Do you know John McCain voted NO fr equal pay for WOMEN?!?

NEW ORLEANS — Republican Sen. John McCain, campaigning through poverty-stricken cities and towns, said Wednesday he opposes a Senate bill that seeks equal pay for women because it would lead to more lawsuits. Senate Republicans killed the bill Wednesday night on a 56-42 vote that denied the measure the 60 votes needed to advance it to full debate and a vote. Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., had delayed the vote to give McCain's Democratic rivals, Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama, time to return to Washington to support the measure, which would make it easier for women to sue their employers for pay discrimination. McCain skipped the vote to campaign in New Orleans. "I am all in favor of pay equity for women, but this kind of legislation, as is typical of what's being proposed by my friends on the other side of the aisle, opens us up to lawsuits for all kinds of problems," the expected GOP presidential nominee told reporters. "This is government playing a much, much greater role in the business of a private enterprise system." The bill sought to counteract a Supreme Court decision limiting how long workers can wait before suing for pay discrimination. It is named for Lilly Ledbetter, a supervisor at the Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.'s plant in Gadsden, Ala., who sued for pay discrimination just before retiring after a 19-year career there. By the time she retired, Ledbetter made $6,500 less than the lowest-paid male supervisor and claimed earlier decisions by supervisors kept her from making more. The Supreme Court voted 5-4 last year to throw out her complaint, saying she had waited too long to sue. Democrats criticized McCain for opposing the bill. "Senator McCain has yet again fallen in line with President Bush while middle-class families are falling by the wayside," Clinton said in a statement following the vote. "Women are earning less, but Senator McCain is offering more of the same." Democratic National Committee spokeswoman Karen Finney said: "At a time when American families are struggling to keep their homes and jobs while paying more for everything from gasoline to groceries, how on Earth would anyone who thinks they can lead our country also think it's acceptable to oppose equal pay for America's mothers, wives and daughters?" McCain stated his opposition to the bill as he campaigned in rural eastern Kentucky, where poverty is worse among women than men. The Arizona senator said he was familiar with the disparity but that there are better ways to help women find better paying jobs. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/04/23/mccain-opposes-equal-pay-_n_98342.html

Public Comments

1. There is: New School--Obama; Old School--Clinton; Obsolete School--McCain.
2. Obviously McCain wasn't alone as the bill failed to pass. All that does is allow for non stop lawsuits and it would be similiar to affirmative action. We don't need that.
3. All it is is payback to the trial lawyers. It is stupid to have the government stick their nose into every contract where people agree to work for other people. Next, they will be telling them how much they have to pay everyone not just the minimum wage. Good for McCain. It would have been unforgivable for him to pander in such a reckless way.
4. Well how can McCain be the champion of the people; as The President of the United States, when he clearly doesn't believe in equal rights or pay. First he voted against MLK Federal Holiday; then later attempted to have it recended. Voted on a Bill the affected the Native American citizens in the State of Arizona negatively; and now wants to have women paid less than men. This reminds me of the Pastors he takes funding from who speak ill will against homosexuals. Why do we want McBush as President, please remind me?
5. Because the bill is plain, unadulterated BS. It establishes ridiculous criteria for determining what constitutes equal pay and is an open invitation to lawyers to further destroy business with frivolous law suits. This is typical Democrat party pay back to their fellow parasites, the ABA. More Socialist intrusion into areas that are NOT the governments concern. From what I read about Lilly Ledbetter, she was kept as a marginally qualified supervisor because of her sex. If she had been a male, she would have been demoted or canned long before reaching retirement age. She is an example of the mediocrity that affirmative action promotes in the name of equality. Karen Finney is a Socialist twit and a hemorrhoid on the posterior of the human race, in case you need her comments put into perspective. Edit: ts_flanders makes a valid point that I had not stopped to think about. A female coworker of mine leaves about 15 - 20 minutes early every day. She has already taken off several sick days and never volunteers to fill a shift for a coworker who is out on vacation. I'll bet I get paid more than her and it is because I pull my share of the load and I'm not a shirker like she is. She states she hasn't received a raise in two years and we both work for the same female boss. I've received raises both of the last 2 years. This idiotic law would allow her to sue for being paid less than me when the reason is obvious. She's lazy.
6. (yawning)....so what's the problem??
7. We don't need new legislation for something that doesn't need fixing. Women and men both already have the opportunity to make the same amount of money. Show me a job advertisement that says men will be paid $50,000 .... women will be paid $45,000. IT DOESN'T EXIST. If women would put in the extra overtime and effort in their jobs, perhaps they would EARN as much money as men.
8. If McCain wins this election...I predict that it will be the end of the Democratic Party. Granted that women are already a protected group....but For him to win, meaning a substantial number of Democrats crossed party lines, in spite of this sort of thing, would mean that the Democrats have nothing left to stand for. It has been rare in American history that a party dissolves and is replaced by a new one. But it has happened, and if they fail to represent anything viable..it is bound to happen again.
9. Oh! Really? I'll be damn. I would know if you don't open your big mouth. Since you wrote so long, what you gonna do bout it? Better still, what can you do? Maybe you just keep on talking only.
10. .Would you pass a bill, allowing for free medical care, if you could not hold any doctor liable for malpractice? Sometimes a bill that sounds good may hold little details that make it very bad. It's an old trick. One party sponsors a bill that sounds good, but when the details are looked at, makes things even worse than they currently are. When the bill fails, the sponsoring party makes the opposition look as if they don't support some aggrieved party. Funny how the timing worked on this story.
11. There's not unequal pay now, so why the hell do we need a law? Please tell me no one still believes the old BS that men make more than women. You do know the sociologist who first proclaimed this difference now says that it doesn't now nor did it ever exist, you do know that don't you.