Greta Van Susteren got into a heated debate about Hilary Rosen's comments about Ann Romney with Karl Rove. It's a shame that Van Susteren - instead of Democrats - stated the obvious: that Rosen was not knocking stay at home Moms but calling into question Romney's understanding of working women.
Of course, Van Susteren didn't challenge Rove's ridiculous attempt to paint Ann Romney as an everyday woman struggling to pay the bills and get her kids off to school. Van Susteren also made a point of saying that the Democrats created a phony war on women, "which the Republicans saw as a First Amendment debate" (never mind about Rush Limbaugh's disgusting comments about Sandra Fluke!). But as it turns out, Rosen is a friend of Van Susteren.
Van Susteren said, "I know her (Rosen)... The way I read it... she was not critical of Ann Romney staying at home... but the idea that she... didn't know the business world."
According to Politico, here is what Rosen said:
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.
"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," Rosen continued, adding that Romney "just seems so old fashioned when it comes to women."
It was as completely obvious to me what Rosen was trying to say as it was to Van Susteren. So why Democrats are quivering and retreating at the faux outrage from the right, is a mystery.
Hilary Rosen was not attacking mothers. She was making the accurate point that Mitt Romney’s gender appeal problem is not helped by him saying that his wife is the source of his information about women’s economic issues today. She was pointing out that Ann Romney wouldn’t know much about this area, since she’s never dealt with the economic challenges most women must handle on a daily basis.
Rosen was combining the two areas where Romney is in serious trouble: 1. GOP actions over the past couple of years have driven women away, particularly in recent times with the Limbaugh attack on Sandra Fluke and the reprehensible state legislation around the country designed to attack womens’ rights. The GOP has an even bigger skeleton that the Dems are exploiting – their refusal to support the Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act. Romney’s own inability to appeal to women is exacerbated by these facts, and his trotting out of his wife like this is a sign to Rosen and most women that he’s way too old fashioned in his thinking. 2. Romney and his wife are quite out of touch with how lower income people than themselves deal with things. Romney has already demonstrated this numerous times, with the 10K bet, with the comment about firing people, and with his general sense of entitlement. Romney’s new refusal to publish his tax info is another sign of this – it looks like he’ll have another embarassingly low number for what he actually paid. (Obama by contrast paid 20+ percent, and also donated 22 percent to charity. Add that up and Obama is paying a respectable amount – and he’s willing to pay more.) Romney citing his wife as a source of info on women’s economic issues makes no sense, since she’s never had to do without the amenities the Romneys can easily afford.
Ann Romney would be a fine source of information if you wanted to know about the issues of raising multiple children in a household with a frequently absent husband and father. She would be a fine source of information if you wanted to know about what women go through when fighting diseases like cancer and MS. She would be a fine source of information about how the wealthy try to perform public service. But she is a poor choice if you’re looking to find out what working women in this country are thinking.
It’s annoying when NBA players do it, and it’s even more annoying when politicians do it. It’s straight up disingenuous.
Which is a ridiculous thing to do, as your post makes clear.
