Jeannieology
Feminists looking for handouts now define 'working'
By Jeannieology
Liberals have no problem taking money from hardworking people and handing it over to those who won't work. Unless of course you're a self-made millionaire and the person you're supporting happens to be the mother of your children; then the left feels justified in mocking women who choose to be stay-at-home moms.
In another stunning example of the right-to-choosers ridiculing a woman if her choice doesn't include abortion or female careerism, DNC adviser Hilary Rosen — a woman who, like Hillary Clinton, obviously would never lower herself to "have stayed home and baked cookies and had teas" — discussed Ann Romney's lack of working experience on CNN's Anderson Cooper 360.
Working-woman advocate and liberal shill Hilary Rosen sat down with Anderson to bandy about the subject of the alleged Republican War on Women, a battle in which liberal feminists with high-paying career aspirations fight for taxpayer-funded contraceptives. During the conversation, Rosen lobbed a gender-denigrating grenade in Mrs. Romney's direction, saying "Guess what, [Romney's] wife has actually never worked a day in her life."
Democrats want to be viewed as distinct individuals yet they invariably categorize people by race, gender, age, and sexual orientation. Now, according to a unique set of liberal standards, they have also assumed the role of deciding what does and does not constitute "work."
Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't the rise of women in the workplace the direct result of the economic need for two salaries? Are liberals officially taking the position that the mothers in families who do not require two salaries choosing to have children and dedicate their lives to responsibly raising those children are not working?
In an article for the Huffington Post entitled "Ann Romney and Working Moms," Rosen responded to the firestorm that erupted in response to her 'Ann Romney never worked' comment expressed on AC360. Judgmental and disparaging, Hilary defended the remark by saying "Spare me the faux anger from the right who view the issue of women's rights and advancement as a way to score political points." Now that's a stunning comment in itself, especially coming from someone whose political party uses anything available to score political points.
Nevertheless, if given the choice of either raising their children or dropping them off at a daycare center/Petri dish, wouldn't most women, if they were honest, choose to marry someone whose income allows them to stay home with their babies, at least until they're of school age?
Truth be told, nowadays most women aren't fortunate enough to have the option Ann Romney enjoyed, possibly including Hilary Rosen. In a vulnerable moment, Rosen admitted that if given the choice, when raising her adopted twins Jacob and Anna with former partner Elizabeth Birch, she'd have preferred Ann's lifestyle to her own.
As far as the "work" aspect of the debate, in a Salary.com article entitled "Mom Deserves a Raise in 2007," it was estimated that if paid a salary, a stay-at-home Mom would earn $138,095 a year.
Facts like these matter little to Democrats as they attempt to portray Mitt Romney as an ostentatious square with his family automatically guilty by association. The objective is to render Romney out of touch with the common folk President Obama identifies with while attending $40,000-a-plate Democrat fundraisers.
Kudos to Ann Romney; she promptly addressed the pandering idiocy of a woman proving to be yet another in a long list of self-righteous liberal feminists. After hearing Rosen's remarks, Mrs. Romney defended the choice to raise her children at home, which was thanks to a husband who, rather than bilk the government, worked hard to provide for his growing family.
By way of @AnnDRomney at Twitter, Mrs. Romney, mother of five and grandmother to 16, informed Ms. Rosen when she said "I made a choice to stay home and raise five boys. Believe me, it was hard work."
Ann's tweet came just as "Mitt wrapped up a second day of campaigning that all but entirely focused on the 'war against women.'" At events packed with "female business leaders," Romney accused the Obama administration of economic policies that "hurt women" — which they do.
Reluctantly, many mothers are forced to work outside the home to pay for gasoline and taxes and to support husbands who, thanks to Barack Obama, remain chronically unemployed.
Yet, despite Democrats that include strategist David Axelrod's and Obama 2012 campaign manager Jim Messina's criticism of Rosen's inappropriate comments, if Hilary really cared about women she would discuss those who are denied the choice to raise their own children because of the economic catastrophe Obama has foisted upon American families.
Maybe the next time Ms. Rosen appears on AC360, after she discusses the crime of Mitt Romney providing for his family, she can also expound upon how liberals can defend hardworking Americans, be they male or female, supporting those who refuse to work.
And then after frequent White House visitor Hilary Rosen discusses how American taxpayers should help pay for contraceptives for supposedly self-sufficient women who are cash-strapped because of exorbitant daycare bills, maybe she can cap off the segment by reviewing Michelle Obama's largely taxpayer-funded vacation schedule and explain how hosting state dinners, modeling haute couture, and dancing exuberantly on Nickelodeon's iCarley constitutes "working."
Author's content: www.jeannie-ology.com
© Jeannieology
April 14, 2012
Liberals have no problem taking money from hardworking people and handing it over to those who won't work. Unless of course you're a self-made millionaire and the person you're supporting happens to be the mother of your children; then the left feels justified in mocking women who choose to be stay-at-home moms.
In another stunning example of the right-to-choosers ridiculing a woman if her choice doesn't include abortion or female careerism, DNC adviser Hilary Rosen — a woman who, like Hillary Clinton, obviously would never lower herself to "have stayed home and baked cookies and had teas" — discussed Ann Romney's lack of working experience on CNN's Anderson Cooper 360.
Working-woman advocate and liberal shill Hilary Rosen sat down with Anderson to bandy about the subject of the alleged Republican War on Women, a battle in which liberal feminists with high-paying career aspirations fight for taxpayer-funded contraceptives. During the conversation, Rosen lobbed a gender-denigrating grenade in Mrs. Romney's direction, saying "Guess what, [Romney's] wife has actually never worked a day in her life."
Democrats want to be viewed as distinct individuals yet they invariably categorize people by race, gender, age, and sexual orientation. Now, according to a unique set of liberal standards, they have also assumed the role of deciding what does and does not constitute "work."
Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't the rise of women in the workplace the direct result of the economic need for two salaries? Are liberals officially taking the position that the mothers in families who do not require two salaries choosing to have children and dedicate their lives to responsibly raising those children are not working?
In an article for the Huffington Post entitled "Ann Romney and Working Moms," Rosen responded to the firestorm that erupted in response to her 'Ann Romney never worked' comment expressed on AC360. Judgmental and disparaging, Hilary defended the remark by saying "Spare me the faux anger from the right who view the issue of women's rights and advancement as a way to score political points." Now that's a stunning comment in itself, especially coming from someone whose political party uses anything available to score political points.
Nevertheless, if given the choice of either raising their children or dropping them off at a daycare center/Petri dish, wouldn't most women, if they were honest, choose to marry someone whose income allows them to stay home with their babies, at least until they're of school age?
Truth be told, nowadays most women aren't fortunate enough to have the option Ann Romney enjoyed, possibly including Hilary Rosen. In a vulnerable moment, Rosen admitted that if given the choice, when raising her adopted twins Jacob and Anna with former partner Elizabeth Birch, she'd have preferred Ann's lifestyle to her own.
-
Now let's be clear on one thing. I have no judgments about women who work outside the home vs. women who work in the home raising a family. I admire women who can stay home and raise their kids full-time. I even envy them sometimes. It is a wonderful luxury to have the choice. But let's stipulate that it is NOT a choice that most women have in America today.
As far as the "work" aspect of the debate, in a Salary.com article entitled "Mom Deserves a Raise in 2007," it was estimated that if paid a salary, a stay-at-home Mom would earn $138,095 a year.
Facts like these matter little to Democrats as they attempt to portray Mitt Romney as an ostentatious square with his family automatically guilty by association. The objective is to render Romney out of touch with the common folk President Obama identifies with while attending $40,000-a-plate Democrat fundraisers.
Kudos to Ann Romney; she promptly addressed the pandering idiocy of a woman proving to be yet another in a long list of self-righteous liberal feminists. After hearing Rosen's remarks, Mrs. Romney defended the choice to raise her children at home, which was thanks to a husband who, rather than bilk the government, worked hard to provide for his growing family.
By way of @AnnDRomney at Twitter, Mrs. Romney, mother of five and grandmother to 16, informed Ms. Rosen when she said "I made a choice to stay home and raise five boys. Believe me, it was hard work."
Ann's tweet came just as "Mitt wrapped up a second day of campaigning that all but entirely focused on the 'war against women.'" At events packed with "female business leaders," Romney accused the Obama administration of economic policies that "hurt women" — which they do.
Reluctantly, many mothers are forced to work outside the home to pay for gasoline and taxes and to support husbands who, thanks to Barack Obama, remain chronically unemployed.
Yet, despite Democrats that include strategist David Axelrod's and Obama 2012 campaign manager Jim Messina's criticism of Rosen's inappropriate comments, if Hilary really cared about women she would discuss those who are denied the choice to raise their own children because of the economic catastrophe Obama has foisted upon American families.
Maybe the next time Ms. Rosen appears on AC360, after she discusses the crime of Mitt Romney providing for his family, she can also expound upon how liberals can defend hardworking Americans, be they male or female, supporting those who refuse to work.
And then after frequent White House visitor Hilary Rosen discusses how American taxpayers should help pay for contraceptives for supposedly self-sufficient women who are cash-strapped because of exorbitant daycare bills, maybe she can cap off the segment by reviewing Michelle Obama's largely taxpayer-funded vacation schedule and explain how hosting state dinners, modeling haute couture, and dancing exuberantly on Nickelodeon's iCarley constitutes "working."
Author's content: www.jeannie-ology.com
© Jeannieology
The views expressed by RenewAmerica columnists are their own and do not necessarily reflect the position of RenewAmerica or its affiliates.
(See RenewAmerica's publishing standards.)
