Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Is Rachel Maddow sincere? [View all]WilliamPitt
(58,179 posts)22. That was nasty?
Cool.
It must be getting better around here.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
94 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
if she cared about unvarnished truth, she wouldn't have quoted the clip selectively.
HiPointDem
May 2012
#3
Then why not say "Women doing the same work/hours with the same qualifications, experience, on
HiPointDem
May 2012
#49
just to be clear, then, we're no longer talking about maddow getting it wrong in any way.
unblock
May 2012
#60
There may indeed be some form of discrimination going on beneath that 18%, but it's nothing
HiPointDem
May 2012
#65
no, she's under no obligation to present a full picture, but in that case, how is what she does
HiPointDem
May 2012
#74
i don't think we have enough information to say how much of it is due to discrimination
unblock
May 2012
#82
"discriminated against" = systematic lower pay for women v. men for doing the same work with the
HiPointDem
May 2012
#23
"At a lot of companies" = more true for the top 20% than the bottom 80%. Yes, at the top
HiPointDem
May 2012
#52
no, it's a big deal to some in the top 20%. like maddow. personally, i could care that she gets
HiPointDem
May 2012
#58
I'm also female. I'm not "miffed" that men have lost ground, I'm angry, outraged, that the entire
HiPointDem
May 2012
#62
And let me state *this* plainly. No one is disputing the principle of equal pay for equal work,
HiPointDem
May 2012
#66
statistical adjustments. it *is* partly a mathematical problem, even if you don't understand it.
HiPointDem
May 2012
#72
the real issue is that once you adjust for differences in women's employment patterns, the
HiPointDem
May 2012
#17
The burden of bearing children still falls on women. Right now, only women can have babies. And
LiberalLoner
May 2012
#21
Agreed. But that's a different issue than some kind of systematic discrimination by employers
HiPointDem
May 2012
#25
"It happens" does not a pattern make. And what happens to upper-tier corporate workers
HiPointDem
May 2012
#53
and the fact that you've never held such a position speaks to a difference in our class positions.
HiPointDem
May 2012
#67
the issue so far as the maddow report goes is that most of that difference can be explained
HiPointDem
May 2012
#47
The studies in question did not look at "assistant A" and "assistant B". They aggregated data
HiPointDem
May 2012
#54
no, they averaged the wages of thousands of people in a broad job category. Like "manager".
HiPointDem
May 2012
#68
good. i didn't realize that *me* changing *my* position was the only possible reason to discuss
HiPointDem
May 2012
#73
Dude doesn't understand why the supreme court forbids mandatory school prayer, for one.
Warren DeMontague
May 2012
#32
If you are concerned, bring it to her attention. When she makes a mistake, she admits it. She
mfcorey1
May 2012
#27
Rachel Maddow is one of the smartest and most sincere people of all the political shows.
Tennessee Gal
May 2012
#85
your blanket statement is not factual. and that's not even what maddow said.
HiPointDem
May 2012
#91