Dittos, 

ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
Back Home Button
The Rush Limbaugh Show
Excellence in Broadcasting
RSS Icon
ADVERTISEMENT

EIB WEB PAGE DISGRONIFIER

Dingy Harry Blames GOP for Abramson Firing

BEGIN TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: This Jill Abramson thing, I have to say, I'm confused.  I must have from yesterday, left over here, five stories all devoted to why she was fired.  One of the things that I mentioned yesterday was that she went in there, she went in to that Little Pinch -- by the way, I found out why the nicknames.  Okay, Little Pinch, Arthur Sulzberger Jr., his dad is Arthur Sulzberger Sr. and his nickname is Punch, and the reason his nickname is Punch, is he had a sister named Judith that they called Judy, and there is a British animated cartoon called Punch and Judy, so they call him Punch.  Punch is also, nothing to do with Sulzberger, a fabulous brand of premium cigars.  But that's another story. 

So, okay, how did they name Arthur Sulzberger Jr. Pinch?  Well, one year after he took over as the head honcho of the New York Times, he announced a 10% reduction in staff, payroll, budget, everything.  So penny pincher is the root of the nickname Pinch.  (interruption)  Right.  The cheapskate.  He's a tightwad, a cheapskate, and Pinch goes with Punch, and in the case of his dad, his dad liked the nickname Punch.  You know, 'cause it's manly.  But Little Pinch doesn't like his nickname, is what I'm told. 

Anyway, I mentioned yesterday that Jill Abramson was fired because she said she went in and wanted as much money as her predecessor was making, Bill Keller.  She found out that Bill Keller was making a hundred thousand dollars a year, maybe a little bit more than that, more than she was.  So she went in, had a lawyer do it, not herself 'cause she wanted to avoid being pushy, and got fired.  And I had so many people, "No, no, no, Rush, she eventually got paid. That's not why she got fired."  I was just turning on Fox and they're doing a whole segment a minute ago on she got fired because she wasn't being paid as much as the guy.  So I'm still confused.  (interruption)  I know, I read that, too.  Pinch put out a statement, compensation had nothing to do with why she was fired. 

I'll tell you why they got rid of her.  They got rid of her because she wasn't working.  She was out doing all these appearances on panels and discussions.  She liked being the face of the job, but she didn't really like doing the job.  Pinch himself has alluded to that.  And plus the fact that she probably wasn't very good.  And then they're also dumping on her that she was no good with the digital side.  But this equal pay thing, of course it was hypocritical in a way, and ironic because here's the Regime making this big deal about equal pay and women being sabotaged by evil CEOs, and looky here.  The liberal house organ is discriminating against a woman, and Obama pays his women even less than the New York Times does. 

Both instances are classic, by the way.  That's the reality.  They tell everybody else what rules they're gonna live by, but they don't.  They exempt themselves from all this.  You may have to pay the women and men on your staff the same, but they don't.  They get credit for demanding that everybody else do it, but they don't have to do it themselves.  And they don't do it.  They don't do half the crap that they want you to.  You think Obama's gonna live under Obamacare?  There's no way Obama is gonna have anything to do with any exchange anywhere even after he's gone.  No way.  Nor will anybody in his family.  And it's the same with a lot of these people.  Dingy Harry is blaming the Republicans for what happened to Jill Abramson.  Grab audio sound bite number eight.  This is on the Senate floor yesterday.

REID:  It should not be lost that Republican senators are continuing their agenda by just saying "no."  Whether it's something as logical and as important as pay equity, so that a woman doing the same job as a man gets the same amount of money.  That was blocked.  And, Madam President, this is an issue that is more than just something that takes place away from the matting crowds.  Look what happened it appears in the New York Times.  The woman that ran that newspaper was fired yesterday.  Why?  It's now in the press because she complained she was doing the same work as men, and two different jobs, and made a lot less money than they did.  That's why we needed that legislation.

RUSH:  Damn Republicans.  Look what they're causing to happen.  Look what they're doing, their blocking the legislation, just saying "no," and so the New York Times decided to pay Jill Abramson less than what they were.  And they're out denying it.  She did get a raise when she asked for it.  She did get bumped up. And she did have a lawyer go in and do it because it is said that women shouldn't do it. 

Well, the New York Times: "Moving Past Gender Barriers to Negotiate a Raise ... But it can emerge when women act in ways that aren’t considered sufficiently feminine, and when women advocate for themselves, these experts say, some people find it unseemly, if on a subconscious level. As a result, women need to take a more calibrated approach, whether in asking for a higher salary or a new position. Otherwise, they can risk being perceived as overly demanding and unlikable, experts say, and their requests can backfire."

That was in the New York Times, and the headline was, "Moving Past Gender Barriers to Negotiate a Raise." In this article it was also stated that women are advised, get a third party to go in and ask for your bread.  Don't do it yourself 'cause -- (interruption)  It is always the victims.  They're always the victims.  If you do this, you're gonna be mistreated, and if you don't do it this way. 

So the story, I've got it right here.  "Asking for a raise is the type of conversation that can make even the most confident among us uncomfortable. Women, however, may have good reason to feel that way. Discrimination persists in the workplace and it isn’t necessarily intentional or overt, experts on gender and negotiation say." Do you think the New York Times could ever write a story that doesn't involve an expert?  Can they just report a story that does not involve an expert weighing in on it?  A negotiation expert?  And a gender expert?  As the source authorities for how to ask for a raise? 

Yes, "it can emerge when women act in ways that aren’t considered sufficiently feminine, and when women advocate for themselves, these experts say, some people find it unseemly, if on a subconscious level. As a result, women need to take a more calibrated approach, whether in asking for a higher salary or a new position."  Yeah, especially if the paper is going down the tubes and there isn't any money, you gotta be really careful how you ask for more. 

"'We are asking women to juggle while they are on the tightrope,' said Linda C. Babcock, a professor at Carnegie Mellon University and founder of its gender equity program. 'It’s totally unfair because we don’t require the same thing of men. But if women want to be successful in this domain, they need to pay attention to this.'"  They can't ask for the raise themselves.  They have to ask a third-party representative so that they don't come across as unseemly or insufficiently feminine.  (interruption)  What was it you said?  (interruption)  They are.  (interruption)  No, no.  Women are supposed to be equal, but they're not equal 'cause of men, so they can't do things like men do 'cause it's not equitable out there. 

Anyway, this was all over the news, all these different stories on how to ask for a raise, did Jill Abramson do it right and all this stuff.  They're still reporting that she got canned because she wanted more money.  And it turns out it looks like it's not true, and besides, Harry Reid says the Republicans are to blame anyway.  

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH:  So somebody tell me, has anybody at the New York Times, any of the journalists there, any of the people that worked for Jill Abramson, has anybody spoken up in her defense?  Have you seen anybody say that they're upset by this?  I don't know.  I haven't.  (interruption)  Why would they be afraid?  You telling me that the people that work at the liberal Bible would be afraid to say what they think?  These are the people that control the speech codes.  These are the people that determine who can say what. 

You know those two guys that had that show on the LGTV, whatever it was, these two guys that are anti-abortion, pro-choice -- their bank just dropped 'em.  Sun Trust.  Just saw the story, their bank just dropped 'em because of their comments on I guess gay marriage and abortion.  Their TV network canceled their show, and their bank just said they don't want do business with them anymore.  Holy smokes.  For being anti-abortion and I guess anti- it's the anti-gay marriage that did it.  But I guess the activists found out their bank and were pressuring the bank, I guess.  I don't know. 

Jill Abramson, here's the thing.  Apparently she was fired 'cause she was too bossy.  She was not liked at this place, at the New York Times.  She did things without communicating with others, kind of autocratic. I mean, she was just behaving normally the way autocrats are.  Gee, there are all kinds of lessons here.  (interruption)  No, no.  I'm not saying she's bossy.  I never worked for her.  I don't know if she's bossy.  It's in all these stories.  Anonymous people saying she's bossy.  That's my point is, I can't find anybody who's speaking up for her.  

END TRANSCRIPT

ADVERTISEMENT

Rush 24/7 Audio/Video

Listen to the Latest Show Watch the Latest Show

Facebook

ADVERTISEMENT

Most Popular

EIB Features

ADVERTISEMENT: