Who is more extreme in the Republican War on Women: Paul Ryan or Todd Akin?

There is no war on women by the Republicans. What Akin said was stupid, but no where did he say a woman could not/should not have an abortion if she's been raped.


Democrats denigrate women that choose to be stay at home Moms
************************
Obama and Democrats pay women staffers less than they pay male staffers:

The pay disparity is consistent with other Free Beacon analyses, which found that female employees of both the White House and Democratic lawmakers were consistently paid less than their male peers.

Women working for Democratic Senators made about $6,500 (10 percent) less on average than male staff members in 2011, public records show. Several prominent Democrats, such as Sens. Patty Murray (D., Wash.), Chuck Schumer (D., N.Y.), and Dick Durbin (D., Ill.), paid their female employees more than 20 percent less on average.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.) paid her female staffersalmost 30 percent less on average than males staffers in 2011.

The pay disparity was especially pronounced among employees of the White House. The median female salary there in 2011 was about $11,000 (18 percent) less than the median male salary.
*****************************...
Democrats support gender selection abortion, which usually ends up in the abortion of females.
*****************************...
Democrats have refused to provide child care at the DNC so female Democrats with children can attend the convention.
*****************************...
Historically, Republicans fought for women’s rights, not Democrats. Over Democrat opposition, Republicans got the 19th Amendment passed, giving women the right to vote. So it comes as no surprise that Democrats are still waging a War on Women. The only difference is that in today’s era they have decided that not all women are created equal; some must be treated worse than others.


I'm sure there's more, but you can google that stuff for yourself.

Of course, the gender pay gap is a long-term overall economic trend, not simply a problem that exists in Obama's White House. In fact, the gap is actually smaller at the White House than in the overall economy. According to BLS data, in the fourth quarter of 2011, women earned about 81 percent as much as men in the overall economy. Based on the Beacon's numbers, women earn about 85 percent as much as men overall in the White House.

Moreover, the Beacon's juxtaposition of the pay data with Obama's comments about "paycheck discrimination," and the speculation about whether female White House employees would file lawsuits under the Lilly Ledbetter Act, hint at wage discrimination being practiced at the White House. But as The American Prospect's Paul Waldman has noted, the only thing that the Beacon's data indicate is that "men, on average, are occupying higher-paying jobs in the White House (a legitimate grounds for criticism, but not something they pointed out), not that women are being paid less for doing the same job -- the kind of discrimination the Ledbetter act was designed to combat."

Right-wing media have picked up the Beacon's report to suggest that it's actually Obama -- not Republicans -- who is perpetrating a "war on women." But this is yet another distraction from the torrent of GOP-backed legislation over the past few years that would have real consequences for women -- limiting their reproductive rights, access to health care access, and access to equal pay.

http://mediamatters.org/blog/...

The actual income gap is far less, it's roughly 91 cents for blacks and hispanics is even less then that when you consider all factors. Obama was trying to an average of 77 cent gap which is his funny math at play again. I'm sure that you will agree that Obama's math is off since I also used the BLS data.

[Indeed, economists at the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis surveyed economic literature and concluded that “research suggests that the actual gender wage gap (when female workers are compared with male workers who have similar characteristics) is much lower than the raw wage gap.” They cited one survey, prepared for the Labor Department, which concluded that when such differences are accounted for, much of the hourly wage gap dwindled, to about 5 cents on the dollar. (UPDATE: Our colleagues at WonkBlog calculate that the gap narrows to 91 cents for every dollar “if you control for life choices.]


http://www.washingtonpost.com...


Now we can compare democrat and republican fairness to women as well. Based on this report a woman would've been much better off working for the McCain campaign in 2008 than the Obama campaign.


[Using the public information compiled on the Web site of the non-partisan group Legistorm, Murdock concludes that, on average, women in McCain’s office are paid more than the men in McCain’s office — $1.04 for every dollar a man makes. Men in Obama’s office make more than women do; female employees make 83 cents for every dollar made by male employees.

Murdock frames this as an issue of pay equity, but it’s not really — if anything, it’s more a matter of a "glass ceiling."

(Or, at least, that’s what feminist groups would likely be saying if the situations were reversed.)

Only one of Obama’s five best-paid Senate staffers is a woman. Of McCain’s five best-paid Senate staffers, three are women.

Of Obama’s top 20 salaried Senate staffers, seven are women. Of McCain’s top 20 salaried Senate staffers, 13 are women.]


http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/p...

So the wage gap is less depending on what study you use? BFD And that matters how?
"For people interested in more information, the Institute for Women’s Policy Research has put together a handy guide showing some of the differences between some of the data sets. (UPDATE: Heidi Hartmann of the IWPR on June 13 wrote a blog post saying “there is nothing at all misleading or biased” about Obama’s use of the figures."



Your other numbers also don't mean squat.. From you link;

"Murdock frames this as an issue of pay equity, but it’s not really — if anything, it’s more a matter of a "glass ceiling."

"The Obama campaign does not dispute Murdock’s figures (and neither does the McCain campaign), but Obama campaign spox Ben LaBolt argues that it’s a much different situation on Obama’s presidential campaign.

Obama’s campaign is jam-packed with high-ranking women, LaBolt says, citing Senior Advisor Valerie Jarrett, Senior Advisor Michelle Obama, Chief of Staff Stephanie Cutter, Senior Advisor Linda Douglass, VP Chief of Staff Patti Solis Doyle, VP Communications Director Ricki Seidman, National Finance Chair Penny Pritzker, Policy Director Heather Higginbottom, Domestic Policy Director Neera Tanden, Director of Rapid Response Christina Reynolds, Senior Adviser Anita Dunn, Senior Speechwriter Sarah Hurwitz, Battleground States Director Jen O’Malley, Research Director Devorah Adler, Director of Scheduling and Advance Alyssa Mastromonaco, Chief Financial Officer Marianne Markowitz, Chief Operations Officer Betsy Myers, and the woman whom LaBolt says is the campaign’s highest-paid official, Finance Director Julianna Smoot. (Nice work, Jules.)

How many employees total does Obama consider "senior staffers"? How do the numbers of high-ranking women on the Obama campaign — and their salaries — stack up?"

Your argument doesn't hold water per your own link..