Ann Romney can’t represent American women
I’m plenty aware that I am going to be accused in the comment thread of class envy, but I’m just laying out facts. They shouldn’t be held against her: For all I know Ann Romney is the most generous, empathetic, and self-abnegating woman in the United States. But it’s simply a fact that she’s never had to worry about how she was going to feed her kids, or what she might do if tragedy befell. And lo and behold, tragedy, or something very close to it, did befall. She received two devastating diagnoses. She undoubtedly had excellent insurance coverage and undoubtedly received the best possible care. And since conservatives are so obsessed with pillorying the people they think of as the undeserving in society, I say it’s not unreasonable of me to point that out she “earned” her excellent insurance and care by marrying well.
But what of the millions of women who share her bad luck health-wise but don’t share her good luck wealth-wise? We don’t know what she thinks, and maybe since she’s not the candidate she is under no obligation to tell us, interesting as it might be to find out. But we do know what her husband, her own presumed insurance provider, thinks. He thinks the hell with them. He used to care about them, when he passed a law giving them a fair shot at buying affordable coverage, but now he wants to repeal the law that does the same thing nationally, and the only reason is political calculation and cowardice. That’s his, not hers. But I do wonder whether she agrees with him that these women should be left on their own because to help them would be to hand a political victory to the enemy.
The interesting thing about all this is that your “typical,” if there is such a thing, stay-at-home mom bears not the remotest resemblance to Ann Romney.









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
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2
Straw woman arguments, both. Ann Romney never presented herself as the quintessential symbol of American womanhood – only as someone who has lived with her own struggles (which she has) and is sympathetic to the needs of all women (which she is).
That’s the only point people are making, and it is a good one.
topdog on April 14, 2012 at 11:21 AM
Hey, dude. Ever received a “devastating diagnosis” like either one of these that could KILL you? Insurance helps, but those things level the playing field of humanity REALLY fast. The woman still managed to stay married (do you know how many marriages end because of these types of diagnoses? AND her husband didn’t go philandering around like someone named Edwards we all know). She STILL managed to raise FIVE children who now have successful children in their own right. AND she still had enough class to out-class all of you who are trying to tear her and every other mother who’s chosen to stay at home and “never work a day in her life.”
Get a clue!
(But please, PLEASE keep right on digging. I’m so happy you all finally found a shovel-ready job!)
UnderstandingisPower on April 14, 2012 at 11:24 AM
Jug-Ears likes to talk about how Moochelle was making $300K while he was making $100K when elected to the Illinois State House.
Thing is, it was by all accounts a no-show gig she got because Illinois law limited how much one could pay a State Senator, and 0bama’s patrons wanted to “supplement” it. Same could be said of Hillary Clinton’s employment history as well.
And a dirty little secret is that wealthy wives who manage charitable organizations are often just the face of the org while the paid employees actually run things. The last First Lady who had a real jobby-job would have been retired actress Nancy Reagan.
Men who are wealthy enough to run for the Oval Office are men like my uncle. My aunt has remained a homemaker because if she had ever gone professional in her informal role as wedding and party consultant, it would have launched them into a tax bracket to where any money she’d make would be eaten (and then some) by the higher taxes they would pay.
Sekhmet on April 14, 2012 at 11:24 AM
Did anyone ever write columns titled, “Michelle Obama can’t represent American women”???
Why the attacks on Romney’s wife?
Why did no one ever question Michelle Obama’s “credentials” for being the first Lady?
She was rich – $350,000 job, Ivy League university educated…she represented the average American woman?
albill on April 14, 2012 at 11:28 AM
Jackie Kennedy comes immediately to mind.
Wow, these lefties are freaked out afraid of Ann Romney.
petefrt on April 14, 2012 at 11:38 AM
I’m just gonna go ahead and say it. Michelle Obama is a racist.
bgibbs1000 on April 14, 2012 at 11:39 AM
I get so sick of these perennial arguments over potential first ladies. How could any one woman be representative of all US women in her biography? We are all different as individuals. I just want a first lady (or first dude) who’s calm, kind, loves America, and helps his or her spouse in the job of serving as president while avoiding being too strident.
juliesa on April 14, 2012 at 11:40 AM
That’s OK, Tomasky.
You can’t represent me. Nor my beliefs. After all, you’ve apparently never worked a day in your life as a “real worker” out in the boonies either. That cushy college education and then a writer.
No real world experience.
ProfShadow on April 14, 2012 at 11:41 AM
That a bunch of over-educated, smug liberals to dictate who can and cannot represent the “common people” is priceless.
RedRedRice on April 14, 2012 at 11:52 AM
I’m confused. I thought it was Mitt Romney running for president in order to represent American women.
Sigh. Never can keep up with these things.
J.E. Dyer on April 14, 2012 at 11:53 AM
Boy, that Rosen really screwed the pooch, didn’t she? Here the left was, comfortably sniping at Ann Romney, and that idiot gave away their real position. Now they have to fire all the rhetorical ammo they were hoping would last until November.
RadClown on April 14, 2012 at 11:54 AM
What a condescending prig! Many of those women dreamed of being a mother from the time they were little girls playing with dolls. To this jerk, being a stay-at-home mother as a primary choice is incomprehensible, a result of stupidity or circumstance.
theCork on April 14, 2012 at 11:54 AM
this is stupid- who can represent EVERYONE? everyone has various life experiences and just because someone’s doesn’t match up with yours doesn’t mean they don’t care about you or they know nothing about you.
Sachiko on April 14, 2012 at 11:55 AM
Oh wait,
I forgot … Obama can’t represent me either, since he never was educated the way I was, worked as I worked, lived as I’ve lived.
So Tomasky, to be consistent, you must agree that Obama doesn’t represent men in America either.
ProfShadow on April 14, 2012 at 11:55 AM
Very good point. Obama certainly can’t represent me.
J.E. Dyer on April 14, 2012 at 12:09 PM
I don’t need anyone in politics to “relate” to me. We all have our struggles. Class warfare and envy are stupid. I want a competent President, not this bumbling that’s going on now. As for Ann Romney, she loves her country and presents a positive face, and does not try to drag people down. I really admire her.
Paddington on April 14, 2012 at 12:09 PM
I’m not a particularly big HondaV65 fan, but he/she was around here for quite a while before you arrived.
DarkCurrent on April 14, 2012 at 12:09 PM
I’m living in absurd land.
“representative” of the American woman?
Good grief. As an American woman not anything remotely like Ann Romney, I’m offended by this article. Oh, wait, a man wrote it. It figures.
(lol)
Not that deep of a thinker are you there, Michael Tomasky? sheesh
bridgetown on April 14, 2012 at 12:15 PM
And you guys really thought that dems were trying to change the subject…. Huh?
Did you notice the subtle point “she had great healthcare”?….remember that for next time you hear it on the campaign.
Mr. Romney, based on your experience with a wife with serious health condition, what do you tell women who have the same but can’t afford the type health insurance you had for your family?
Imagine if that question was to Santorum?
That’s what you get for nominating Wallstreet against the Union’s little b!tch.
Can.I.be.in.the.middle on April 14, 2012 at 12:20 PM
They’re going after Ann Romney with the DNC and the Obama WH’s tacit approval in an attempt to throw Mitt and other leading Republicans off their game. If you’re defending Ann Romney’s character and personal lifestyle choices, you aren’t on the offense re Obama. You’re on the defensive, and rightly so. It means Team Romney knocked it out the park with putting the focus on how Obama’s economic policies have caused a record number of women to lose their jobs the last few years. You can’t have Mitt saying WH-damaging factual stuff like this while they’re leading a “Republicans’ War on Women” campaign.
RepubChica on April 14, 2012 at 12:24 PM
My wife is represented by James Lankford, Tom Coburn and James Inhoffe. Mrs. Romney is married to a guy running for president and isn’t running for office.
Bobbertsan on April 14, 2012 at 12:25 PM
DNC operatives: Need distraction. Let’s start a war against Ann Romney.
RepubChica on April 14, 2012 at 12:37 PM
MelonCollie on April 14, 2012 at 11:06 AM
It takes a trailer trash to know a trailer trash.
HerneTheHunter on April 14, 2012 at 12:39 PM
Excellent point.
If Tomasky wants to claim that a white black man-child Alinskyite socialist community agitator from Hawaii/Kenya/Indonesia is representative of the average American, have at it.
HeatSeeker2011 on April 14, 2012 at 12:39 PM
Obviously, Michelle Obama and her 300k a year no-show Chicago hospital job are a much better fit, eh?
Moesart on April 14, 2012 at 12:51 PM
Except it wasn’t quite no-show. Wasn’t Michelle responsible for a program that shuttled poor women away from the highly-rated academic medical center to “urban clinics” as a cost-saving measure?
What about those women, Tomasky? Did they just have “bad luck health-wise,” or were they actual victims of the sainted Michelle Obama?
Just Sayin on April 14, 2012 at 1:08 PM
Mothers are mothers, everywhere. Motherhood transcends age, language, and economic barriers. EVERY mother can relate to her stories of her boys, of worrying when they were sick, of the antics 5 children can get into…add to that the breast cancer-every woman’s fear, and her solid marriage….
Yes, liberals…be afraid…be VERY afraid…
lovingmyUSA on April 14, 2012 at 1:09 PM
So this Tomasky mental lightweight says Ann Romney can’t represent American women, because she is rich and out of touch. But Eleanor Roosevelt, Jackie Kennedy, Lady Bird Johnson, Hillary Rodham and a woman who was never proud of her country, all by the way had gobs of money and treated servants like 2nd class citizens, can represent the waitress working the graveyard shift at the 24/7 diner to make ends meet.
wizzdumb on April 14, 2012 at 1:17 PM
There’s an old saying about luck and hard work and the harder you work the “luckier” you are. Now it’s true that some people have hard luck but how is it the government’s role to smooth life out for everyone? The libs are bent on everyone having an equal outcome in life. If they believe so much in diversity, how is that going to happen?
Think of the untold millions of dollars spent in the US on drug treatment programs, etc. or even programs like Head Start that have abysmal results but we keep funding them. I guess some people would say that “if it saves one person it’s worth it” but I don’t know about that. Harsh I guess, but that’s life.
2L8 on April 14, 2012 at 1:18 PM
After the huge blowback against Hillary Rosen’s gaffe, which clearly threw the White House, et. al., off their game, the double-down on stupid attacks against Ann Romney and defense of Rosen by the pols and punditry of the Left is almost puzzling. Almost.
During the Clarence Thomas hearings, Anita Hill came off as– in Media Matters founder David Brock’s immortal words– “a little bit nutty and a little bit slutty.” But in the weeks and months that followed Thomas’ confirmation, the Left continued to push until the polls had completely reversed– and Thomas was forever after the villain and Anita Hill the victim saint.
This is why pushing back– what the Dems are attempting to re-label as faux outrage against the feigned War on Women™– is NOT a “distraction from the real issues,” not a waste of Romney’s time (although he’s said nothing much about it all, instead giving an NRA speech which could be vintage Reagan if Reagan had delivered it, let’s hope he means it), and serves the vital purpose of keeping the other side on the defensive and unable to solidify a new Romney meme a là Anita Hill.
Whatever kind of nice guy he might be in private, Mitt has to wish that he could at least fake the sincerity and human warmth that Ann Romney projects. She may turn out to be his most valuable campaign asset and the Dems and media (but I repeat myself) are trying desperately to neutralize her, as they did Clarence Thomas with Anita Hill. They’re trying to drag the Romney campaign into this fray as a further distraction, but after Ann Romney’s devastating little tweet, it’s not the Romney campaign that’s piling on. It’s blogs like this one, Fox News, and “our” pundits, like Limbaugh. And after Fluke, why shouldn’t he?
de rigueur on April 14, 2012 at 1:32 PM
Tomasky and AP called it – the left want to make Mitt the Cleaver, and Ann his June.
On the article, two things:
1. I always rejoice when Tomasky whines and suffers.
2. If he’s right, then Michelle O, Hillary Clinton, the Heinz woman, the former Gore wife, and Hilory Rosen have no say either.
They grew up and lived just as cushioney.
Schadenfreude on April 14, 2012 at 1:56 PM
I didn’t need nor did I read past this: And since conservatives are so obsessed with pillorying the people they think of as the undeserving in society, I say it’s not unreasonable of me to point that out she “earned” her excellent insurance and care by marrying well.
The first part of his sentence defines him as a bigot. The last part reflects envy. An envious bigot. The entire paragraph is Democratic projection; Freud would be pleased.
I never would have imagined that the Administration & the Dems would be helping the Republican cause. Not sure what is going on yet, but it’s interesting when you see the enemy saying things that will cause their own defeat. Carry on….:-)
bluefox on April 14, 2012 at 2:16 PM
So what? Where in the Constitution does it say that a potential first lady has to be representative of anything? What woman would be representative of all women?
Bill Ramey on April 14, 2012 at 2:48 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H7_sqdkaAfo
bridgetown on April 14, 2012 at 3:10 PM
Lol! I stand corrected.
Bill Ramey on April 14, 2012 at 4:30 PM
So Anne Romney can’t represent women because she never had to work for a living, but a man can tell us who can and cannot represent women.
Awesome logic there, doofus.
Meryl Yourish on April 14, 2012 at 10:20 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2