, and Ann Romney has no fucking clue what struggles the typical American woman faces:

    What you have is Mitt Romney running around the country saying, ‘Well, you know my wife tells me that what women really care about are economic issues and when I listen to my wife that’s what I’m hearing.’
    Guess what? His wife has actually never worked a day in her life. She’s never really dealt with the kinds of economic issues that a majority of the women in this country are facing in terms of how do we feed our kids, how do we send them to school and why do we worry about their future.

    Was she right, or was she right? I personally can’t stand Hilary Rosen, but dammit, we should have rallied behind this statement.

  8. 8.

    Boudica

    April 30, 2012 at 9:42 am

    @low-tech cyclist:I had never heard of Hilary Rosen before this kerfuffle of hers. I agree with you. Her one sentence was taken out of context. What she said was right on the money and that the Dems let this be turned into a rehash of stay at home momv vs working moms was ridiculous and poorly handled.

  9. 9.

    Ash Can

    April 30, 2012 at 9:44 am

    @low-tech cyclist: It’s too bad she threw in the sentence about working a day in her life, which is what opened her up to attack. If she had just left that out, this never would have even made the news.

  10. 10.

    butler

    April 30, 2012 at 9:45 am

    Do you think Alex Castellanos was born that smarmy and condescending, or does he have to practice to get like that?

  11. 11.

    tesslibrarian

    April 30, 2012 at 9:45 am

    I admire Rachel’s ability not to punch that guy in the neck.

    And both low-tech cyclist and Boudica are right: Rosen’s point was true, and that Dems let it get away from them rather than work for them (“why can’t Romney talk to women himself? what are Ann’s qualifications outside of her gender?”) was depressing.

    But I still want to punch that guy in the neck.

  12. 12.

    Valdivia

    April 30, 2012 at 9:46 am

    The effing condescension from that Castellanos a-hole. Can we get a rusty pitchfork in him please?

  13. 13.

    Villago Delenda Est

    April 30, 2012 at 9:47 am

    @Schlemizel:

    I believe Dancin’ Dave is a good example of this type.

  14. 14.

    ...now I try to be amused

    April 30, 2012 at 9:47 am

    If only Rosen had said, “Ann Romney never had to work a day in her life.”

    A bit of Doonesbury dialogue stuck in my memory. Jane Fonda’s housekeeper said to Jane Fonda, “Ma’am, you’re busy because you want to be. I’m busy because I have to be.”

  15. 15.

    ruemara

    April 30, 2012 at 9:49 am

    I don’t get why “the Dems let anything blablahblah happen” is the outrage here. You do realize that the democratic mouthpieces are few and far between and the media will spin it that way without any Dem help whatsoever? Although I do second punching whatever asshat that is in the neck, nuts and a few vital organs until he achieves some sense.

  16. 16.

    mistermix

    April 30, 2012 at 9:50 am

    @low-tech cyclist: Sorry, disagree. The message is right, but she steps all over it with the “never worked a day in her life” part. Good messaging is the right thing said the right way. Rosen did exactly the opposite.

    Either she’s stupid or she knowingly threw down some bait for the media to get her mug on the TeeVee. Either way, there she is on MTP, still distracting from the underlying message.

  17. 17.

    Chris

    April 30, 2012 at 9:51 am

    Come to think of it, that quote covers the vast majority of the Republican voter base. They’re pretty stupid, but it wouldn’t matter so much if they didn’t diligently vote in elections whose issues they don’t understand, follow news designed to keep them stupid and refuse to learn from anyone who actually knows shit from peanut butter.

  18. 18.

    Biscuits

    April 30, 2012 at 9:55 am

    That twat of a man. The arrogance. I just realized why I couldn’t make it through the whole clip. Condescension. The talking over her, his tone…the “now now little lady” of the whole thing. I hate them.

  19. 19.

    Mino

    April 30, 2012 at 9:59 am

    I don’t know. Ann Romney promply stepped all over her own message with the birthday quote and a lot of people took a harder look at her. (I have friends in the Morman church and she is not particularly liked among those who know her best.)

    And Rachel shows everyone how to do it.

  20. 20.

    Elie

    April 30, 2012 at 10:01 am

    ..And since then, Anne Romney has gone on to further effups relating to the fact that she “loves” the fact that many women have to work and raise children. And let us not also forget the line she gave about it being “our (their) turn”.

    Don’t worry. She is as clueless and tone deaf as her husband and the MSM will have to work very hard to keep interpreting their eruptions in a positive light…

  21. 21.

    Ash Can

    April 30, 2012 at 10:10 am

    @Elie: She’s obviously none too bright. As long as she keeps talking every time a microphone gets pointed at her, people will keep sticking microphones in her face, and she’ll keep fucking up, unless and until the campaign geniuses wise up and throw a net over her. And they may never do that, seeing as how they have yet to demonstrate that they’re anything other than none too bright themselves.

    Obama and Biden versus the Romneys plus whomever gets roped into being Romney’s running mate. This campaign is shaping up to be sheer box office. (And no way in the entire world is Michelle O going to get anywhere near this circus or even say word one about it, but I can still fantasize about watching a debate between her and Ann Romney…)

  22. 22.

    Kay

    April 30, 2012 at 10:21 am

    @low-tech cyclist:

    Good advocates don’t continue to appear as advocates once they’ve made mistakes that distract from the issue, because that’s self-serving.

    If you set yourself up as a speaker for others, as Rosen did, and screw up and you’re no longer an effective speaker on that issue, don’t appear.

    She’s putting herself over the people she’s speaking for, and they didn’t even choose her. She’s a paid pundit, not an elected official. No one chose her. I certainly didn’t.

    Sorry, but lots of things aren’t “fair”. It’s a real disqualifier, this behavior, in my book. I don’t think it matters, because I think the War on Women was NOT driven by pundits and media or campaign professionals, I think it was more organic than that, but once it’s about her, no matter how that happens, she’s no longer an effective advocate on that issue.

  23. 23.

    WWStBreitbartD

    April 30, 2012 at 10:26 am

    Rachel Maddow really served … Alex Castellanos

    Really????
    “Maddow: Don’t tell me what the reasons are.”
    So using the Maddow standard, Obama ate a Dog.
    And the progressive talking point that he was only 6 (could have been 6-10) can be refuted with “Don’t tell me what the reason was.”

  24. 24.

    ...now I try to be amused

    April 30, 2012 at 10:26 am

    @Ash Can:

    I can still fantasize about watching a debate between her and Ann Romney…

    Oh yes. It would be three debate mismatches instead of only two.

  25. 25.

    Tuffy

    April 30, 2012 at 10:34 am

    Women work fewer hours. They drop out of the workforce (to have children or care for family members). They go into lower paying fields. They go into jobs with more flexibility in exchange for lower pay.

    If you control for these factors, men and women are paid the same. It isn’t rocket surgery, and Rachel shouting down her opposition doesn’t change these facts.

  26. 26.

    Villago Delenda Est

    April 30, 2012 at 10:36 am

    @WWStBreitbartD:

    Ah, the slime makes itself heard.

    I am so glad your shitstain hero is dead, asshole.

  27. 27.

    Kay

    April 30, 2012 at 10:39 am

    @low-tech cyclist:

    If I had my druthers. we’d get away from the idea that we need each and every self-proclaimed advocate that (purportedly) espouses liberal causes. I don’t think we owe the advocates themselves individual loyalty. If they’re no longer the best available on any given issue, well, there are lots of people who can make this case, and better. It doesn’t have to be so personal, because that isn’t what speaking on behalf of others is about, really. No slaps in the face or throwing under the bus. Just looking for the best advocates available, on any given issue.

  28. 28.

    gaz

    April 30, 2012 at 10:41 am

    Captain douchey mcdouchebag sort of reinforced Rachel’s point by interrupting her and condescending her. What an ass.

  29. 29.

    ruemara

    April 30, 2012 at 10:42 am

    @Tuffy: We do? I had no idea I chose this low pay, even though I do the same as my boss and I have no kids. And I work with a 24/7 availability clause. And that you can go fuck yourself.

  30. 30.

    gaz

    April 30, 2012 at 10:46 am

    @Tuffy:

    Rachel shouting down her opposition doesn’t change these facts.

    Really? We must not have been watching the same video just now. If you’re gonna be disingenuous about it, you’ll have to do better than that.

    Why don’t you answer ONE question? It’s one rachel brought up too, but now it’s being brought up by a man, so maybe you’ll listen:

    Why is it fair that a women who finally figures out she is getting paid less than a man for the same work should have to be penalized because it took her so long to discover the wage disparity? How is that fair?

  31. 31.

    Villago Delenda Est

    April 30, 2012 at 10:48 am

    @Tuffy:

    The women I served with in the Army worked the same shitty hours I did, 24/7.

    So you can stuff it, asswipe.

  32. 32.

    Ash Can

    April 30, 2012 at 10:48 am

    @Tuffy: You sound awfully eager to dismiss the issue of equal pay for equal work, which is what the pay controversy is all about in the first place. And you sound completely and thoroughly ignorant of the social and economical dynamics that have been forcing women into the kind of jobs you mention for ages.

    If you’ve got that kind of axe to grind, you’re not going to get a whole lot of sympathy for grinding it here.

  33. 33.

    gaz

    April 30, 2012 at 10:50 am

    @WWStBreitbartD:

    “Maddow: Don’t tell me what the reasons excuses are.”

    FTFY

    Maddow was too kind to do so on the air.

  34. 34.

    Cacti

    April 30, 2012 at 10:51 am

    @Tuffy:

    Women work fewer hours. They drop out of the workforce (to have children or care for family members). They go into lower paying fields. They go into jobs with more flexibility in exchange for lower pay. If you control for these factors, men and women are paid the same

    The Truthiness is strong in this one. Meanwhile, in the real world…

    Using data from longitudinal studies conducted by the U.S. Department of Education, researchers Judy Goldberg Dey and Catherine Hill analyzed some 9,000 college graduates from 1992–93 and more than 10,000 from 1999-2000. The researchers controlled for workplace flexibility, ability to telecommute, as well as other several variables including occupation, industry, hours worked per week, whether employee worked multiple jobs, months at employer, and several education-related and “demographic and personal” factors, such as “marital status,” “has children,” and “volunteered in past year.”

    The study found that wage inequities start early and worsen over time. The portion of the pay gap that remains unexplained after all other factors are taken into account is 5 percent one year after graduation and 12 percent 10 years after graduation.

  35. 35.

    butler

    April 30, 2012 at 10:53 am

    If you control for these factors, men and women are paid the same.

    Then why did Lily Ledbetter have a reason to file suit? Clearly it isn’t always the case that equal work = equal pay.

    Or to put it another way: if men and women are getting equal pay, then why would Romney refuse to endorse something as innocuous as the Fair Pay act?

  36. 36.

    Enlightened Liberal

    April 30, 2012 at 10:54 am

    @low-tech cyclist:
    Good observation. This is why the right-wing “wins” these arguments. They pick their “slur” and then run with it, so they never have to debate Hilary Rosen’s point, which is 100% valid.

    Unfortunately, we have no way to silence the outrage machine so that substantive disagreements can be discussed. Instead of arguing whether or not Mrs RMoney has her finger on the pulse of American women, we argue whether a minor Democratic operative hates June Cleaver, and therefore all Democrats including the Kenyan usurper blah person hate Stay at home Moms too.

  37. 37.

    gaz

    April 30, 2012 at 10:55 am

    @Cacti: Thank you for that. I’m working right now, or I’d have posted it. You saved me the effort. =)

    cheers

  38. 38.

    gaz

    April 30, 2012 at 10:58 am

    @low-tech cyclist:

    Was she right, or was she right? I personally can’t stand Hilary Rosen, but dammit, we should have rallied behind this statement.

    I’m mixed on that. The statement may have been true, but the optics of it were fux0red. It’s far too easy to take it and wield it like a cudgel. If one were to decide there was value in picking ones battles, I wonder if the democrats would have fared much better for getting behind it. I’m pretty sure Obama recognized this. OTOH, you could be right, but we’ll never know for sure.

  39. 39.

    brent

    April 30, 2012 at 10:58 am

    @WWStBreitbartD: You misunderstand what she was getting at and so your analogy is incorrect. Castellanos stated that Maddow made a factual error not one of interpretation. But asked to back up this claim, he starts by trying to explain away her facts rather than demonstrate that they are somehow incorrect. Her response (don’t tell me about the reasons) was about establishing that he obviously couldn’t back up his claim that she had made a factual error. Despite that, he repeated the claim several times in that exchange. He seems not to understand the difference between a fact and the interpretation of a fact. Hes a bit dim.

    The dog analogy is incorrect because no one has said to the claim that Obama ate dog that the claim itself is factually incorrect. Merely that the fact itself isn’t particularly salient to the issue of how an adult treats a family pet.

  40. 40.

    gaz

    April 30, 2012 at 11:01 am

    @brent: Fuck off with your facts and logic. That’s so 90’s of you. =)

    cheers

  41. 41.

    gaz

    April 30, 2012 at 11:05 am

    @Kay: I have to cosign that.

  42. 42.

    Shinobi

    April 30, 2012 at 11:05 am

    I bothers me that the moderator couldn’t do any actual fact checking on the statements both Maddow and Alex Condescention were making.

    Why don’t they have people in the back with google and a headset who can weigh in on these facts? Isn’t that their job? It is a news organization after all?

  43. 43.

    Cacti

    April 30, 2012 at 11:06 am

    @gaz:

    If one were to decide there was value in picking ones battles, I wonder if the democrats would have fared much better for getting behind it. I’m pretty sure Obama recognized this. OTOH, you could be right, but we’ll never know for sure.

    I think the POTUS actually played it pretty well, being the good cop to Rosen’s bad cop. By coming out forcefully against “attacks on family” he boxed the Romney camp in re: future attacks on the first family.

    Also too, after the tempest in a tea pot died down, the phrase that was left in the public consciousness was “Ann Romney has never worked a day in her life”.

  44. 44.

    TooManyJens

    April 30, 2012 at 11:06 am

    @Tuffy:

    Women work fewer hours. They drop out of the workforce (to have children or care for family members). They go into lower paying fields. They go into jobs with more flexibility in exchange for lower pay.
    —
    If you control for these factors, men and women are paid the same.

    And these factors all have to do with choices freely made by women, having nothing at all to do with them being driven out of higher paying fields or with men not taking on their share of the work of childrearing, right?

    Also, if you control for those factors, men and women still aren’t necessarily paid the same. There are still cases like, oh, Lilly Ledbetter’s. Are you trying to tell us that straight-up wage discrimination never happens, or just that women shouldn’t have adequate legal recourse when it does happen? Because you pretty much have to believe one of those things to vote against the Fair Pay Act.

  45. 45.

    gaz

    April 30, 2012 at 11:07 am

    @Tuffy:

    It isn’t rocket surgery,

    OT a bit, but I have to ask exactly what “rocket surgery” is? Does it pay well?

  46. 46.

    gaz

    April 30, 2012 at 11:09 am

    @Cacti: All excellent points, from where I sit. =) cheers

  47. 47.

    TooManyJens

    April 30, 2012 at 11:10 am

    @gaz:

    OT a bit, but I have to ask exactly what “rocket surgery” is? Does it pay well?

    Not if you’re a woman.

  48. 48.

    gaz

    April 30, 2012 at 11:12 am

    @TooManyJens: win! I tried to work that in, but I needed a 3rd party to deliver a punchline. You fucking read my mind. heh. double win. I’ll be shipping your internetz UPS, if that works for you =)

  49. 49.

    feebog

    April 30, 2012 at 11:17 am

    Cacti @ post 34 for the win. As usual, facts have a well known liberal bias.

  50. 50.

    ThatLeftTurnInABQ

    April 30, 2012 at 11:25 am

    @mistermix:

    Either way, there she is on MTP, still distracting from the underlying message.

    __
    The only way you can get on Villager TV if you are Dem is if you are (1) an idiot useful as a foil and chew toy for the conservatives who are there to push the message the Village wants pushed, (2) a traitorous DINO (Call me Harold!) on camera to stab the Dems in the back for similar purposes, or (3) somebody who is too powerful and important to be ignored. Draw your own conclusions about which category any given guest falls into, but it all boils down to idiot, traitor, or well-fuck-I-guess-we-have-to-put-you-on-sigh.

  51. 51.

    EnfantTerrible

    April 30, 2012 at 11:26 am

    In my not-so-humble opinion, Maddow did some important work yesterday by calling out Castellanos on one, raising his own spin of the facts above the facts themselves; and two, showing that his attempt to deny Maddow the opportunity to get her point across by interrupting her was rooted in the belief among Republicans that women’s perspectives don’t count. And she is absolutely correct that the discussion over women’s issues should be framed in terms of *policy*.

  52. 52.

    serge

    April 30, 2012 at 11:26 am

    I don’t think that Alex Castellanos should even be allowed to drive a car.

  53. 53.

    Brachiator

    April 30, 2012 at 11:27 am

    @mistermix

    One must beware of anyone who is stupid and diligent—he must not be entrusted with any responsibility because he will always cause only mischief.

    Great quote.

    I tried to stay away from the episode, but was curious because I wondered why Rosen was on, and wanted to see Maddow.

    The first segment with the GOP strategist was kinda interesting. Gregory asked is the US was safer under Obama and the guest deflected the question into the standard GOP talking point, that the US was not stronger. Being super mighty really matters to these guys.

    @low-tech cyclist:

    Much as I hate to defend IP strangulation lobbyist Hilary Rosen, she was actually right on target in her observation a few weeks back that started this particular fire: that Mitt Romney is relying on Ann Romney for his information about what matters to women in this election, and Ann Romney has no fucking clue what struggles the typical American woman faces

    Rosen pointlessly stepped on her message and alienated women. She still comes to close to suggesting that stay-at-home moms are lazy slugs who don’t do anything, and that the Democratic party are full of elitist feminists who look down on ordinary women.

    Even suggesting that Mrs Romney doesn’t understand ordinary women just because she is wealthy is equally stupid. A woman friend of mine who is deeply liberal felt sympathy for Mrs Romney as a mother because of a story Romney told about feeling somewhat overwhelmed when Mitt was away campaigning.

    There is an element of sisterhood that cuts across ideology, and Rosen is tone deaf to this.

    Worse, she made her MTP appearance about her, not about any message. Dumb.

  54. 54.

    Judas Escargot, Your Postmodern Neighbor

    April 30, 2012 at 11:29 am

    @Shinobi:

    Why don’t they have people in the back with google and a headset who can weigh in on these facts? Isn’t that their job? It is a news organization after all?

    I’ve wondered the same thing myself, and this would be an excellent news/panel format.

    However, it does not serve the interests of the PTB. Therefore… we don’t get to have such a Nice Thing.

  55. 55.

    PurpleGirl

    April 30, 2012 at 11:32 am

    @gaz: It’s a mixture of two terms — rocket science and brain surgery. You can call someone dumb twice with one word.

    From Urban Dictionary: A mixed metaphor describing a non-existent, yet implicitly high level of qualification. The greatness of this term is in its subtle ability to call someone stupid twice in one euphemism. The irony may go over someone’s head and they would call out that this field of study doesn’t exist.

  56. 56.

    WWStBreitbartD

    April 30, 2012 at 11:34 am

    @brent:

    Castellanos stated that Maddow made a factual error not one of interpretation. But asked to back up this claim, he starts by trying to explain away her facts

    Rachel had one fact and the phrase “Not exactly” does not equal “Maddow made a factual error.”

    RACHEL MADDOW: Women in this country still make 77 cents on the dollar for what men make. So if–
    ALEX CASTELLANOS: Not exactly.
    RACHEL MADDOW: Women don’t make less than men?
    ALEX CASTELLANOS: Actually, if you start looking at the numbers, Rachel, there are lots of reasons for that.
    RACHEL MADDOW: Wait, wait. No.
    ALEX CASTELLANOS: Well, first of all, we–
    RACHEL MADDOW: Don’t tell me what the reasons are. Do women make less than men for the (UNINTEL PHRASE)?

  57. 57.

    Ben Cisco

    April 30, 2012 at 11:38 am

    @Shinobi:

    I bothers me that the moderator couldn’t do any actual fact checking on the statements both Maddow and Alex Condescention were making.

    This would have required:

    1)A moderator that was interested in facts.
    2)A moderator that was capable of fact-checking.
    3)A show producer that was interested in having 1) and 2) above.
    4)An audience that was interested in having 1) through 3) above.

    Please note that the lack of all four is a feature of the program and not a bug.

  58. 58.

    twiffer

    April 30, 2012 at 11:57 am

    @Tuffy: next time my wife has to work all weekend to meet a deadline (after working a full week and overtime), i’ll let her know that women work fewer hours. i’ll be sure to let all the women on my team at work know that as well. i’m sure they’ll agree with you.

  59. 59.

    jefft452

    April 30, 2012 at 11:57 am

    @WWStBreitbartD:
    RM: Women in this country still make 77 cents on the dollar for what men make. So if—
    AC: Not exactly.

    So, is it exactly 77 cents or not, what is it? 76.8 cents?

    AC: Actually, if you start looking at the numbers, Rachel, there are lots of reasons for that

    Ah, so by “not exactly” you mean you agree that it is 77 cents on the dollar, you just think that it is justifiable

    Not what “not exactly” means in English as she is spoke

  60. 60.

    Richard S

    April 30, 2012 at 12:08 pm

    I don’t think their facts diverged at all – Women are simply worth less than men to right wingers.

  61. 61.

    joel hanes

    April 30, 2012 at 12:11 pm

    anent the quote:

    Here’s the first version I saw; it was attributed to “The Officer’s Guide” :

    “There are four types of officers :

    The clever and industrious you must send to the General Staff.

    The clever and lazy you make your combat commanders, for only they have the requisite nerve for life and death decisions.

    Some use can be found for the stupid and lazy.

    The stupid and industrious you must get rid of without delay, for they are really dangerous.”

  62. 62.

    wiscomom

    April 30, 2012 at 12:13 pm

    @Shinobi: Sad truth of it is I think the answer to your question is that David Gregory is too lazy to do actual fact checking. He doesn’t appear interested in carrying conversations forward based on “facts”…both sides do it, and everything, you know. He is profoundly disinterested and does not appear to pay attention or listen to the responses of his guests; he simply moves on to the next question on his notepad.

    This is a man who books John McCain as often as possible. I wish they would start booking John Kerry as much as they do McCain if they believe we need to hear from failed presidential candidates and all that.

  63. 63.

    gaz

    April 30, 2012 at 12:16 pm

    @PurpleGirl:

    A mixed metaphor

    That’s why the term is ironic. Employing it arguably makes the person wielding it the dumb one.

  64. 64.

    catclub

    April 30, 2012 at 12:16 pm

    @Tuffy: “If you control for these factors, men and women are paid the same. It isn’t rocket surgery, and Rachel shouting down her opposition doesn’t change these facts.”

    Except for Lily Ledbetter, who was doing the exact same work and getting substantially less pay. Facts are inconvenient things.

    Also, it was very clear that Rachel never did shout.

  65. 65.

    TooManyJens

    April 30, 2012 at 12:20 pm

    @jefft452:

    Ah, so by “not exactly” you mean you agree that it is 77 cents on the dollar, you just think that it is justifiable

    Precisely.

    @catclub:

    Also, it was very clear that Rachel never did shout.

    Not to mention that Castellanos was interrupting her when it was her turn to talk. I guess she just should have deferred to him like a woman who knows her place instead of insisting on getting to make the point she was invited there to make.

  66. 66.

    John M. Burt

    April 30, 2012 at 12:32 pm

    @Cacti: Thank you for giving Tuffy the takedown he really needed: facts which prove his is talking out the side of his punch-deserving neck.

  67. 67.

    JCT

    April 30, 2012 at 12:32 pm

    @Cacti: Now, now — the study authors were WOMEN, so this is likely to be all mad cup

    /snark.

    Not surprisingly, this issue goes all the way up the tree — professional women who are negotiating for new, higher paid jobs are well known to be “lousy” at it. They accept lower starting offers and then are not as aggressive at seeking raises as men. Employers take advantage of this all the time.

  68. 68.

    Sentient Puddle

    April 30, 2012 at 1:21 pm

    @Shinobi:

    Why don’t they have people in the back with google and a headset who can weigh in on these facts? Isn’t that their job? It is a news organization after all?

    Here, it seems relevant to point out that when asked about how ABC was getting PolitiFact to do fact-checking for This Week and whether or not NBC should do it for Meet the Press, David Gregory said (and I quote) “People can fact-check ‘Meet the Press’ every week on their own terms.”

    So to answer your question, David Gregory disagrees with the premise, saying that fact-checking isn’t even his job.

  69. 69.

    OzoneR

    April 30, 2012 at 1:36 pm

    @low-tech cyclist:

    we should have rallied behind this statement.

    As if that would’ve done any good? The media decided within moments of that statement that the real story was “mean old Hilary Rosen picking on cancer-survivor mom of five Ann Romney”

  70. 70.

    priscianusjr

    April 30, 2012 at 2:01 pm

    Who is Hillary Rosen? Wait — don’t tell me, I’m really not interested. I could say the same about a lot of people everybody’s talking about, I just don’t care. Life’s too short.

  71. 71.

    Skerry

    April 30, 2012 at 2:21 pm

    @Cacti:
    Thanks for the civil reply and presenting facts.
    I was thinking of saying something more along the lines of DIAF, Tuffy.

  72. 72.

    Tuffy

    April 30, 2012 at 2:30 pm

    @34

    The study found that wage inequities start early and worsen over time. The portion of the pay gap that remains unexplained after all other factors are taken into account is 5 percent one year after graduation and 12 percent 10 years after graduation.

    So I guess women aren’t paid 77 cents per man-dollar, but rather 95 to 88 cents?

  73. 73.

    pseudonymous in nc

    April 30, 2012 at 2:38 pm

    @JCT:

    professional women who are negotiating for new, higher paid jobs are well known to be “lousy” at it. They accept lower starting offers and then are not as aggressive at seeking raises as men. Employers take advantage of this all the time.

    It’s well-documented: if a woman in a professional field tries to negotiate in the same way as a man for a salary or raise, it’s interpreted not as “tough bargaining” but as “overbearing and demanding”, and do we really want a ball-busting woman nagging us for more money? Etc.

    This even applies in public-sector work, where salaries are graded, and we can see that when they’re disclosed under open records laws: women occupy the bottom of the range for a given position, men the top.

  74. 74.

    pseudonymous in nc

    April 30, 2012 at 2:39 pm

    @Tuffy: I guess you should fuck off to your man-basement and play with your man-micropenis.

  75. 75.

    pacem appellant

    April 30, 2012 at 4:00 pm

    Who’s the rude dude in the mustache? He couldn’t stop being a chauvinist pig even when told he was being one! Our country is doomed if the Interruptor gets to decide what gets said on the TeeVees.

  76. 76.

    Ben Wolf

    April 30, 2012 at 4:54 pm

    @Tuffy:
    The portion of the gap which remains unexplained, you dummy. You’d have been better off not responding at all, because the screeching dodge you just made to the original point was the equivalent of shouting out, I’m wrong and I know it!.

  77. 77.

    Jebediah

    April 30, 2012 at 5:21 pm

    @Tuffy:

    So I guess women aren’t paid 77 cents per man-dollar, but rather 95 to 88 cents?

    So I guess you are conceding that there is pay inequity that is strictly gender-based?

  78. 78.

    Provider_UNE

    April 30, 2012 at 7:02 pm

    @butler:
    Do you think Alex Castellanos was born that smarmy and condescending, or does he have to practice to get like that?

    I once posed a nearly identical question to Lee Hamilton when he visited my highscool back in the early eighties about Political Rhetoric. He was the rep of my district at the time, visted the school for a talk in our auditorium and had a q&a at the end and I was a smart assed 16 or 17 year old with an axe to grind about Reagan. Unfortunately I did not get a satisfactory answer, though took satisfaction, that not only was he was not prepared for the question, it was clear that he did not appreciate it at all.

    Within a couple of years (can’t remember whether I was a Sophmore or Junior at the time) I graduated as the first Black Senior class President (and possibly only) in the history of the school in question.

    We ran a very subversive campaign, setting the stage for one of my neighborhood friends to take the title the next year. After that “rules were adjusted.”

    Anyway thanks for the memories.
    .

    edited for spelling

  79. 79.

    Polar Bear Squares

    April 30, 2012 at 7:44 pm

    I’m going to hope that title of this post refers to one of favorite songs by Madlib and I’m going to try and forget how Rachel is basically the only sane person in this room. But that’s the Republican answer for everything. Sexism? Actually its really not. Racism? Actually YOU’RE the racist one. Hate crime? Actually that’s not fair to the hater. This is their answer for everything. They can justify (to use a really inappropriate metaphor) a nun being raped if would continue said injustice. Because the real injustice is not the occurence but the government actually stepping in and doing something about it.

    Sigh.

  80. 80.

    kestral

    April 30, 2012 at 11:49 pm

    To the guy in the MTP clip talking about how women don’t go into fields like engineering and math: say that to my IBM-engineer-turned-math-teacher mother, you jackass.

  81. 81.

    Brian

    May 1, 2012 at 8:19 am

    This is kinda where fact checking and anything to set the record straight or allow equal time by Gregory might be handy.

Comments are closed.

Primary Sidebar

🎈Keep Balloon Juice Ad Free

Become a Balloon Juice Patreon
Donate with Venmo, Zelle or PayPal

2023 Pet Calendars

Pet Calendar Preview: A
Pet Calendar Preview: B

*Calendars can not be ordered until Cafe Press gets their calendar paper in.

Recent Comments

  • lowtechcyclist on Thursday Morning Open Thread: Groundhog Day (Feb 2, 2023 @ 10:33am)
  • Geminid on Thursday Morning Open Thread: Groundhog Day (Feb 2, 2023 @ 10:31am)
  • Old School on Thursday Morning Open Thread: Groundhog Day (Feb 2, 2023 @ 10:28am)
  • Cameron on Thursday Morning Open Thread: Groundhog Day (Feb 2, 2023 @ 10:27am)
  • Wanderer on Thursday Morning Open Thread: Groundhog Day (Feb 2, 2023 @ 10:27am)

Balloon Juice Posts

View by Topic
View by Author
View by Month & Year
View by Past Author

Featuring

Medium Cool
Artists in Our Midst
Authors in Our Midst
We All Need A Little Kindness
Favorite Dogs & Cats
Classified Documents: A Primer

Calling All Jackals

Site Feedback
Nominate a Rotating Tag
Submit Photos to On the Road
Balloon Juice Mailing List Signup

Front-pager Twitter

John Cole
DougJ (aka NYT Pitchbot)
Betty Cracker
Tom Levenson
TaMara
David Anderson
ActualCitizensUnited

Shop Amazon via this link to support Balloon Juice   

Join the Fight!

Join the Fight Signup Form
All Join the Fight Posts

Balloon Juice Events

5/14  The Apocalypse
5/20  Home Away from Home
5/29  We’re Back, Baby
7/21  Merging!

Balloon Juice for Ukraine

Donate

Site Footer

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

  • Facebook
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • Comment Policy
  • Our Authors
  • Blogroll
  • Our Artists
  • Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2023 Dev Balloon Juice · All Rights Reserved · Powered by BizBudding Inc

Share this ArticleLike this article? Email it to a friend!

Email sent!