Ann Romney Versus Hilary RosenBy: Heather Campobello - April 13, 2012
Obama and DNC advisor Hilary Rosen is under fire after she said “Mitt Romney seems a little old fashioned,” “Doesn’t view women as equals,” and highlighted that Ann Romney “Never worked a day in her life.”
Ann Romney made an appearance on “America’s Newsroom” and said that when she first heard Rosen’s statements she wished she could have seen how difficult it could be to raise her five sons. She went on to explain that being a mother was her “career choice” and that being a mother and working was also a choice.
She also told viewers that Mitt said being a stay-at-home mom was a “forever job that would give her forever happiness” and was a more important job than any temporary assignment that he was working on.
Hilary Rosen responded to Ann’s emphasis on choices in women’s life by saying that this is not about Ann Romney or women of means like myself:
“This is about the waitress at a diner at some place in Nevada who has two kids — whose daycare funding is being cut off because of the Romney/Ryan budget and she doesn’t know what to do” … “it’s not about whether women of means can afford to make a choice to stay at home and raise kids. Most women — let’s face it — don’t have that choice.”
Ann Romney reacted to this by saying that she knows what it is to struggle and maintained that her husband admires and listens to women.
But how does that directly respond to how Mitt will help women overcome adverse economic conditions?
According to the Huffington Post, “The plan, proposed by Rep. Paul Ryan who chairs the House Budget Committee, would eliminate slots for about 200,000 children in 2014, according to an analysis by the National Education Association. Over the next decade, the NEA estimates, more than two million children would lose opportunities to attend Head Start centers as a result of the cuts.”
President Obama criticized Mitt Romney and mocked House Republicans for creating a “laughable” budget that “makes the Contract With America look like the New Deal.” He went on to say that “It’s nothing but thinly veiled Social Darwinism,” … “It’s antithetical to our entire history as a land of opportunity and upward mobility for everyone who’s willing to work hard for it, a place where prosperity doesn’t trickle down from the top, but grows outward from the heart of the middle class.”
Do you think that Rosen deserves the backlash?