The Twitter Critics Miss Hilary Rosen’s Point

The uproar against Hilary Rosen’s comments by a storm of twitics indicates to me that they may not have carefully considered what Ms. Rosen did NOT say. She said nothing about Ann Romney being lazy or non-productive. What she DID say is that Ms. Romney never had to worry that the house needed cleaning, or there wasn’t time to do the grocery shopping for dinner because she had to do a big load of laundry. She never had to worry that there wasn’t enough money to get the boys new clothes at the beginning of the school year, or that the old car might break down on the way to a school event.

Considering the fact that Ann Romney never had budget problems or lack of funds to provide for the family, and always had capable help with most of the menial jobs around the house — and Mitt never had to be concerned about her work overload with five boys to raise — should make it a bit easier for the dissenters to understand what Hilary Rosen meant. She was making the point that both Ann and Mitt Romney were likely unable to understand, on a gut-level,  the problems that most Americans have to contend with daily.

Ms. Rosen made that point clearly, and it should have been obvious to any careful reader what she meant.

Categories: Commentary, Politics | Tags: , , , ,

Post navigation

10 thoughts on “The Twitter Critics Miss Hilary Rosen’s Point

  1. Hairless

    How does it follow that any of these things make Governor Romney less fit to govern? The Senate and House are the representatives of the people, and it is their job to keep track of issues and advise the Executive Branch on courses of action. The President’s job is act as CEO of the world’s largest corporation, and Mr. Romney’s background is certainly not in conflict with that.

    • You’re right, Ted – none of this has anything to do with the point of your post, so forgive me for remaining off-topic. But since Hairless brought it up, I want to respond to his comment.

      See, this is the sort of thinking that irritates me. America is so much more than a corporation, and the presidency is not a CEO position. Expenditures and revenues are not as black and white if you are the president. Your budgetary decisions affect the education of our children, the health and well-being of our citizens, the security of our nation, whether or not we invest in new energy sources or technologies, and so many other important matters. These are things a CEO never needs to think about in a normal corporate setting. And that’s just the budgetary concerns. When a CEO enacts corporate policies, they don’t have the potential to affect the freedoms or civil rights of all Americans, nor must they take into account any social or moral consequences for our entire population. Does a CEO have the responsibility for handling delicate diplomatic interactions with heads of state, or making foreign policy decisions that could radically change international situations for hundreds of millions of people, or deciding whether to send American troops into war? This country’s strength and stability are about so much more than a budgetary bottom line. The presidency is an extraordinary and unique position to hold. Business acumen alone does not prepare one adequately for such a role. People who fail to consider this fact, like Romney and his supporters, are doing this nation a grave disservice.

      • Ted

        Thanks, Chris. Any input from you — on or off-topic — is welcome. You have a way of digging to the center of a subject and exposing reality.

    • Ted

      It is amazing to me that after reading my comment, someone would come up with the question, “How does it follow that any of these things make Gov. Romney less fit to govern?”
      I was talking about people being unable to understand the English language well enoug to understand what Hilary Rosen said. But — WTF. Even President Obama’s people didn’t get it either.

  2. thePoliticalMuse

    My wife and I have two young boys and they are a handful (my wife is a stay at home; mom, accountant, CFO, engineer, personal chef, medic, among other daily occupations) So, I would consider raising five boys quite a workload, with or without laundry. I’m also glad that they’re people like Rosen who can look into a person’s life and understand them on a “gut-level.” I guess one can only empathize with another if they’ve had the exact life experiences. Hairless, you’re right this is just a distraction and has nothing to do with Mitt Romney’s ability to lead.

    • If Ms. Rosen could take her words back and rephrase them, she might want to change her statement from “She’s never worked a day in her life” to “She’s never HAD TO work a day in her life”. That was, I beileive, the point she was trying to make, and it’s a valid one. If a candidate is going to inject his wife into a discussion about women’s economic issues, then it makes sense to ask whether his wife has any more real-world understanding of those issues than he does himself. And I don’t think she necessarily does. It is hard work being a mom. It is much harder to have to raise a family while also having to contribute to your household income in some way, and Ann Romney knows nothing of that experience.

  3. Ted

    Do you and your wife have unlimited funds with which to hire domestic help, keep a new Cadillac at each of two homes for transportation, and never have to worry about providing the necessities — let alone the luxuries — for your family. Seems you two have to work your butts off to make income meet fiancial requirements, yet you still feel that Mitt knows what the average American needs?
    I wonder who’s muse you think you are — politically speaking, that is.

  4. Pingback: Hilary Rosen vs. Ann Romney: why the dust-up is fake – « Ye Olde Soapbox

  5. Pingback: Ann Romney: Hilary Rosen Controversy Was ‘My Early Birthday Present’ « The Fifth Column

  6. Pingback: Hilary Rosen Is Correct America Has A Working Class « Critical&Political

Create a free website or blog at The Adventure Journal Theme.

%d bloggers like this: