The New York Times?? Skewed??

In an Oval Office meeting on Dec. 29, 10 of President Obama’s top advisers stood before him discussing the heated fiscal negotiations. Every one was a man...

The skew was widespread: male appointees under Mr. Obama outnumbered female appointees at 11 of the 15 federal departments, for instance. It occurred at all levels of government service, from the highest-level advisers on down. In some cases, the skew was also deep. At the Departments of Justice, Defense, Veterans Affairs and Energy, male appointees outnumbered female appointees by about two to one
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/09/us/pol...s.html?_r=2&;

Don't think for one moment the Obama admin is taking this lying down.

White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said that “diversity is important,” but defended President Obama from the suggestion that he isn’t appointing enough women to his cabinet by noting that expertise is the most important factor.

“The President does believe that diversity is very important and he also believes that picking the absolute right person for each job is very important,” Carney told CNN’s Brianna Keilar during the White House press briefing. “And the nominees he announced today represent that principle in that he believes Senator Hagel and John Brennan are the right individuals for the jobs to which they have been nominated.”

http://washingtonexaminer.com/wh-grilled...18#.UOx3Qqyk07A

Which means, I think, unless my logic is faulty in some respect, that according to Obama females don't quite cut the mustard when it comes to the top jobs. Hmmmm.

Which means, I think, unless my logic is faulty in some respect, that according to Obama females don't quite cut the mustard when it comes to the top jobs. Hmmmm.

Exactly right. And women don't in the Obama administration don't get the same pay as men, and at least two women have quit, one woman stating that the Obama WH was hostile to women.

But that's alright to today's pseudo-feminists because he's a leftist, and he's hard-core pro-abortion.

The reality of his sexism is of no concern as long as he violates the rights of Christians to promote and pay for killing babies.

Too bad that the lib women can't figure out that they were used like a cheap whore for political purposes.

Good points, ladies. Also consider the word "skewed". Laughable. Imagine if this same situation had pertained with GW. Anyone think the NYT would have called it "skewed" and the harridans of the Left would be silent?

Quote: Cincinnatus wrote in post #4

---

Good points, ladies. Also consider the word "skewed". Laughable. Imagine if this same situation had pertained with GW. Anyone think the NYT would have called it "skewed" and the harridans of the Left would be silent?

---

Who spends their time counting the number of men and women in each department anyway?

Equality of opportunity..not outcome.