What makes Rosen better qualified than Ann Romney to comment on the plight of average women?
Rosen explained in a Huffington Post piece that her point was that Ann Romney should not be a person who Mitt Romney looks to for advice about the economic conditions of women, because, “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 do we worry about their future.”
Of course, if this is the standard, then most women who work in politics—including Rosen—should not be able to offer advice on the economic plight of the average American woman, since with few exceptions they are hypereducated upper-income yuppies. Really, according to this line of reasoning, Hillary Clinton and Elizabeth Edwards should never have been able to talk about women’s issues as the spouse of candidate since they never had to worry about how to feed their kids…
The idea that “women’s work” is indeed valuable to society has long been a contention of feminists, so it’s strange to see a prominent Democrat lash out a stay-at-home mother and wife in this fashion. Feminists have agitated for as long as I can remember for society to value and respect the “unpaid work” that women do in the home and society. The fact that Ann Romney doesn’t struggle financially doesn’t make what she does any less valuable. I suspect there is a lot about how she has contributed to her community that we don’t know.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Duh, she’s a pro-choice, lesbian democrat. If those aren’t bona fides in today’s world, I don’t know what is.
mchristian on April 12, 2012 at 11:57 PM
Kirsten’s co-workers are starting to influence her.
Just like David Brooks’ & Kathleen Parker’s co-workers have influenced them.
itsnotaboutme on April 12, 2012 at 11:58 PM
The “war on women” is probably over for a while. It will now shift to “the war on the young” as Obama attempts to build a firewall around his 18 to 29 year old voter demographic. Biden fired the first shot in that battle today.
This is not about the Democrats campaigning on their merits. This entire campaign is going to be about demagoging the Republicans and creating strawmen to run against because the Democrats have exactly nothing to bring to the table in the form of achievements.
Romney can counter this by raising awareness that Obama has taken away their jobs and is forcing them to take out student loans to pay their rent and buy their food. Then he should remind them that those student loans can not be washed away with bankruptcy later, those loans are an albatross around their necks for life. Government student loans can not be discharged in bankruptcy and he has eliminated the private student loan market.
Then once they do get out of school and start working, their taxes are going to be much higher than today because Obama and the Senate Democrats are set to smack them with major tax increases that take effect right after the election.
Barack Obama is no friend of the young voter. In fact, he is just the opposite. He is stealing their lunch money … for a good portion of their working life.
crosspatch on April 13, 2012 at 12:05 AM
Remember, liberal women are liberals first.
fossten on April 13, 2012 at 12:05 AM
I’m not sure who mentioned this, but it was on here. I think the root of this is the Prop8 vote in California. The extreme radical gay agenda was LIVID at the Mormons for some reason.
SouthernGent on April 13, 2012 at 12:06 AM
The reason was that it was perceived that Mormons put a lot of money into the Prop 8 effort to ensure that marriage was to remain between opposite genders.
crosspatch on April 13, 2012 at 12:10 AM
KP’s gone so far off the reservation she’s going to be on the democrat destroy list very, very soon.
Rational Thought on April 13, 2012 at 12:14 AM
But not Harry Reid
thebrokenrattle on April 13, 2012 at 12:15 AM
This same article was quoted and linked in Allahpundit’s Quotes of the Day..
http://hotair.com/archives/2012/04/12/quotes-of-the-day-995
ITguy on April 13, 2012 at 12:15 AM
To liberals, hence, she has absolute moral authority.
Wikipedia says she and her “partner” adopted a boy and a girl in 1999. So what’s the role of this partner? Stay-at-home or career woman?
Exit question: Ann Romney should point out that she spent 45 months lugging around five children before giving birth.
BuckeyeSam on April 13, 2012 at 12:29 AM
Now I get Limbaugh’s comment that Hilary Rosen has her finger on the pulse of women. I think it was “pulse.”
RBMN on April 13, 2012 at 12:32 AM
Great article, except it had one word missing. I’ll insert it in parentheses.
Schadenfreude on April 13, 2012 at 12:35 AM
Soon it will come out that Hilary Rosen actually has more housemaids, err, “domestic employees” than Ann Romney does.
People underestimate how tough it is to watch other people look after your kids and do all your housework while you spend all day practising your dressage skills.
bileduct on April 13, 2012 at 12:49 AM
KirPow’s BS indignation is sickening. She is so freaking phoney. She gets all hot and bothered by Dems all the time, then runs right back into their arms over and over again. She’s the neediest pundit on the planet.
CycloneCDB on April 13, 2012 at 1:11 AM
…..Iron my shirts!!!!
Baxter Greene on April 13, 2012 at 1:16 AM
Actually her partner is the president of the American Federation of Teachers (basically a union boss).
LibertarianRepublican on April 13, 2012 at 1:34 AM
Can’t help but wonder if this wasn’t payback to Obama for his decision not to decide on the anti-gay discrimination thing.
crosspatch on April 13, 2012 at 2:00 AM
Eventually they will get to the 250 million reasons why Ann Romney can not talk about the plight of the average woman. Except they did not have 250 million reasons when the boys where young 30 years ago.
tjexcite on April 13, 2012 at 2:13 AM
Why, she’s the village idiot…silly
Gohawgs on April 13, 2012 at 5:02 AM
Guaranteed vote for Obama…again. As if she could do otherwise.
swinia sutki on April 13, 2012 at 5:21 AM
MUT’s Badass of the Week: Ann Romney — Some humorous aspects of my analysis of the Rosen fiasco: 1) A Mormon mother tagged as a “Badass”; 2) A reference to how Ann Romney will be Palinized with email inquisitions, requests for clothing expenditures, and rumors of affairs; and, 3) A hilarious pain scale, with an addendum as to how much pain Team Obama is in right now.
Mutnodjmet on April 13, 2012 at 6:06 AM
Personally I like her because she is objective – an endearing quality. If she does vote for Obama there are 35-50 people at HA that plan to do the same who are self professed salt of the earth conservatives.
Where is your scorn for them?
Bradky on April 13, 2012 at 6:08 AM
I’m saving it all for you, sport.
swinia sutki on April 13, 2012 at 6:25 AM
Plight? Is it really appropriate to say American women are in plight when Afghan women are regularly beaten and murdered in public? American women live like queens compared to the rest of the world. If you’re not just talking about American women, then the women’s movement hasn’t cared about women in a long time. They care more about left-wing politics than they do about women.
Odysseus on April 13, 2012 at 7:11 AM
And the Palinization of Ann Romney begins…
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2012/04/it-begins-leftists-call-ann-romney-a-cnt-btch-whre-for-being-stay-at-home-mom/
You knew they were just waiting for this like a bunch of vicious attack dogs.
UnderstandingisPower on April 13, 2012 at 7:17 AM
Don’t all women have regular meetings with the president?
forest on April 13, 2012 at 7:33 AM
I believe most American women pull down $750k per year and have insider access to the POTUS.
Bishop on April 13, 2012 at 7:43 AM
that’s not the plight of women in America. The plight of women in America is havin’ enough rubbers and IUDs to keep you shaggin’ all you want while you in G-Town Law School.
ted c on April 13, 2012 at 7:49 AM
the 2nd neediest…..
may i introduce you to….Allahpundit?
ted c on April 13, 2012 at 7:50 AM
No, you’re thinking of Clinton.
swinia sutki on April 13, 2012 at 8:20 AM
Between pieces like this and her association with Fox News Channel, KP better keep an eye on her tires.
KS Rex on April 13, 2012 at 8:54 AM
Damned straight. Especially now that I hear that her “partner” is a teacher’s union boss.
Say, between Rosen and her “partner,” they must be making some decent coin. Since when to a couple of lesbians making top dollar raising two adopted kids in the DC area constitute a couple of gals with middle-class concerns?
BuckeyeSam on April 13, 2012 at 9:37 AM
Um. Her position on abortion, duh.
/Dems
Washington Nearsider on April 13, 2012 at 9:47 AM
100% correct
derecho on April 13, 2012 at 9:48 AM
Don’t take the bait on this trap.
Rosen is a gay activist with adopted kids.
Stick to the topic.
faraway on April 13, 2012 at 9:49 AM
Kirsten is setting the trap.
faraway on April 13, 2012 at 9:54 AM
Amen to this. I feel this way anytime the left brings up poverty in America. You want poverty? Go to a shantytown in India or Brazil. That is poverty. Only getting 30 channels instead of 500 on your govt subsidized cable plan is not poverty.
angryed on April 13, 2012 at 10:09 AM
Because she’s a Democrat.
Spliff Menendez on April 13, 2012 at 10:11 AM
Sorry, Kirsten: I was there in the Seventies.
The liberal women deliberately chose to demean, dismiss, and disrespect women who chose to become career homemakers and mothers.
AesopFan on April 13, 2012 at 10:26 AM