Here's what Democratic political consultant Hilary Rosen said concerning Mitt and Ann Romney....
“What you have is Mitt Romney running around the country, saying, 'Well, you know, my wife tells me that what women really care about are economic issues, and when I listen to my wife, that’s what I’m hearing.' Guess what? His wife has actually never worked a day in her life. She’s never really dealt with the kinds of economic issues that a majority of the women in this country are facing, in terms of how do we feed our kids, how do we send them to school, and why do we worry about their future.”
"My career choice was to be a mother," she said Thursday in an interview on Fox News. "We need to respect choices that women make."
Having gotten their political fingers terribly burned by playing with anti-contraception and women-bashing state initiative fires, Republican strategists literally plunged into the deep and murky wingnut waters of projection last week without even looking where they were going.
You see, Romney and the Republicans lost significant polling support immediately after the contraceptive faux-outrage and state-ultrasound-wand-ordered rape legislation in Virginia and Texas. Rightfully so. Efforts by the extremists steering the GOP led to a rapid backlash by women. For example: a two percentage point lead among women for Romney in February in the swing state of Virginia quickly turned into a 12 point Obama lead following the contraception and transvaginal ultrasound discussions.
Almost before Hilary Rosen's words, "his wife has actually never worked a day in her life", vibrated her vocal cords, Big Wingnut Media went...well...apesh*t. Democrats were accused of attacking yet another Queen Mother Republican. Obama and Democrats were warring against women, conducting a "war on stay-at-home moms."
Here's just one of dozens I could post....
I am woman, hear me slam stay-at-home moms.
No, that’s not the way I remember the feminist rallying cry either. But it was essentially what Democratic strategist Hilary Rosen said when she criticized Ann Romney on CNN yesterday.
It was obvious that Rosen was not bashing stay-at-home moms, but rather, the Mittster's claim that his wife, Ann, "tells me what women really care about".....i.e, "economic issues." It's important to get this point. Obama and the Democrats had been pointing to Republican efforts to limit a woman's right to choose, to curtail access to contraception, to defund Planned Parenthood, as part of a concerted effort to bait the extremist-wing, cultural warriors on the right. But according to S. Carolina GOP Governor Nikki Haley, "women don't care about contraception".....what women really care about....(insert Ann Romney's alleged comment to Mitt Romney)...."women care about economic issues", not contraception silly.
Which almost begs the Rosen question...."what would Ann Romney know about women and economic issues, she's never worked a day in her life." An astute observation, really. Rosen spoke the truth....Ann Romney never had to work a job outside the home because her and Mitt were very wealthy. Because Mitt and Ann Romney belonged to the top 1% from the beginning, allowing Ann Romney the freedom to never have to earn a paycheck......what pertinent advice could Ann give Mitt about women and economic issues? Answer: not much.....and that's exactly what Hilary Rosen was getting at with her comment. which she later unnecessarily apologized for.
The typical conservative suspects were oh-so-offended by Rosen's alleged 'attack on stay-at-home moms', and quickly responded with a truckload of 'do you know how hard it is to raise children....do you know how much work it is to raise children?'....rebuttals. Only problem is....these conservative-media knee jerkers forgot they were defending the Slinky-spined, serial flip-flopper, Mitt Romney.
GOP presidential nominee, Mitt Romney, January, 2012....
" Even if you have a child 2 years of age, you need to go to work," Romney said of moms on TANF (Temporary Assistance for Needy Families).
"I wanted to increase the work requirement," said Romney. "I said, for instance, that even if you have a child 2 years of age, you need to go to work. And people said, 'Well that's heartless.' And I said, 'No, no, I'm willing to spend more giving day care to allow those parents to go back to work. It'll cost the state more providing that daycare, but I want the individuals to have the dignity of work.'"
"I want the individuals (women) to have the dignity of work." Women who are poor and do not work aside from the hard work of raising their children, (just like Ann Romney's hard work at home raising five boys), do not gain that necessary "dignity of work" that, apparently, is lacking in the lives of poor single moms...because of....only staying home and raising their children. Does Ann Romney, then, lack the "dignity of work?" According to Mitt, poor single mothers on welfare do. That's why Mitt wanted those stay-at-home moms to get out there and experience that "dignity" of working outside the home for the purpose of taking care of one's family. Again, does Ann Romney lack that "dignity of work"? And if she doesn't, why is it that poor, single moms do?
The other day I reminded folks of the only battle-line division afflicting our nation. The rich versus the poor. If you use my suggested rule of thumb....applying it to the alleged debate about stay-at-home moms, Ann Romney, Rosen's comments and poor single mothers.....I think you'll find that it's perfectly fine, admirable really, for wives of rich males to stay home and raise their children without gaining the dignity of working outside the home for a paycheck. Why? Because wives of rich males.....are rich too....and therefore, already possess dignity. But what about single moms of scant means? Isn't it also admirable for single moms to stay at home and only work raising their children? Not a chance. Single moms of scant means NEED that dignity gained by working outside the home.....the dignity which Ann Romney, despite never working outside the home for a paycheck, automatically possesses because she is rich.
This is a clear double standard. One rule applies for the poor, another for the rich. Same game.....different political-topic venue.
About This Blog