The Democratic Party has the courage to stand up to the Catholic hierarchy, nominate a black person for president, oppose the Iraq War, and introduce universal healthcare. Is it too soon for that liberal feminist party to stand up to the wife of their Republican opponent—is too much at stake?
Ann Romney is not another silent housewife married to 40 years of political ambition—a Pat Nixon without a martini—she’s an aggressive campaigner. Not only can she praise her husband, she can pander to audiences and sharply attack the Obama administration. She literally claims that she’s so afraid of where Obama is taking the country that she decided to tell Mitt that he simply had to run for president again.
Inevitably and disastrously, one Democrat spokesman, Hilary Rosen, had had enough and on CNN wondered why Ann Romney is qualified to speak on women’s economic issues “not having worked a day in her life.”
Click on: www.politico.com/arena/
Unanimously, Obama’s campaign sophisticates repudiated Rosen. Ann Romney will remain free to carry on saying whatever she likes.
After all: “I made my choice to stay home and raise five boys. Believe me it was hard work.”
Sorry. Physically exhausting work—for Mitt’s growing boys or for a food processor in Georgia—doesn’t give anyone special insight into how to govern America or any true understanding of how other Americans live. Further, it shouldn’t give anyone protection in political debate.
Not making snide remarks about staying home and waiting for Mitt and five boys is not the same as conceding to Ann Romney that she has any practical experience of what working women face as employees, as taxpayers, and as applicants for welfare, food support, unemployment assistance, child care openings, and training grants.
Ann and Mitt Romney are both political animals. One pretends to be merely on leave from business and the other on leave from housekeeping. They are convenient scams. It would be negligent if the press and punditry allow them to stand.