Rosen vs Romney: That's what she saidFollow

I get what you're saying, but I think it's worth asking what sort of sacrifice we're talking about here. While for some households, the loss of income is relevant, for many it's a wash (especially at the point in their lives when children are entering the picture). The cost of babysitting and day care would consume one of their salaries and cost them time with their children. From an economic standpoint, you can either afford to have someone stay at home (assuming a married couple here), or you can't. If you can, then I don't see how that choice is any different regardless of how much above the point of being able to afford it you are.

From a self-reliance point of view (being a breadwinner), there's a different sort of sacrifice. This is where the whole women's lib type of argument comes in. Sometimes, it's not about the money, but about the sense that one is providing for themselves (and their family). But that choice/goal/whatever is not (or should not) be considered any better or worse than the decision to stay at home and raise a family. Which kinda brings us to the issue here. That choice is no less a sacrifice for Anne Romney as it is for any woman in a similar situation. It's just not all about the money IMO.



Again, I disagree. Unless one completely discounts an element of sacrifice which I suspect a whole lot of women (especially liberal women) would think is a big deal. Regardless of how much her husband makes, a woman is sacrificing something by choosing not to embark upon a career of her own. This is part of why I think this thing has struck such a cord with so many people. The heart of the statement makes an assumption that is completely counter to a century or so of women's right arguments. It assumes, in a backhanded way, that a woman who can be supported financially by her husband has no intrinsic reason or need to work and should not feel like she's missing anything by not doing so.


Again, I suspect a whole lot of women's rights activists would take exception to that assumption. The only reason this isn't being much more loudly condemned by those groups is because of politics. If Romney were a Democrat, you can bet the outrage would be 10 times as loud.

Politics is pretty consistent in that regard. In this case, it's relevant to point out because one side is currently loudly attempting to claim that it is somehow magically more in tune and more in support of women's issues than the other.

Romney is still trying to convince Republicans he's against equal pay for women while at the same time convincing everyone else he's for it.

In a lot of ways, that was Romney's "Bush Doctrine" moment...

In what respect, Charlie?

It's an issue that was supposedly a sore point with Congressional Republicans, and it is my understanding that the official GOP line is that they are against the law (because it creates an unnecessary regulation and encourages lawsuits, yada yada.)

I don't think anyone expected a pithy answer from him, but in the original interview it seemed as if the aide didn't even know what it was.

A goat. Toby Keith demands a goat.

I thought the original, real issue was that Mitt Romney claimed that Ann Romney is a major advisor of his on economic affairs. This raised the question, is Ann Romney a GOOD advisor on national economic affairs? Given that economics seems to be more of an art than a science, and the wealthiest people often buck conventional economic "wisdom", that means I'm not terribly concerned that she doesn't have an economics degree, or a job in economics. But because Mitt has claimed her as an economic advisor, and he's running for President, it DOES open up public questions as to her proficiency in the art of economics. What's she like on forecasting? What executive and legal changes does she think will serve Americans' economic interests?

Ok, my mistake. This does beg the question, how often does Romney, a presidential candidate, listen to his wife as a representative of all American women, and what they care about? This opens up public questions about Ann Romney's mental finger on the pulse of what American women as a whole really want.

So it might sound catty, but it is a justified observation that Ann Romney doesn't live a life that is like most American women. So does she have a good mental, theoretical grasp of lives she is not living herself? What is her aware, thoughtful, informed empathy like?

Not true. Once we're a year into the Zombie Apocalypse, sandwiches will be far more valuable than any currency we currently employ, at which point she will be quite the economic adviser.

Here's the thing though, He's not an idiot. He's not using his wife as a women's affairs strategist. He doesn't have one, nor is he looking for one. He really could not care less about this topic. Significant changes could be made to the law in either direction and he'd be wholey ambivalent. He hates pandering, partially because he's ****** at it, more so because he doesn't understand it, at least not really. Which explains why he sucks at it. And why he used the comments not to bloviate halfheartedly on women's rights reform and why hes the man to bring it about, but rather to segue, via his wife, into a topic he's infinitely more interested in: Money, and how to make more of it for his shareholdersvoter base. This is what he wants for this country, to run it like a business, optimizing returns for the upper echelons of his base, providing employment for the lower tiers, and anything which detracts from that goal is harmful, anything which does not interfere is irrelevant. Race, creed, religion, age, interests are only important in the degree that they help or hinder that goal. Law is that which optimizes growth. That's what he's selling, nothing more, nothing less.

just putting it out there, as a stay at home mom by choice, most SAHM's are in charge of budgeting money and learning how to pinch a penny. We gotta keep those bon bons coming in somehow.

Why not? Plenty of people have gotten their criminal justice degrees from watching Law & Order.

Well i didn't say she was an expert, but she could know a lot more than most about it. Really have no idea what she does in her free time. She could be some type of economics junky and reads book after book after book about it. Saying she has no idea what she is talking about because she is a SAHM who doesn't need to work and the family has millions of dollars is pretty speculative.

Hell for all we know the entire romney family monetary situation could entirely be her doing. Hubby works, she handles the money.

Non news is stupid news, this story screams yahoo headliner.