Liberal “feminists” double down on #WarOnMoms rhetoric, beclown themselves

Posted by: ST on April 13, 2012 at 11:20 am

After an immense day of heavy push back from conservatives and senior WH movers and shakers like David Axelrod, Democrat strategist Hilary Rosen eventually backed off (a little) on her cheap shot against Ann Romney about stay at home moms (SAHMs).  Our celebrity Prez himself even made the push back from the Democrat side “official” with his opinion on Rosen’s comments:

President Obama said Thursday that there is “no tougher job than being a mom” as he distanced himself from the remarks of veteran Democratic strategist Hilary Rosen, who created a firestorm when she attacked Ann Romney’s decision to be a stay-at-home mom.

In an interview with an ABC television affiliate in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, Obama sought to diffuse the budding controversy over Rosen’s comments on CNN on Wednesday that the wife of presumptive GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney had “never worked a day in her life.”

Obama told interviewer Bruce Aune of KCRG-TV9: “When I think about what Michelle had to do, when I think about my own mom, a single mom who raised me and my sister: That’s work. Anyone who would argue otherwise probably needs to rethink their statement.”

[...]

Obama did not mention Rosen by name in the interview. But he declared that attacks on the spouses of political candidates are off limits.

“My general view is, those of us who are in the public life, we’re fair game,” Obama said. “Our families are civilians. I haven’t met Mrs. Romney, but she seems like a very nice woman who is supportive of her family and supportive of her husband. I don’t know if she necessarily volunteered for this job so, you know, we don’t need to be directing comments at them.”

Well … that’s mighty “heroic” of the President but of course what he’s really doing is exactly what he did in 2008 (on the issue of Bill and Hillary’s alleged “racism”): Letting his underlings & other reliable associates do the dirty work while he paints himself as being “above the fray”, when in actuality this was a coordinated strategy from the DNC.

Cases in point: those liberal Democrat “feminists”, both female AND male, who are out playing defense for Rosen.  Radio talk show host Michael Graham writes (bolded emphasis added by me):

Mother Jones magazine’s Stephen Robert Morse wrote, “I don’t blame Ann Romney for marrying a man whose salary and family wealth made it such that she didn’t have to work.”

Instead he blames anyone who believes “housewives, domestic engineers, or whatever other in-vogue term they are being called today, work as hard as women who .?.?. work outside of the home.”

The left’s message to stay-at-home moms: “Dumb, lazy and submissive is no way to go through life, girl.”

On what planet is this a winning strategy? And yet the attacks continue.

Ah, but note that part about Romney’s “family wealth.” It recalls President Barack Obama’s recent comment that back in Chicago, he and Michelle “didn’t have the luxury for her not to work.” The “luxury.”

Meanwhile prominent liberal Markos Moulitsas of the Daily Kos says the most relevant question is “How many nannies did the Romney household employ?” You know, because of all that breast-cancer, MS-infused “luxury?”

NOW’s President Terry O’Neill would not be left out of this “debate”, either (emphasis added by NB writer Mark Finkelstein):

TERRY O’NEILL: What would we be saying if Hillary Clinton [sic] had said this: that Ann Romney has never, has not worked for pay outside the home a day in her life?  That’s my understanding that’s an accurate statement, and that raises the exact issue that Hilary Rosen was trying to get to, which is do Mr. & Mrs. Romney have the kind of life experience and if not, the imagination, to really understand what most American families are going through right now? I think that that was what Hilary was getting out, and so she left out the words “for pay outside the home.”

Salon editor Joan Walsh says it’s Ann Romney who should apologize:

Well, I’d like to demand that Ann Romney apologize to all women for equating the “struggle” of a wealthy mother who had full-time household help to that of a poor or working-class job-holding mother, who must choose between her job and her children when a child gets sick. How dare you, madam? Have you no shame? I’d like to demand that Mitt Romney apologize for his wife’s remarks, too. I’d like to hear every prominent Republican denounce Ann Romney for her heinous insensitivity to non-wealthy mothers who must work outside the home.

Wait. Ann Romney’s not a Democrat, and I’m not a Republican, so that’s not how the world works. Sorry about that. I apologize.

No, Ann Romney doesn’t need to apologize – but in a grown-up world, Hilary Rosen wouldn’t have had to either. The point Rosen was making was, and is, valid: Mitt Romney repeatedly refers to his wife, Ann, in lordly terms, “reporting” to him what matters to women. Reporting to him, like she’s an employee, or maybe a translator. It’s valid to suggest that he ought to talk about what women believe from his own experiences, or what he learns from women colleagues, co-workers, campaign staff. He should stop referring to his wife’s “reports” about women’s issues, sounding like Thurston Howell III.

Batsh*t crazy, people.

Not to be outdone, MSNBC host Chris Hayes weighed in with what could arguably be described as the most hilarious comments made about the whole SAHM debate so far this week (video at that same link):

“It’s completely feigned outrage — it reminds me of the lipstick on a pig comment, which was a idiotic fake outrage over Barack Obama, but at least in that case, Barack Obama actually said it. Hilary Rosen is just a person that said something on television! It’s like do I have to go on my show this weekend and distance myself from Hilary Rosen because she too said something on television, is that that actually the logical connection? It because she is a Democrat. Should every Democrat have to endorse, vouch for every statement and opinion made by every other Democrat in the entire nation, that seems to be the logic that is being applied here. Just to clear it out of the way. I do think like no, there’s no way in which this actually effects the election in any demonstrable way. And there’s something fascinating at the core of this. there’s a huge a of uncompensated labor in the country by men and women, mostly women, who stay home and take care of their kids. And there are countries where that labor is compensated by the state. So I would love to have that conversation, if they actually think it is work and they feel it’s work, why isn’t there any wage for that kind of work? Why is that uncompensated?

As a side note, isn’t it amusing the number of Democrats who have used the same talking point about “why should I have to distance myself everytime another Democrat says something stupid?”?  Of course, this doesn’t enter their minds at all when they do that very thing when demanding every Republican and their 6th cousin once removed denounce the Pat Robertsons of the world.  This is the game THEY play. Played by THEIR rules.  But of course, dosages of their own medicine don’t go down as smoothly when it’s THEM  having to take it.  I  have just shed a single tear for them over this.

NOT.

Again, let me emphasize that this is a conversation Democrats WANTED to have.  THEY are the ones who started the phony  “War On Women” nonsense months ago and they have steamrolled on to a war on stay at home mothers which, in reality, elitist “feminists”  have been waging for years. As I noted on Twitter last night, I suspect Rosen gladly stepped in to be thrown under the infamous Obama Bus for her comments, because – as idiotic as they were – they get people to talking, and the left’s  hope is that maybe, just maybe enough voters will think Democrats have a “point” on this.  The only problem is that the only people who agree with the Rosens and Walshes of this world are people who were going to vote for them anyway.   So Ms. Rosen in reality has not won any fence-sitting voters and may in fact have lost many.

Also, I’m seeing some commentary from a few conservatives like Matt Lewis today that we need to “stand down” on this issue, that this is a “phony” issue can’t win on, especially in an election year. To that I say: If we don’t have this debate now, then when?  How often should we take a back seat to liberals and “feminists” over the role of women in society? I refuse to stand down in the face of repeated attempts by the left at defining conservative/Republican women as “subservient to the patriarchy” whose “life experiences” don’t matter.     As a conservative woman who knows many and admires many, not only do I find the accusations highly offensive and insulting, but also the suggestions by some that we need to “move on.” Like hell!

Those conservatives who want to “stand down” on this issue can go right ahead.  Just make sure you stay the hell out of the way of those of us who WILL NOT.

Game on.

Related: Michelle Malkin – Real Moms of the GOP battle White House SOP

RSS feed for comments on this post.

3 Responses to “Liberal “feminists” double down on #WarOnMoms rhetoric, beclown themselves”

Comments

  1. Great White Rat says:

    Hilary Rosen is just a person that said something on television!…Should every Democrat have to endorse, vouch for every statement and opinion made by every other Democrat in the entire nation, that seems to be the logic that is being applied here.

    Right, because as we all know, when Rush Limbaugh – just a person who said something on the radio – made his Fluke remarks, the Democrats absolutely did NOT try to make a political issue out of it. It’s not like the President tried to inflame the issue by calling Fluke and sympathizing with her or anything. Oh wait….

    Here’s a hint, Democrats: don’t whine when you throw the first punch and someone else punches back. Don’t start the war if you’re not prepared to deal with the consequences. Payback, as they say, is a b*tch.

    By the way….weren’t these same Democrats making snide comments four years ago about how Sarah Palin never should have held down a job or entered public life, but should have stayed home with the kids?

    And it’s hilarious that Rosen’s criticism of Ann Romney is that she “never worked a day in her life”, while the Democrat ticket is going to be led by someone who never worked a day in his life.

  2. Drew the Infidel says:

    Chris Hayes needs to go back to grammar school. He should have said Rosen “is a person who” not “a person that” which denotes an inanimate object. Wait, maybe he’s onto something here.

    The commiecrats have not learned you cannot put out a fire by throwing gasoline on it, at any price per gallon.

  3. Ken66 says:

    People like Hilary Rosen wouldn’t know about stay-at-home moms. They probably don’t have the guts to be moms.

    Or, like another Hillary we know and love, they leave the child and let the father raise her (Bill Clinton).