Rachel Maddow Calls Republican Strategist ‘Condescending’ For Lying About Equal Pay For Women
I feel bad for Rachel Maddow. She’s a genuinely nice person and seems incapable of being flat out mean. Maybe she’ll get crankier as she gets older and deliver the smackdown that so many conservative mouthpieces so richly deserve.
Case in point: On Sunday’s Meet the Press, Maddow was discussing the fact that women get paid less for the same work with Alex Castellanos and, in true right wing fashion, he lied through his teeth. Here’s the video:
I can only assume that Maddow didn’t just call him a lying sack of manure because her parents raised her better than that. I, on the other hand, am not burdened with such an abundance of tolerance. Castellano is a liar and not a very good one. Let’s examine his claims:
1. Men work an average of 44 hours per week and women work 41 – This is completely irrelevant for two reasons. The first is that if they are paid by the hour then working extra hours will indeed give the man a bigger paycheck but the problem is that the man is paid more per hour than the woman. The second is that if they are salaried, then it doesn’t matter how many extra hours the man works, he gets paid the same and he still makes more than a woman working the same hours.
2. Men go into engineering science and math which pays more – Again, the point is that the women that go into those same fields make less money than their male counterparts. Castellano is either stupid or disingenuous.
3. If it was true every businessman in America would hire women and save money – Hur hur hur. He made a funny! No, jackass, the problem is that men are considered “superior” workers in the first place. Why do you think they get paid more to do the same exact work? This is a talking point that only very stupid people will fall for. No doubt it is very popular with the Fox News crowd.
4. Single women between the ages of 40 – 64 make $47,000 a year compared to men’s $40,000 – But is it in the same field? He doesn’t say but obviously it’s not or Castellano would have made that distinction. Yet another case of comparing apples to oranges.
So, clearly, Castellano’s prepared talking points have about as much substance as Ann Romney’s struggle as the homemaker wife of a multimillionaire. It was obvious he knew it as well as he continued to rudely interrupt the uppity woman that dared to speak truth. Finally, Castellano let loose his (not so) inner misogynist:
Castellano: I love how passioante you are. I wish you were as right about what you are saying as you are passionate about it, I really do.
Maddow: That’s really condescending.
Alluding to a woman’s emotions or “passion” is about as transparent a ploy as it gets. The insinuation is that women can’t control their feelings and it makes them stupid. Condescending is an understatement. Insulting is a bit closer to home. Lying weasel would be even closer but Maddow is far classier then I am and certainly far more so than Castellano.