Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Raw Story)   Woman claims the GOP's "War on Women" is directly responsible for her earning $20,000 less than her male predecessor in the same position. Fark: That position is Chairwoman of the Washington state Republican Party   (rawstory.com ) divider line
    More: Asinine, GOP, male predecessor, executive board  
•       •       •

2734 clicks; posted to Politics » on 22 Nov 2013 at 7:00 PM (2 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

2013-11-22 05:30:39 PM  
9 votes:

Tigger: She presumably joined the Republican party voluntarily?


And only becomes upset at the results of Republican leadership after she is personally affected.
2013-11-22 07:22:12 PM  
5 votes:
It seems to be a trend with republican women that they only see how destructive their party is when it affects them personally.
2013-11-22 07:07:47 PM  
5 votes:
As a fellow woman, I would like to tell her that, perhaps, supporting a party that pays a woman $20k/year less than her male predecessor is a sign that she is supporting the wrong party.
2013-11-22 05:50:29 PM  
5 votes:

impaler: Tigger: She presumably joined the Republican party voluntarily?

And only becomes upset at the results of Republican leadership after she is personally affected.


Central deficit of republicans revealed. They can only understand a point of view if personally affected.

See also McCain on torture, Cheney on gays, Allen West on war crimes. Oh wait not that last one.
2013-11-22 09:24:42 PM  
4 votes:

Captain Dan: Gay Republicans are, on average, affluent.


I think a lot of gay Republicans are gay people from Republican families who found out that they could be gay *or* profess to be a Democrat but not both without losing most of their family's support.

Easier to fake being a Republican than to fake being straight.
2013-11-22 07:52:32 PM  
4 votes:

Moodybastard: FTFA
"many within the party were upset that Hutchison even mentioned "the 'war on women' meme" in her memo.
"There is no war on women," once source told the Times."

Ok, so what is it then?
A Police Action on women?
A Counter-Insurgency on women?
A Riot Suppression on women?

Whatcha calling it?


The War of Feminine Aggression.
2013-11-22 07:38:20 PM  
3 votes:
•  As chairwoman of the GOP, she's okay when they do it to OTHER women?  But now that they're doing it to her it's outrageous?
•  This lady makes $75,000 a year and is upset about it because the person before her made more?
•  She doesn't want this case of the GOP treating women as a lesser getting out because... people might start to think the GOP doesn't think women are equal?

This one is precious too: "I left the meeting demoralized, and so did my hardworking staff."

• Her hardworking staff got demoralized because their boss didn't get a raise?

What a biatch.
2013-11-22 06:08:30 PM  
3 votes:
Well, this lady doesn't sound that bright.  The original article has some real great stuff, and really sheds some light on why she deserved to have her salary cut.

The pay for the Republican chairman's position had been cut by GOP leaders - citing budget issues - at a meeting just prior to Hutchison's election in August.

So they knew she was going to win, or something?  Sounds to me like they would have lowered it regardless.

She added she'd personally raised $22,000 from 18 non-Republican Party donors from her personal list of contacts - "which more than covers" the $20,000 pay raise.

I don't think it works that way.  You don't raise money for your organization under the impression that you'll get all the money yourself.  Just ask your non-Republican Party friends to give you the money directly next time?
Hell, maybe your predecessor raised $40,000 from his personal list of contacts?

Since I declined nearly $11,000 in medical benefits, the true dispute involves less than $10k to the WSRP! That is not worth all the time and effort - and ill-will it has engendered

Again with the math.  You don't just get to trade in your medical benefits for cash.  Does not work that way, lady.  Maybe she should accept the $11,000 in medical benefits just to spite them.
2013-11-22 04:19:26 PM  
3 votes:
For the "a little too late" Files:
"Please, for the sake of the Party, put this issue to rest and don't let it fester going forward," she wrote. "I particularly don't want persons outside the party to hear about the quibbling as it will undermine our fundraising efforts among major donors."

I also like their response, "There is no War on Women."
2013-11-23 12:15:58 AM  
2 votes:

Captain Dan: CorporatePerson: At least you're self aware enough to realize that what you support is wrong but you still do it anyways.

There are large parts of the Republican agenda I disagree with (including economic, social, and military).  It's possible to support a party without endorsing its entire platform.


Oh do tell. After those three, wtf is left that you like about republicans, captain?
2013-11-22 08:59:37 PM  
2 votes:

Witty_Retort: JohnnyC: Witty_Retort: And that her new salary was passed after she was elected (appointed? volunteered?) but before she took office.

So... after they found out it was going to be a woman...

Captain Dan:
That's not what the article says.  Quote: "The pay for the Republican chairman's position had been cut by GOP leaders - citing budget issues - at a meeting just prior to Hutchison's election in August."

Cpt. Duh is correct in this one instance on this one point. I did misread the quote and formally apologize for that.
How he can rationalize that a woman should be paid 20% less than a man for the same job, I leave to him.


They knew the winner was going to be a woman. The other serious contender was Luanne Van Werven, also a woman. So regardless of who won, a woman was taking the position. Two other candidates (both male) were nominated for the position but they were not considered serious contenders and were quickly eliminated from the running by the two female candidates.
2013-11-22 08:30:59 PM  
2 votes:

Arctic Phoenix: I don't understand why any woman or minority would be a republican.  Or any poor person.  Or anybody who puts the good of the country above their own.  Or really, anybody but the few people who are uber uber wealthy and have much to gain from republicans remaining in power.

I'm glad I live in Washington State, though, where republicans don't have as much control as they do in other states... but damn, if Eastern Washington isn't too conservative for my liking.  It's gotten better over the last decade or so, but they're still too derpy over here for me.


I find it so very bizzare how the Gay Republicans get denied entry to the convention each time, complain, finally get a spot in the back so everyone can give them the stinkeye while the speaker rails about how all gays should be executed, hiding behind their gay republican signs and looking charigned the whole time, before going off to vote for him EVERY SINGLE TIME?!

I still do not understand how you can vote for someone whose stated primary goal if elected is your genocide.
2013-11-22 08:05:05 PM  
2 votes:

impaler: Tigger: She presumably joined the Republican party voluntarily?

And only becomes upset at the results of Republican leadership after she is personally affected.


So......she is a normal Republican?
2013-11-22 07:42:06 PM  
2 votes:

fusillade762: In sorta related news.

Limbaugh sees rape, nuclear option parallel


Did he tell his listeners that the GOP should just lay back and enjoy it?
2013-11-22 07:27:28 PM  
2 votes:
Fellow Republicans told The Seattle Times that many within the party were upset that Hutchison even mentioned "the 'war on women' meme" in her memo.

What she actually said: Hutchison argued that the vote to reduce her salary had violated party bylaws, but more importantly, would seem "discriminatory and vindictive," especially given the party's recent problems with female voters.

The first step to fixing your problems is admitting that you have them.  Unfortunately for the Republican party, it appears to now be verboten to do so.
Ant
2013-11-22 07:23:13 PM  
2 votes:

impaler: And only becomes upset at the results of Republican leadership after she is personally affected.


This is expected behavior. Your conservative appears to be operating normally.
2013-11-22 07:13:24 PM  
2 votes:

Koalaesq: fusillade762: In sorta related news.

Limbaugh sees rape, nuclear option parallel

I really... REALLY... wish I hadn't read that.

Damn it.


The dumbest part is that in his first example, he says the group needs 6 people to let the 4 women be raped, but the women always get 2 men to vote no. Then one guy changes the rule so you only need five votes - but if the women still keep getting 2 guys to vote no, the vote will still be the same. The argument is not only intentionally inflammatory but makes no mathematical or logical sense. So it's perfect for his listeners to bob their heads at while they get blowjobs from their cousins.
2013-11-22 07:09:09 PM  
2 votes:
"There is no war on women," once source told the Times.


Well, there it is then. No GOP war on women, ever since source told the Times so.
2013-11-22 04:05:04 PM  
2 votes:
Ain't karma a biatch?
2013-11-23 08:40:38 AM  
1 vote:

Moodybastard: FTFA
"many within the party were upset that Hutchison even mentioned "the 'war on women' meme" in her memo.
"There is no war on women," once source told the Times."

Ok, so what is it then?
A Police Action on women?
A Counter-Insurgency on women?
A Riot Suppression on women?

Whatcha calling it?


The Blue Team version of the "War on Christmas". With a few tiny grains of truth, but not too far off.
2013-11-23 07:41:49 AM  
1 vote:

Moodybastard: FTFA
"many within the party were upset that Hutchison even mentioned "the 'war on women' meme" in her memo.
"There is no war on women," once source told the Times."

Ok, so what is it then?
A Police Action on women?
A Counter-Insurgency on women?
A Riot Suppression on women?

Whatcha calling it?


You see that is the thing, they do not see it as a "war on women" and infringements on women's rights.  The Conservatives view the whole thing from a different perspective.  They see it as them being "defenders" fighting against those waging a "war on men".  To them the loss of white male privilege is a war on "men's rights".  As the playing field has leveled, the white male has started facing some of the same adversity as female and minority workers have faced historically.  The problem is with the conservative male is they blame the minority/female worker and "liberals" when they should be blaming the "job creator" class; who on average have record cash reserves, record productivity from workers, and yet pay low stagnant wages.

So rather than joining the women and minorities in requesting better wages and benefits, they politically fight against the rights gained by women and minorities; in order to get back the unfair "privilege" they feel is their "right" based on being a white Christian male.
2013-11-23 04:09:07 AM  
1 vote:

Captain Dan: There are large parts of the Republican agenda I disagree with (including economic, social, and military).


That is the entire platform.
2013-11-23 01:08:33 AM  
1 vote:

Captain Dan: Since it appears likely that the Supreme Court will take the gay marriage issue off the table next year, I'd expect relatively more gays to vote Republican in the future.


Sure. It is not like the Republicans have a documented history of doubling down on the derp when they lose or anything.
2013-11-23 12:42:28 AM  
1 vote:

Captain Dan: CorporatePerson: At least you're self aware enough to realize that what you support is wrong but you still do it anyways.

There are large parts of the Republican agenda I disagree with (including economic, social, and military).  It's possible to support a party without endorsing its entire platform.


Other than that, how did you like Dallas tonight, Mrs. Kennedy?
2013-11-23 12:12:12 AM  
1 vote:

CorporatePerson: Fark y'all I got mine.


Nobody really thinks that.  It's more like: if I vote for a Democrat, my taxes will go up, and the money will be wasted on stupid bullshiat that I don't support.  If I vote for a Republican, money will still be wasted on stupid bullshiat that I don't support, but my taxes will stay lower, and the resultant debt will be paid off in ways that don't lean as heavily on income tax increases.
2013-11-22 09:19:47 PM  
1 vote:
Stockholm Syndrome.

So, so sad...
2013-11-22 08:11:49 PM  
1 vote:

Captain Dan: "Pay me more

equally to my immediate predecessor or I'll reference Democratic tropes in an internal memo which I can plausibly deny that I leaked point out we really are as bad as the other side claims."
2013-11-22 08:08:20 PM  
1 vote:
I don't understand why any woman or minority would be a republican.  Or any poor person.  Or anybody who puts the good of the country above their own.  Or really, anybody but the few people who are uber uber wealthy and have much to gain from republicans remaining in power.

I'm glad I live in Washington State, though, where republicans don't have as much control as they do in other states... but damn, if Eastern Washington isn't too conservative for my liking.  It's gotten better over the last decade or so, but they're still too derpy over here for me.
2013-11-22 08:01:43 PM  
1 vote:

Mike_LowELL: I don't know how to respond to this thread.


We broke him guys! We finally broke him!
2013-11-22 07:57:21 PM  
1 vote:
"Pay me more or I'll reference Democratic tropes in an internal memo which I can plausibly deny that I leaked."
2013-11-22 07:47:19 PM  
1 vote:
In an interview Wednesday, Hutchison said she considered the matter closed. "I'm sure that as time goes on and as people become more confident in our ability to raise money and so forth, we'll all take a look at it again," she said.

You bet they will all look at it again. Next time they vote a man into the position. Now get me a sammich.
2013-11-22 07:45:26 PM  
1 vote:
I don't think a bad fiction writer could pen something as tone deaf as the modern Republican Party.
2013-11-22 07:28:09 PM  
1 vote:
Stop supporting the GOP, then?
2013-11-22 07:23:23 PM  
1 vote:
My initial reaction: well, that sucks, but she kind of had to know that Republicans do that kind of thing.

"I particularly don't want persons outside the party to hear about the quibbling as it will undermine our fundraising efforts among major donors."

My new reaction: Oh, it's okay if women get paid less than men as long as no one find out?  Well then, all I have to say now is to bid you a hale and hearty go fark yourself.
2013-11-22 07:21:18 PM  
1 vote:
This reminds me of when Michele Bachmann's presidential campaign was shocked by the sexism displayed by religious Conservatives in Iowa. Surprise, a lot of Conservatives see women as nothing more than helpmates and do not see them as worthy of holding positions of power.
2013-11-22 07:06:27 PM  
1 vote:
God, I loathe Susan Hutchinson. Always have, back when she recited the news on TV. She's not wrong on this one, though.
2013-11-22 06:32:03 PM  
1 vote:

serial_crusher: Again with the math.


rainbowreveriedotnet.files.wordpress.com
2013-11-22 06:16:07 PM  
1 vote:
I don't know how to respond to this thread.
2013-11-22 06:11:27 PM  
1 vote:

The Stealth Hippopotamus: If she doesn't like it she could go work in the White House.

It is a little better.


Meh, that there's your standard flaw of taking the median salary across all employees in an office without accounting for similarity of job responsibilities.
2013-11-22 05:36:08 PM  
1 vote:
In before the wage gap deniers
2013-11-22 04:11:58 PM  
1 vote:
Perfectly perfect. Seeing the GOP in action, it's almost as if the wicked witch threw the bucket of water on herself.
2013-11-22 03:48:51 PM  
1 vote:
schadenfreude, how does it work?
 
Displayed 42 of 42 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter








In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report