Mitt wants to bash Obama over statistics that show more women than men exited the work force during the recession. Ann wants to draw empathy from working women even though Ann has never been in the work force. Hilary did a poor job distinguishing between women in the work force and women who are not in the work force who work extremely hard maintaining a home, caring for children and parents, managing household finances and many more tasks. The bottom line is that Ann does not share working life of the women whose votes Mitt is trying to get.
Do you understand what it's like to be a politician, a woman, a doctor, a minority? No? Becuase you haven't lived that life? Then Rosen doesn't understand what it's like to be a full time mom and has no valid comparison, because she sent her kids to daycare and didn't have to spend all her time educating them, cleaning up after them, caring for them. A mom that works spends less time being a parent. That's a fact of working. So SHE doesn't know how much work it was for Anne - especially since she also didn't have cancer or MS, while raising 5 kids... Get a grip on reality.
You are full of it. I was a full time single parent that worked full time, I have a lot of knowledge that Ann Romney does NOT. She worried about cleaning up for the parties they had in their mansions with servants, we worried where the next meal was coming from. Ann Romney has zero clue, I'd very gladly switch roles as far as money with her, but she'd be dead or insane in a month.
And Ann is not running for president. But if it were a wealthy male Democrat, you would vote for him, no, even if his kids went to private school and their kids were raised with help? So who's kidding whom?
People who can afford to support kids should have them. I, as a taxpayer, should not be expected to give pre-natal care, day care, food stamps, medical treatment and welfare to a woman who did nothing more than lie on her back for five minutes. Get married, stay married and have kids. But, for God sake, take responsibility for your own actions.
Other countries should support themselves. I as a taxpayer and pacifist, should not be expected to give security, food supplies, military aid, and more to these countries that do nothing more than fight with each other and embezzle foreign aid.
But for God's sake; nay, for the benefit of social issues and the needs of the poor, American taxpayers will provide for their needs. I think God would be happy that those who could make assistance, didn't cower from making a difference by helping.
Spoken like a true women-hater. Wow, reading these posts it is hard to believe it is 2012, sounds more like 1912. I guess an accomplished black President is more than the neocons can stand. The hatred in these neocon posts is palpable. They damn themselves with their own words more than I ever could. Respectfully, retired US Army Medical Officer. PS gipper, try saying that to a close female member of your family who gets pregnant.
Bottom-line is that we are $16 trillion in debt. More that $5.5 trillion of that has been added in the last three years. This entitlement society that we have created since Lyndon Johnson is a train wreck about to happen. Soon or later, we are toast anyway you look at it. I would prefer that it be later.
These government programs that we are funding are run by a bunch of fat cats who think nothing of junkets to Vegas and Hawaii. I worked for government for six years while I went to law school. I have seen the waste personally. There is no such thing as something for nothing. At the end if the day, somebody has to pay.
"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."
It almost sounds like she is pro-choice. I know this is selective perception by interpretation of what choices are made. There is probably some kind of qualification on that, like respect the choices mothers make.
The concept that being a mother is a career choice mixes concepts and muddles the issues. Implicit in the term career is that an individual is engaged in some form of commerce or service for which they receive cash compensation. Implicit in choice is a conscious decision to pursue a course of action. Implicit in mother is giving birth to a child. Put it all together, the closest career choice to being a mother is surrogate motherhood.
Anne Romney and Mitt will never get it. They hob nob with the rich and famous and have no connection whatever with the poor and hard working middle class. I'm sure neither of them have ever had to cash a pay check that was mostly eaten up by bills already due or late and just hope there was enough left to get through the week.
Like others here that envy those rascally "rich" people - you don't know what Anne has been doing for the last year... She's been out asking women what's important to them. It comes down to two things; jobs and the soaring deficit we are handing to our kids. That's a lot more in touch with women than the statements made by Rosen, of anything Michelle Obama has said or done.
Hilary Rosen was just trying to explain how out of touch Mitt Romney's family is. Hilary stepped on some toes but really Ann hasn't had a typical job in her life. Point taken. Yes you can put on your resume that you are a homemaker but what people would prefer is that Ann was more knowledgeable especially if she has to give Mitt advice.
You obviously do not know what Anne Romney has been doing for the past year. She's been meeting with women all over America to find out what they are most interested in - which is jobs and the soaring deficit that will be handed to our children. If you don't think it's "work" to stay at home and raise children, or go out on the road and campaign, then you're sadly mistaken. Anne and Mitt know what's important to voters. Is isn't taxing the rich out of some class warfare ploy. It isn't mandating healthcare, it's jobs and gov overspending. Plain and simple. Whether she raised kids or worked for a company, Rosen's comments where designed to sidetrack the issue and take Anne away from talking about what really matters. Now back to your regularly scheduled program.
Anne Romney and Mitt will never get it. They hob nob with the rich and famous and have no connection whatever with the poor and hard working middle class. I'm sure neither of them have ever had to cash a pay check that was mostly eaten up by bills already due or late and just hope there was enough left to get through the week.
The richest Presidents were George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Herbert Hoover and J.F. Kennedy. How did they do? I say pretty good. Oh, yea even Kennedy was pro-tax cuts. Not like our divider in chief.
Laman, both Ann and Mitt Romney have donated thousands of hours of service as members of the Mormon church. As a Bishop (Pastor), Mitt would be directly responsible for providing food for the hungry, financial assistance for the poor, visiting the sick and counseling those with serious problems. It is as demanding as being a fulltime social worker. You are assuming that just because they are successful, that they are isolated from the real world - think again.
Why apologize for stating the simple and honest truth? I'm glad you said it. I was waiting for someone to have the "b@lls" to state the obvious .......
Ah, before you speak so arrogantly, YOUR president never had a real job either nor did he raise the kids. And she's NOT running a country...oh shoot, NEITHER IS HE. Life is enjoyable. But why are liberals so belligerent & angry all the time?
The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. By using this Web site you agree to accept our Terms of Service. Click here to read the Rules of Engagement.
Reply to Comment The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. By using this Web site you agree to accept our Terms of Service. Click here to read the Rules of Engagement.
Other countries should support themselves. I as a taxpayer and pacifist, should not be expected to give security, food supplies, military aid, and more to these countries that do nothing more than fight with each other and embezzle foreign aid.
But for God's sake; nay, for the benefit of social issues and the needs of the poor, American taxpayers will provide for their needs. I think God would be happy that those who could make assistance, didn't cower from making a difference by helping.
These government programs that we are funding are run by a bunch of fat cats who think nothing of junkets to Vegas and Hawaii. I worked for government for six years while I went to law school. I have seen the waste personally. There is no such thing as something for nothing. At the end if the day, somebody has to pay.
It almost sounds like she is pro-choice. I know this is selective perception by interpretation of what choices are made. There is probably some kind of qualification on that, like respect the choices mothers make.
Hm.
Life is enjoyable. But why are liberals so belligerent & angry all the time?