<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Democrat Bills Pay Back Lawyers, Unions</title>
	<atom:link href="http://sweetness-light.com/archive/dem-bills-to-payback-lawyers-unions/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://sweetness-light.com/archive/dem-bills-to-payback-lawyers-unions</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 23 Nov 2009 01:09:36 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=abc</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: bill</title>
		<link>http://sweetness-light.com/archive/dem-bills-to-payback-lawyers-unions#comment-129024</link>
		<dc:creator>bill</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 10 Jan 2009 01:34:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sweetness-light.com/archive/dem-bills-to-payback-lawyers-unions#comment-129024</guid>
		<description>Gee, couldn&#039;t I make the case for fundamental fairness of House rules for Republicans during debate? Or is fundamental fairness only apply to Democrats and their issues? Weird how these socialist loons think about things.

Fundamental fairness yeah right.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Gee, couldn&#8217;t I make the case for fundamental fairness of House rules for Republicans during debate? Or is fundamental fairness only apply to Democrats and their issues? Weird how these socialist loons think about things.</p>
<p>Fundamental fairness yeah right.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: GuppyNblue</title>
		<link>http://sweetness-light.com/archive/dem-bills-to-payback-lawyers-unions#comment-129020</link>
		<dc:creator>GuppyNblue</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 10 Jan 2009 01:00:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sweetness-light.com/archive/dem-bills-to-payback-lawyers-unions#comment-129020</guid>
		<description>I wouldn&#039;t hold it against any company today that decided to get the hell out and do their business in another country. Our government is quickly becoming nothing more than lowlife extortionist.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I wouldn&#8217;t hold it against any company today that decided to get the hell out and do their business in another country. Our government is quickly becoming nothing more than lowlife extortionist.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Colonel1961</title>
		<link>http://sweetness-light.com/archive/dem-bills-to-payback-lawyers-unions#comment-129018</link>
		<dc:creator>Colonel1961</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 10 Jan 2009 00:36:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sweetness-light.com/archive/dem-bills-to-payback-lawyers-unions#comment-129018</guid>
		<description>I guess one day I&#039;ll figure it out and achieve victim status, but I still have a shred of dignity left...

lol</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I guess one day I&#8217;ll figure it out and achieve victim status, but I still have a shred of dignity left&#8230;</p>
<p>lol</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Liberals Demise</title>
		<link>http://sweetness-light.com/archive/dem-bills-to-payback-lawyers-unions#comment-129006</link>
		<dc:creator>Liberals Demise</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 09 Jan 2009 23:14:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sweetness-light.com/archive/dem-bills-to-payback-lawyers-unions#comment-129006</guid>
		<description>Colonel, this is just another one of their ploys at seperating the masses. White vs.Black, Middle Class vs. Poor vs. Rich, Men vs. Women, Cars vs motorcycles.....the list is endless as long as you create a victim. If we aren&#039;t careful we will all be victims; if we aren&#039;t already!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Colonel, this is just another one of their ploys at seperating the masses. White vs.Black, Middle Class vs. Poor vs. Rich, Men vs. Women, Cars vs motorcycles&#8230;..the list is endless as long as you create a victim. If we aren&#8217;t careful we will all be victims; if we aren&#8217;t already!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Colonel1961</title>
		<link>http://sweetness-light.com/archive/dem-bills-to-payback-lawyers-unions#comment-128997</link>
		<dc:creator>Colonel1961</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 09 Jan 2009 21:16:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sweetness-light.com/archive/dem-bills-to-payback-lawyers-unions#comment-128997</guid>
		<description>More disincentive to hire anyone or to grow a company.  Segues nicely from what LD said the other day: how are you going to get rich (i.e., founding a company and making it grow) when the Gubmint is daring you to even try without endless lawsuits?

For the record: I have daughters, and if I thought pay bias was real, I&#039;d be the first to raise holy hell...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>More disincentive to hire anyone or to grow a company.  Segues nicely from what LD said the other day: how are you going to get rich (i.e., founding a company and making it grow) when the Gubmint is daring you to even try without endless lawsuits?</p>
<p>For the record: I have daughters, and if I thought pay bias was real, I&#8217;d be the first to raise holy hell&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: BillK</title>
		<link>http://sweetness-light.com/archive/dem-bills-to-payback-lawyers-unions#comment-128925</link>
		<dc:creator>BillK</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 09 Jan 2009 07:48:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sweetness-light.com/archive/dem-bills-to-payback-lawyers-unions#comment-128925</guid>
		<description>Just because we want to &quot;drive&#039; the economy doesn&#039;t mean that typical liberal agendas aren&#039;t just as important.

From the Los Angeles Times:

&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;b&gt;Democrats focus on workplace bias&lt;/b&gt;

New legislation seeks to undo a Supreme Court decision that threw out a discrimination lawsuit brought by a woman who was paid less than male employees for years.

By Jim Oliphant

&lt;b&gt;The first bill that lands on Barack Obama&#039;s desk after he becomes president could provide him with an opportunity to make an immediate mark on civil rights.&lt;/b&gt;

&lt;b&gt;Democrats in Congress are pushing legislation that would undo a controversial 2007 decision by the Supreme Court that tossed out a workplace discrimination suit brought by a female supervisor at Goodyear Tire &amp; Rubber Co. The woman, who alleged she was paid less than comparable male employees for years, won at trial, but the justices ruled she had sued too late.&lt;/b&gt;

The House is expected to vote on the bill today, and the Senate will probably take up the measure next week.

The plaintiff in the case, Lilly Ledbetter, worked at a Goodyear plant in Alabama for nearly 20 years and learned of the pay discrimination late in her career.

In a 5-4 vote, the court held that she should have filed suit within six months of the company making a pay decision based on her gender -- saying, in essence, that she should have sued before she discovered she was being discriminated against.

&lt;b&gt;The case inflamed workplace advocates and others, who said the outcome would exacerbate what they saw as a substantial pay gap between men and women. Her cause was adopted by Democratic candidates; Ledbetter spoke at the party&#039;s national convention and was cited by Obama on national television.&lt;/b&gt;

&quot;&lt;b&gt;This ruling just doesn&#039;t make sense in the real world&lt;/b&gt;,&quot; Ledbetter said this week.

If the legislation becomes law, it will probably affect more than the time limit for filing pay claims. Since the high court ruled in the Ledbetter case, federal judges have employed the stricter standard in a variety of lawsuits, including those alleging discrimination in housing and college athletics.

&quot;We now see pay claims being thrown out of court or not being filed at all,&quot; said Marcia Greenberger of the National Women&#039;s Law Center.

The House passed a similar bill last session, but President Bush threatened a veto. The measure never made it out of the Senate.

&lt;b&gt;House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco) said Thursday that she wanted the new Congress to take up the matter as quickly as possible. &quot;It is of the highest priority to us,&quot; she said.&lt;/b&gt; …

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/washingtondc/la-na-discriminate9-2009jan09,0,3457462.story&lt;/blockquote&gt;

Yes, nothing is more important that giving employees the right to sue companies into insolvency over perceived pay inequities.

&lt;b&gt;That&#039;s&lt;/b&gt; the Democratic party we know so well.

(Let&#039;s not forget the U.S. Government has blanket immunity against such lawsuits.)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Just because we want to &#8220;drive&#8217; the economy doesn&#8217;t mean that typical liberal agendas aren&#8217;t just as important.</p>
<p>From the Los Angeles Times:</p>
<blockquote><p><b>Democrats focus on workplace bias</b></p>
<p>New legislation seeks to undo a Supreme Court decision that threw out a discrimination lawsuit brought by a woman who was paid less than male employees for years.</p>
<p>By Jim Oliphant</p>
<p><b>The first bill that lands on Barack Obama&#8217;s desk after he becomes president could provide him with an opportunity to make an immediate mark on civil rights.</b></p>
<p><b>Democrats in Congress are pushing legislation that would undo a controversial 2007 decision by the Supreme Court that tossed out a workplace discrimination suit brought by a female supervisor at Goodyear Tire &amp; Rubber Co. The woman, who alleged she was paid less than comparable male employees for years, won at trial, but the justices ruled she had sued too late.</b></p>
<p>The House is expected to vote on the bill today, and the Senate will probably take up the measure next week.</p>
<p>The plaintiff in the case, Lilly Ledbetter, worked at a Goodyear plant in Alabama for nearly 20 years and learned of the pay discrimination late in her career.</p>
<p>In a 5-4 vote, the court held that she should have filed suit within six months of the company making a pay decision based on her gender &#8212; saying, in essence, that she should have sued before she discovered she was being discriminated against.</p>
<p><b>The case inflamed workplace advocates and others, who said the outcome would exacerbate what they saw as a substantial pay gap between men and women. Her cause was adopted by Democratic candidates; Ledbetter spoke at the party&#8217;s national convention and was cited by Obama on national television.</b></p>
<p>&#8220;<b>This ruling just doesn&#8217;t make sense in the real world</b>,&#8221; Ledbetter said this week.</p>
<p>If the legislation becomes law, it will probably affect more than the time limit for filing pay claims. Since the high court ruled in the Ledbetter case, federal judges have employed the stricter standard in a variety of lawsuits, including those alleging discrimination in housing and college athletics.</p>
<p>&#8220;We now see pay claims being thrown out of court or not being filed at all,&#8221; said Marcia Greenberger of the National Women&#8217;s Law Center.</p>
<p>The House passed a similar bill last session, but President Bush threatened a veto. The measure never made it out of the Senate.</p>
<p><b>House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco) said Thursday that she wanted the new Congress to take up the matter as quickly as possible. &#8220;It is of the highest priority to us,&#8221; she said.</b> …</p>
<p><a href="http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/washingtondc/la-na-discriminate9-2009jan09,0,3457462.story" rel="nofollow">http://www.latimes.com/news/na.....7462.story</a></p></blockquote>
<p>Yes, nothing is more important that giving employees the right to sue companies into insolvency over perceived pay inequities.</p>
<p><b>That&#8217;s</b> the Democratic party we know so well.</p>
<p>(Let&#8217;s not forget the U.S. Government has blanket immunity against such lawsuits.)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
