Every now and people who appear rational find themselves repeating nonsense, usually in the Nashua Telegraph which is one of New Hampshire leading sources for editorial nonsense. This time around it’s a guest commentary from Robert Collinsworth, who has an internet footprint large enough to identify him as an otherwise sensible guy. So why has he taken to the editorial pages to sell the left wing meme that there is a gender/wage gap?
I only bring it up because his reasoning is right out of the liberal weenie play book. Women only make 0.78/$1.00 compared to men. He then asks why Republicans in the US senate are blocking the liberal legislation being sold as a fix, as if we can and should trust this unexplored talking point.
Rather than try explore any one persons motivations or sanity, we should probably just look deeper into the issue, and a Bill that looks like it creates more problems than it solves. (Links and resources on the jump.)
Like most liberal shibboleths Paycheck Fairness is based on incomplete analysis to pander to a bloc of voters the democrats have identified as worthy of their endless grievance mongering. To repeat their talking points is, as far as I can tell, not worthy of Mr. Collinsworth or anyone else.
This is not an issue that can be evaluated strictly on the price paid for an hour of labor averaged across the full spectrum of work and wages. To do so ignores every other factor in life, the free market, and the real danger that the legislative solution being proposed creates.
[ UPDATED Senator McConnell has officially come out against earmarks:“Today, I am announcing that I will join the Republican leadership in the House in support of a moratorium on earmarks in the 112th Congress,” he said].
There’s something you might want to keep in mind about the state level Democrat wind machine as we move forward toward 2012.
survive without them so they need to manipulate the business/worker environment to maximize their income earning potential. 
Democrats continue to insist that they created jobs. To do this they extracted trillions from our economic future in an effort to create jobs that did not yet exist–that perhaps were not needed yet. Looking at similar exercises, cash for clunkers–which moved car sales forward a few months but has since resulted in a collapse in the market; the home mortgage bail outs, supports, credits, and the "home affordable" programs which improved home sales briefly but which have since collapsed (also to historic lows); and then there’s the stimulus, several public sector employee bailouts, bank lending infusions, small business bills, and everything in between including health care reform–many trillions spent, all made with claims that they would create, save, or incentivize job creation.
Carol Seiu-Porter gets 50% of her PAC money from Unions. You remember the Unions? Their leadership extorts taxpayer dollars away from the real workers to pay union employees then demands that they tithe money to them for the privilege of doing it again. Then they give some of it to Carol so she can help protect their interests.
Comparing
Carol SEIU-Porter seems to think we need government. That the Tea Party and others do not want any government. That there is no role for government. And while there is a minority of people within the various facets of the movement who might agree, most of us do not because anarchy leads to oligarchy and totalitarianism. That’s just how people are wired.
Don’t expect ShaHodeSheaPorter to wrestle with this conundrum; while running for office in 2008 they insisted that the Bush Tax cuts were "for the rich," or "the wealthiest Americans." The class warfare rhetoric made the case that Republicans didn’t provide tax relief for anyone else, and the democrats promised to remedy this the moment they were elected. The result was to embark on a multi-trillion dollar spending binge that cannot possibly be paid for without taxes on everyone and everything–though they still insist otherwise.