The right wing and its mouthpiece, Fox "News," love a good culture war as it reinforces the us vs. them right wing/Fox narrative and provides a platform for the meme of conservative victimization which is, as Jon Stewart said, the "true genius" of Fox News. Meanwhile, they deny the existence of a war on women which is based in the real world of *epic attempts to roll back women's rights. Hilary Rosen's statement that Ann Romney is not qualified to speak about women's economic issues has now, not surprisingly, generated a new divisive meme - a "war on stay at home moms." This morning, Steve Doocy (not working mom Gretchen Carlson) interviewed three women about this new "mommy war." Given the direction of the discussion, one wonders if Doocy's guest bookers were asleep at the switch. Or maybe they were actually trying to be "fair & balanced." At any rate, Doocy got as good as he gave - perhaps even better!
Mr. Happy, whose stay at home wife doesn't exactly face the kinds of economic strains as stay at home moms who don't live in affluent New Jersey suburbs, reported that "Democratic consultant" Rosen is trying to "take back her comment that launched a war on stay at home moms." (Scuse me, what war and who is waging it? President and Ms. Obama were critical of Rosen's comment as were leading Democrats.) He played Rosen's initial comment and her apology along with Ann Romney's comment about "choice." He asked if this was "too little, too late" and if stay at home moms are "turned off." He introduced his panel: "Mommy Blogger" Elizabeth Esther who was last seen on Fox & Friends saying that healthy school food is "icky," Joanne Bamburger, a blogger (Doocy didn't say that her articles appear on the evil, librul Huffington Post, and Betsy Hart, a conservative writer who once suggested that women can't be both good mothers and good soldiers. The chyron reinforced the Fox agitprop message: "Mommy Wars, Stay at Home Moms Revolt."
Esther whined that Rosen "denigrates the hard work that all stay at home moms do and mocks what we bring to the table" yadda, yadda, yadda." Betsy Hart said that it wasn't really an apology. She claimed that Rosen was expressing a "broad, philosophical belief that motherhood is not significantly important." She claimed that this is what Democrats and feminists believe" (wrong, we respect choice as much as Ann Romney does) and what is thought "far and wide in Democratic circles." (Oh, let's do the time warp again. This is the kind of bullshit that Phyllis Schlafley - not a stay at home mom - was saying about feminists back in the day when Phyllis and her pals were fighting the ERA). And showing that the Obama administration can't win, she said that they were quick to "throw her [Rosen] under the bus" and "that shows that chivalry isn't dead in certain quarters." (And if they hadn't done that, can you imagine the hue and cry from Fox and the GOP!?)
Bamburger described herself as a work at home mom. She said that the main issue isn't a "mommy wars," but how the Romney campaign "address issues that impact working families" and whether Ann Romney is the right person to be advising him on that "when she had a much more privileged version of a stay at home life than most moms" regardless of their working or staying at home. Doocy stuttered as he responded about how a recent Washington Post article reported that when the Romney's were first married they lived in an apartment that cost $65/month, "they ate spaghetti because they didn't have any money, his dad didn't give him any money." (Awww, poor Mitt). As Bamburger said that "we can agree that they were much more privileged," Doocy raised his hand and whined "but she had cancer and MS." As Esther said "hardship is hardship," "no one on the left is attacking Ann Romney." Doocy interjected, "they should not attack her." The two conservative women were babbling in stereo as Doocy closed out the piece.
Both working and stay at home moms, as noted by MSNBC grown up morning talk host, Mika Brezezinski, face emotional conflicts regarding their choices. It's complicated; but Fox is now turning it into a way to pit evil librul "feminazis" (as beloved Rush refers to us) against virtuous stay at home moms. It's also a distraction from, as Ms. Bamburger said, Romney's real positions of women's real issues. So, thank you Ms. Bamburger for taking this bogus "war" meme and shredding it into pieces. Doocy really should read your article which really sums up the whole thing. Your concluding comment was priceless: "And if one more person says this is just an attack on stay-at-home moms, rather than a larger discussion of women voters, I'm going to send them to their room." Given Doocy's inanity, methinks he deserves a nice, long "time-out."
*Newest assaults on women: Zygotes are on their way to being full fledged "persons" in Oklahoma.Mississippi is on its way to closing the only abortion clinic.Arizona has banned abortion after 20 weeks with no exceptions for fetal abnormality. WI Gov. Scott Walker signed bill repealing equal pay for women law. How do Mitt and Ann Romney feel about these restrictions on women and their "choices?"
It’s WAR, WAR, WAR! Unending WAR! Always a WAR! We see WAR everywhere.
According to the interviews they gave in 1994 in Boston, Mitt and Ann did indeed live in a basement apartment for $62 per month while they were studying together at BYU. It wasn’t fancy, and they had to make do with less. But here’s the key: Neither of them was holding a job. The $62 and all their expenses were covered by Mitt selling stock he had been given by his father. The stock was worth the equivalent of hundreds of thousands of dollars today.
So yes, they did try to live the life of someone who doesn’t have that level of income, particularly since they wanted to show their parents that they weren’t just waiting for their inheritances. But they never really had to make the seriously tough choices most of us make on a daily basis. They could have easily lived in a more expensive place, as they chose to do when they moved into a house in Boston with a loan from Mitt’s father. They also would have had the assistance of their parents had they really needed it – they simply chose to show that they didn’t. Which is admirable, but does not make the case that they truly understand what the less well-off think about the economy.