Skip to comments.Thank You, Ms. Rosen
Posted on 04/12/2012 6:54:02 PM PDT by smoothsailing
April 12, 2012
Though everyone is talking about Democratic strategist and Obama confidant Hilary Rosen's insolent remarks about Ann Romney, I want to discuss them, too, because they reveal her leftist mindset.
Rosen didn't misspeak; she spoke deliberately and with passion. And when given a chance to retract or soften her remarks, she doubled down -- at least initially.
Her comments came in a segment on CNN with Anderson Cooper. Cooper pointed out that in the current economy, "women are seeing jobs come back much more slowly than men are," and he asked Rosen, essentially, whether there was anything wrong with the Romney campaign's highlighting that fact and "reaching out to women on an issue that they care about, on the economy."
"Guess what?" asked Rosen. "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 we worry about their future."
Though Rosen's next comment hasn't received as much attention, it exposes liberal thinking. She said: "There's something much more fundamental about Mitt Romney, because he seems so old-fashioned when it comes to women. And I think that comes across. ... He just doesn't really see us as equal."
Ann Romney responded in her newly launched Twitter account, "I made a choice to stay home and raise five boys. Believe me, it was hard work."
Back on CNN the next day, Rosen protested that she loves stay-at-home moms. "This is not about Ann Romney," she said. "This is about the waitress in a diner someplace in Nevada who has two kids whose day care funding is being cut off because of the Romney-Ryan budget and she doesn't know what to do."
Rosen's remarks, taken together, tell us that like many of today's leftists, she sees America not as a melting pot, but as a Balkanized land of categorized groups, warring against one another. She sees people as blacks, women or gays, not as individuals.
From Rosen's leftist perspective, Republicans don't care about these groups but consider them inferior; "he just doesn't really see us as equal."
As usual with leftists, she's projecting. Who's not seeing women as equals, Ms. Rosen? Deny it as you now must, but you are the one dissing stay-at-home moms, diminishing their role and its worth and dignity, and implying they are somehow inferior.
That's not the way conservative women see it; they respect women whether they stay at home or work. As Ann Romney told Martha MacCallum on Fox News Channel: "My career choice was to be a mother. ... We need to respect choices that women make." She said that Mitt had always told her that her job was more important because it would make a permanent difference.
But we must understand that Rosen's comments also transcend her opinion of stay-at-home moms. She's articulating the narrow, intolerant leftist view that if you are a member of a particular group, you must adopt the attitudes of the left, or you won't measure up. If you are black, a woman or gay and don't subscribe to liberalism and embrace its hostile identity politics, you are not an authentic black person, woman or gay person. If you are a pro-life woman, you can't fully identify with real women.
Rosen's view that the "Romney-Ryan" budget victimizes waitresses further displays the left's habit of seeing everything through the prism of identity politics. Like President Obama, she places people in economic classes, too -- the haves and the have-nots -- and the only solution they offer the "have-nots" is government assistance, not the hope of advancement through greater opportunity.
Ann Romney served up a delicious smack-down on this argument, as well, saying that she's been on the campaign trail for a year and what women are talking about are "jobs and ... the legacy of debt that we're leaving our children." She gave no quarter to Rosen's implication that the Romneys' wealth makes them insensitive to the less fortunate -- again mouthing the noxious view that unless you're part of a group, you can't relate to that group. "Mitt and I have compassion for people that are struggling, and that's why we're running."
Sorry to break it to Ms. Rosen, but the question isn't whether a president is poor -- none of them is; Obama's not -- but whether he would implement pro-growth and anti-debt policies.
Truth be told, conservatives, generally speaking, have more compassion than those leftists who relegate people to dehumanizing groups. Compassion is a very human phenomenon, not sterile political advocacy ostensibly on behalf of categories of people ripe for political exploitation.
The left's manufactured GOP "war on women" is backfiring. Thank you, Hilary Rosen, and thank you, Ann Romney.
The Democrats find themselves in a bind finding that they have members willing to cross all the lines in the sand no one else will cross.
They have Democrat politicians in Congress who'd abort a baby on the floor of the House just to secure the leftist vote. All this sudden concern about another Democrat who thinks women who take care of their families have nothing to do is just a part of that same attitude.
The Democrats can pretend they don't share in that sort of barbaric attitude but we know better.
At the same time Mitt's long overdue to drop out of this race. He's not a Conservative and he's not a real Republican ~ in fact, he's made major donations to Democrat campaigns.
I wish he would drop out, Ann Romney is a far better candidate.
Wonder what happened to make Ms. Rosen decide to finally apologize. Would love to have been in the room when she realized the bus was coming.
She was threatened with eternal banishment from Leftyland.
It's fun to watch these Commies panic and eat their own.
The sodomite Rosen resents Mrs. Romney for being a real woman, mother, and wife. That’s where the venom comes from. Expect the same from the NAGS.
In typical Bolshecrat fashion, Ms. Rosen, was demanding that the taxpayer pay for the choice she made in the name of her lifestyle. She criticized Mrs. Romney for being the wife of a rich man, who could not possibly know the stresses mothers who works have, implying, that the government be her sugar daddy providing her with day care, good schools, and free lunches, so she can avoid the hard choices.
While hearing about this on the radio earlier today, I thought about the conundrum of defending the woman and the precepts at odds with the ways of Romney.
When my second son was born I retired after spending 42 years working for phone company, to be Mr. Mom. This allowed my wife to finished her career and retired.
I preach to everyone that I would rather have stay digging ditches and climbing poles that to have a Mothers job.
God bless all Mothers.
She sounds like she is angling for a job with Mitt if he wins.
Hilary Rosen is to “women” as Sandra Fluke was to “contraception”, a lying Democratic, leftist shit.
Both knew that they were lying and insulting people, as well as trying to set up conservatives who might reply. Rush did, but he used the wrong word.
Fluke, was no fluke, but she was a nymphomaniac. Do the math. If she needed $3,000 for birth control items during her three years of law school (When did she ever study?), then even if she had sex with her boyfriend 3 times a week (3 rubbers x 52 weeks = 156), and rubbers cost about (I don’t know, say $5 a dozen), then for $3,000’s worth, she’d have to screw 2,500 times in three years. (My math is very bad but I think I’m in the ballpark).
There isn’t a woman alive who could do that, except Ms. Fluke. Where I come from, she would be called a “super nymphomaniac”, or a football league players’ “dream girl.”
Hilary Rosen has been around a long time. She knows that many American women stay at home to raise their children, so she is not only lying, but also insulting tens of millions of decent mothers.
The point of my comment is that the Democratic women are lying shits, with no morality, ethics, common sense, real intelligence, or even a sense of femininity - i.e. Boxer, Waters, Pelosi, Sheila Jackson Lee, Rosie O’Donnell, Roseanne Barr, Hillary Clinton, Debbie Wasserman-Putz, the head of NOW and her predecessors, Eleanor Norton Holmes, etc.
They lack what is necessary to be “feminine” - honesty. You can dress them up in fancy clothes and jewelry, send them to upscale schools, and elect them to congress, etc., but in the end, they are street gutter-snipes who hate real women.
Plus they are jealous of Michele Bachmann, Sara Palin, Michele Malkin, and Anne Coulter (among others),for having the guts to stand up to the Left and speak the truth.
My mother gave up a career as an opera singer to stay at home and take care of my sister and me, as well as my father. We always had clean clothes, a good dinner, a clean house, thousands of books and records to read and listen to, a piano to play, a beautiful garden, and a mother we could be proud of (she was involved in many charities when her health allowed it).
She also took care of my father when he had several heart attacks and bouts of cancer, never leaving his side when she could be there. And remarkably, she was an FDR/Truman Democrat but she would have been appalled at what the Democratic women of today have become.
In fact, I think she would have been a conservative, like my father. I know she would be ashamed of the Dem-fems of today.
Where I grew up in the south, a woman like that would have been known as the "town pump".
As for Rosen, she was on the Dem team and was paid to say what she said. When it backfired she was disowned by the team and tossed out like the trash.
These damn Commies are ruthless, and they don't hesitate to destroy their own to further their vile agenda.
BTW, God Bless your Mom. I too was lucky enough to have such a mother.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.