Dem strategist Rosen: Ann Romney ‘never actually worked a day in her life’ [VIDEO]

[seekerz]

Many women who are stay at home mothers say it is ‘work,’ and that it has economic worth. Ann Romney said her job bringing up five children was ‘work.’

NPR: What Is Mom’s Work Worth?

Stay at home moms are not, however counted in the ranks of those who lost their jobs and are having trouble regaining them, which is actually one of the issues that exchange was really about.

 

[seekerz]

Obama Rejects Rosen’s Comments on Ann Romney

abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/04/obama-rejects-rosens-comments-on-ann-romney

How odd to hear this from Barack Obama - the same man who has not denounced once the statements from various Democrats making obscene comments about conservative women such as Sarah Palin and her children.

Right on Cue, Obama Rides in to Play the Role of the Moderate Who Loves Moms

pjmedia.com/tatler/2012/04/12/right-on-cue-obama-rides-in-to-play-the-role-of-the-moderate-who-loves-moms

That took long…the only thing POTUS hasn’t yet caved to ‘reject’ is…??? what exactly?

 

[seekerz]

So Ann Romney can not sympathize with struggling women with or without children because her husband is wealthy? I don’t think that is true or fair. Most if all of the presidents have been wealthy, thus their wives and the rest of their family has been too. Why isn’t Hilary Rosen putting what she say on to them too? Ann Romney’s position is not unique.

Did these other women’s husbands reference them as their go-to source for women’s concerns? If a president wants to know what women think, I guess he’d ask them? No?

 

[ConcernedApathy]

At last, someone willing to discuss the real issue Rosen was referencing…where have you been all day?

I appreciate the support seekerz and I liked what you were saying earlier in the thread.

One of the few things I actually admire about the Right is their ability to purposefully mishear and misinterpret something and in doing so change the entire direction of a conversation. It’s just so darn effective politically. They are masters at manipulating language, (i.e. Obamacare, death panels, entitlements etc.) and then repeating it so often it gets wedged into the lexicon and the national conversation as if it were the God’s honest truth. This is just another, apparently successful attempt. To see liberals actually attacking Rosen is pathetic. If we lose this year, this is why, because we don’t have the backbone to stand up in situations like this and just say “You’re wrong, what Rosen said is spot on correct and we will not play into your fiction that this is some sort of swipe at stay-at-home moms. It is not our fault that you can’t or won’t understand.” That’s what the Rosen should have said, that’s what the Obama’s should have said, that’s what Wasserman-Schultz should have said.

I’m so sick of kowtowing centrist Dems. My kingdom for a real firebrand progressive.

 

[seekerz]

Apparently in Rosen’s mind, Ann Romney can NOT:
think about it
have an opinion about it
hold concerns about it
care about it
know about it
learn about it -

so how could poor Mrs. R have sympathy/empathy about it?
Hilary Rosen says A Romney could not and H Rosen has
appointed herself Speaker on the Issue.

Good luck with that, Miss Rosen.

Seriously, have you listened to that segment? ***Rosen was asked a question ***about women’s employment numbers. Ann Romney wasn’t even the subject of the response - she was only referenced as her husband’s publicly proferred source of info. So the defenders of stay at home moms can go easy on the indignation…possibly…now that everybody and his brother has fallen over themselves apologizing for a statement of fact made in a relevant context.

 

[seekerz]

I appreciate the support seekerz and I liked what you were saying earlier in the thread.

One of the few things I actually admire about the Right is their ability to purposefully mishear and misinterpret something and in doing so change the entire direction of a conversation. It’s just so darn effective politically. They are masters at manipulating language, (i.e. Obamacare, death panels, entitlements etc.) and then repeating it so often it gets wedged into the lexicon and the national conversation as if it were the God’s honest truth. This is just another, apparently successful attempt. To see liberals actually attacking Rosen is pathetic. If we lose this year, this is why, because we don’t have the backbone to stand up in situations like this and just say “You’re wrong, what Rosen said is spot on correct and we will not play into your fiction that this is some sort of swipe at stay-at-home moms. It is not our fault that you can’t or won’t understand.” That’s what the Rosen should have said, that’s what the Obama’s should have said, that’s what Wasserman-Schultz should have said.

I’m so sick of kowtowing centrist Dems. My kingdom for a real firebrand progressive.

Can’t wait to hear Maddow take on the WH tonight over this. I may not agree with all her views but tonight should be worth watching - and I do consider myself centrist, but not of the fall-on-the-floor-and-play-dead-for-every-word-of-fake-outrage-typed-on-a-blog variety!

 

[catharina]

Seriously, have you listened to that segment? ***Rosen was asked a question ***about women’s employment numbers. Ann Romney wasn’t even the subject of the response - she was only referenced as her husband’s publicly proferred source of info. So the defenders of stay at home moms can go easy on the indignation…possibly…now that everybody and his brother has fallen over themselves apologizing for a statement of fact made in a relevant context.

Frankly, Rosen’s take on it re-referenced the ugliness of
the 1970s women’s lib garble. Hated it then. Hate it now.
I already lived through such garbage when I was still a young
adult back then. I don’t want to see it again tied up in fresh ribbons.

 

[irishpatrick]

Wow - Great post

Ann Romney may be able to sympathize with the realities most women confront, but she cannot claim to have been tested by them herself. She has never had to figure out how to juggle more than she wanted to handle.

It makes me think of that movie “Trading Places” with Dan Aykroyd and Eddie Murphy.

Such utter nonsense.

She raised five children, and in the beginning the Romney’s did NOT have the money they have now…it was not an easy life the first years.

The very idea of attaching any such statements about “not working a day in her life” to a mom of five kids, is utter nonsense. People who say such things likely have never walked that walk.

A mother’s job is 24 X 7, even if she has only one child–all the more with five children. There are literally hundreds of things mom must do, and most of them touch upon economics. Mothers know better than most men what the price of food and goods are, they are very much away of gas prices, and of the general state of the economy–they remain awat because it is closely related to her raising her children.

 

[seekerz]

Frankly, Rosen’s take on it re-referenced the ugliness of
the 1970s women’s lib garble. Hated it then. Hate it now.
I already lived through such garbage when I was still a young
adult back then. I don’t want to see it again tied up in fresh ribbons.

I was pretty young in the 1970’s but nothing Rosen actually said or implied in the exchange harked by to that IMHO. You can’t go on about women’s job numbers and then proffer as your adviser a woman who’s never had to concern herself personally with any of that. It’s like asking a teacher about nurses’ problems or a banker about surgeons’ issues.

 

[catharina]

I was pretty young in the 1970’s but nothing Rosen actually said or implied in the exchange harked by to that IMHO. You can’t go on about women’s job numbers and then proffer as your adviser a woman who’s never had to concern herself personally with any of that. It’s like asking a teacher about nurses’ problems or a banker about surgeons’ issues.

I was an adult then.
Dismissing the ‘thinking capabilities’
and inherent good sense - and even
wisdom - of women who “stayed home”
was a very long stinking arm of total
condescension.

I’m stunned I’m hearing again.
It was divisive then
It’s divisive now.

It’s patronizing -
as in ‘the women in the workforce are
better in that they’re more like men.’

Glad Rosen’s jab didn’t fly with most folks.

 

[seekerz]

I was an adult then.
Dismissing the ‘thinking capabilities’
and inherent good sense - and even
wisdom - of women who “stayed home”
was a very long stinking arm of total
condescension.

I’m stunned I’m hearing again.
It was divisive then
It’s divisive now.

It’s patronizing -
as in ‘the women in the workforce are
better in that they’re more like men.’

Glad Rosen’s jab didn’t fly with most folks.

Rosen made a factual response to a specific question. Nothing to do with what women can or can’t do.

 

[meltzerboy]

I don’t know about the background behind that particular bill to make an assessment of why Republicans rejected it, but when I see the ACLU and a bunch of other liberal groups supported it there must be a good reason why Republcians did it not support it at the time.

It is an absolute disgrace to all the women in the world whose rights are curtailed, from not being allowed to vote in Saudi Arabia, to women being forced to have an abortion against their will in China, for you to say that there is war on women in America. To say that there is a Republican ‘war on women’ is nothing but to try to create a distraction to divert from Barack Obama’s failed policies.

You say the Ledbetter bill is about equal for equal work? Why aren’t women paid equally as men in the Obama White house?

freebeacon.com/hostile-workplace

The Obama campaign has not commented on why the pay differentials exist or if any Ledbetter lawsuits have been filed on behalf of Obama admin employees. Seems hypocritical.

If these statistics are correct, I agree it is hypocritical. And I stated in one of my prior posts that I believe Hilary Rosen should not have said what she did about Ann Romney. Of course women have it much worse in other parts of the world. I’m not denying that, but that doesn’t mean we should be silent when there are injustices in our own country. Otherwise, we might as well also be silent about the economy, health care, foreign policy, and a host of other issues since other countries are far worse. My comment was not meant as a distraction, let alone an “absolute disgrace to all the women in the world whose rights are curtailed.” I admit to what I regard as Obama’s failures, but, unlike some in the opposing camp, will also give him credit for his successes. And I will do the same for the loyal opposition, unlike many of my fellow liberals. However, all in all I see the Democratic party as more beneficial to women than the Republicans, and the Congressional votes on women’s issues confirm this.

 

[mary_bobo]

Did these other women’s husbands reference them as their go-to source for women’s concerns? If a president wants to know what women think, I guess he’d ask them? No?

Ann Romney is out on the campaign trail, talking to people. Can she not report back to her husband what she has heard? Our president has said that Michele is one of his top advisors. Is it only Dems that can listen to what their wives have to say? This whole dust-up is a campaign boo boo from start to finish and finally the committee to reelect the president shut down the talk.

 

[ishii]

Rosen made a factual response to a specific question. Nothing to do with what women can or can’t do.

Rosen stepped into it bigtime. This is a huge gaffe for the Democrat party as it betrays what they really think - the only worthy occupation for women is that of a professional career. If a baby gets in the way, abort it or send it off to daycare. If you can’t afford daycare then vote for the Democrats who will provide funding for daycare. Another Hillary basically said the same thing - the only worthy occupation for women is a professional career when she made her “I could have stayed at home baking cookies but what I decided to do was fulfill my profession” remark during the height of the ethics scandals. She was basically belittling the women who stay at home to take care of their children. The Democrat party’s “war on women” campaign issue has backfired. Good.

Ishii

 

[catharina]

Rosen made a factual response to a specific question. Nothing to do with what women can or can’t do.

Still it’s a part of a very ugly timeline. It is.
She clearly echoed the '70s stance. Lots of folks “got it.”

 

[catharina]

Rosen stepped into it bigtime. This is a huge gaffe for the Democrat party as it betrays what they really think - the only worthy occupation for women is that of a professional career. If a baby gets in the way, abort it or send it off to daycare. If you can’t afford daycare then vote for the Democrats who will provide funding for daycare. Another Hillary basically said the same thing - the only worthy occupation for women is a professional career when she made her “I could have stayed at home baking cookies but what I decided to do was fulfill my profession” remark during the height of the ethics scandals. She was basically belittling the women who stay at home to take care of their children. The Democrat party’s “war on women” campaign issue has backfired. Good.

Ishii

Completely agree with your view on this.

 

[catharina]

Ann Romney is out on the campaign trail, talking to people. Can she not report back to her husband what she has heard? Our president has said that Michele is one of his top advisors. Is it only Dems that can listen to what their wives have to say? This whole dust-up is a campaign boo boo from start to finish and finally the committee to reelect the president shut down the talk.

Yep.
Logical!

 

[UNITE_MY_WILL]

If these statistics are correct, I agree it is hypocritical. And I stated in one of my prior posts that I believe Hilary Rosen should not have said what she did about Ann Romney. Of course women have it much worse in other parts of the world. I’m not denying that, but that doesn’t mean we should be silent when there are injustices in our own country. Otherwise, we might as well also be silent about the economy, health care, foreign policy, and a host of other issues since other countries are far worse. My comment was not meant as a distraction, let alone an “absolute disgrace to all the women in the world whose rights are curtailed.” I admit to what I regard as Obama’s failures, but, unlike some in the opposing camp, will also give him credit for his successes. And I will do the same for the loyal opposition, unlike many of my fellow liberals. However, all in all I see** the Democratic party as more beneficial to women** than the Republicans, and the Congressional votes on women’s issues confirm this.

With the majority of the Democratic party supporting abortion, millions of baby girls would
certainly disagree that the Democratic party is more beneficial, millions of baby boys as well.

 

[meltzerboy]

Rosen stepped into it bigtime. This is a huge gaffe for the Democrat party as it betrays what they really think - the only worthy occupation for women is that of a professional career. If a baby gets in the way, abort it or send it off to daycare. If you can’t afford daycare then vote for the Democrats who will provide funding for daycare. Another Hillary basically said the same thing - the only worthy occupation for women is a professional career when she made her “I could have stayed at home baking cookies but what I decided to do was fulfill my profession” remark during the height of the ethics scandals. She was basically belittling the women who stay at home to take care of their children. The Democrat party’s “war on women” campaign issue has backfired. Good.

Ishii

Two women named Hillary make belittling remarks about stay-at-home moms, and this means the whole Democratic party thinks the same way? Would you apply the same reasoning to the Republican party on the basis of Romney’s remarks during the primary, or the remarks of his operatives? I think one might just as well conclude that people by the name of Hillary are against women who don’t work outside the home.

 

[bellasbane]

Rosen stepped into it bigtime. This is a huge gaffe for the Democrat party as it betrays what they really think - the only worthy occupation for women is that of a professional career. If a baby gets in the way, abort it or send it off to daycare. If you can’t afford daycare then vote for the Democrats who will provide funding for daycare. Another Hillary basically said the same thing - the only worthy occupation for women is a professional career when she made her “I could have stayed at home baking cookies but what I decided to do was fulfill my profession” remark during the height of the ethics scandals. She was basically belittling the women who stay at home to take care of their children. The Democrat party’s “war on women” campaign issue has backfired. Good.

Ishii

I completely disagree with you on this. Most professional women sacrifice at least part of their career aspirations in order to be a mother. The simplest explanation for the glass-ceiling that exists for women in the workplace is that women love babies and will take time off of work to have them. To suggest that motherhood is not important to professional women is really insulting. Hillary is a mother - you should respect her for that. She raised a great kid.

I personally can’t imagine how horrible it must be to live in a world where wife and mother are the ONLY identities suitable to a woman. Limiting us in that way is extremely belittling and is precisely what the feminists of the 70s were reacting against. If anyone created hatred towards these vocations, it is those who would impose them upon a person against her will. Nobody likes being told who they are allowed to be.