Dump costly men, hire cheap women

From ScrappleFace.com.

At a White House news conference today, President Obama encouraged employers to boost their profits by slashing expenses, or in his words: “Dump costly men, hire cheap women.”

“With women earning just 77 cents on the dollar compared with men,” Obama said, “they’re a real bargain, allowing you to move 23 percent of your HR budget straight to the bottom line.”

The president noted that, “Not only are women cheap and renewable, but they’re smart and they work hard, often doing jobs that no man would do. And some of them have even bigger biceps than their husbands.”

President Obama signs an executive order, firing every male employee in the executive branch, to be replaced with “cheap, renewable women,” saving taxpayers millions of dollars this year alone.

An unnamed economist at the American Woman Cooperative Marketing Board agreed.

“If women really earn so much less,” he said, “why would a business ever hire a man? All other things being equal, it makes no economic sense.”

However, a spokesman for Man Worker International noted that despite their proclivity to engage in risky after-hours behaviors and to die sooner, men are still a good deal.

“Sure, they cost a little more up front,” the spokesman acknowledged, “but men consistently put work before family, senselessly devote their lives to developing boring but useful expertise, and rarely get pregnant.”

By Scott Ott.

6 Responses to Dump costly men, hire cheap women

  1. This is brilliant. Didn’t know Scott Ott wrote stuff like this. Can we borrow, if you get a chance?


  2. Senior Blonde says:



  3. zip says:

    An interesting note to go w/ this. Since M. obama has been costing the American taxpayer so much more than normal, it would go to say that it doesn’t matter to M. the cost. The sky is the limit.
    It might be answered too, if we realize who’s really in that position. See for yourself: http://12160.info/profiles/blogs/michelle-obama-is-a-transvestite-or-transexual-shocking-video-and


    • I watched that video purporting to prove that Mrs. Obama is a biological male, but the evidence they present is flawed. Having ring fingers that are longer than the corresponding index fingers is not proof that one is male; if it were, I would be male, and I’m pretty sure I’m not. (If I were, I’d be the first biological male in history to conceive, carry to term, give birth to, and breastfeed not one but four babies.) I also have very broad shoulders, which is not at all surprising, given that my biological mother also had them. She and I used to commiserate over how difficult it was to find clothes that fit comfortably.

      I’m definitely not taking sides on the question of Mrs. Obama’s gender, but the fact that her ring fingers are longer than her index fingers and the fact that she has unusually broad shoulders do not constitute proof that she is not a woman.


      • zip says:

        I hear you Bob. I noticed my fingers too when I saw that. Also big bones and such are common in females as well. But, in lieu of the many cons and lies that this adminst. entails, and who they work for (not America as we knew), this info caught my attention.
        I’d recently seen a rerun show on Blue Bloods that had transvestites – those males played very convincing females. Add some real female hormones in the mix and magically you have a 1st lady Michael. Since records are sealed and birth certif.s of daughters or ‘acting prez’ are viewable, it only adds to the authenticity that this could be true. All those ‘bios’ are easily rewritten and many ‘innocently’ believe what they’re told. It seems so bazaar, but considering the nwo agenda (21), it fits. It’s right in our faces, but we’re so conditioned, we can’t ‘see it.’ What’s more important is the direction that’s so ‘foreign’ to what we grew up believing as moral and true. Thanks Bob! {Maybe your Great Uncle Arthur can tilt his head this- way-and-that and see thru the guise!}


%d bloggers like this: