E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSOn a softball field near the Capitol this week, a scrappy team of bipartisan women from the House and Senate – including four grandmothers – took on a far younger lineup of women from the congressional press corps to raise money for breast cancer research. The women of the press corps won 13 to 10, but not without fighting off a late-inning rally from the politicians. Watching from the sidelines: an 82-year-old retired high school coach, a woman who flew across country to root for one of her former students, California Congresswoman Laura Richardson. A lot of the women on both teams played high school and college ball. So did UN Ambassador Susan Rice, who showed she had game in a basketball face-off among cabinet secretaries and WNBA players Thursday night. Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sibelius also had some moves.
None of this would have happened before Title IX revolutionized women’s athletics, and a lot more. As President Obama (basketball coach to Sasha’s school team) points out today in his web address, “Title IX isn't just about sports. From addressing inequality in math and science education to preventing sexual assault on campus to fairly funding athletic programs, Title IX ensures equality for our young people in every aspect of their education. It's a springboard for success.”
There is perhaps no better example of what women could accomplish through sport and education than Pat Summitt, awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom at the White House for her accomplishments. And we shouldn’t forget that Title IX helped young women force their way into math and science courses that, in many cases, they had routinely been discouraged from taking.
For me, it’s personal. When I was the program manager of my college radio station, women couldn’t do sports play-by-play. The barriers went well beyond athletics: after graduating, on assignment for a Philadelphia all-news radio station, I was once barred from the press room in the State Capitol in Harrisburg, Pa. No women allowed. Now, I look around our newsroom and see an incredible team of female executive and senior producers who have options that would have been inconceivable before Title IX. Appropriately, they take sports for granted. My senior producer, Michelle Perry, did crew for Berkeley. Our Senate producer, Libby Leist, was on the swim team in high school. And there is plenty of evidence that women who compete in sports perform better in other pursuits off the field.
For my generation, the imbalance was perhaps best symbolized by the careers of women like Billie Jean King. That’s why her defeat of Bobby Riggs, in the same era as the passage of Title IX, was such an empowering moment. Thanks to Title IX, Billie Jean and other women athletes were able to break down barriers for all the women who will be taking the field next month at the London Olympics. I’m going to be cheering them on, and thanking Billie Jean, Pat Summitt and all the others who pioneered the way.
Leave a Comment:
Although I have no respect for Ms Mitchell's credibility, Title IX was exactly the right thing to do at that time.
Ms Mitchell showed intentional bias with selective editing and commentary concerning Romney's comparison of the private to the public sector. Actions such as this make everything Ms Mitchell reports suspect.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=97VwlTJW2t4
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/brent-bozell/2012/06/19/msnbcs-selectively-edited-romney-video-andrea-mitchells-non-apology-il
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/06/19/msnbc-edits-romney-rally-speech-portrays-candidate-as-out-touch/
this is news, where is fast and furious coverage?
The reality of the world is females are not well respected when it comes to grant funding. I recall utlizing the Richard Nixon lX entitlement to persuade GWB organization to install a gym period for latino girls. I went as far as seeking a cooptation strategy and informing the councilmember of that particular district. Secondly, I was prepared to teach Latino girls about the anatomical and physiological functions of the female body. But both projections were turned down. Lastly, I wrote a construct regarding the needs of restoring the playground. This would allow the children to "Move into Position and Play Safe." Orthopaedic surgeons and chiropractors were asked to speak, to both the male population and the girls population but a reconcialiation could not be made on this particular topic. The girls did obtain the opportunity of joining Billie Jean Kings endorsement of Go girl Go / Star Program.
I don't understand what the reason for this article is. Is this some anniversary of Title ix or is someone threatening to repeal it. Why was this on the first page of the newspaper?
I think we, as a Nation, spend way too much, of our educational time and money on organized sports, for both mens and womens sports...maybe Title X should have a clause something like this..."No school district may use more that 3% of their Annual Budget on Organized Sports..."
Here is something else title IX did.... It wiped out men's minor college sports.
In 1979, there were 104 division one men's gymnastics teams. By 1990, there were 9 programs. Mens diving, swimming and wrestling took similar hits as well.
No, gymnasts don't aren't 6'-2" helmeted monsters that have 4.3 speed, nor consistent at shooting a jumpshot from 20 feet out, but they are gifted athletes as well.
It's what it is.... Better to go study anyway.
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/08/07/sports/gymnastics-colleges-reluctantly-drop-men-s-programs.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm
Nice fluff piece...where is the investigative story on National Security Leaks, or the death of agent in Fast and Furious, and how about something on the displaced voters in Philadelphia and why this administration dropped the case of the NBP after a guilty verdict had been established. How about a little research into the guy who was appointed to the NLB? How about some investigation into Axelrod's company that made millions off Obamacare and increased Axelrod's personal wealth? Come on Mitchel, if you want to be considered a big league reported, start acting like one.
@ tmz
I'm sure it is already to late for you, so this is a warning to any other Conservatives on Newsvine, Derailing will get you suspended
Since you are not on subject are you also derailing?
I hope you fly (flew?) better than you "rite" (<--- being tongue and cheek)
That is flat wrong. Every college I have every heard of has intercollegiate sports - one frat against another. This is misinformation/smoke 'n mirrors, pure and simple.
------
FLYNAVY1
Here is something else title IX did.... It wiped out men's minor college sports.
No, gymnasts don't aren't 6'-2" helmeted monsters that have 4.3 speed, nor consistent at shooting a jumpshot from 20 feet out, but they are gifted athletes as well.
#1.6 - Sun Jun 24, 2012 3:33 AM EDT
Amused.... I fully admit that I'm barely fluent in my own language. Math & Physics though, you'd better bring your "A-Game".
Do you enjoy watching men's gymnastics at the Olympic level? Do you wonder why our men's program reached it's pinnacle in the 1980s and died since then? Look no further for the reason than title IX. We will have individual performances to be sure, but until things change, the US will never be a real international contender.
Title IX isn't about "fairness" and never was. It entitles girls' sports to half the earnings of the men's sports. "Girls' rules". When the girls earn their own way, they can call themselves women.
Bob: wrong. (and as others point out, pretty whinney). Equal access isn't "entitlement"...but I guess when you think you're "entitled" to the whole pie with women sitting on the sidelines it might look that way. Did the boys "earn their way" and can now call themselves men because they EARNED access to sports or were given it? It is indeed about ridding the world of such anacharistic dinasaurs as those who think girls have to "earn" what boys are "given".
Most girls view sports as something to do until they can get pregnant and trap some guy into paying all their bills while they watch Oprah.
It still is the oldest profession.
@mtr89123 - You are so ignorant. Oprah isn't on anymore, and besides, most women today work hard whether in the workplace, on the sports field or in the home. Women are fighting for your freedom in the military, they are smart and self-supporting mothers and sisters. You know the ones who wiped your butt and fed you when you were a baby. Some do it all and some do a protion, but most do it very well. Your statement implies that we should go back to the days when women should be the property of the "MEN" in their families.
You, sir, should be neutered, then you wouldn't have to worry about getting someone pregnant and having to pay their bills. Seems fair to me.
Was George Bush entitled to go to Yale just because he father did?
I believe there are plenty of entitlements to go around and some people enjoy almost all of them from cradle to grave but delude themselves into thinking that their earning it really had something to do with it.
Again, the girls are entitled to every cent they earn. I know that at the state university near me the girls' basketbal coach's salary is greater than the total income generated by her program. That's before any other expense.
AP, I'm having a hard time understanding your position. If there is a pie of money that is used for scholarships (atheletic or scholastic) and you take a piece of that pie away and dedicate it to one gender (or one skill) but not another, why isn't that an entitlement since it is achieved at the cost of another gender (or kill)?
Women's sports are an important part of development, but not at the expense of the development of someone else.
He got into and through Yale BECAUSE of his father.
---
KeenInsight
Was George Bush entitled to go to Yale just because he father did?
Exactly. When women don't need handouts to get ahead, they can consider themselves equal.
AP
You are a complete moron. Women started nothing, developed nothing, earned nothing, and can sustain nothing without men. Especially in the athletic arena. Their sports are financially non-viable. They exist because men's sports exist. There isn't a pool of money sitting around that we have to fairly divide up. Men's sports earn the money, women's sports use the money. Sound equal? It isn't.
A good expose' on Title IX is included in an interesting book, "Taking Sex Differences Seriously."
Title IX, another example of crying on daddy's shoulder to get what we are too lazy to fight for. Just imagine how much freedom we would have if we did not owe our souls to uncle sugar.
Just imagine the freedom if we didn't have men claiming equal access was "crying on daddy's shoulder"...Jealous that the "fight" was one you lost?
AP-1414066
Hate to be the bearer of bad news, but I have not lost anything.
There are more women out there that act like Casey Anthony than like Mother Teresa...A LOT MORE.
And the courts let them go because of the bleeding heart liberal women on the juries.
It's a sisterhood; as long as a man is screwed over, then let the woman go.
Call the WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAmbulance for mtr. man.
Bob - you old dinosaur, you. You'll just never get it.
Get what? Leave women to their own devices and they fail. if they don't have men to pay for them or pick up their mess they have nothing. All they are good for is breeding.
Hey sickened --you DID realize that a man's biological purpose on earth is over in roughly 30 seconds? After that, women get along just fine. Actually, less than 30 seconds since the advent of infertility technology.
(Doubt he'll realize how "sick" he sounds after looking at his "point" from anothr perspective though.)
Good point! Men certainly have the upper hand with the efficiency issue but you are doing something wrong if your men only take 30 seconds.
WAAAAAAAAA The comments above prove that some men (at least the ones crying above) cannot handle competition or fairness at any level and will resort to name calling and degrading comments to make themselves feel better. They want women to stay as second class citizens and when they fight to gain equal treatment and are successful, then complain that it was unfair. Can't stand it when the playing field is a little more competitive. Sad little whiners!
whynotme:
It is only the pugbags that are doing the crying. They think incorrectly of course, that they, and only they, know what's best for everyone else. They can't handle the FACTS, and fail to realize that women are not going to be second class citizens.
So yes, they are a bunch of sad little whiners. Weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
I would like to make clear, too, that I know so many fantastic men that are so secure in their "manhood" that they welcome competition and fairness! They see it as a challenge in all areas of life and are happy when they see others succeed, whether at work, at play, at school, etc! Now that is a MAN!
The fair-minded, equal rights for women liberals had a chance to elect the first woman President in history, but they chose instead to vote for a man who was much less qualified than Hillary Clinton just because they couldn’t handle a strong woman. To add insult to injury, the MAN who they selected wouldn’t offer her the courtesy of the VP spot. They instead gave that spot to another less qualified MAN and made her a secretary. No self-respecting man would accept a Secretary of State job after losing to the eventual President.
Actually, Hillary had significantly less political experience than Obama. U.S. Senator in 2000, then reelected in 2006. That's it. Obama was at least a state Senator for seven years before becoming a U.S. Senator.
Does eight years as First Lady really count all that much? I don't think so, but maybe you disagree. In which case we'll see Michelle Obama run for President at some point. I like Hillary and supported her in 2008, but to proclaim her more qualified is pure opinion, and unsupported by the facts. Hillary received a huge amount of criticism when she ran for the U.S. Senate, with people saying she had zero experience.
Also, Democrats did elect the first Black President. Don't worry, there is little doubt they will be the party to elect the first woman President too. Referring to the Secretary of State position as merely a "secretary" shows the artless rhetoric with with you communicate. She is hardly the executive assistant you try to paint her as.
Finally, you seem to believe that Democrats should have elected Hillary simply because she is a woman. I personally disagree with that opinion. Equal rights and euqal protection should not mean favoritism.
Well, Obama won the presidency in large part because he is black, so why is electing the first woman president less of a factor for the Democrat's nomination? A first woman would have been equally historical. All indicators are that Clinton had a better resume. Being First Lady for eight years by itself is not a qualifier for the White House, but living with the President all that time and seeing how he worked the system was a plus. Clinton had eight years under her belt as US Senator while Obama only had four years.
Obama won the presidency because no one wanted a certain off-the-wall book banning Governor from Alaska only a heart beat a way from the oval office. McCain would have had a better chance if he had made a better selection. I imagine in another year or two, he will diagnosed with dementia.
Name one profitable women's sport. One. Name a single female endeavor that they can do without a subsidy from men.
I would like ask the so called Road Warrior who he actually voted for
Don't give me that Clinton thing you know you would never have voted for her - and maybe her role was to be the best damned Secretary of State we've ever had
Makes Condoleeza Rice - who only studied Russian politics at Madame Albright's father's knee a complete neophyte
So Hillary Clinton may not have been meant to be President but - we lucked out - and if Obama has a second term next lady in line is our Representative to the United Nations another woman by the name of Susan Rice - another winner
And who would Willard appoint John Bolton - loser personified
Clotho, Obama was not a US Senator in 2000...he was a state senator from Illinois. He was not re-elected to the US Senate, he was elected. He also missed 314 votes as a US Senator, 24% of all the votes that were cast. Hillary on the other hand had spent years as the Senator from New York and cast more votes then the 1300 that had been before Obama.
In addition, Clotho, after declaring for the presidency he missed 34% of the votes in the Senate, and on the other 66% of the votes he voted NO regardless of the issue. Not one affirmative vote according to the NYT and the AP. Now you know why Reid isn't doing his job and why his party boss isn't forcing him to face the music.
Barbara,
You and Clotho are missing the point. This article is about women moving up in the world. What is a better statement than the first female president? You libs had your best chance because of the anti-Bush feelings and an inept John McCain, but you chose to ditch her in favor of a man. And you call yourself pro-women? Hardly.
As I recall, Hillary lost the nomination in part because she (and her followers) had a bad habit of talking down to male voters.
I also seem to recall her losing favor with the female vote over her attitudes towards women who chose family over career.
Hillary lost the nomination via her own devices. It had nothing to do with "libs" being unwilling to vote for a female president.
LOL....Billy Jean King beat a man who was 55 years old, old enough to be her father. As to "fairness" and "equal pay", the only fair way is to have all open competition, and may the athlete win.
So I suppose you think that the weight categories in wrestling competitions should be eliminated and we let the 250 pounder go against the 150 pounder. Boy, that's fair and what Title IV intended to eliminate!!!!!!
whynotme,
I fail to see how a woman competing against someone who is old enough to be her grandfather can be compared to weight divisions in wrestling and boxing. I guess you think it's fair to allow women golfers to compete with men for the same prize money while teeing off 50 yards closer to the green.
The only thing missing from the current glorification of Title IX is a memorial to all of the men's sports programs dropped by schools in order to comply with Title IX. To name just a few:
• Boston University dropped its football program due to Title IX pressures after 91 years.
• University of San Francisco cut football after 64 years.
• Colgate University eliminated men’s baseball after 107 years.
• Cornell University’s men’s fencing team was discontinued after 98 years.
• Princeton University ended its wrestling program for fear of litigation due to an inability to satisfy “proportionality”.
• UCLA dropped its swimming and diving team in 1994 that had produced 16 Olympic Gold Medalists, 41 individual national titles, and a team title in 1982.
Exactly. What Title IX did was requiring the same number of scholarships for women athletes as men. If a college could find enough interest from women to match the men scholarships, the school had to reduce the number men scholarships to match the women numbers. Dumb rule. The fact is most women lose interest in sports after high school. I have two nieces who are excellent soccer players, but they have turned down college scholarships. They are more interested in boys.
This, exactly this. Title IX is a charity, if the sports program, male or female, can not stand on it's own, then it should fold.
Not to mention that many schools have dropped mens gymnastics and Title IX ended mens volleyball altogether.
Well, it seems like this article really brought the best out in some people! Did not know so many people were such haters! Nixon is smiling in his grave over this BS. The sports each college dropped when Title IX hit were nothing but HUGE money pits and everyone knew this.
Big deal, so what, who cares!
ADD morgan State, and Howard University Wrestling teams to the list. Historical Mens teams destroyed by this. My dreams were dashed due to this.
The dinosaurs will never get it. Equal opportunity doesn't mean that a welterweight has to be able to beat a sumo wrestler but that they both get fair fights on a level playing field. Before Title IX, "girls" got the leavings and discards of the "men", were suspected to be gay if athletic, were supported more for being cheerleaders than athletes (or scholars). Title IX changed that and generations of women are grateful while a few men are still crying into their beer. Likely those are the same men now at war with women and attempting to drag us by the hair back to the barefoot and pregnant past when white men were king.
No. But men should have they say as to how what they earn is spent. When women's sport earn a profit, they can exist. Until then, the twits can play club sports.
Title IX is much like the WNBA, i.e., useless and unnecessary. It is a perfect example of political correctness run amok. It is not 'competition' or 'fairness' it is artificiality created to help sooth the egos of those unable to accept the disparity between biology and ideology. Let the free market decide. People like to see women compete in many sports--like gymnastics, tennis, swimming. No one wants to watch women play basketball, softball, etc. It's boring as hell. You can literally see better ballplay in men's pickup matches at the park. Down with political correctness, up with common sense.
Bull@!$%#! The WNBA is incredibly competitive, and great fundamental basketball. Sure the athleticism is understandibly not on par with NBA players, but to indict women's basketball as boring tells me you are biased. WNBA is far more exciting than any boring MLB game any day, in no small part thanks to Title IX.
Fundamental basketball is a euphemism for garbage. About as compelling as watching paint dry.
The sad truth is collegiate women's sports are rarely money maker's. Very few schools have any femal sports that can self sustain themselves. All Title IX did was force schools to cancel a great many of the male programs since they could not afford to support an equal amount of money losers for the females. Anytime you "impose fairness" you always get the opposite.
Joshua Bailey - you say that women's sports are not money makers and lesser men's sports suffered
Bunk if the lesser men's sports were making money they would not have been dropped
Sports is MONEY - I guess wrestling was not making money - easy equation give the girl's a chance
So to blame women's sports in favor of men's is pure hogwash - if tiddly winks made money they would be at the top of the list and you know it!
Also changed the lives of men. My college wrestling team got its progrm eimiated
because of Title IX. I know that may not have been the intention, but it is the
consequence. Thirty or so guys on my team had to find something else to do in
order to meet gender equality stadard. Many colleges decide to eliminate men's
programs to meet the balance instead of addind women's programs. Those choices
help neither gender.
I don't believe that there is a single woman's' sport that could support itself through the revenue generated by ticket sales.
I could probably think of a thing or two women activities I'd pay to watch but I don't believe they'd be considered sports. :)
With all the sports made available to them, you'd think there would be more of them that were in shape, as opposed to the 99% that are obese. I watched my niece at the state finals and the whole team could have double as sea cows for a Disney movie.
Your niece is very lucky to have you...
I agree. She has someone who tells it like it is and not some overly emotional woman who bases all her decisions on emotions and jungle-fever, rather than the facts.
You said your niece was a sea cow? OMG I feel so sorry for her to have you as an uncle.
Because women play sports like they do everything else nowadays. Half ass. They know that when they fail they can just say they didn't really care to begin with, get knocked up, and be taken care of by their parents or the state.
WNBA game tonight: everyone gets a free taco if 100 people show up to the game.
Wow...mtr you really do know how to attract friends. If you have any knowledge about how we got to where we are now. And I dont mean physically, I meant as a whole culturally. You would realize that sports are a replacement for tribal warfare that in centuries past would end up with tribes and entire groups of people being brought to near extinction. Some tribes in PacRim islands still practice the "act" of war where they shoot arrows at each other killing people on occasion before the go back home and make soup the rest of the year. On occasion we as humans resort to real warfare where our intellect devises methods of great destruction to try and gain the upper hand or to stop more destruction. Now...with that all said. In real history recollections and writings we mostly see men in battle even though women always play a part....in days of yore women and old men roamed the battles fields looking for relatives and burying the dead. And to be honest the last great war in North America the women who followed the Union into battle were named for the General Hooker ....doesnt take much to figure out that one. So to sum it all up .....until this time in history women really didnt fight in many combat situations or play in many sports. So there is no historical reference for titleIX. But I have enjoyed many Division I Womens hockey games, even if they dont check or fight.
Or play real hockey.
Football and Basketball are the ONLY moneymakers for the universities . Title IX destroyed established sports programs at many universities, and that is an undisputable fact. Guess field hockey and women's softball are supporting the colleges athletic funds? mtr89123 , does the 100 in attendance count the people who get free tickets and the players? Still need 20 more to get that taco. I would rather watch my grass grow than watch WNBA ( which can not support itself without the NBA).
Boys still crying huh. Well get the hell over it, it is about fairness. I am sorry you still live in the age that women should just keep quiet and do "woman" things. The rest of us have moved on.
If Title IX were about "fairness," it would not have been structured so as to force schools to eliminate men's sports programs to be in compliance. I have absolutely nothing against women's sports. In high school my daughter played basketball, softball, soccer and even ran track one year. I just disagree with Title IX forcing the elimination of men's sports program in order to comply with the law.
Fairness is when you can pay your own way sweetheart. Until you are the sports earning the profits, you can STFU and live with club sports.
Wilfred of Ivanhoe - quite a name - My grand daughters took crew - and my one grand daughter is a Brown Belt - now soon to be a Physician's Assistant - don't be misled by the name same courses as a doctor
Sorry Wilfred if the sports that the boys - not yet men were in were money makers they would not have been dropped
How about less money going to football - we saw how that happened in PA and spread the money around to accommodate all sports
$4 Billion at Penn State - sorry no excuse to cut any programs except greed
Dear Sick Vet,
So there should only be Men's Football and Basketball? All other college sports that cannot sustain themselves should be canceled? Like Men's wrestling, soccer, Track & Field, baseball, swimming, etc...?
Also, in the interest of fairness, if you cannot 100% sustain yourself in life (no support from family, friends, loans, goverment, etc.) then you should not be allowed to participate in that life. Just end it all and starve and freeze.
If you cannot stand alone, then you should die. That is the end message in your logic.
"Boys still crying huh. Well get the hell over it, it is about fairness"--- Now Sharon, that is just hilarious! So you want fairness, fine, why don't you tell your partner to treat you "fairly" and the next time you are crying about something have him/her tell you "Well get the hell over it"! Or is that only what You say to the boys!
So, thanks title IX for helping Andrea become the lying, unscrupulous reporter she is today! Wonder what she thinks of Joe Williams getting into trouble for racist comments on MSNBC's Fez Basher show? A little creative editing would have helped, huh Andrea?
I can understand why she was barred from play-by-play announcing. Then, like today she had a bad habit of broadcasting the parts she wanted people to hear and leaving out the rest.
I'm really pleased to see that young women are able to participate. It makes all those years of fighting for a place in athletics worth it. Many of us endured the same obnoxious comments and arguments 40 years ago as are being made in these statements now. The difference is that young women can now compete at any level---something that they couldn't do prior to Title IX; it wasn't allowed. And as to all of the universities (including the alma mater of the Vice President!) who use Title IX as an excuse to drop men's sports, it's not about women. It's about the money. What a convenient excuse; blame it on the girls, so that the administration doesn't have to take the responsibility for balancing the budget. But as I said at the beginning, at least the girls can compete now.
No they can't compete at any level. At every level they are subsidized. They are not capable of sustaining activity on their own. Nothing has been accomplished other than to steal resources from those who actually produce and actually do things of value.
Hey REV when are you going to stop your nonsense - Andrea Mitchell is married to Alan Greespan not exactly a liberal
You probably are the most uninformed person who posts here
Plus Andrea is now going through a bout with breast cancer
Take your hatred someplace else like your Masters at Fox News - you sir are a bore!
And frankly very tiresome - adios - don't let the door hit you! YuKK! I guess you're name is about Al Sharpton a better man than you can ever be!
The bottom line is this: it's all about fairness. If you want fair treatment across the board, don't vote for romney. Take a look back at the legislation like this that our government has passed, and look at who the sponsors were, and you'll see that in the vast majority of the bills it's always been the democrats who wanted it. If your for the special interests then maybe a country like russia or china would be more to your liking.
It all depends on your definition of fairness. If your definition is to take from people with money and give it to the ones who don't, then you should vote for Obama. If you believe fairness is equal opportunity for everyone to pursue happiness, not equal outcome, then you should vote for anyone but Obama. I have not voted Republican since 1988. I am voting for the person who is not Obama, most likely Romney.
Having separate sports for men and women is totally sexist! There should only be one football team, one softball team etc. Unless you believe women can't compete with men.
Andrea Mitchell (Mrs. Alan Greenspan) is saying Romney said "It's Amazing" and then chuckles. Then after a pause the tape picks up with "girls play sports". More unbias reporting from Andrea Mitchell. LOL
Her comments about Romney is just more proof msnmbc could not present a story that isn't slanted and biased.I don't really believe they know the standards of journalism! They are worst than some 501B organizations At least with the "B",you can expect and do expect a slanted opinion or point of view.With msnbc ,they do trhe exact same thing. msnbc banned me for 4 days claiming I inslted someone! They insullt me everytime I read an article in this blog or site.They indulge in lies,half truths and inuendo to produce stories. Msnbc went 25 days out of 28 days with a lead story on gays/lebanese which is only 1.7 % of popultion in the US.They have produced 2 articles in 6 months one jobs and both were enemic with facts and rich with the blood cells of lies.They blame the repub in both articles,never once placing the least bit of blame on the dims! I expect to be removed again because msmnc really doesn't like when someone tells the truth on their site!It's embarrassing to them!
Andrea Mitchell was shown making fun of Romney and some hamburger place he ate at during his campaigning. You use a touch screen to order and get your food. They edited to make it sound like he was so excited about ordering a hamburger when in fact after seeing the entire segment he was excited about the technology. He was stating that it is exciting to see the private sector to come up with advances. Just to show that sometimes you can't believe everything you hear.
They want equality,give the women all the money that their particular sport makes and do the same for men.Women should share in funds but only up to the percentage earned by women of overall income earned by all sports of a college or university.That's equal,not slicing the pie 50-50 just because of census figures !
mas098 - Great Brittain passed the Equal Pay Act for Women in 1964
Contraceptives came into our lives in 1960
Roe- versus - Wade - 1973
Most civilized Western Countries have National Healthcare and your ralling about women's sports?
And we call this country progressive?
Title IX made it possible for my sister to attend college on an athletic scholarship. But the most henious unintended result was the creation of massive private sports associations across America. I mean every school of nearly every size gets a lot of funding from private associations outside of Title IX reach. Just in my state alone coach Bob Stoops is the highest paid public official in the state and that was made possible by the creation of private funding foundations. If they did not have those foundations, then they would have to pay Sherry Coal the same amount. Bob gets less than 25 percent of his total pay from Title IX governed funds. Title IX propelled funding of sports from inside the school budget to outside it. Do you honestly think schools in Texas spend the same totally on boys as they do girls? You don't know Texas if you believe that. There are schools in the Dallas Metro area that spend $5M per year privately on just boy's sports. Womens sports at the same school is around $400,000. That's because the school allocated $400,000 for boys and $400,000 for girls per Title IX. But the athletic director is allowed to go out and get private funding and set up accounts and he can spend that any way he desires outside of the Title IX oversight. At the University of Texas, total classified expenditures for mens versus womens sports is like 30 to1. Its totally within Title IX because all public funded schools spend the same state and federal monies per sex.
The Eye for an Eye Law is the ONLY LAW that works and reduces
recidivism!!!
Our miserably WEAK courts sentence individuals to prison; where
they sit, watch TV, work out in wait rooms, have telephone priviledges,
visiting hrs, yard time, and BS in the yard with their buddies.
Hardly equal punishment for killing, stabbing, raping, disfiguing someone
for life or beating an innocent person!!!!!!!
The judge did right...all other adult crime judges should follow him as
our laws of punishment is hardly equal justice for their crimes!!!