In a courageous act of armchair investigative journalism, I ambled over to Larry Johnson's
No Quarter USA blog to see what was what. Whatever this site used to be, it's now pretty much all (anti) Obama, all the time. Johnson's post on
Christopher Hitchens' cast-against-type denunciation of waterboarding is a rare exception.
It's also a rare issue-related post. The site is light on policy, surprisingly so. Oh sure, it's fairly standard nowadays to either attack or laud a candidate's character without touching on their positions. But this is a blog meistered by a security wonk, so you'd think there'd be more going after Obama on stupid ideas they might allege he has. But again and again, you read the words "inexperienced", "unreliable", "untrustworthy," with the implication that whatever Mr. Barack says he's either lying or doesn't know what he talks about. That and his birth certificate is
fake which, what's the narrative here? Someone wanted to raise a puppet US president, but they failed to get him born in the country? I tremble with fear.
Then there's this
exposé on LIAR Obama's two-faced support for gender pay equity. Well, why don't I just reproduce the whole thing here.
What He Wants Us To Believe
Barack Obama has made recent claims indicating pay equity for women would be a top priority if he were elected President. Sounds great. In fact, it might compel some to seriously consider his candidacy.
Don’t be fooled. What we’ve seen of Mr. Obama is a candidacy based on opportunism. Whenever convenient, he will use his prose to proclaim lofty ideals, ideals that many want so badly to believe in, ideals so many want to become realities.
Mr. Obama is all talk. How do we really know if his lofty ideals will translate into actual policy? We certainly can not point to his legislative accomplishments. There are too few. He may have been present but what the hell does that mean - nothing in the context of policy.
Anyone can advocate anything. A true leader turns advocacy into bona-fide action. We’ve not seen this from Mr. Obama. We have seen, unfortunately, reversals and inconsistencies.
Actions
While Mr. Obama may be an advocate for pay equity, analysis of his Senate staff leaves one to wonder. We know the reports that show women on his staff earn roughly $6,000 less than males on staff. But, here is further information:
Of five staffers that earned more than $100,000 only one was a women
Of staffers earning more than $23,000/year, 33 were men while 31 were women and the pay difference between them was >$10,000
Comparatively speaking, Senator Hillary Clinton’s Senate staff is comprised more than 2 to 1 women to men. And, the pay is nearly equal. In fact, nearly 70% of Clinton’s staff are women.
Did You Know?
Senator John McCain’s Senate staff, comprised of 69 individuals as of October, 2007 which also includes interns, MORE than half were women. Excluding the 23 interns, the 30 women on his staff earned an average of $59,100 compared to the $56,600 earned by the 16 men.
Remember, talk is cheap. Look for action, past and present. I own my vote.
"Oh but Ben," I hear you cry, "You screwed up. You didn't include all the links that fdrjim added to bolster his case."
Yeah, about that. I actually did. The astroturfy "I own my vote" site is the only one this blogger linked to. He or she did not include links to any news sources. Wonder why.
A
Google search on some of the keywords is rich in results, but not so much in variety. You get
stories from L Brent Bozell's
pet news site;
copies of same by other Nobama sites; much
dittoing from generally loony right-wing blogs; and
approving quotes on general-audience messageboards, no doubt from impartial observers.
In fact, the entire "Obama gyps the girls" meme pretty much seems to stem from this one Cybercast story. Which is, to say the least, a little light on peer review. At this juncture the story has about as much credibility as the
Michelle Obama "Whitey" panic. And if you've forgotten how that turned out, here's a
reminder.
