Powered by TypePad

« Fly Me To The Moon | Main | Bring It On! »

August 26, 2012





TM: "...someone else is paying for it, so it's all good"

Fed "pilot program" in 4 states giving all school kids, regardless of need, free breakfast and lunch. Two of the states are MI and WV, so the other two may be OH, NV, NM, name that swing state.

Danube of Thought

Shame on you, Iggy.

"Familes fooish enough to believe Obama's promise that if they liked their health care they could keep it..."

The New York Times said that? What's going on?

Melinda Romanoff

Or have some Federal Agency take care of that for them.

If they prove they voted properly.


This is a bizarre development that undercuts the basic goal of health care reform — to expand the number of insured people and make their coverage affordable.

Reveal preference is a useful concept to keep in mind while trying to make sense of the world. Of course, politicians and the power-worshiping lewinsky press would like the notion to be ignored. What is termed a "bizarre development" relative to "the basic goal of health care reform" might be more accurately described as simply the preferred reality of the new government-managed system, the goals of which are different than the unicorns-and-rainbows bs as promoted by the lickspittle shills at the nytimes.


"The people left in the lurch would be those who had lower incomes but were not poor enough to qualify for Medicaid."

Oh, The Humanity !....

Well for those who favor the Hobbesian Choice, this is good news. Cuz, ya know, Obama is gonna short-sheet the poor, and you guys will be their Champion.


hit and run

The New York Times said that? What's going on?

They didn't. It's TM -- mistakenly blockquoted....


Bizarre development? It was obvious from the beginning that this would happen. They were warned repeatedly.

hit and run

But then...
"Familes fooish enough to believe Obama's promise that if they liked their health care they could keep it..."

Why is TM gratuitously slamming Foo Bar there? He hasn't been here in months.

Rick Ballard

"But that seems unlikely at a time when House Republicans are determined to do everything possible to disrupt the health care reform law."

The position of the majority in the House is reflected by their vote to repeal Obamacare. The Democrat Majority Leader and Reputed Pederast in the Senate has refused to allow a vote on repeal.

The House vote to repeal is supported by a majority of the American electorate. How very odd the NYT fails to note the fact.

Danube of Thought

Thanks hit. Order has been restored.


Actually passing it doesn't tell us much either. We need a probe inserted in Sebelius cranium to know what will be required/provided.


We need a probe inserted in Sebelius

I would not do her with my best friend's package...


It is frightening to know that Sebelius has more power than a soccer official.

What a mess this incompetent fraud has created for us and our grandchildren.


--I would not do her with my best friend's package...--

Even if it had been treated with VEET hair removal potion?

Danube of Thought

Mickey Kaus nails the MFM on the eve of the convention. God, do I yearn for the outright death of NPR.


Mickey sure has the MFM's number.. "Will the pre-game analysis of Charlotte be “Still-mysterious Obama desperately needs to outline second term agenda”? …"

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/08/25/mute-it-with-meta/#ixzz24fPJSXAL


Iggy, I held off overfilling my friends emails with the Veet review, but I think I HAVE to do it.


New Obama ad The Do-Over contends it's Romney who desperately needs one, not Preezy "We're not where we want to be."


Tracking map seems to have shifted westward again. Now seems to be centered on Gulfport Mississippi. Creeping ever westward is NOLA next? I think the 9th ward is abandoned now, maybe the lack of people in the area changes the level of misery?


Entertainment Weekly scratching their head, we totally ignored 2016 how can this be happening:

Here’s how things have gone for 2016: Obama’s America, though: Three weekends ago, 2016 earned $34,133 out of 10 theaters, which gave it a per theater average of $3,413 — not all that remarkable for a limited release. When it expanded into 61 theaters the next weekend, its per theater average did a funny thing: it jumped up to $5,202. Last weekend, the film experienced an even bigger expansion, into 169 theaters, and again, its per theater average substantially leapt up to $7,365.

Let’s be clear: this almost never happens.

This phenomenon might actually be a real example of a preference cascade.


Meanwhile in Florida, appeals to the stupid continue to be televised. Last night I noted the appearance of an ad for the loathsome Alan Grayson in which senior citizens scowled their opposition to Grayson's Republican opponent's plan to privatize Social Security on the grounds that "It's my money!"

Today, ads for Obama warning that Mitt Romney wants to raise taxes so you shouldn't vote for him.


Gallup while still tracking RVs shows a tie, yet RAS is showing a small lead for Zero? I think Scott is deliberating hyping the "close race" thing, thinking it gets him more premium members, more air time and publicity. LVs should be significantly more Republican than RVs and his own intensity measurements have been significantly more Republican for two years. When does he change and see "movement"? A couple of weeks before the election is my guess, why not keep milking the cow? Maybe once Gallup goes likely voter he will be shamed into though and that should be early October.

unpossible mission

Ryan had become the Dick Tracy comic strip character with a personal rain cloud over his head - - and just as Ryan was to jet off for the Tampa Convention a bigger, legitimate storm - - Hurricane Isaac - - took aim at the Florida Gulf Coast and has already cut at least one day off four days of GOP hoopla there.

They say national party nominating conventions are intentionally superficial and scripted, but this one won't escape some discussion of changing climate extremes - - Ryan voted against measures to stem greenhouse gas emissions (see a report on Ryan's record, p. 136) - - even if the Tampa event puts more climate change deniers under one roof than attended the last ALEC reunion.

And as Florida first responders are pressed into action with the approaching hurricane, Romney may wish he hadn't said the lesson of Scott Walker's recall election win was that we didn't need more firefighters and police officers.

Tampa had already heavily borrowed police from across Florida to help with convention security, and that was before Isaac began to bear down on the convention city.

Nothing has gone right for the the GOP since Ryan loped into an oddly-choreographed early Saturday morning news conference/photo op on the dock off the USS Wisconsin, now a museum ship permanently tied up in Virginia.

It's still a long way to November 6th - - but shorter by two weeks, and counting, then when Ryan joined Team Romney.

Rocky takeoff for sure, in part because Ryan didn't use those two lost weeks to show us he's ready to sit in the Captain's seat.

In fact, he hasn't looked much different than Dan Quayle, 2.0.


Must be a lot of fun house mirrors at Pitzer...


Jeb Bush with a useful message just before the convention, especially in light of 2010.

I like W and GHWB personally, but I kinda wish this whole frickin family would permanently STFU.


Now Hillary's research director, probably 'dialed it up to 11', he forgets what they
did to him in '94.

Danube of Thought

I recall remarking more than six months ago that O was doing better with Raz's LVs than with Gallup's RVs.

Rick Ballard


Gallup is providing most of the information necessary to develop an LV screen from their RV numbers. If you click on the 2012 DEMOGRAPHICS tab, there is an Excel download button and the "Definitely vote" percentage can be used as an additional screen. Note that Gallup's sample is very heavily over weight for >50. They re-weight against 2008 turnout by age group to get their total percentage.

Gallup is also projecting 8% undecided across all age groups. I have sincere doubts as to whether reality is reflected by that assumption.

I believe next Sunday's 'big story' will be the size of the post convention bounce for Governor Romney. Gallup has already announced a 'historical standard' of 5% and I will be very surprised if Governor Romney gets more than a 3% bounce. If he does get 3% against expectations of 5%, it will be trumpeted as evidence of weakness.

Danube of Thought

"The parallels between 2008 and 1932 are not trifling."

--Dana Gilbert Ward of Pitzer College

Danube of Thought

I do not suspect either Rasmussen or Gallup of manipulating their data to achieve a desired outcome for any purpose, either financial orpolitical.

Danube of Thought

I also doubt Romney's bounce will exceed 3%. i expect Obama may not get one at all.


I do not suspect either Rasmussen or Gallup of manipulating their data to achieve a desired outcome

Well then reconcile for me the disparate outcomes? As rick rightly points out Gallup has a certain to vote screen that is showing Republicans at 88% and Democrats at 81%. That will not yield a LV result more favorable for Democrats than the RV results.

I am looking for a reason that is obvious or subtle to allow both results to be correct. I do not currently see one, but maybe I am missing it, enlighten me.


Well they sampled 56/44, F/M for the poll on the Kinay, that's a touch of weight on the scale, maybe the strongly dissaprove/approve
determination makes a difference.


Lets assume for the moment that the self ID in the electorate is 36% D and 34% R.

Using the certain vote metric as a proxy for likely voter you end up with:

29.1 % D
29.9 % R

If the self ID is equal ( using 34% each ) you would get:

27.5 % D
29.9 % R

or +2.4 R

You may note that I have been saying I think this election is likely to be historical in recent times, in that more Republicans will show up and vote than Democrats by about + 2.

Danube of Thought

Correction: at this point Gallup is still polling adults, at least in its approval polls.

I can't explain the differing outcomes, because too many subjective judgments are brought to bear by both organizations.

Could it be that Gallup favors Republicans, and wants to encourage them? I don't believe so for one second; nor do I believe that it favors Democrats. I think it is simply a case of two professional polling organizations using different methodologies and applying different judgments.

For either organization to fudge their results for any purpose would be to court absolute disaster. The fudging would have to be known to a number of employees, any one of whom could blow the whistle to the Washington Post and destroy a reputation earned over decades--in the case of Gallup, more than half a century.

Danube of Thought

"more Republicans will show up and vote than Democrats by about + 2."

Sure hope so. Raz's generic congressional ballot last week had the GOP by 1.


to fudge their results for any purpose would be to court absolute disaster.

Have you ever heard of Tom Jensen? Take a look at PPP sometime. Pollsters know they are judged on their last poll before the election, vis a vis the election. Folks like Jensen have no problem monkeying with polls that are outside of that, if they think they can move public opinion.

Scott is trying to make a living out of his public polling, and he does have some motivation financially to make it a close horse race. If he did not buckle previously to criticism from hack Nate Silver of the NYT and change his model, I would be less suspect of him. But my memory is quite good and he absolutely did that, so it not impossible to think his model could be mallable again.

I will listen to arguments that can reconcile the two results, but Gallup being too Republican is not supported by any historical results. That one does not pass the test.

Rick Ballard

"nor do I believe that it favors Democrats"


That's not quite true. There is a 1-2.5% bias in Gallup modeling which was pretty glaring in their final polling for 2008. It's what allows Rasmussen to pitch 'closest to the mark' when selling product.

Gallup has gone very 'open source' this cycle, providing a ton of basic demographic splits in comparison to Rasmussen's 'secret sauce' methodology.

The Gallup bias may be due to Republican's refusal to be polled. I know I've never been included in any of their samples and I don't feel particularly isolated (I don't discriminate - Rasmussen doesn't count me either).

Jane - talk is cheap!

I also doubt Romney's bounce will exceed 3%. i expect Obama may not get one at all.

Dick and I discussed this on the air on Thursday. He is intent on believing no bounce - no win. I don't think there will be much of a bounce. I think what is happening is a wave and it's gonna grow and grow into a tsunami by November.


My untutored view is that polling is both science and art, and at this stage of the game the subjective factors of the polling firms may account for the difference we see between Gallup and Raz.


correction of the correction

Gallup is polling Registered Voters in the head to head. Follow the link and note the subheading of the title : among Registered Voters



Jim Ryan

Romney's "Ryan speech bounce" will be significant. Ryan is unknown to many who will tune in to watch him speak, and he will impress them.


Having just come from sacrificing a chicken, I shall now rummage around in the entrails and get back to you on the outcome of this election. Before my inspection I can safely say it will either be hearts soaring like hawks or DOOM.

Anything else I should divine? BCS? World Series. I'm available for weddings.

Jim Ryan

Frau, I loved the pic of the Major Matt Mason shirt, thanks. Hanks has been trying to make a movie with himself as Mason, by the way.


--My untutored view is that polling is both science and art--

My untutored view it is science and art in the same way a witch doctor, or MarkO, engages in science and art.


Rick point is a good one. Bias can be deliberate or systemic. Polling in general does seem to have a systemic bias for Democrats. It may well be that caller ID and busy lives make Republican harder to find. More Democrats are polled than ever show up to the polls, even in 2008.


My mentor, David Seville:



You need an inspection certificate from Hialeah, Mark, in order to verify that you properly sacrificed the chicken, Rule 123.45.subsection 4,


No if we want to indiscriminate in your slaughterings, that can be arranged;


Danube of Thought

Rick, I only meant "favors" in the sense of a rooting interest, not the mathematical sense.

Danube of Thought

"Gallup being too Republican is not supported by any historical results"

Please note that I rejected the notion out of hand. But one could "prove" it by comparing Gallup's results to Rasmussen's just as well as one could prove the reverse by looking at it from the opposite direction..

Clarice expresses my view.


narc, I prefer to sacrifice my poultry by acting out scenes from the New Testament.

Danube of Thought

Appreciate the correction. Posting from iPad and can't look around very well.

Charlie (Colorado)

New Obama ad The Do-Over contends it's Romney who desperately needs one, not Preezy "We're not where we want to be."

Isn't it funny this ad came out right at the same time Mickey Kaus pointed out the legacy media hitting the same theme?



No if there is a proof is is versus actual voters not against another pollster. Rick is correct that Gallup does tend to lean a little to the Democrats, not as much as the University pollsters or the media polls do.

Rasmussen in the past trumpeted using his survey of self ID on a rolling three month to adjust the sample. Then he withered under the sawed off runts criticism and changed it. Now he seems to be hiding the ball. He seems to be using a something like a D + 4 model although its impossible to tell. Does shield him from criticism from the Nate Silver's of the world, but pollster that dont show their work usually are hiding something.


What do you say about this review;



The problem is that the bias is insidious and in the case of the Left isn't even recognized. All right thinking people think the way they do, of course. Except when there is a sea change.

There is a deep unease with Obama and his policies. On the Left and on the Right.Obama's campaign is to sling as much mud as possible and hope it sticks.

The "are you better off than you were 4 years ago?" argument and the terrible record of Obama's administration, along with it's incredible crookery should be the issues at which Romney keeps hammering.

Danube of Thought

I should make my point more clearly: I don't believe that either of these two pollsters massages his data out of a desire to see one party or the other win.

In the 2010 wave, weren't R and D equal?

Danube of Thought

Suppose pollster X wants Obama to win, and will adjust his poll so as to improve Obama's chances. What does Pollster X do? Does he portray Obama as being ahead, in order to discourage Republicans from voting? Or does he show Obama behind, in order to generate more contributions? Does showing a candidate ahead increase or decrease the turnout of his supporters?


They have gone deeply splunge, as is the wont of the House of Conquistador;



Take the CBS/NY Times or NBC/WSJ poll, one thinks one would be embarassed to cite them
in polite company, the dogs would get a rash
and the fish would swim away, yetthey do so.

Danube of Thought

Today Gallup shows 45% approval for Obama among Adults. Raz shows 49% among LV's.

What, if anything, does this tell us about either pollster's preference in the election? (I maintain the answer is zero.)


Note I never implied the data is massaged in order for someone to win. I did give a plausible motivation for RAS having a result which is counterintuitive of the migration from RV to LV.

In the 2010 wave, weren't R and D equal?


And the migration out of the Democrat party has continued since then.

No recent presidential election has been Even for turnout, which the fall back argument given when someone points out that the facts dont currently seem to be pointing to a D + 4 turnout.

I continue to think R + 2 is where the vote will end up, but Even works as well. I got a full wallet that says D + 4 is not going to be anywhere close to being right when the dust settles in early November. Who wants that easy money? Cmon, CBS says it D +8, I am spotting you 4 heads up!

JM Hanes

If you're looking for a little comic relief, try this AP Interview with teh One. Obama 2.0 will be all about reaching across the aisle!

Obama also offered a glimpse of how he would govern in a second term of divided government.... He said two changes — the facts that "the American people will have voted," and that Republicans will no longer need to be focused on beating him — could lead to better conditions for deal-making.


Where does Obama see himself closing the deal? In the debates!

The president said Romney could run into trouble because of arguments that are not backed up by facts, citing a widely debunked television ad campaign in which Romney accuses Obama of gutting the work requirement in the federal welfare law.

You can find out everything you need to know about Obama by looking at what he says about his opponents.


What, if anything, does this tell us about either pollster's preference in the election?

Now you are resorting to strawmen to make a counterpoint to an argument never raised. Do show me where I said either pollster has preference on a winner?

Danube of Thought

We are in general agreement, Gmax.


Good Morning!

From an aviation Weather site I deal with a lot here is the aviation forecast for the next few days at KTPA (Tampa International).

------------------------- FORECAST -------------------------
TAF KTPA 261739Z 2618/2718 05014G22KT P6SM VCTS SCT025CB BKN050
TEMPO 2618/2622 07022G32KT 5SM SHRA BKN025
FM262200 06011G21KT P6SM VCTS SCT010 BKN020CB OVC050
FM270600 07012G22KT 6SM -RA VCTS SCT007 BKN020CB
FM271400 09015G25KT 5SM RA VCTS SCT012 BKN025CB =

In plain language what that is saying is that between 1800 on the 26th and 1800 on the 27th, the winds are forecast as from the direction of 050 degrees at 14 knots, with gusts up to 22 Knots. (No big deal at all). Visibility greater than 6 Statute miles, and scattered clouds at 2,500 feet, and an overcast at 5,000 feet.

Looks like they can expect light rain on the 27th after 0600, and more rain after 1400, so at least for the airport no big deal.

That's as far out as they are forecasting at the airport. There are some Sigmets (Significant Meteorological Reports) at the end of my weather page discussing the Tropical Storm/Hurricane, but nothing of consequence so far for Tampa.


That's another way of saying 'I Won' isn't it?

JM Hanes


"Do show me where I said either pollster has preference on a winner?"

But you are suggesting that Rasmussen is cynically manipulating his data to make the race look closer than it actually is, no?


JMH cynically is in the eye of the beholder. What I believe is two things. One RAS is not showing his results, which is bad for a pollster. Two he knows his results show both a self ID of +1 R and an intensity on the part of Republicans far in excess of Democrats.

Are both of those because he fears another lashing from Silver? Or does the coinage look pretty good and plenty of time to find "movement"?

Can say for sure, I just cant reconcile the two polls.

And apparently based on the discussion here, no else can either. At least so far.


I wonder if he saw the tribute at the Olympics;



I should have said "work" not results. Typing speed got ahead of brain speed. Hey it happens. Grin.

bio mom

The problem is not the pollsters. The big problem for the country is the biased, corrupt, mediocre media.



There was no indication in that long, multi-AP reporters interview that Obama was even mildly challenged on any of his multitudinous lies. Still incredible despite the low view I hold of the msm.


Tories turned off by extreme Republican party

"Why, most of those fellows are still enamored of Churchill! Can you imagine?"

JM Hanes

Knew what ya meant, GMax. Do you know if there's any recent polling from Pennsylvania? I keep hoping for some evidence that it might actually be in play, but so far, I haven't seen any.


I am disheartened that Obama can muster more than 25% approval.

Rick Ballard


Look for reports of sightings of an unusual number of clean cut young men in white short sleeved shirts and clip on ties going door to door in suburban and rural Pennsylvania. That would be a very strong tip off.


The president said Romney could run into trouble because of arguments that are not backed up by facts

And the president could run into trouble because of arguments that are backed up by facts.


I am playing around with the certain to vote screen Gallup provides us that Rick put us onto. Here is a link


Go to the tab that slices by age group. Note Zero carries only one demographic the 18-29 year olds among RV and is losing the 50-64 and 65+ big time. Now click on the tab given for "Certain to vote".

It shows the yutes to be 60% certain while the 50+ crowd are at 85 and 86% respectively.


I dont think you need much of a math background to see the impact of that turnout differential, especially.

Yes there was a PA poll yesterday from a group I never heard of that had a very improbable Democrat lead. Could not find internals, and common sense says if OHIO and Michigan are close so too is Pa. But no I dont have a poll that can show it.


Well Carter, had 37% at this time, according to Gallup.

Charlie (Colorado)

And apparently based on the discussion here, no else can either. At least so far.

One of the problems with talking about polls is they're statistical, and it's not intuitive to say "we don't know". (I blame the Law of Excluded Middle.) But the real answer to the questions most everyone has been asking is "we don't know".

All these registered and likely voter polls, first of all, are based on a model or the population. How much do you believe it when someone says "I'm registered to vote"? how many of those people are wrong? how about likely voters? Then these samples are adjusted, not only to account for your methods on that, but also to a turnout model.

Any errors in any lof these models introduces what's called a "systematic bias" -- but in statistics a systematic error is just a procedure that changes the shape of the posterior distribution. it doesn't imply intent. So yes, technically.y there may be a systematic error here, but that doesn't mean there is a conscious bias. It might well be someone making the decision has a method for assigning their turnout model that has an unconscious bias.

Second thing is more of the results are actually within or near their margin of error. That just means that the math suggests the real value lies within a band around a mean. That mean is from a random variate with (roughly) a normal "bell curve" distribution, and all it means is "the chances are about 19 in 20 that the value would really be within this band."

Averages of polls, like RCP, are nearly meaningless: you can make an argument that there's more information there, but putting together all these different polls means the variance *increases*. Meaning the margin of error increases. By the time RCP has averaged a dozen polls, the real margin of error might be plus/minus 10 points.

The point is that when you have two different polls, with one saying Romney +2 and the other saying Obama +1, the polls actually *agree*. They're not telling you "Romney (or Obama) is winning", they're just telling you and "either Romney or Obama is gonna win."

Rick Ballard


The actual weights of the Gallup age groups in 2008 were:

18-29 18%
30-49 32%
50-64 30%
65+ 20%

The current samples are grossly over weight >50 and have to be adjusted.


Ex-MI guv Jennifer Granholm tweet:

"R convention delay due to Isaac: I guess God has ways to shut that whole thing down"

Talk about someone who holds "extreme" views.

bio mom

This talk from Dems was predictable and reflects who they are.Sad.


--I am disheartened that Obama can muster more than 25% approval.

Posted by: MarkO | August 26, 2012 at 02:40 PM --

When Barry's signature is on the front of all or a part of the paychecks 50% of the people receive we're lucky it isn't higher than it is.

bio mom

I agree with Charlie. Most head to head and swing state polls are margin of error differences. Race is tied.

Pray for the Gulf. And I am sure Obama will milk this storm as much as he can.


So how does candidate internal polling get a more accurate numb er?


So God is killing people to keep Republicans from holding a convention. Good thing her name isnt Palin.

Jim Rhoads a/k/a vjnjagvet

Another great job, Clarice, and kudos to Jane and JMH for their contributions. If ever there was a undressing of the current "war on women" meme this was it.

I watched that war and I know that during my career, women won the war in college, professional school and law practice. My 1965 class at Penn had a total of 8 women in a class of about 200. The firm I first worked for in Atlanta was a 16 person management labor firm with a national practice. In 1968 it had a female partner and two female associates. The partner left to start her own firm and was counsel to Doe of Doe v. Bolton, the companion to Roe v. Wade. One of the female associates became Chief Judge of the Georgia Court of Appeals, GA's intermediate appellate court. The other became a Judge in the Northern District of GA where she still sits in senior status. All were under 40 when they assumed those positions.

In 1974, my partner and I started a new firm. Our first summer associate was an AA female from Vanderbilt who went on to become the County Attorney. We discovered early on that only good came of hiring women to practice with us because it virtually doubled the talent pool. Because many of the women were such good lawyers, it made perfect sense to help them manage pregnancy, child raising and other issues unique to women. By 1989, our firm had grown to about 50 attorneys in four states. The gender mix was always close to 50/50 because that was generally the mix of great candidates from excellent law schools.

It was women like Clarice, Jane, JMH, RSE and others that blazed the trail for the excellent current cohort of female professionals, and it was my good fortune to have worked with such women. Thanks.


ABC has this wierd cross promotion thing with Current TV, otherwise we wouldn't know that
she mattered, not that she does.


Jane, when you drop by, I finally watched Fox News Sunday on the cable replay. For the first time, I actually "like" Romney. I agree it was an excellent interview and presentation of them at home and as people.

JM Hanes

It's depressing to have to put MO back on my swing state list, but I noticed that Rasmussen says, "The margin of sampling error is +/- 4.5 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence." Since this is edu day, could one of our pros tell me how those two things interact?


--Since this is edu day...--

Geez, I hope there isn't going to be a test because I'm not only not paying attention but was planning on cutting class after lunch.


When I was still in college and working a Summer sales job, our District Manager was asked why he hired so many women (a majority), especially women with babies. His answer was simple, "They work harder because they aren't working for themselves, they work to feed, clothe and house their kids." This was back in the mid '60s, long before anyone had heard of a woman's movement.

OTOH, when I first went to work for the newspaper in the advertising department, male pay was about $100 more a week in all pay grades than their women counterparts. In the mid '70s there was a rebellion and the company's explanation was that men had families to support. This caused outrage and became the cause du jour since in just one of the three big adv. departments, classified, there were over 100 employees, all women, and 73% were sole providers for themselves and one or more children. When the facts were presented, we got our parody in two ways: the pay was equalized and they began to hire a few men for the department.

Our last big gender fight came over contract advertisers. The big bonus money came from lineage and lineage came from car dealers more than any other type of client. There was some archaic idea at the paper that car dealerships and used car lots were no place for a woman, so they were not allowed to handle those accounts. It took us longer to get that restriction lifted than it did to get parody in pay and promotions.

However, by 1975, all those issues were settled. That was over 30 years ago. Who is out of touch with this silly "war on women?" In every other area of life, except car mechanics, I have found being a woman a definite advantage.


Thanks, Jim. Very kind.

Jim Eagle

daddy, et.al,

We (NE Florida) are already getting counter clock wise squall bands from Isaac. Intermittent wind, rain and sunshine. Heavy surf, red flag riptides, tidal surges - and Isaac is still 50 miles SSE of Key West. Tampa is not on the perimeter yet since the vector is more NNW and moving WNW every hour or so. We are a 3 hour drive from Tampa and already feeling Isaac - so imagine what Tampa is going to feel - rain and lots of it for at least a day or maybe two. But not evacuation kind of rain and wind. But it might dampen the enthusiasm of the weirdo set and Biden (I repeat myself, sorry).


I'm reading the archives. Peter was the first to say Romney 2012 when we learned Obama won.

Danube of Thought

"So how does candidate internal polling get a more accurate number?"

It doesn't. The idea that a candidate has "internal" polls that he trusts more than the ones he reads about in the paper is one of the enduring political myths.

The comments to this entry are closed.