The Massachusetts Liberal blog has the post Brilliant diversion which makes the point:

And while Brown is anything but consistent between rhetoric and action, his campaign has shown it consistently thinks one or two moves ahead on the tactical chess board. Which brings us to the pay equality vote.

Though Elizabeth Warren’s latest ad is very good, I wonder shy she doesn’t make the more explicit points some place else that I made in my previous blog post, Senator Brown casts vote against wage bill:

The law  “requiring employers to provide a reason for pay gaps when asked” doesn’t seem to be that onerous.  If any of the supposed legitimate reasons mentioned by Republicans for a pay gap were the real reason, then all the employer would have to do is to say so.  However, don’t you have to wonder why the Republicans think that there might be systematic differences in pay “based on performance”?  Do they really think men do the job so much better than women that they merit a 30% wage differential?
.
.
.
Scott Brown claims to be working for all of Massachusetts, but he always finds a reason why a particular law to help the middle-class would be bad, and he never finds a reason why a particular law to help the wealthy would be bad. Is this sort of like Faux Noise’s “fair and balanced”?