Skip to comments.The Meltdown of the Obama Genderhawks
Posted on 04/09/2014 4:08:49 AM PDT by Kaslin
I have created a new species designation for the female Democrats who play hypocritical gender politics on behalf of Barack Obama. They're genderhawks.
You remember the term "chickenhawk," don't you? During the Bush years, anti-war activists and journalists hurled the ad hominem epithet at anyone who supported military action against our enemies but hadn't personally served.
I say let's give 'em a dose of their own tactical medicine.
Genderhawks are feminist chickenhawks. They demand "equal pay" for women, practice militant identity politics based on chromosomes and purport to wage an all-out government war on gender inequity. Yet, they personally refuse to hold themselves and their lousy male bosses accountable for their own gender-based failures and delinquencies.
Meet genderhawk Jennifer Palmieri. The Clinton administration veteran faithfully defended a lecherous philanderer-in-chief against what his sexist operatives called "bimbo eruptions." Then she served as spokeswoman for adulterous crapweasel John Edwards. Now, she is Obama's communications flack and chief social media gender warrior. On Tuesday, which Team Obama and its feminist pals dubbed "Equal Pay Day," Palmieri took to Twitter to call out the sexist White House press corps:
"Love all these guys, but note that 6 of 7 news orgs in front row sent men to ask @presssec abt the problem of gender pay inequity," Palmieri tweeted.
Oooh. Get it? Palmieri was womansplaining, gender-shaming and upside-the-head-smacking the mainstream media for sending tone-deaf men to ask about women's issues. She really zapped and zinged 'em, didn't she?!
Well, only in her Beltway bubble-wrapped head.
Palmieri humiliated just one person: herself. In her faux-minist fog, she forgot that her own boss, the president, is a man . His vice president is a man . Their labor secretary is a man . In fact, 12 of 15 Obama cabinent members are dastardly men. And White House press secretary Jay Carney, sent by her male managers to answer questions about gender equity from the men Palmieri deemed insufficiently sensitive to women's issues, is a man .
Thankfully, sane journalists of both genders pushed back against Palmieri's identity politics run amok. Fox News reporter Ed Henry fired back: "WH sent man to podium, right?" Pittsburgh Tribune-Review reporter Salena Zito retorted: "In your line of (thought) Jennifer, a woman should have taken the question for the White House not a man." National Review's Charles W. Cooke quizzed: "Would the answers have been different if the questions had been asked by women?"
Forced to respond, Palmieri grudgingly acknowledged that the press secretary carries XY chromosomes, but she rationalized that he's a man "who advocates for policies to reduce gender pay inequality and appreciates seriousness of problem." See, gals? Jay Carney feels your pain -- unlike those chauvinist pigs in the press corps asking pesky questions about bogus White House wage inequity stats! See, guys? If you pay lip service to caring, you can be honorary genderhawks, too.
Obama and his femme-a-gogue flock aren't fooling anyone. It's not just evil men and right-wingers raising questions about the Democrats' Equal Pay Day theater. Reporters bombarded Carney about a new American Enterprise Institute study that found that the salary for the median female White House staffer is 12 percent lower than for a male staffer. Carney meekly replied that at least the White House pay gap is not as bad as the national average.
Both the left-wing Daily Beast and the free-market Wall Street Journal opinion pages debunked the "77 cents on a dollar" myth, which inflates the gender gap by failing to account for education, occupation and marital status. When challenged on the White House promotion of junk science, Carney sneered at a Reuters reporter that he "would expect something a little more precise."
While Palmieri runs interference for Carney and Obama, the cloud of sexism charges hanging over the White House hasn't gone away. It's liberal media outlets including The New York Times and Time magazine that have noted the "boys' club" climate at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, epitomized by the glaring absence of women in featured Oval Office photos of Obama's meetings with senior advisers. (Well, except for that one photo that showed a sliver of Valerie Jarrett's leg.)
And it was a top female aide, Anita Dunn, who very precisely told author Ron Suskind on tape that the Obama White House "actually fit all of the classic legal requirements for a genuinely hostile workplace to women."
Meanwhile, Obama genderhawk Jennifer Palmieri thinks squawking about male reporters is the way to achieve feminist social justice. Whatever we're paying this unhinged, selective man-hating lady is way too much.
Lol. He’s not giving women a 25% discount but charging men a 25% up charge. This has to be satire.
Personally, I prefer the term moonbat bitches
“she forgot that her own boss, the president, is a man . His vice president is a man”
Could have fooled me.
Michele Malkin is absolutely brilliant in this piece.
One gem after another.
She is another example of Rush’s Unavoidable Truth About Feminism - it allows unattractive women access to the mainstream.
Ex-wife + ugly = feminist
“Equal effort” is a red herring, drawn across the path of anybody trying to get to the bottom of the mystery of how it is that men seem to wind up with larger paychecks than women.
The fact is, anybody gets just about as much money in exchange for the time and effort put in on the job as the rest of society is willing to give that person. Rock stars and sports figures get lots of money because, well, poor people give rich people money. In some dimly perceived way, the very act of elevating another to an exalted status somehow elevates even the lowest to think, “Hey, maybe I has a little something to do with that.”
Applauding with cash is a time-honored method of showing that approval and personal affection for another, and defining that trigger by which a greater or lesser amount of reward is showered upon an individual is as elusive as trying to prove any article of faith or personal belief. The impulse would seem incoherent or totally irrational to anyone else.
Some would question that assumption.
IF I ran a company, I would do the following after Obama’s EO about ‘Equal pay for Equal work’.
I would call in every one of my employees to a meeting, hourly & salaried alike.
I would announce that every single one of them will now be punching in a time clock—at or before 8 in the AM, punching out for lunch, back in at the end of lunch, and out at 5 pm. Any late arrivals, or early departures would result in pay being docked.
I would make sure every single one knew that I was setting up a system in which I could prove whether men & women did the same amount of ‘hours’. Any assignments which were not done in the time expected would result in a write-up.
From such time forward, if anyone took off for a dental appointment, or such, it would be docked from their pay. IF a ‘mother’ whined about having to leave for medical appointments with their kids, I would remind them-—THEY CANNOT HAVE IT ALL. You want to have a ‘CAREER’ and you want to have kids....choose. I am paying employees to be here to do their JOBS....not to be making plans to leave for another ‘appointment’.
I have personally never seen equal work from women across the board at any place I ever worked. VERY, very few of them were on a ‘career path’. Their paycheck was an ‘extra’ for the household. They didn’t take the job very seriously, and they didn’t have much in mind about promotions. They didn’t continue their education. They didn’t treat their job as a place to be for their working life. Very few even understood their role in keeping a company competitive.
They use their kids as a reason they ‘have to leave early’ or ‘come in late’. When that happens, the work load gets put upon the others who didn’t take any time off. Did WE get paid extra for covering ‘Susie’s missing efforts”? Hell, no!! But the workload had to be done.
I lived with this for my entire working life. I never had any kids. and was single most of my life. It was a factor in my becoming self-employed before I was 40. I resented it then, and I still have such resentment.
“This work has to be finished today, and ‘Susie’ is out because one of her kids is sick” was never a welcome statement.
Measuring the balance of ‘Equal Work’ for ‘Equal pay’ is an impossibility.....especially in a paper world. Only can be done when someone is making parts in a factory, etc. Then you can compare ‘units of production’.
Obama is running another smoke & mirrors policy in front of women to dupe them into continuing to vote for Democrats.
I challenge other business owners to find a way to do such measuring.
Someone needs to find his ‘big boy pants’ & learn to “Cowboy Up”.
Some hilarious stuff here.
Deny at your peril, patriarchy! Dont miss this gut-busting mockery of ridiculous feminist signs [pics]
Back when I was in the ‘work’ work force (Asphalt Paving) we never had to really ‘put up’ with females in the field but naturally had them in the office, and as usual happens with most ‘office pogues’ the world revolves around them, NOT the people in the field or plants that keep the money flowing in to pay the ‘Office Pogues’ — from the Owner down to the flat laborer that was hired yesterday.
When I got to ‘ownership’ and in my ‘bar room discussions’ when this so called equality for minorities and females would rise, my stock ‘smart ass’ remark would be
“If it is true that men are being paid .25 more per hour than females and minorities, then all of us ‘hirers’ are flat stupid for not firing ALL the men and hire ‘others’ in their place and put the .25 in our own pockets”.
There used to be a story running around that when RFK took over as AG he started visiting plants and work places around the country in the name of ‘equality’ with the bottom line being to stamp out the inequality of hiring only whites in ‘Southern plants’.
His entourage pulled up to some factory in Alabama and RFK sought out the owner and started reading the ‘riot act’ about hiring practices.
The owner excused himself, called in his secretary and asked just what he had to do.
RFK went on to break down that (say) 20% of the force should be minority and minorities should have a goodly share of the ‘management’ positions.
Owner turned to secretary and said:
‘Start with the A’s, and work up dismissal papers on the first 250 minority employees, INCLUDING supervisors’
turning to RFK
‘you see sir, I have 1000(?) employees and currently have 450 Blacks on my payroll. I will be most UNHAPPY to get in compliance with Government standards and keep 200 Blacks as I don’t want to be in danger of not meeting YOUR quotas.’
“NOW you can leave my office, I have to go hire some employees to replace the 250 that I had to FIRE, per your instructions”.