By Guest Writer Greg Lewis
The events following public relations professional Hilary Rosen’s unimaginably ill-advised assertion that Ann Romney “never worked a day in her life” have created nothing less than a firestorm for Barack Obama’s presidential campaign. Although it appears that Rosen’s words themselves were spontaneous, the faux war on women that Rosen is helping to orchestrate for the Obama administration by claiming it’s Republicans who are the guilty party represents an important front in the left’s and the Obama campaign’s more general war on America.
Rosen has visited the White House at least 35 times since Obama’s inauguration, and she was hired — along with Anita Dunn, the former White House Communications Director and Rosen’s partner at SKD Knickerbocker, the liberal PR agency where both women are employed — to coach the loose-lipped DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz, who is herself known for making intemperate remarks. In fact, in weighing in following Rosen’s faux pas, Wasserman Shultz insisted, against the evidence, that Barack Obama respects “the priorities of women,” where Mitt Romney does not. By the way, SKD Knickerbocker also represented contraception queen Sandra (“What The”) Fluke.
It’s unclear how Ms. Shultz could have misunderstood so badly what her coach, Hilary Rosen, said about Ann Romney’s — and by extension Mitt Romney’s — priorities with regard to women. But that’s what it means to be a faux feminist. Must be something in the gender.
Among the things that emerges so clearly when you see faux feminist women in action is just how angry they are and just how unwilling they are to admit they’re even remotely capable of making a mistake. Rosen’s “apology” — which includes the words “to Ann Romney and anyone else who was offended . . . [by my] poorly chosen words“ — is, like every apology I’ve ever heard from a liberal, not an apology at all but an attempt to shift blame. You don’t apologize “for offending someone,” you apologize because you’ve done something wrong or made an insensitive remark. Rosen’s remarks put the burden of blame on Ann Romney; it’s clear that Rosen is saying that it’s Ann Romney who’s at fault for being so unenlightened as to be offended by her comment.
It’s quite astonishing that leftists, who will brand you a racist or a sexist or a homophobe at the drop of a hat if you make a remark that even comes close to casting aspersions on a minority group, are incapable of recognizing that fault in themselves. The particular minority Rosen’s words are offensive to is stay-at-home moms, but what the liberals who routinely castigate work-at-home mothers don’t realize is that a significant majority of American voters have no problem with women choosing to stay out of the work force in order to devote full time to raising their children, whether they or their spouses are doing so or not.
In fact, some five million stay-at-home moms in the U.S. are doing just that, devoting full time to raising their children. It’s not a burden that leaves you without the “life experience” to relate to most Americans, as NOW president Terry O’Neill has asserted, but something most stay-at-home moms choose to do. And it’s again quite astonishing that so-called feminists applaud a woman’s choice if she chooses to take the life of an unborn child through having an abortion, but denigrate women for making the choice to stay home in order to nurture their children, an act of affirming the sanctity and importance of human life and positive family values of which most women approve.
Only a small fraction of American stay-at-home moms — “momneys” as one commentator dubbed them — are wealthy enough so that the choice can be called a luxury. In fact, for most staying at home represents a financial sacrifice, made worthwhile by the benefits to their children that having a full-time parent at home brings. But beyond that, even if they were in the workforce, they’d find that it’s financially more difficult for women in the workplace. As is the case at the White House, women are paid less for doing the same work as men, thanks in no small part to union-sponsored workplace rules that penalize women who have greater responsibilities in the home for not having the same freedom as men to work unscheduled hours.
Note also that in their shrieking about stay-at-home moms, the fems conveniently forget to mention that there are more than a few stay-at-home dads in America today. I think we can assume that for feminists it’s OK for dad to forego working outside the home to raise the kids, even if it’s sinful for mom to do the same. It’s also worth noting that when Sarah Palin became the Republican Vice-Presidential nominee in 2008, among the first words out of the mouths of these babes were to condemn Palin for not staying at home to care for her children.
The faux feminists, while attacking women who make their own choices in America, are silent about the plight of so many women around the world, especially those in many Muslim countries who are subject to such barbarities as genital mutilation and honor killing while being denied even the most fundamental social rights, including the right to vote and the right to drive a car. If feminists ever once took up a truly pro-woman cause, rather than continuing to promote the pro-leftist, anti-American agenda out of which their movement was born, American women might be more inclined to listen to what they have to say. In the meantime, in their ignorance about what most American women want and stand for, they’ll continue to be surprised as their message and their candidate is met with strong resistance from real women as the presidential campaign moves forward.
Greg Lewis Ph.D. is the author of The Politics of Anger, which systematically lays out the communist/socialist foundations of the liberal political agenda by examining the important writings of leftist thinkers of the past 75 years.
Lewis also co-authored "End Your Addiction Now : The Proven Nutritional Supplement Program That Can Set You Free."
© 2012 by Greg Lewis
First Rights Only