digg

Join DiggAbout

Donkeys and Elephants and Delegates,oh my!
Check out the most popular Elections 2008 content on Digg.

See the original image at alternet.org

McSexist: McCain's War on Women

alternet.org — McCain is ignorant about pay equity, wants to overturn Roe v. Wade and likes to brag about his "sexual conquests" and visits to a strip club.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • nowsamsara, on 07/24/2008, -5/+37"But the suggestion that women -- and feminist women, at that -- will be lining up behind him is a fairytale. At least, it should be. McCain's record and policies on issues of importance to women are neither moderate nor maverick."

    *and*

    "In The Nation, Katha Pollitt put it simply: "[T]o vote for McCain, a feminist would have to be insane.""
    • superkendall, on 07/25/2008, -19/+1And even more insane to vote for Obama after the things he said about Clinton.
    • IKORKYI, on 07/25/2008, -1/+1ignorant about pay - ok i can go with that
      wants to overturn Roe v. Wade - ok that seems reasonably true
      likes to brag about "sexual conquests" and visists to a strip club .....

      buried
  • tcbishop12, on 07/24/2008, -7/+65McCain really did vote against a proposal that would have required insurance companies to cover prescription contraception in the same way they pay for Viagra.

    McCain has also repeatedly underscored his opposition to abortion and has said on the campaign trail that the landmark law, Roe v Wade, that protects a woman's right to abortion procedures "should be overturned."

    McCain also skipped the vote on the Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, which “restores the longstanding interpretation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act,” overturned last year by a 5-4 Supreme Court ruling. In New Orleans at the end of April this year, McCain explained his opposition to the bill by claiming it “opens us up to lawsuits for all kinds of problems.”

    Later in Kentucky, he added that instead of legislation allowing women to fight for equal pay, they simply need “education and training“ to earn the same money men make for the same job. Geez, John. Thanks for the tip.

    Add to that his crude chauvinism regarding women, generally.

    This year's GOP candidate is no friend to women.

    And any woman - whether or not she is a feminist or disappointed Hillary supporter - who votes for McCain would have to be as brain dead as McCain is.

    • superkendall, on 07/25/2008, -11/+6See, the difference is that while McCain opposes abortion he supports (and has said he supports) Roe V. Wade, and thinks it's up to STATES to decide things like abortion policy. And that's the way it should be, states free to make up their minds.
      • dagamer34, on 07/25/2008, -3/+11Looking at how he votes on everything else, "states rights" is simply a cover-up reason. And this isn't the 1860's son.
      • Kerrigore, on 07/25/2008, -0/+8I don't think you understand. If the laws in question go against the American constitution, then states can't have those laws in force. Courts cannot make new laws, they can only interpret based the constitution and previous laws/rulings. When a court finds a law unconstitutional, it can overturn it. This is one of the checks and balances against both state and federal powers that is provisioned by the constitution for just this reason. Roe vs Wade was a case of the Supreme Court finding anti-abortion laws to violate the constitutional rights of women. Whether or not you agree with this assessment, to say that it should be upheld yet abortion policy should be left to each state individually suggests to me a fundamental misunderstanding of the situation.
    • zaffir, on 07/25/2008, -6/+6"McCain really did vote against a proposal that would have required insurance companies to cover prescription contraception in the same way they pay for Viagra."

      Talk about a spun statement. What the ***** does Viagra have to do with this, other than to make the insurance companies (not to mention McCain) look like misogynistic evildoers. You could just as easily have said:

      "McCain really did vote against a proposal that would have required insurance companies to cover prescription contraception in the same way they pay for post-partem depression medication."

      What conclusions can you actually draw from his actions here? Assuming he didn't vote no due to some pork barrel rider on the bill, all it says is he doesn't think the federal government should force insurance companies to pay for birth control. Nothing more.

      While we're at it, isn't every politician in favor of that bill a man-hating feminist? After all, they want insurance companies to pay for women's birth control, but are happy with men having to pay for condoms out of their own pocket.

      "Later in Kentucky, he added that instead of legislation allowing women to fight for equal pay, they simply need “education and training“ to earn the same money men make for the same job. Geez, John. Thanks for the tip."

      I'd like to know the exact context in which he stated that. Perhaps he was referring to a specific example? Was he responding to a question about new legislation that would "allow" women to fight for equal pay? Perhaps that legislation was too broad and heavy handed. Isn't it already illegal to discriminate based on sex? A three word quote does not make for sufficient evidence.

      There may be a correlation between lower wages and being a woman, but that does not mean that that relationship is causal. Some fairly recent research shows that one of the major reasons women don't make as much as men is that they don't ask for as much when negotiating their pay.

      I'm an Obama man all the way, don't get me wrong. But if you're going to hate on McCain do it in a somewhat credible manner.
    • Herostratos, on 07/25/2008, -3/+3"McCain really did vote against a proposal that would have required insurance companies to cover prescription contraception in the same way they pay for Viagra."

      Well... Excellent. Why on earth should contraception be covered by the insurance companies...? If you want your contraception insured, make a contract with an insurance company which does that kinda thing.
  • mabs0, on 07/24/2008, -10/+30@TheLastSmoker

    Does a man do the equal work of a woman? Does a man share equally the burden and risks of a pregnancy and birth? No. So quit being a jerk and grow the ***** up!
    • marabout40, on 07/24/2008, -5/+17Honey, ignore ignorance. That was such a blatantly ignorant comment that you didn't need to dignify it with a response.
    • Shadwell, on 07/25/2008, -2/+4Two words: Selective Service.
      • DarkPrincess74, on 07/25/2008, -3/+6Three words: There's no draft!
      • tomarocco, on 07/25/2008, -6/+4One word: *****.
      • Shadwell, on 07/25/2008, -0/+4My point is if we want to point out inequalities of the genders on an atomic level, there is a plenty of ammunition on both sides. I am going to call out anyone who makes it sound as if doing the work of being female is more noble, unfair and difficult than that of being a man. Neither gender has the market cornered on shoveling *****.
    • buckchoris, on 07/25/2008, -3/+2Look who is talking the same digg bastards who make sexists comments like women are whores etc... have flipped tables in this article.
    • Galaxylander, on 07/25/2008, -3/+3And yet a guy gets slapped if he expects a woman to hold the door for him. Huh.

      I'm all for women's equality, but if they want equality, they're going to GET equality, even the stuff that they don't like.
    • satyarth, on 07/25/2008, -1/+1@mabs0

      Look! I'm using the reply button!
  • slug007, on 07/24/2008, -4/+12someone get mccain a bottle of bub after his lap dance.
  • wonderworm, on 07/24/2008, -5/+22Don't forget McCain and Cheney's visits to the DC madam's prostitutes? Oh wait, she and the working girl that serviced them are mysteriously dead now. Maybe I should keep my mouth shut.
    • PolishLogic, on 07/24/2008, -6/+5Pffft, proof? Who needs proof when you have speculation and internet chatter.

      There was nothing mysterious about her death, she was merely practicing the role of Brooks from Shawshank Redemption for her one-woman production and took it a little too far.
      • skinfitz, on 07/25/2008, -0/+4You mean apart from the fact she'd previously publicly announced she would never commit suicide and she was concerned about it, yet turns up dead as a suicide?

        No - nothing suspicious about that at ALL...
    • superkendall, on 07/25/2008, -9/+3Hey, it's the Truthers! They've moved on to a totally new form of utter unproven *****!
  • wishninja, on 07/24/2008, -19/+5I am not sure what strip clubs and getting laid has to do with it. I guess everyone should have to be a monk to get support from the fembots. or gay.
    • Gemfinder, on 07/25/2008, -0/+2You haven't read the Carmina Burana, have you?
    • twiztidsinz, on 07/25/2008, -1/+6There's a difference between going to a strip clup as a regular person... and going to a strip club, bragging about it and bashing women when you're a presidential candidate.
  • msaleem, on 07/24/2008, -7/+18Hammer. Nail. Coffin.
    • superkendall, on 07/25/2008, -4/+2So is that the coffin McCain is climbing out of, or the one Obama is climbing into:

      http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/artic ...
    • patpl22391, on 07/25/2008, -3/+5Wait, so women who do not support abortion are sexist? Also, why should the government regulate who gets paid what? I thank John McCain for voting against for ridiculous legislation and regulation that does not help in anyway. Roe vs. Wade WAS a bad ruling. It should be decided by the states, individually.
      • DarkPrincess74, on 07/25/2008, -1/+3That's true because clearly most state legislatures are at least 50% women so they should be able to decide what's right for their state. Supreme courts were definitely not setup to protect the rights of those without the majority power. For that matter let's overturn brown vs. board of education because some states shouldn't have to integrate people of various races and should be able to provide inferior schooling to non-white kids. So in the same logic women in certain states should be allowed to have inferior medical treatment also. With these types of policies it just makes things so much easier on ignorant white men.

        /sarcasm
      • Kerrigore, on 07/25/2008, -1/+2I don't think you understand. If the laws in question go against the American constitution, then states can't have those laws in force. Courts cannot make new laws, they can only interpret based the constitution and previous laws/rulings. When a court finds a law unconstitutional, it can overturn it. This is one of the checks and balances against both state and federal powers that is provisioned by the constitution for just this reason. Roe vs Wade was a case of the Supreme Court finding anti-abortion laws to violate the constitutional rights of women. Whether or not you agree with this assessment, to say that it was a bad ruling because it should have been left to each state individually suggests to me a fundamental misunderstanding of the situation. Laws protecting abortion rights do not have to say or prove that abortion is moral, merely that making it illegal is unconstitutional.

        You might as well say that slavery should be decided by each state.
  • Cuchanu, on 07/25/2008, -2/+14Maybe if somebody tells McCain that the internet contains every type of porn he could imagine he'd learn how to use a computer.
    • Sil369, on 07/25/2008, -1/+4betcha he's lying and google knows it
  • Izzardo, on 07/25/2008, -7/+19This is one of the things that just baffles me as to how McCain could be a presidential candidate. He seems to think he's James Bond, but to quote Judi Dench, he's "a sexist, misogynist dinosaur, a relic of the Cold War". Any woman that votes for him votes for a man who clearly doesn't regard women as equal. And let's be honest, he's a fair way past any "boyish charms"!
  • AFJon, on 07/25/2008, -15/+8This whole McXxxxx is getting pretty lame, McSame, McSexist, McBabyKiller, McMuffin, McLovin ....
  • mcm020, on 07/25/2008, -15/+3What's wrong with being pro-life?
    • wadge22, on 07/25/2008, -1/+7It's a position that supports changing the law to legislate morality.
      • sogod, on 07/25/2008, -0/+2Don't kill people is already a law. Maybe it is legislated morality, but its virtually universal.
    • Tenlow, on 07/25/2008, -0/+7You can be pro life all you want. Just don't make it illegal for anyone to disagree with you.

      How many "pro lifers" are there that are willing to adopt all of the unwanted children banning abortion would bring into the world? Since there already aren't enough people willing to adopt all of the unwanted children, I doubt there's a huge pool of waiting and available adoptive parents just sitting around.
      • sogod, on 07/25/2008, -0/+1To pro-lifers, fetuses are people, so while it is definitely a tragedy that more unwanted people would be born into the world, it is still somewhat less of a tragedy than organized mass murder .
      • greensprout, on 08/06/2008, -0/+0That would be wonderful, except for the fact that the World Health Organization recently did an international investigation that definitively showed that, in countries that outlaw abortion:
        1) The rate of abortions DOES NOT go down.
        2) The rate of women dying from botched procedures goes UP, by a lot.
        And you know what? When those women die, which is a tragedy in and of itself, the fetus dies as well anyway. So you get two deaths instead of one (if you believe that a fetus registers as a human death). That's a "mass murder" on a much larger scale, and it includes living, breathing, adult people, as well.

        Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/12/world/12abortion ...

        Explain to me how that is pro-"life".
    • weside, on 07/25/2008, -6/+1Absolutely nothing. Unless you're a liberal, and then it becomes some form of prejudice against "women's rights."
      • DarkPrincess74, on 07/25/2008, -0/+7That's true, I mean a woman getting pregnant is entirely her fault and her responsibility so at that point she's just a baby factory and has no rights, why should she get to choose how health care is provided to her when ignorant men think they can do that just as well.
      • sogod, on 07/25/2008, -2/+1Abortion is not, fundamentally, about the mother's rights. Its about whether or not the fetus is a person. If you accept that fetuses are people, which most people do agree is the case after the first or second trimesters, then no rights the mother has could possibly override the babies right to life and allow murder.
      • Tenlow, on 07/25/2008, -2/+1but sogod, how can you claim the mother has no rights when she is the only reason the fetus is alive? If the mother were to die, the fetus would die with her. She is the sole provider of life. Until it can survive outside the womb, it's not a person.

        And off topic, but why is it most "pro life" people are also for capital punishment? Kind of a mixed message if you ask me.
      • sogod, on 07/26/2008, -0/+0When the fetus becomes a person is the fundamental question here. Virtually everyone can agree on what rights a fetus doesn't have before its a person, and what rights it does have after it is a person. We just don't know when a fetus becomes a person. No one, including myself knows the answer.

        Actually, we may have to accept there isn't going to be one anytime soon. Until we as a civilization work out philosophically, beyond any ambiguity or doubt, what it means to be a 'person'.

        So, I generally oppose abortion because we don't know the answer to that question, and the right thing to do, the most morally sound option, is to act on the side of caution. Its a choice between the lesser of two evils, ruining lives, and ending lives.
    • raquel9e, on 07/25/2008, -1/+1In the article there is a summary of an interview in which he basically said he was Pro-Choice when it came to his own daughter. So in his case, the problem with being Pro-Life is that he's actually just a hypocrite.
  • STPZ, on 07/25/2008, -3/+19I think his attitude towards women is pretty well summed up in tale of his first marriage.
    • Dustin00, on 07/25/2008, -0/+18I think it was better summed up when he called his current wife a ***** in front of a live mic and cameras.
    • datastorageguy, on 07/25/2008, -4/+1Spoken like a true Bill Clinton voter.....
  • spookyttws, on 07/25/2008, -4/+16Let's make abortion illegal! That way no one will ever have an abortion! I mean previous to Roe vs. Wade it's not like people went to underground clinics, or fiend's houses and used coat hangers or extremely poisonous drugs. That would be illegal. It's like when we made Marijuana illegal, immediately everyone stopped using it..right?

    Just because you don't agree with something doesn't mean there should be a law against it. I personally would never encourage my female friends to have an abortion (within normal circumstances) but I know it needs to be a safe and available option. And what happens when a girl does have and abortion, how are you going to punish her?
    • Gemfinder, on 07/25/2008, -1/+7You need only go back to the Sixties to find out how girls that got abortions were punished.
      It's called "Death by septicemia."
      • minox, on 07/25/2008, -6/+3spooky, your point is fatuous. You can use your own argument to say that any number of things should be decriminalized because they don't stop people from breaking the law. And it also fails to appeal to the objection of pro-life people who believe that overturning Roe v Wade will result in a net DECLINE in deaths, because they consider the baby to be a human being. So even if back alley abortions did occur, and woman did die from them, the overall numbers would still decline dramatically as many women who would otherwise seek legal abortions would not procure back alley abortions.
      • DarkPrincess74, on 07/25/2008, -1/+3I think it should be illegal for people to self-appoint themselves as morally superior because they idolize concepts from a book together. Certainly there would be less self-appointed morally superior people out there then we wouldn't have to debate about health care decisions for women that should just be made by women.
      • Gemfinder, on 08/05/2008, -0/+1@minox:
        My point wasn't fatuous, it's a recorded fact. Women died in the thousands from back-alley and self-inflicted abortions.
        So you're saying that the lives of babies are more important than those of the women bearing them? It is less expensive, resource-wise, to maintain a breeding adult than to bring a foetus to breeding adult status...after which their life-status would fall a couple rungs down the ladder and they become nothing more than a womb with life support and, possibly, means of locomotion.
        Oh yeah. Way to encourage reproduction.
    • mycatsasha, on 07/25/2008, -4/+1Stealing is illegal, but people still do it anyway. Maybe we should legalize it.
  • Gemfinder, on 07/25/2008, -1/+7Dolores Umbridge would vote for McCain.
  • siobhankeogh, on 07/25/2008, -4/+10I would like for McCain to get knocked up and endure the pregnancy so he can understand the repercussions of not making birth control accessible. And then I would like him to pop it out of his anus, just for extra pain.
    • DiggerDoombot, on 07/25/2008, -1/+4Something like that happened in The Fresco.

      "Sheri S. Tepper uses male pregnancy as a form of political commentary in The Fresco, when intergalactic peace officers take politicians at their word that all life is sacred."

      "In The Fresco by Sheri S. Tepper, some aliens temporarily stranded on Earth pick on a group of powerful conservative American men to incubate their young, reasoning that since the men are opposed to abortion, they'll agree that it is their duty to help the aliens out. The men are not happy, especially when it turns out the young aliens will have to eat their way out of their bodies."
  • superkendall, on 07/25/2008, -13/+8Holy cow, an *Obama* supporter did not really take us into wondering about how sexist the candidates are, did they?

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/02/16/abc-is-ob ...

    http://lisalexicon.typepad.com/how_dare_she/2008/0 ...

    Man you guys have forgotten about Hillary WAY too soon. You have historical memory as poor as Obama himself it would seem.
    • kinerry, on 07/25/2008, -3/+3you're using a blog and an article that merely asks the question...talk about FAIL
      • Labyrinth336, on 07/25/2008, -3/+1you, sir... are the failure..
      • superkendall, on 07/25/2008, -4/+2And you are complaining about a response to an article that was originally from Alternet of all places...

        EPIC FAIL.
  • Morchades, on 07/25/2008, -4/+13n the 2000 primary, he was asked what he would do if his daughter Meghan, then 15, became pregnant. McCain said it would be a "family decision."

    "The final decision would be made by Meghan with our advice and counsel," McCain said, referring to himself and his wife, Cindy. When reporters suggested that this view made him, in fact, pro-choice, McCain became irritated. "I don't think it is the pro-choice position to say that my daughter and my wife and I will discuss something that is a family matter that we have to decide."

    ---

    Is he KIDDING?
    • superkendall, on 07/25/2008, -8/+2So in other words he's really pro-choice, and everyone above you got it wrong about McCain doing anything to abolish Roe Vs. Wade. Just another day on Digg.

      Thanks for clarifying McCain's REAL position.
      • TsuruchiBrian, on 07/25/2008, -0/+2sarcasm?
      • Morchades, on 07/25/2008, -0/+7No, in other words he's a huge ***** hypocrite. That's a quote FROM the linked article. The person who asked was trying to get McCain to ACTUALLY think about the issue at hand. He votes down pro-choice legislation but when it comes to HIS daughter it's his family's decision.
    • DarkPrincess74, on 07/25/2008, -0/+7McCain is pro-choice when it comes to his family but nationally he's pro-life. It's funny how there are many laws that McCain doesn't apply to his family but everyone else better follow them or he'll call them out on it.
    • crocodilexp, on 07/26/2008, -0/+1Morchades, that's a gem indeed -- thank you for finding out the quote.
  • patrflav, on 07/25/2008, -1/+7At least I don't plaster on the makeup like a trollup, you *****.
  • Fun4Two, on 07/25/2008, -0/+6Is there an exit strategy for this particular war.
    • Rotzooi, on 07/25/2008, -0/+1McCain is a Republican. Of course there is no exit strategy.
  • YodaJones, on 07/25/2008, -5/+3*****.com domain still available.
  • MetalFaceDumile, on 07/25/2008, -0/+4Ridiculous. I thought the title was McSexiest and I automatically clicked it. Tricked into a McCain article.
  • freebsdmike, on 07/25/2008, -4/+6Personally I think they should rethink Roe Vs. Wade. Don't think I'm saying ban abortion, because I'm not. I think BOTH people should have the right to say "Hey I want that kid". After all it does take two people. Yes, it's the womans body, but it's not just her kid. If the father wants to take care of the child and she doesn't want it then let her say so and then not have anything to do with it. No child support nothing.

    Personally I think abortion is wrong, but I also think it's wrong to impose my moral code on someone else. However, if it was my kid she was wanting to abort I'd want to able to say "Hey, it's my kid too. Let me have him/her and you can walk away".
    • kinerry, on 07/25/2008, -5/+11except you don't have to deal with 9 months of your body getting destroyed, then a stretched vagina and stretch marks and birthing pains

      so stfu
      • freebsdmike, on 07/25/2008, -3/+8You forget fathers have rights too.
      • Monk22, on 07/25/2008, -0/+1then don't let the penis in your vagina if you don't want to deal with it. otherwise you STFU. not to mention your body isn't being "destroyed" its biologically built to make people.
    • spaceddaisy, on 07/25/2008, -1/+8"Let me have him/her and you can walk away"

      Except women can't because they're still gonna have to carry the baby to term, including all the health risks that come with pregnancy. Women aren't incubators.

      I agree it's not fair to men who would want a child, but unfortunately our bodies are different and there will never be a fair way to either side of the story to deal with this.

      When a man doesn't want a child he should be able to vocalize that early and not have to pay child support. The downside would be that technically men could knock up tons of women and never take responsibility, unfair to the children.

      It's such a difficult situation to be able to take a stance and say 'this is best'. No matter what you choose to do (give men more rights in family law, take away women's, keep it like it is now etc.) someone's gonna be miserable.
      • freebsdmike, on 07/25/2008, -0/+5You're right it would be a very difficult situation to be in. I couldn't imagine what it would be like to go through that and I wouldn't want too.

        What I'm getting at is I should be able to say yes, I want the child and unfortunately you have to carry it to term. You had sex, which you knew could lead to you getting pregnant, now you are and I won't let you abort it, because I want the child.

        If the carrying child to term would cause the woman to die, then I would be heart broken, but I wouldn't expect her to sacrifice her self for the child. I'm not saying one life is worth more than the other, because it's not. At that point I say let her decide and then accept the decision.

        You're correct about men being able to say that, and I think that it should be just like it is now. Both parties say "Yes, no child support is expected".

        I agree this a moral situation and almost impossible to legislate and really shouldn't be based on it being a moral issue.

        I'm not saying take away womens rights, I'm saying just give men equal rights.
    • DarkPrincess74, on 07/25/2008, -1/+3Well if you consider a few thousand cells a child then you should be able to have them and do what you want with them without the women being involved since you're the one that wants "the child".
      • mycatsasha, on 07/25/2008, -2/+1However you look at it, your still "just a bunch of cells."
    • apox24, on 07/25/2008, -0/+3Thats not remotely fair, and I'm a guy! The final decision rests with the one who has to go through with it, I mean 9 months!? And then something that size comes out of there?! And frankly the situation you're describing sounds like you are not reaching an agreement about it together, she probably wouldn't even be talking if you were to try to force her to bear your child against her will, you can't force someone to do that!
      I mean I know it takes two to kick start it, but it is growing inside the woman - it's her body that it feeds off and she pays the price physically and makes the sacrifices.
  • thailand1972, on 07/25/2008, -0/+9Whoever wins, there needs to be an overhaul of family law. Custody is awarded to the mother in 90%+ of the time. Divorce is initiated by women 60-70% of the time (depending on which source you read). Would the initiator of divorce do so knowing they would see their children less, or would they do so knowing they would basically "win" everything while performing a "parentectomy" and moving in the new boyfriend (and getting the financial support still from the non-custodial ex?). I'm guessing the latter is more of an incentive than the former.

    There are old ways of thinking in the west that are not truly equal (chivalrous). Introduce shared parenting as default, and if one parent ISN'T fit to be a parent, give sole custody to the father or mother. Just defaulting to the mother almost everytime is ridiculous (this assumes women are morally superior to men 90%+ of the time, how sexist), and is one of the root causes of boys becoming delinquent (Obama touched on this, but instead very simply blamed the irresponsibility of ALL fathers....sigh). Yes, I expect this comment to be dugg down, but the truth isn't always palatable.
  • weside, on 07/25/2008, -10/+4Funny, McCain wanting to overturn Roe vs. Wade is one of the primary reasons I'll be voting for him this November. And people say that about him like it's a bad thing - or like HE has the power to overturn it anyways.
    • j0keR, on 07/25/2008, -2/+3I'm surprised you got dug up. I'm more leaning towards the pro-choice arguments, but I think the Roe vs Wade case is unconstitutional. Sadly, McGriddle probably doesn't disagree with the case for the right reasons. Instead, he's probably just going by the talking points his campaign adviser plagiarized from the George W. Bush playbook.
    • DarkPrincess74, on 07/25/2008, -1/+1Sadly this is also the reason why most women don't vote for you.
  • WakeRider, on 07/25/2008, -3/+9I know everyone here hates McCain, but can we please stop all the dirt digging and *****? I'm not defending McCain, I'm just sick of all the damn stories bashing everybody, Digg is just about as bad as FOX for dirt digging, just one for the lefties rather than the religious right. Lets stop all the dirt digging, personal attacks, slander etc. and concentrate on what really matters; the POLICIES. America is in the *****, lets discuss the policies that could rectify the situation rather than bitching about the candidates like a bunch of drunken 16 year-old girls on MTV. We should be better than that.
    • Morchades, on 07/25/2008, -2/+5But this is policies. It's his voting records on women's rights and family rights.
    • tomarocco, on 07/25/2008, -2/+2Yin-Yang, brother. You get FOX to STFU and we'll settle down.
  • BasBarian, on 07/25/2008, -3/+5Just don't vote republican! I think every Digger supports that. Its just that not everybody is that enlightend. I think its safe to say that America with its huge debt and strange politics needs something different and not a continuation. My only question is how can you make the republican voters understand this?
  • j0keR, on 07/25/2008, -4/+3thailand1972 above makes some good points, but I think there is more to the story that people don't really consider. The first point is that no matter how much force the government applies, it cannot make people equal. The main reason women aren't paid the same as men is because of the risk of pregnancy and forced benefits. It isn't a "politically correct" fact that the news media will ever cover, but if you investigate it a little further you will find it to be true. I know of many women close to me who have taken advantage of companies using these programs and then have not gone back to work. I believe that many companies would voluntarily have much fairer practices if left to the market, but today many women have the potential to cause a heavy burden on a business's bottom line and like it or not employers will always adjust accordingly in salary.
    • smemily, on 07/25/2008, -0/+3If that were true, we'd see the wage gap disappear for women over 50.

      Also, are you even familiar with the "forced benefits" associated with pregnancy? For large companies (over 50 employees), they must provide up to 12 weeks per calendar year of UNPAID LEAVE for the birth and care of a newborn child, among other situations.

      UNPAID. For many employers (mine) if you wanted any pay during this time period, you used up your sick and vacation pay.

      And that covers men too. (though less common for them to take it since they aren't the ones breastfeeding and the family usually still needs income) But the act is gender neutral and a new father can take the exact same amount of time off as a new mother.

      That's it. 12 weeks unpaid leave. All they have to do is hold the job until you return. That is all. And since it applies to fathers as well, your point is completely moot. There is no magical expensive thing the employer has to cover for women that they don't for men.

      And ALSO, if a woman "takes advantage of these programs" WTF exactly does that mean? They hold the job for her, she quits instead? Whoop te do. Anyone can quit at any time anyway, only they at least have a temp lined up already if she quits after using FMLA. Or are you saying they took their vacation pay and then quit? If so it just comes out of their last check, same as anyone else that uses vacation pay before earning it.

      Your excuse is lame and not based on fact.
  • phphreak, on 07/25/2008, -6/+6Let's stop pretending that everyone supports abortion on demand. To say it's a constitutional right is questionable at best.
  • SabrinaHeaven, on 07/25/2008, -12/+5Of course the suggestion that feminist women will be lining up behind the GOP is a fairytale--feminism is a branch of Communism. The feminist movement in rooted is Marxism and serves no intelligent purpose. Those traitors and anti-American agitators should be lined up in the street and shot.
    • tomarocco, on 07/25/2008, -2/+2So, you're a rape victim, eh? Join the club....
      • SabrinaHeaven, on 07/26/2008, -0/+1I've been accused of being a white male living in my parents' basement, but never a rape victim. That's funny.
  • BasBarian, on 07/25/2008, -6/+2feminism a political movement? its just rights of the individual....
  • JPD1941, on 07/25/2008, -7/+4Dear Democrats.
    It has always been and shall always be the Democratic mentality to demean all candidates not associated with Democrat policies/give aways/hand outs. Please for once, try to rise above this. There is more here at stake than swigging Coors beer and peeing off the side of the porch. Make an attempt to grow up just a bit.

    Thank you
  • BasBarian, on 07/25/2008, -5/+4
    Dear republicans,

    It has always been and shall always be the republic mentality to demean all canidates not associated with republican policies/give aways/hand outs. Please for once, try to rise above this. There is more here at stake than swigging Coors beer and peeing off the side of the porch. Make an attempt to grow up just a bit.

    Thank you
  • tomarocco, on 07/25/2008, -4/+1Socialist Workers Unite!
  • buckchoris, on 07/25/2008, -0/+1Look who is talking the same digg bastards who make sexists comments like women are whores etc... have flipped tables in this article.No wonder the politicians are just like us.
  • Galaxylander, on 07/25/2008, -1/+3I'm a complete Obama supporter, but people, honestly, shut the ***** up. MILLIONS of other guys go to strip clubs and you don't whine about them. Why does becoming a presidential candidate suddenly make it worse for you to go to a strip club? Just because he's a presidential candidate doesn't remove his right to be a normal human being.

    This is complete crap people.
    • smemily, on 07/25/2008, -2/+4I don't care except when it corroborates a pattern of treating women as lesser than men.
  • alvination, on 07/25/2008, -4/+4I love strip clubs. I love women and their luscious boobies. And I love them making me sandwiches. I don't get what the hubbub is.
  • wh3873, on 07/25/2008, -2/+2Being in the Army and having an attraction strong women I have witnessed both extremes of the whole sexism battle. For the most part the Army keeps sexism under control, unless you find women supporting a combat arms unit. The men in the combat arms units rarely interact with female soldiers and act like dicks towards them. At the same time a small minority of the women make things worse by screwing everything that comes their way (to include each other) or by taking offense at what has historically been Army behavior (if you don't know what that means I can't help you). Most women I have served with have been capable and most units I have been with treat them about the same as the men, but I do often see knuckle dragging bullet stoppers treating women like ***** and it pisses me off. So I find myself in the position of correcting the situation.

    That being said my life in college showed me the other side of the battle of the sexes. Women who act like the male gender is out there to destory them or that they aren't getting what they "deserve" because they are a chick. A little sceret A LOT of people don't get what they deserve and it dosen't have a lot to do with gender. You know why women make less than men? For women, more often than with men, jobs aren't their number 1 priority family is, that's not a bad thing but it doesn't max the pay scale. Men are something like 4 times more likely to negotiate for a higher starting salary (probably from years of doing the same thing at the bar). Women also tend to take time off from work for pregnancy, which stops them from advancing theiry carrer while their male peers stay at work, once again not a bad thing just a reason for the pay inequity.

    All in all life is hard. No matter what anyone tells you men and women are diffrent, thank god (or the FSM whatever). Dudes should treat Chicks nice and, Chicks, give a dude a break we try.

    Learn to lugh it'll help http://youtube.com/watch?v=uwgk3lwLQbM
  • Evanmontegarde, on 07/25/2008, -3/+2I could never in good conscience vote for a person who does want want to take the comparatively tiny amount of the Federal Budget it would require to expand health care to low-income families and individuals. If nothing else, this is why I vote Democrat.
  • orchidee2, on 07/25/2008, -1/+2This article was quite alighting for me as a woman and a moderate feminist. Even if John Mc Cain tries to get closer to the common sense, he shows from time to time a view on women subjects that is not only ignorant but chauvinist!
    • greensprout, on 08/06/2008, -0/+0Don't be afraid to call yourself a feminist. The only core tenet of such a huge and varied movement is that men and women are equally human and equally deserving of respect and protection. You either truly believe that, or you do not. There is no need to "moderate" yourself.

      Don't be afraid to stand for you own humanity in the face of those who would silence you with all the tired old crap about what a "feminist" supposedly is (hairy, smelly, humourless, man-hanting, lesbian.. get some fresh material already :) )
  • grneye53, on 07/25/2008, -2/+2Don't knock the strip clubs! Apparently he meet his wife there, after all he keeps calling her a "HO"!
  • vinnyvenus, on 07/25/2008, -3/+4 I stole this comment from another post but it applies here

    "When a woman wants an abortion its considered her reproductive rights, she can do it for any reason she wants, even if the father is a good upstanding man, who would take care of the baby and require nothing from the mother other than carrying the child full term, for 9 months.

    When a man wants an abortion he is an insensitive ***** who couldn't begin to understand what a woman wants. Unless she agrees to it, he'll be paying a percentage of his income for the next 18 years or until the child becomes emancipated. It doesn't matter if the woman was poking holes in condoms, its his child, he has to take responsibility and pay for it.

    How about some Male reproductive rights. And don't any of you spew about men getting a vesectimy if they don't want children, if thats the case every woman who gets an abortion should have her tubes tied".
    • WiredLain, on 07/25/2008, -2/+3The operation to get a woman's tubes tied is far more invasive and therefore more risky, expensive, longer recovery time, etc. than a man having a vasectomy.
    • weside, on 07/25/2008, -1/+1Amen!
    • ftx437, on 07/25/2008, -2/+1Then how about they just don't have sex? If you can't deal with the consequences don't do the deed..it's easy.
  • mcm020, on 07/25/2008, -3/+5First, let me say I'm not some big pro-life guy. It's not a big issue for me. But if you kill a fetus then what's the difference in killing the baby as soon as it pops out? I also find it ironic that those who favor illogical animal rights fall in the same political class as those who favor abortion.
    • TheCatsPants, on 07/25/2008, -1/+4Because after birth the baby is an independent entity and is no longer part of the woman's body.
      • eryximachus, on 07/25/2008, -1/+21) The baby is not an independent entity. If a woman craps out a baby and leaves it there, it will die. Doing that would also be a crime. Like many mammals, our young are born dependent on their mothers.

        2) The point at which the baby is born is very much subject to luck. A baby born 7 months after conception will most likely survive if born prematurely. Your argument makes no sense because if you kill a baby that is still inside the woman 7.5 months after conception you are a doctor, but if the baby is outside the womb you are a killer.

        Personally, I don't really care much about these laws. I believe children should be the property and responsibility of the parents who should be able to keep them or dispose of them at will irrespective of age.

        Sparta, baby.
      • TheCatsPants, on 07/25/2008, -0/+3@eryx
        It's no longer dependant on that one specific woman. I didn't say it could go and forage for food like a gazelle. The point of an abortion is that the woman doesn't want to carry it. Once that relationship is gone, no need to kill the baby, and society should and does protect such children. Lets face it, if there was such a thing as artificial wombs, abortion would be obsolete.
        7.5 months is a bit late for taking action, and I'm pretty sure that such cases are very, very rare and usually due to necessary medical intervention rather than the choice of the woman.
      • mcm020, on 07/25/2008, -0/+1I understand your point, but what you need to understand is that there's no biological difference in a baby that inside the womb and a baby that's just been delivered.

        Do you support abortions that that late in pregnancy?
      • TheCatsPants, on 07/26/2008, -0/+2Not unless the mother's life is in danger, in which case the baby should be saved if viable, or if the baby is dead (in which case it's not an abortion). I'm pretty sure that demand for very late abortions is very very rare. The vast majority are carried out well before that (I'm in the UK).

        At the early stages of pregnancy there is a huge difference between an embryo/fetus and a baby. Abortion, if it *has* to be done, should be done as early as possible. And there should be a time limit on it. Where that time limit should be is up to experts in developmental biology, medical sciences, sociology and ethics.
  • Zippo, on 07/25/2008, -5/+3Man, if McCain gets voted in (or steals his way in), you guys are ***** with a capital F.
  • whytheam, on 07/25/2008, -4/+3I can't believe that someone typed 4 pages of this crap. Seems like people submit just about anything to digg.
  • hydrogenbomb, on 07/25/2008, -5/+0Geritol, prunes, viagra and a Blonde 20 years younger Heiress, the cocktail of choice for airforce elititests and old fat cat GOPers.

    Hey, he's rich, older that dirt, and sexist, the female gold diggers dream. Republican women will line up for that old fart.
  • fatrandy13, on 07/25/2008, -5/+4OMFG STFU... the ***** guy went to a strip club. SHUT UP YOU *****

    THIS IS NOT A ***** NEWS STORY..
    This will, in no way, effect how I vote. Obama's quest for socialism will however..
  • ramiro, on 07/25/2008, -7/+7BURIED: Leftist brainwashing propaganda.
  • Enzo33, on 07/25/2008, -4/+1The women's movement and feminism is sooooo 1970's! Get over it women - this is a man's world!! Don't believe me, go ask Hillary. HA!
  • barktwiggs, on 07/25/2008, -0/+2In other news: Obama's for Equal Pay, Yet Pays Female Staffers Less Than Males
    http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx ...
  • thailand1972, on 07/25/2008, -1/+1"If there's something obviously ***** up with the kid and there's no good reason to keep it alive, it should be euthanized. "

    @stagmire, your opinion is obviously ***** up and you should have "euthanized" it post-submission.
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.