I couldn't agree more with Warren's remarks. The Republican attacks on women's rights, particularly abortion and other health-related choices, are shockingly brazen. If the rash of bills proposing invasive vaginal ultrasound and other offensive requirements such as being shown an ultrasound image for getting an abortion in certain red states isn't terrifying, you should do more research.

Women are statistically more likely to vote Democratic (http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2012/tables/12s0419.xls), which is one reason they have been a target (not to mention old-fashioned sexism).

To answer the headline: yes.

"just the smoke and mirrors of a losing campaign" -> YOU BETCHA!

and to debunk another tidbit she/Dems like to grandstand with

It's Time That We End the Equal Pay Myth
By Carrie Lukas
http://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2012/04/16/its-time-that-we-end-the-equal-pay-myth/

Holidays are sometimes moved for the convenience of the calendar. Each year, Americans celebrate George Washington‘s birthday on the third Monday of February – not on his actual birthday, which is February 22 – to ensure that the public has a long weekend. Yet the logic behind declaring Tuesday, April 17, “Equal Pay Day” as the feminist movement has dubbed it, is increasingly flawed.

Equal Pay Day is supposed to represent the day that women have finally earned enough to make up for last year’s wage gap. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, full-time working women earned 81 percent of what full-time working men earned in 2010 (the most recent data available), leaving a “gap” of 19 percent between the sexes. But that means to make up for that “under-payment,” women would have to work through March 10. So we are celebrating Equal Pay Day more than a month late.Yet the mistaken logic of Equal Pay Day goes deeper than this simple calculation. Equal Pay Day presumes that the difference between men and women’s average earnings stems from discrimination, as President Obama suggested in his official proclamation last year: “I call upon all Americans to recognize the full value of women’s skills and their significant contributions to the labor force, acknowledge the injustice of wage discrimination, and join efforts to achieve equal pay.”

The wage gap statistic, however, doesn’t compare two similarly situated co-workers of different sexes, working in the same industry, performing the same work, for the same number of hours a day. It merely reflects the median earnings of all men and women classified as full-time workers.

The Department of Labor’s Time Use Survey, for example, finds that the average full-time working man spends 8.14 hours a day on the job, compared to 7.75 hours for the full-time working woman. Employees who work more likely earn more. Men working five percent longer than women alone explains about one-quarter of the wage gap.

There are numerous other factors that affect pay. Most fundamentally, men and women tend to gravitate toward different industries. Feminists may charge that women are socialized into lower-paying sectors of the economy. But women considering the decisions they’ve made likely have a different view. Women tend to seek jobs with regular hours, more comfortable conditions, little travel, and greater personal fulfillment. Often times, women are willing to trade higher pay for jobs with other characteristics that they find attractive.

Men, in contrast, often take jobs with less desirable characteristics in pursuit of higher pay. They work long hours and overnight shifts. They tar roofs in the sun, drive trucks across the country, toil in sewer systems, stand watch as prison guards, and risk injury on fishing boats, in coal mines, and in production plants. Such jobs pay more than others because otherwise no one would want to do them.

Unsurprisingly, children play an important role in men and women’s work-life decisions. Simply put, women who have children or plan to have children tend to be willing to trade higher pay for more kid-friendly positions. In contrast, men with children typically seek to earn more money in order to support children, sometimes taking on more hours and less attractive positions to do so.

Academics can debate why men and women make these different choices. The important takeaway, however, is that there are many reasons that men and women on average earn different amounts. It’s a mistake to assume that “wage gap” statistics reflect on-the-job discrimination.

Women have many reasons to celebrate today. Women are increasingly taking on leadership roles in businesses around the world. Technology is increasingly creating more flexible work arrangements, creating new options for parents to combine work and family life. Women are excelling academically (earning far more college degrees than men). Given that the economy tends to place a premium on education, we can expect women to contribute (and earn!) more in the future.

Feminists may protest, but American women aren’t the victims of a sexist economy. It’s time to declare an end to the Equal Pay Day myth.

Carrie Lukas is the managing director of the Independent Women’s Forum.

I am a woman and I find the ads coming from the democrats about the "war on women" insulting. I would hope the women watching these commercials would do a little digging before they believe what they see on TV. The comments made over the past few days by the MO republican was incredibly stupid. Just because there is 1 moron with an R next to their name, does not mean all republicans are that uneducated. I can think of a few morons with a D next to there names. Shall I immediately lump all democrats with them?

Republicans are going to take a beating this November (including the Dems holding majority Senate and Executive) but I suspect Brown will in fact be reelected. To answer the question about War on Women, YES but I dont think its calculated I think its the byproduct of a holier than though moral 1950s white male conservative bible thumping key demographic among GOPs and the views being secondary in these personalities rather than anything planned and premeditated.

Further if someone described the Akin debacle minus name or party affiliation and asked Americans which party member was responsible for the quote I think GOPs would not be hard to connect, it isnt something isolated as this trash comes from the mouths of Reps often (now if we are comparing 'dump behavior' in general not the case, Dems just as guilty but this type of ignorant hypocritical rhetoric the GOPs has locked down)

Bettilou: The Republican platform for the upcoming convention outlaws all abortion, including in cases of rape and incest: http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/08/21/us-usa-campaign-republicans-abortion-idUSBRE87K14J20120821; http://thkpr.gs/O1mMCZ. I agree that there are definitely politicians on both sides of the aisle who are making some mistakes and that the ads often make use of hyperbole. But taking away women's reproductive rights and healthcare is a systematic position of the Republican party.

Elizabeth Warren is behind and she is starting to get desparate. To try to lump one candidate with another person's dumb comments is irresponsible. I am tired of her ad that talks about student debt as if the fact that colleges like where she teaches charging upward to 55,000 a year are not mostly responsible for the debt kids assume to attend school. To break it down, she and her husband make almost 1,000,0000 dollars to teach at a school that sits on a 33billion dollar endowment. In other words she is asking tax payers to subsidize a school in which if you called them a company would be a fortune 100 company, and pays her in excess of 500,000 a year. Why, talk about an elitist hypocrite.

Reader: I read the article you posted and I was disapointed that the wording being voted on was not given. Agan, I believe there is no war on women. Abortion is one issue in a world of many. Perhaps it is the beliefs I personally have. I don't like abortion. I believe this is simply an issue some people cannot agree on. Not a war on half our society.

Bettilou is right, abortion is not a woman only issue. Many people have religious and personal reasons for their positions and this has nothing to do with other rights that woman may have or may not have.

Elizabeth Warren, a Democrat, has zero successful legislation or Obama success's to fall back on ,so In my opinion, she chooses to throw mud at her opposition. We have monumental fiscal problems committed by the Politicans on both the State and Federal level. Elizabeth what is your opinion on how to clean up this mess? before the Middle Class is toppled into the swamp of a 1930 depression.Stick to issues to give the voter an educated choice.... please.

Yes -- When republicans modify rape with words like "legitimate" or "forceable" there is a war on women. Rape is rape. It goes on. Equal pay for equal work means exactly that, and it is long overdue.

Bettilou--If you were to do even the tiniest bit of research, you would see that the terms used by Akin have been used historically but the extreme right wing faction that has taken over what was the GOP.

The current platform of the republican party would require that a girl impregnated by a relative carry her baby to term. Some in the radical right have gone so far as to suggest that resulting baby should be embraced as a "blessing." You know this and yet you don't see a war on women? Typically these same radical right wingers support the death penalty and the sale of assult rifles to average citizens, so they are most certainly not "pro-life."

My personal and religious choices about abortion are just that. They would surprise you. My religion does not trump anyone else's. Separation of church and state, remember?

Professor Warren's school, and several others like it, uses its endowment to make sure that students don't graduate with loan debt. Please do your research.

Professor Warren is an intellectual of high caliber. There is no question about that, and we need smart, fair-minded people in congress.

Sorry. S/b "historically *by* the extreme right-wing"

Bias much, Roberto Scalese? "a stunt"?

War on women? I think Pocahontas Warren has been waging a War on Truth and the Massachusetts media is giving her a pass. 1/32nd Cherokee suddenly became 1/64th Cherokee and 1/64th Delaware,...and the media is SILENT?

She rails against big banks and foreclosures, - while she and her kin flipped some 20 foreclosed homes in Oklahoma? She rails about the 'high cost of college' - while she collects $350K salary from Harvard?

Didn't these two agree not to sling derogatory personal remarks about one another? Seems to me that EW mentioning SB in particular about this issue is unnecessary and malevolent ... stick to the issues, don't take advantage of current media hype. Akin said (and I think he truly believes) a very stupid thing but in no way should this be a reflection on other legislators. I cannot wrap my mind around this woman speaking about financial matters when I know she is one of the ones that the Dems are wanting to tax for higher income. Can someone explain her to me...I just don't understand her at all. And I very much doubt that she understands just what the "middle class" is faced with every day and into the future. Someone, somewhere, made a very big mistake picking her to run ... who even heard of this woman before she was elected to run? As a news/political junkie, I sure never did. And why does she refuse to make herself available on talk/call-in radio? But, back to the subject at hand, no, I don't believe there is a war on women. That is a manufactured sentiment expressed by our wonderful and wise news people, don't you think? Just my humble opinion.

Everyone should look at this thread and realize how easy it is to be suckered into a single issue re a candidate, for example 'the war on women', Medicare, gun rights and economic stimulus. Consequently, polarization increases and consensus on any issue is a fairy tail, as shown by the current Congressional stalemate. Personally, I'll be holding my nose in November when voting more for a candidate that I'm least against than for supporting. Maybe the Bard was prescient with 'a plague on both your houses'.

Paul,

Why not get involved and then rather than holding your nose, you could support someone. I am kind of tired of people who complain about candidates in every election.

The 'War on Women' also includes the approximate 600,000 unborn women killed every year in this country. Sadly, both Warren and Brown are pro-abortion. I'll vote holding my nose.

Thought those who commented may have an interest in seeing a documentary on Obama. It is playing at the Tyngsboro AMC this Friday the 24th through Thursday, August 30th. It was produced by Gerald R Molen who produced "Schindler's List."
You can find the listing and times at www.movies.com "Obama's America".

Ron ... I do, indeed have an opinion. I just felt your reply to Paul was a bit harsh. You appear to be a strong-minded individual and I appreciate that since I am as well; however, I believe it is compassionate to respect the thoughts of others whether we agree or not. Isn't that what these comments are all about, to share differing thoughts? I suspect that you and I may share many same beliefs but please make room for those of differing feelings. This is a hard time for all of us and making decisions is not easy for everyone, some need more time, more information, which I don't really think we are getting enough of from either candidate at this time. It's just a bit sketchy to some people, the information from the media is limited to the ads they feature from the candidates themselves, boasting mostly about their attributes. You are perfectly correct ... research is the answer ... and past performance is an indicator of future endeavors by both. And to repeat,no, I do not believe there is a "war on women", I believe that is a manufactured comment to stir up controversy in favor of EW.

Senator Scott Brown certainly is NOT waging a "war on women". He has a loving wife and two daughters. The lady from Oklahoma and Harvard yard is not qualified to represent my views on common sense and level-headed approaches to our problems. She cannot match Brown's life experiences growing up in an abusive childhood, serving as a Mass. legislator and the military. There does seem to be a lot of women in the Republican Party who make their own personal choices I would suppose, so this gender war must only be misconstrued by SOME? All rhetoric and paranoia. As for abortion: hate the sin, love the sinner. You have the right to choose, I believe, but it's still killing a child. Abortion is not birth control.

Stepping away from the politics for a minute..Is this the testing ground for political plants? I'm being asked to vote for a lady from Oklahoma to help me locally right? Really? So, we voted in a governor from Chicago, and possibly senator from Oklahoma. How strange. We have a local running, a guy that's born and raised here. Understands us, one of us. And locals are tearing him to shreds in support of the lady from Oklahoma. How strange. When he's done he has to live here. She leaves for Oklahoma. That says a lot about who will care about me. I'm sorry, but I just can't understand why we vote for non-locals to support us. How strange.

Simpe fact of the matter is that- (i) education costs are too high; (ii) equal pay is long overdue; (iii) abortions rights, women's control of their own bodies, and repeal of Roe v. Wade are being threatened by Republican candidates; (iv) infrastructure repairs are required and create jobs, and (v) Wall Street needs to be regulated.
these are issues Elizabeth Warren is raising, not Brown. Brown is running "feel good "ads as if it were a popularity contest.

Side issues like Cherokee blood, " legitimatre rape", professors' salaries vs. CEO pay, are innane, juvenile distractions.
Elizabeth Warren will win because she is on the correct side of the issues, and Brown is hoping no one will ask him about the issues, trying to run out the clock before people realize.

Well said Vincent.

Is any one discussing foreign policy and military related issues? What are we doing about the invasion of drug cartel crime from Mexico? What should we do, if anything, in the Middle East? Is Afghanistan 'putting good money into bad'? Why do we still have troops in Europe and Japan almost 70 years after World War II? Do nations feel 'entitled' to our military at our expense? Why is our military budget identical to the budgets of the next 20 nations, including potential adversaries like China, Russia and Iran? What are we doing about the next conflict types: cyberwarfare, militarization of space?

Vincent is absolutely right. The issue about her pay is one that should be raised when she runs ads condemning the amount of student debt. The fact is that it is a crippling amount of money for college students to pay back. It determines job choices and living arrangments. Ther fact is that she make about 500k at a school that sits on a 33b dollar endowment, all facts and she now wants us to subsidize this. It smacks of hyprocrisy to condemn one set of hand-outs while looking for one yourself.

To: R Gagnon:

"protect a person's natural right to have an abortion"

That's probably the most disgusting thing I've read all day! What about a person's NATURAL RIGHT not to be killed at the whim of their mother?

Iron Mike, I, used the word "natural" right rather than "endowed by our Creator" because, many of the people who approve of abortion as a form of birth control do not believe in a "Creator". I think that most "God fearing" Americans do not approve of abortion as a form of birth control. Just as a cat has a "natural" right to kill a songbird and play with it until becoming bored and then leaving it to rot, some believe it is their "natural" right to kill an unborn baby for whatever reason and then submitting the bill to the tax payers disguised as birth control expenses. My opinion on the matter is quite in line with yours. I don't feel that the human race is done any favors in the eyes of my God by killing its young before they are born. I will not force my opinion on the matter on anybody but a major consideration for me when voting for a candidate is whether or not this candidate would use tax payer funds to pay for women's abortions regardless of the circumstances of conception. If carrying the baby to term is a real threat to the life of the mother, then the difficult decision might have to be made. But, the necessity to end the life of the baby in order to save the life of the mother is becoming more rare with advancements in the medial care for premature babies and prenatal care.

The "taxpayer-funded abortions" argument has been an ongoing boogeyman used by the religious right for several years. You would have a more robust argument that didn't rely on carefully-crafted talking points if you were armed with the facts about the issue from reputable sources. As a starting point, try these:

http://www.guttmacher.org/statecenter/spibs/spib_SFAM.pdf
http://www.factcheck.org/2011/04/planned-parenthood/

Kudos, however, for understanding that forcing your opinion on someone doesn't advance the discussion of what's a serious matter...