"Binders full of women" -- yes, it's gone viral by Niki2

America loves a winner!

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:

And he's proof positive that this is how REAL America feels, according to Rappy.

It's also proof how very little Rappy even cares, so little that he keeps coming back and posting his version of "IS NOT! NYUH-UHHH!" over and over again.

Not caring at all: You're doing it wrong, Rap.

You operate under the hi-lariously false delusion that me pointing out the lunacy of your views, and the juvenile nature of this entire 'binders' non-issue is suppose to be directly connected to me not caring ? Is this how your brain works ? Am I suppose to be beholden to how YOU view the world ?

Truly bizarre.

Romney ASKED for female candidates for his cabinet, and he was GIVEN binders containing exactly that. He didn't generate them, ( back when he was running for Gov, btw ) but in fact sought OUT to hire qualified women. These are the crucial details which the Left intentionally distorts and leaves out, and instead fabricates this false narrative that Mitt is sooooo backwards and out of touch, that he's using binders, TODAY, instead of nearly 10 years ago.

He sought out qualified women to hire - but he hates women?

He was GIVEN names and bios of qualified candidates, in the form of binders - so THAT some how makes HIM a relic from the 1960's ?

How frelling juvenile and pathetic do you really have to be to latch onto something with so little substance, and run w/ it to the point that it's a part of your national campaign ?

Desperate, out of touch and completely focused on the wrong things needed to run this country. That's what has become of the Democratic party.

" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, October 20, 2012 1:07 AM

JONGSSTRAW

2012 will be the TENTH presidential election I'm voting in. Never in all those years have I seen anything quite like this new absurdity that the Democrats are now wallowing in.

Like 3rd graders, they have found a phrase to rally around to mock and taunt the boy with cooties they don't like. Cootie-boy both offends and tickles their sophisticated sense of self-imposed authority with anything concerning women, yet they apparently have no such problems at all with Obama's fund-raising and backstage pal Jay Z singing about ho's, bitches, and worse. Nor are their finely tuned feminine feelers flapped when million-dollar Obama donor Bill Mahr calls conservative women cunts and worse. They're all just fine with those womany things.

I suppose it's all harmless fun, really just some good therapy for them to at least have something these days to make them feel good. It's a terrific distraction from the harsh realities occuring now. I do hope they have a well-stocked reserve of funny stuff hidden away somewhere special just in case, heaven forbid, binder-man wins.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, October 20, 2012 3:12 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up

Quote:
Originally posted by kpo:
We're not ignoring it, we're contesting it on the grounds that the story was concocted! It's possible Romney *did* want to see women appointed to his cabinet, and was genuinely enthusiastic when the woman's group approached him - I don't rule that out at all - but all we have is lying Romney's word for it. For some reason you've accepted it as fact...

From one of Niki's posts above. "First of all, according to MassGAP and MWPC, Romney did appoint 14 women out of his first 33 senior-level appointments, which is a reasonably impressive 42 percent."

Of course, being from a liberal source, they then go on to criticize this as not being good enough because the highest cabinet positions weren't given to women. Did women apply for these positions? Who knows?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, October 20, 2012 6:21 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Quote:
Romney ASKED for female candidates for his cabinet, and he was GIVEN binders containing exactly that. He didn't generate them, ( back when he was running for Gov, btw ) but in fact sought OUT to hire qualified women.

Okay, this time we have a VERIFIABLE reason to call out

, pants on fire!

You can't even wiggle away by saying you BELIEVED that, because I showed very, very clear proof at least two times that Romney DID NOT SEEK OUT the women in question, but was PRESENTED WITH said binders by a women's group. Period.

They intended to present the resumes to WHOEVER was elected governor, so it had absolutely nothing to do with Romney.

I CERTAINLY do think it's an absurd thing, as was the Big Bird thing. But Romney SAID them, thereby letting himself open to ridicule (in the first instance) and ridicule AS WELL AS proof of his blatantly lying (in the second). It's an election, for heaven's sake; this idiocy is what HAPPENS in an election. And Romney has made himself such a laughing stock time and time again, that it's natural people latch onto things he says and blow them out of proportion.

I think the joke doesn't deserve to keep going on like this, funny for a day or two (disgusting for a lot longer, but expected soo...), but that's allo. But I recognize it's politics, it's an election, and there will be more to come whenever any of the four of them open their mouths and say something stupid and/or amusing.

However, the man's mentality keeps on showing itself for what it is, as well as the fact that he'll lie quite freely to pretend it's otherwise:

Quote:
Footage of Mitt Romney touting how his "entire life has been one of working with women and helping women through the glass ceiling," was released Thursday by Buzzfeed. Clipped from Romney's 1994 debate with the late Sen. Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts, the video shows Romney appearing to take credit for the number of women in leadership positions at Bain & Co., a consulting firm that Romney had left a decade earlier, in 1984, to found the private equity firm Bain Capital Partners.

"As chief executive officer of Bain & Co., the highest-paid person at our firm was a woman, and the chairman of the board was a woman," Romney says in the video. "The chief financial officer at my firm, [Bain Capital Partners], is a woman."

Romney briefly returned to Bain & Co. in 1990 to assist with financial difficulties, but returned to Bain Capital in 1992. The first female chairman of Bain & Co., Orit Gadiesh, wasn't appointed until the following year.

The Republican presidential nominee also failed to mention the fact that as of 1994, Bain Capital had yet to invite any women into its lucrative partnership arrangement. The firm would not add any women to that roster until after Romney left in 1999. And at the time, only nine of the 95 vice presidents at the firm were women. None were minorities. Romney offered the Boston Globe the dubious explanation that women and minorities were "not attracted" to jobs in private equity.

Don't like the source? Disprove the FACTS! It's not an opinion piece, it contains verifiable facts.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, October 20, 2012 6:30 AM

Sometimes you own the libs. Sometimes, the libs own you.

Quote:
but in fact sought OUT to hire qualified women.

What, because he said so in his bullshit story? Either back this up with evidence, or pipe down.

It's not personal. It's just war.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, October 20, 2012 6:43 AM

Sometimes you own the libs. Sometimes, the libs own you.

Quote:
Originally posted by Geezer:
Quote:
Originally posted by kpo:
We're not ignoring it, we're contesting it on the grounds that the story was concocted! It's possible Romney *did* want to see women appointed to his cabinet, and was genuinely enthusiastic when the woman's group approached him - I don't rule that out at all - but all we have is lying Romney's word for it. For some reason you've accepted it as fact...

From one of Niki's posts above. "First of all, according to MassGAP and MWPC, Romney did appoint 14 women out of his first 33 senior-level appointments, which is a reasonably impressive 42 percent."

You asserted that Romney "wanted" to appoint women to his cabinet. But all we have evidence for is that he agreed to do so, if others made the effort of scouting out qualified candidates. It seems entirely plausible to me that Romney had no interest in appointing women before he was approached by the woman's group, and then did so only half-heartedly, for cosmetic, political reasons.

Seriously Geezer, Auraptor, can you imagine ANY credible political figure saying 'no' to the offer MassGAP made? How bad would that look? It was a no-brainer for any politician with even an ounce of publicity-consciousness. Your swooning over Romney on this point is quite sad.

ETA: It was a good thing to hear a GOP presidential candidate talk enthusiastically about women in government. But that's all Romney is to be credited for - talk. Whether that talk is sincere or not is another question, and perhaps we'd be wiser to concentrate instead on what his policies are.

It's not personal. It's just war.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, October 20, 2012 8:12 AM

America loves a winner!

Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:

You can't even wiggle away by saying you BELIEVED that, because I showed very, very clear proof at least two times that Romney DID NOT SEEK OUT the women in question, but was PRESENTED WITH said binders by a women's group. Period.

Despite what you claim, I heard otherwise. Doesn't make me a liar because I didn't see YOUR view of things.

Quote:

They intended to present the resumes to WHOEVER was elected governor, so it had absolutely nothing to do with Romney.

Whether he sought , or it was presented TO him, is immaterial. The BINDERS weren't of his doing, but were , as YOU clearly state, intended to be given to WHOEVER was elected Gov.

This issue is now closed.

" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, October 20, 2012 8:54 AM

Sometimes you own the libs. Sometimes, the libs own you.

Stage 1 of Auraptor beginning to sense that he might be wrong:

Quote:
Whether he sought , or it was presented TO him, is immaterial.

Stage 2:

Quote:
This issue is now closed.

It's not personal. It's just war.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, October 20, 2012 9:06 AM

America loves a winner!

Quote:
Originally posted by kpo:
Stage 1 of Auraptor beginning to sense that he might be wrong:

Quote:
Whether he sought , or it was presented TO him, is immaterial.

Stage 2:
Quote:
This issue is now closed.

Not in the least. Niki showed CLEARLY that, on the matter of 'binders', I was right, all along.

Sought out or was given ? Entirely different matter. Should have made THAT the issue, and not this phony binders crap. I'd have given ya that, but the media chose to hype up a completely NON issue.

" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, October 20, 2012 9:18 AM

Sometimes you own the libs. Sometimes, the libs own you.

Quote:
I was right, all along.

You being wrong earlier:

Quote:
but in fact (Romney) sought OUT to hire qualified women.

Quote:
Sought out or was given ? Entirely different matter. Should have made THAT the issue, and not this phony binders crap. I'd have given ya that, but the media chose to hype up a completely NON issue.

Not sure how much the media 'hyped' this - it seemed to catch on on the internet all by itself. But apart from that point, I agree with you.

It's not personal. It's just war.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, October 20, 2012 9:33 AM

America loves a winner!

I'll cede being wrong over 'sought out' vs ' was given'. That's how I understood it.

" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, October 20, 2012 9:42 AM

Sometimes you own the libs. Sometimes, the libs own you.

Quote:
I'll cede being wrong over 'sought out' vs ' was given'.

Wow. Fair play.

Quote:
That's how I understood it.

That's how Romney told it.

It's not personal. It's just war.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, October 20, 2012 9:45 AM

America loves a winner!

Quote:
Originally posted by kpo:
Quote:
I'll cede being wrong over 'sought out' vs ' was given'.

Wow. Fair play.

Yep. It's what I do.

" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, October 20, 2012 9:52 AM

Sometimes you own the libs. Sometimes, the libs own you.

Haha. Let's agree that you have it in your locker

It's not personal. It's just war.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, October 21, 2012 3:03 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up

Quote:
Originally posted by kpo:
You asserted that Romney "wanted" to appoint women to his cabinet. But all we have evidence for is that he agreed to do so, if others made the effort of scouting out qualified candidates.

Whatever the cause, Romney did appoint women to 14 of 33 cabinet positions. Compare to Obama in 2008, who appointed women to 5 of 21 cabinet positions.

Quote:
It seems entirely plausible to me that Romney had no interest in appointing women before he was approached by the woman's group, and then did so only half-heartedly, for cosmetic, political reasons.

Seems to me that you're ignoring what he actually did, and trying to spin appointing women to a large percentage of cabinet posts as a bad thing.

Quote:
Seriously Geezer, Auraptor, can you imagine ANY credible political figure saying 'no' to the offer MassGAP made? How bad would that look? It was a no-brainer for any politician with even an ounce of publicity-consciousness.

I can imagine someone taking the binders and picking a few women for show, but for 14 of 33 positions? Thats almost half.

Quote:
It was a good thing to hear a GOP presidential candidate talk enthusiastically about women in government. But that's all Romney is to be credited for - talk.

Really. What part of 14 out of 33 do you not understand?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 22, 2012 3:34 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Jongsstraw:

Like 3rd graders, they have found a phrase to rally around to mock and taunt the boy with cooties they don't like.

A phrase like "You didn't build that", you mean?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 22, 2012 4:41 AM

BYTEMITE

This is silly and facile. Everyone knows that birth certificates are the real issue of this election. Some people question the nationality of the candidates, but I take it a step further - I am here with the accusation that neither of them were actually born.

Pics or it didn't happen.

/entirely facetious

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 22, 2012 4:54 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:

This issue is now closed.

Ahem...

"Am I suppose to be beholden to how YOU view the world ?"

Do you fancy yourself the moderator of this site? Is an issue closed because YOU say it's closed?

Why do you hate free speech?

"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero

"I was wrong" - Hero, 2012

Mitt Romney, introducing his running mate: "Join me in welcoming the next President of the United States, Paul Ryan!"

Rappy's response? "You're lying, gullible ( believing in some BS you heard on msnbc ) or hard of hearing."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 22, 2012 4:56 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by BYTEMITE:
This is silly and facile.

THIS. IS. SPARTA!!!!

BTW, good to see you back. Pull up a chair and enjoy the comedy.

"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero

"I was wrong" - Hero, 2012

Mitt Romney, introducing his running mate: "Join me in welcoming the next President of the United States, Paul Ryan!"

Rappy's response? "You're lying, gullible ( believing in some BS you heard on msnbc ) or hard of hearing."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 22, 2012 8:51 AM

Sometimes you own the libs. Sometimes, the libs own you.

Quote:
Compare to Obama in 2008, who appointed women to 5 of 21 cabinet positions.

I can think of a couple of reasons why it would be harder to appoint women to WH cabinet positions than to Mass. state governernment. For one, in Mass. they were able to scout and recruit women from across the country, and draw talent from a much bigger pool than the state itself - not possible with a national government cabinet.

Quote:
Really. What part of 14 out of 33 do you not understand?

Ok I get that for you this discussion begins and ends with this fraction. That's almost half! My point is if someone else does all the work of researching suitably qualified women, why wouldn't Romney (or anyone) appoint them?? As I see it he had no reason to not appoint them, and every political reason to do so (as I've already explained). Also the pledge that MssGAP asked of the candidates was to try to make approximately 50% women appointments. As I've already explained, it would've been politically damaging not to commit to that pledge. So all Romney deserves credit for is following through - but again, someone else did all the work, and it would've been politically risky to go back on his pledge.

Quote:
I can imagine someone taking the binders and picking a few women for show

And being publicly criticised by the woman's groups for going back on their pledge to try to appoint 50%?

Quote:
trying to spin appointing women to a large percentage of cabinet posts as a bad thing.

Huh? I don't think you really meant that.

It's not personal. It's just war.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 22, 2012 9:40 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Most excellent one, Byte! Actually, I often find it hard to believe some politicians were ever "born" -- OR "raised" -- given some of the things they say! And your take on this argument is right on: It's a silly argument. It wouldn't even exist if Romney hadn't tried to do what he's done so many times before: take credit for something by lying about it.

As to Romney chancing NOT taking advantage of the resumes offered to him, actually I can find it quite plausible for him not to have -- many time politicians have ignored such things. It's not always smart, and maybe he was being particularly savvy in doing so, but I don't think he was forced to in any way, and it was politically expedient, so it doesn't surprise me. Nor does it surprise me that he appointed them to head up areas he had no interest whatsoever in (or, as the article stated, actually didn't WANT to accomplish anything), that would be a pretty unsurprising male attitude. In my opinion he DOES get points for hiring women, whatever his reasons and however he did it. He didn't have to, period.

Quote:
I'll cede being wrong over 'sought out' vs ' was given'. That's how I understood it.

I'm appropriately impressed that you managed to recognize that much of the truth, Raptor, and give you points for same. Nonetheless, I'm pretty positive you won't "cede" that Romney DID quite consciously LIE about what happened, which would impress me even more, to the point of being shocked. The fact is that Romney himself SAID in the debate what we've quoted here, that he and his "team" got together and made the effort to seek out and hire qualified women candidates, when in fact no such thing happened, he merely was presented with resumes of women by a women's group and asked to consider hiring them. THAT is the most pertinent issue, in my opinion: that someone would be willing to lie when, as has happened before, it was totally unnecessary. He could have made ALMOST as strong a point by saying a group offered him resumes of qualified women and he hired some of them for his cabinet...almost 50% worth, etc., etc. That he had to go just that "extra mile" to make himself look even better speaks volumes about the man to me. That need for the extra self-agrandizement...there's something wrong with that.

Quote:
in Mass. they were able to scout and recruit women from across the country, and draw talent from a much bigger pool than the state itself - not possible with a national government cabinet.

Help my confusion, KPO; can you explain to me why it would be HARDER for a national government to recruit women from across the country than for a state government?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 22, 2012 10:16 AM

Sometimes you own the libs. Sometimes, the libs own you.

More for Geezer:

Carol Hardy-Fanta, MassGAP co-chair - “It was an initiative of women’s organizations, not to force [Romney’s] hand, but to make it be something he had to follow through on.”

Senior-level positions in Massachusetts government held by women:

Before 2002 election - 30%
2002-2004 - 42% (Romney's 1st set of appointments)
2004-2006 - 25% (Romney's 2nd set of appointments)

It's not personal. It's just war.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 22, 2012 10:34 AM

Sometimes you own the libs. Sometimes, the libs own you.

Quote:
Help my confusion, KPO; can you explain to me why it would be HARDER for a national government to recruit women from across the country than for a state government?

Now that you bring it up I'm not sure if that's what MassGAP did, searching all across the country - I got that impression from somewhere but I'm not sure where. But if they did, then that's drawing on a much deeper pool of talent than just the state itself. That's the equivalent of the President recruiting top women from all over the world to form a national government cabinet.

I'm also assuming of course that candidates for national government have to be of a higher calibre than candidates for state government, and if there's a dearth of state-government qualified women then there is likely to be an even bigger dearth of national-government qualified women (in part because of the dearth of state-government qualified women)

I apologise if that's not clear, I might expand on this tomorrow when I'm less tired.

It's not personal. It's just war.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 22, 2012 2:44 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

"I can imagine someone taking the binders and picking a few women for show, but for 14 of 33 positions? Thats almost half."

Uh, no. It's a little over a third.

"Seems to me that you're ignoring what he actually did, and trying to spin appointing women to a large percentage of cabinet posts as a bad thing."

But then, when the public eye was off him, he reversed his position:

"Midway through his four-year term, 42 percent of his 33 new appointments were women, according to a study done by the UMass Center for Women in Politics and Public Policy using some of the data collected by MassGAP.

But over the next two years, women made up only 25 percent of the 64 new appointments Romney made. By the end of his term, the number of women in high-ranking positions was slightly lower than it was before Romney took office."

And there we have it, Romney's MO in a nutshell that he's following to this day: say anything, do anything to sell yourself to the audience, then take it back when the spotlight is off. In other words, a complete hypocrite.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, October 23, 2012 2:35 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up

Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
"I can imagine someone taking the binders and picking a few women for show, but for 14 of 33 positions? Thats almost half."

Uh, no. It's a little over a third.

Actually, closer to one half than one third, but you knew that.

Quote:
"Seems to me that you're ignoring what he actually did, and trying to spin appointing women to a large percentage of cabinet posts as a bad thing."

But then, when the public eye was off him, he reversed his position:

"Midway through his four-year term, 42 percent of his 33 new appointments were women, according to a study done by the UMass Center for Women in Politics and Public Policy using some of the data collected by MassGAP.

But over the next two years, women made up only 25 percent of the 64 new appointments Romney made. By the end of his term, the number of women in high-ranking positions was slightly lower than it was before Romney took office."

Any data on why? Folks moving to other jobs? Appointments to political allies?

Quote:
And there we have it, Romney's MO in a nutshell that he's following to this day: say anything, do anything to sell yourself to the audience, then take it back when the spotlight is off. In other words, a complete hypocrite.

And there we have it. You've decided to hate Romney, so anything he does, no matter how obviously fair, has to be criticized. Put a bunch of women in cabinet positions - just for show. Let his Chief of Staff work flexible hours so she can balance job and family - like so many working women do - and he's patronizing.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, October 23, 2012 5:47 AM

M52NICKERSON

DALEK!

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Am I suppose to be beholden to how YOU view the world ?

Well you are certainly not beholden to reality when you view the world.

Thing is the "Binders Full of Women" is simply a joke mocking Romney. It is doing exactly what is should be, letting the Dems, who see him as out of touch, laugh at him. It is also getting the right all pissed off.

Mission accomplished!

I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.
A warning to everyone, AURaptor is a known liar.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, October 23, 2012 9:02 AM

Sometimes you own the libs. Sometimes, the libs own you.

Quote:
Quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
But over the next two years, women made up only 25 percent of the 64 new appointments Romney made. By the end of his term, the number of women in high-ranking positions was slightly lower than it was before Romney took office."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Any data on why? Folks moving to other jobs? Appointments to political allies?

Ha. When Romney hired an impressively large number of women you took that information at face value - you didn't ask any questions, and you were annoyed at those that did. But when Romney hired an embarrassingly small number of women you're all of a sudden keen to ask questions, and investigate the circumstances. Now why's that?

It's not personal. It's just war.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, October 24, 2012 5:09 PM