“What you have is Mitt Romney running around the country, saying, ‘Well, you know, my wife tells me that what women really care about are economic issues, and when I listen to my wife, that’s what I’m hearing.’ Guess what? His wife has actually never worked a day in her life,” Rosen said on CNN. “She’s never really dealt with the kinds of economic issues that a majority off 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 do we worry about their future,” Rosen continued, adding that Romney “just seems so old fashioned when it comes to women.”
Can anyone say what Hilary Rosen said, in the above excerpt, that was so inaccurate, let alone, offensive ?
Her statement was the most fearless and authentic response to authentic response to Mitt Romney’s insertion of his wife into the world of working women, to suggest that he understands their needs. It is ludicrous for anyone to suppose that Anne Romney could have the same vested interest of the average mother of five, in whether the company she works for has enough funding to keep her job alive. And though it is sweet of Barbara Bush and Michelle Obama to come out in support of Anne’s decision to be a career mom, the facts are that her decison isa luxury that is confined to the brackets of the rich and the stinking rich.
How many women out there can have five children and claim that they chose motherhood as a career? How many women with five children have the luxury of visits to pediatric specialists on a timely basis? How many of them have nannies to help nurture their brood, even while they stay at home to engage the career of motherhood? How many of them have homes in which each of the five children has his own bedroom?
No. These are not baseless questions. These are honest questions that address the unreality of Anne Romney’s normal career at motherhood. Anne most certainly never went to her OB/GYN visits via subway and most certainly never had to opt for the generic supplement because her insurance would not cover the brand name pre-natal supplements. She never sat in the waiting room, on one of these visits, with about twenty other people, some of whom were disorderly children, tired of waiting with their mothers who had to be seen by the tired OBGYN. She never felt the gripping anxiety of a doctor declaring that he needed to run another test on the fetus but was not sure if the insurance would cover it. She never had to drag herself to the office on public transportation, in all of the discomfort of being eight months pregnant and perform as if she were in the peak of health so that when she returned from her four weeks of maternity leave she would not be sent to another department by a spiteful boss who was waiting to kick her out, anyway. And, I dare say, Anne has never had to wonder if there were additional hours she would be able to pick up to supplement her paltry income.
This is part of the parallel that Ms. Rosen was drawing to the real women in the real world of work. She was not insulting stay at home mothers, at all. Rather, camp Romney is the one doing that by trying to hypnotize us into believing that this woman, who went through pregnancy and child rearing in privileged fashion, is a normal working woman, who understands the necessity of a WIC check and knows what it feels like to be examined on a gurney in an HIP office by a doctor who is apologetic for not being able to give the care he knows is needed because the ‘plan’ won’t cover it.
Hillary Rosen has done what many other analysts and politicians are too politically correct and intimidated to do. The politicians who have come out to publicly chastise her remarks are trying to retain their voting block but are doing so at the expense of political truth, here. This is one time Axelrod came across like an airhead.
Hillary has called a spade a spade. Anne Romney has never worked a day in her life. She has never stepped into the real working environment, having to deal with abrasive personalities and petty issues for benefits that do not compensate for these troubles. She has never had to complete a project under strenuous circumstances by coordinating the efforts of personalities that were engaged in antagonistic office politics.
These are simply the facts. The Rosen comments were never intended to lessen the worth of the stay at home mom. Rather, they were made to draw a stark, real paralell to what is the life of the average working woman. Indeed, Anne Romney was never a part of this demographic and will never be and as such will forever be disingenuous with her ‘shoutouts’ to the stay at home moms, in her politcal campaign efforts to show that Mitt understands the needs of this voting block.
We should all be grateful for the bold, brave, honesty of politcal analysts like Rosen. She did not retreat to the politcally neutral stance that all women’s work is equally as important. That was not the issue. The issue here was that one politician, whose shameless prostitution for his Party’s nomination, will see him do and say anything that is necessary to secure it.
Rosen, the real working women and all those who know that there is a clear line of demarcation between being a quarter billionaire and working for a daily living, appalaud Ms. Rosen’s representation of those women who know what it is to work for the means to support a family.
Ordering around nannies, butlers, chauffeurs, home school teachers, undocumented immigrant gardeners, and the assortment of other hired help that attend the stinking rich, simply do not count.