Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
2012/04/12 11:44:35
Subject: Political hack attacks wife of a candidate
yea its going to be a fun political season. Break out the popcorn and fajitas!
Automatically Appended Next Post: And counterfire. If you're like me and love poltical campaigns like a good boxing match this is going to be the year of years. hurray!!!
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2012/04/12 11:52:53
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
2012/04/12 12:04:13
Subject: Political hack attacks wife of a candidate
I will admit though, she makes a good point about Romneys wife. It kind of comes back to that whole "How can a rich politician say he understands the average mans woes, when they are super fething rich" How can she say this is what women of America wants, when she stays at home, and gets bathed in lavish things because she married an uber rich man?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/04/12 12:08:28
2012/04/12 12:10:37
Subject: Political hack attacks wife of a candidate
I agree that economically Ann might never have had to worry about money like most families. But I am sure that raising 5 kids was a lot of work. I don't think I ever heard that she had a fleet of nannies that did her parenting for her.
"Ann doesn't know what it is like to face these kind of economic hardships" would have been a better line of attack. Don't attack stay-at-home moms for placing family over jobs. That never works for either side of the political spectrum.
2012/04/12 12:13:08
Subject: Re:Political hack attacks wife of a candidate
CptJake wrote:I thought the Obama policy was Obama family members were off limts?
Corrected your typo.
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
2012/04/12 12:20:51
Subject: Political hack attacks wife of a candidate
Manchu wrote:The political commentator has some good points about the Romneys.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
d-usa wrote:Don't attack stay-at-home moms for placing family over jobs. That never works for either side of the political spectrum.
Fortunately, no one in that video attacked stay-at-home moms for prioritizing family over jobs.
The actual attack:
"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."
I know she didn't actually say that she placed family over jobs. But she was attacked for never 'working'. And usually any attack on a woman for 'never working' is taken as an attack on stay-at-home moms. That doesn't mean that this was the intent of the message, but it is how the political game is played. Speculating about the motivation behind the statement is as much part of the dialog as the actual statement. And pundits will jump on the "she criticized her for never working, she must hate stay-at-home moms" bandwagon. I don't agree with that reasoning, but it will be there.
If she would have just left out that one sentence, then there would be a lot less to criticize about her statement IMO. Even if you are rich like Ann Romney, raising a family is hard and she should not be attacked for it.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/04/12 13:46:53
2012/04/12 13:49:12
Subject: Political hack attacks wife of a candidate
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
2012/04/12 13:51:41
Subject: Political hack attacks wife of a candidate
CptJake wrote:I thought the Obama policy was family members were off limts?
There's a key difference: When Obama made the comment, he was referring to people attacking Palin's daughter over her pregnancy; he wanted politics to be about politics, not family drama.
In this instance, you have a presidential candidate bringing his own family up, in the political context of economic planning, and in a context that as the commentator states fairly evenly, IMO.
So I'm not sure the two are even remotely comparable.
It's also not Obama saying it...
Automatically Appended Next Post:
d-usa wrote:
I know she didn't actually say that she placed family over jobs. But she was attacked for never 'working'. And usually any attack on a woman for 'never working' is taken as an attack on stay-at-home moms. That doesn't mean that this was the intent of the message, but it is how the political game is played. Speculating about the motivation behind the statement is as much part of the dialog as the actual statement. And pundits will jump on the "she criticized her for never working, she must hate stay-at-home moms" bandwagon. I don't agree with that reasoning, but it will be there.
If she would have just left out that one sentence, then there would be a lot less to criticize about her statement IMO. Even if you are rich like Ann Romney, raising a family is hard and she should not be attacked for it.
While that one line taken on its own might seem like an attack, taken in context it makes complete sense though. Someone who has never had to find or compete for a job simply has no context and no idea what the millions of other women/men/people go through looking for one.
I put that line akin to Romney's "I'm not worried about poor people." As a sound bite, it sounds pretty damning. Taken in context with the full "We have safety nets... ... I'm worried about the middle class" however...
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/04/12 13:56:02
2012/04/12 13:59:16
Subject: Political hack attacks wife of a candidate
Content should not be subordinate to presentation. This a great illustration of what is wrong and broken about political discourse in our culture -- that anyone could with a straight face interpret this commentator's remarks as an attack on stay-at-home moms. It's like if I interpreted your analysis above as an attack on working women. But that's our climate. Look at the title of this thread even. You shouldn't spread the misrepresentation of a person's comments around if you are smart enough to realize that it is a misrepresentation, as you apparently are.
The commentator pointed out that Romney bases his concept of what women are concerned about on someone who is totally unrepresentative of women and that this is a sign that Romney does not take women seriously as the equals of men. This is an argument. Characterizing it as "an attack" perpetuated by "a hack" is a further argument, one based on ad hominem.
d-usa wrote:Even if you are rich like Ann Romney, raising a family is hard and she should not be attacked for it.
You are talking out of both sides of your mouth. Either the commentator did not attack Mrs. Romney or she did. In fact, she did not -- if by "attack" you mean "criticized her for being a stay-at-home mom or that she didn't raise her children properly in some manner."
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2012/04/12 14:01:45
d-usa wrote:
I know she didn't actually say that she placed family over jobs. But she was attacked for never 'working'. And usually any attack on a woman for 'never working' is taken as an attack on stay-at-home moms. That doesn't mean that this was the intent of the message, but it is how the political game is played. Speculating about the motivation behind the statement is as much part of the dialog as the actual statement. And pundits will jump on the "she criticized her for never working, she must hate stay-at-home moms" bandwagon. I don't agree with that reasoning, but it will be there.
If she would have just left out that one sentence, then there would be a lot less to criticize about her statement IMO. Even if you are rich like Ann Romney, raising a family is hard and she should not be attacked for it.
While that one line taken on its own might seem like an attack, taken in context it makes complete sense though. Someone who has never had to find or compete for a job simply has no context and no idea what the millions of other women/men/people go through looking for one.
I put that line akin to Romney's "I'm not worried about poor people." As a sound bite, it sounds pretty damning. Taken in context with the full "We have safety nets... ... I'm worried about the middle class" however...
That is one of the problems with out media though, they rely on "sound bites" to keep the conversation going. Even if the conversation no longer has anything to do with the original comment. Which of course speaks just as much about the media on both sites as it does about the pundits.
And of course the regular folks will rely on the sound bites, and their favorite pundits explanation of that sound bite, for making up their mind. Most will not bother to find out the actual whole statement and/or the contend in which it was mentioned.
2012/04/12 14:05:14
Subject: Political hack attacks wife of a candidate
d-usa wrote:That is one of the problems with out media though, they rely on "sound bites" to keep the conversation going. Even if the conversation no longer has anything to do with the original comment.
d-usa wrote:Even if you are rich like Ann Romney, raising a family is hard and she should not be attacked for it.
You are talking out of both sides of your mouth. Either the commentator did not attack Mrs. Romney or she did. In fact, she did not -- if by "attack" you mean "criticized her for being a stay-at-home mom or that she didn't raise her children properly in some manner."
I don't think it was an attack, but I realize that it can be misconstrued as such and will be presented as such by at least some of the pundits.
My quote was more of a hypothetical. I would not be surprised if somebody would actually attack her for being a stay-at-home mom, given our hostile political environment. And I think an actual attack based on that would be stupid. If that makes any sense...
2012/04/12 14:08:57
Subject: Political hack attacks wife of a candidate
d-usa wrote:That is one of the problems with out media though, they rely on "sound bites" to keep the conversation going. Even if the conversation no longer has anything to do with the original comment. Which of course speaks just as much about the media on both sites as it does about the pundits.
And of course the regular folks will rely on the sound bites, and their favorite pundits explanation of that sound bite, for making up their mind. Most will not bother to find out the actual whole statement and/or the contend in which it was mentioned.
I agree 100%, mind you. Romney's infamous line was repeated over and over initially, but as people began to see the context of it you heard it less and less.
My whole point was that calling that one single line an attack, or even implying that Ann Romney was attacked for raising her family, is a bit disingenuous.
2012/04/12 14:09:42
Subject: Political hack attacks wife of a candidate
Manchu wrote:The political commentator has some good points about the Romneys.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
d-usa wrote:Don't attack stay-at-home moms for placing family over jobs. That never works for either side of the political spectrum.
Fortunately, no one in that video attacked stay-at-home moms for prioritizing family over jobs.
The actual attack:
"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."
I know she didn't actually say that she placed family over jobs. But she was attacked for never 'working'. And usually any attack on a woman for 'never working' is taken as an attack on stay-at-home moms. That doesn't mean that this was the intent of the message, but it is how the political game is played. Speculating about the motivation behind the statement is as much part of the dialog as the actual statement. And pundits will jump on the "she criticized her for never working, she must hate stay-at-home moms" bandwagon. I don't agree with that reasoning, but it will be there.
If she would have just left out that one sentence, then there would be a lot less to criticize about her statement IMO. Even if you are rich like Ann Romney, raising a family is hard and she should not be attacked for it.
There is a difference between a stay at home mom (whom chooses to raise her family herself instead of work) and a women who has never worked a day in her life (because she was born with a silver spoon in her mouth).
d-usa wrote:That is one of the problems with out media though, they rely on "sound bites" to keep the conversation going. Even if the conversation no longer has anything to do with the original comment.
This is exactly the approach you are taking ITT.
I felt like my replies have been a fairly consistent case of
1) she did not actually attack her for staying at home, but she had a sentence in her statement that can and will be twisted to present her in that way. Would have been better if she left that sentence out.
2) actually attacking her for staying at home would be stupid and wrong.
I fail to see how these two are incompatible or construe talking "out of both sides of my mouth".
"I don't think she attacked Ann, and stay-at-home moms should never be criticized for not working anyway." That doesn't seem like an incompatible sentence to me, and I am sorry if I come across as taking both sides.
2012/04/12 14:16:42
Subject: Political hack attacks wife of a candidate
Ma55ter_fett wrote:There is a difference between a stay at home mom (whom chooses to raise her family herself instead of work) and a women who has never worked a day in her life (because she was born with a silver spoon in her mouth).
Agreed. A stay-at-home parent will have worked at some point in their lives. They still would have had a part-time job during high school and/or college, and then worked for a few years post-graduations before having kids.
Never working a day in your life is completely different.
That being said... this was a rather dumb comment on his her part. People can understand, sympathize, and want to correct the plight of others without having to go through it themselves.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/04/12 14:31:22
Manchu wrote:The political commentator has some good points about the Romneys.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
d-usa wrote:Don't attack stay-at-home moms for placing family over jobs. That never works for either side of the political spectrum.
Fortunately, no one in that video attacked stay-at-home moms for prioritizing family over jobs.
The actual attack:
"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."
I know she didn't actually say that she placed family over jobs. But she was attacked for never 'working'. And usually any attack on a woman for 'never working' is taken as an attack on stay-at-home moms. That doesn't mean that this was the intent of the message, but it is how the political game is played. Speculating about the motivation behind the statement is as much part of the dialog as the actual statement. And pundits will jump on the "she criticized her for never working, she must hate stay-at-home moms" bandwagon. I don't agree with that reasoning, but it will be there.
If she would have just left out that one sentence, then there would be a lot less to criticize about her statement IMO. Even if you are rich like Ann Romney, raising a family is hard and she should not be attacked for it.
There is a difference between a stay at home mom (whom chooses to raise her family herself instead of work) and a women who has never worked a day in her life (because she was born with a silver spoon in her mouth).
But even a person with a silver spoon in her mouth can be a very involved mother. This again could be resolved by commenting about her never having to feel the same economic stress and concerns as us common folk instead of commenting about her "never having to work". I would imagine she would feel the same stress when it comes to such thoughts as "I hope my kids get good enough grades to get accepted to a good college", she just doesn't have to worry about the whole "how will we afford college" thing.
2012/04/12 14:17:52
Subject: Political hack attacks wife of a candidate
I misinterpreted you based on your quoting the commentator as "the actual attack" and then again when you said "but she [Mrs. Romney] was attacked," which I did not understand was being used ironically. Of course, if you did not mean those comments ironically then I did not misinterpret you because you are saying both that the commentator attacked Mrs. Romney and that the commentator did not attack Mrs. Romney.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2012/04/12 14:21:47
d-usa wrote:But even a person with a silver spoon in her mouth can be a very involved mother. This again could be resolved by commenting about her never having to feel the same economic stress and concerns as us common folk instead of commenting about her "never having to work". I would imagine she would feel the same stress when it comes to such thoughts as "I hope my kids get good enough grades to get accepted to a good college", she just doesn't have to worry about the whole "how will we afford college" thing.
Except the context of the quote was in regards to less women being able to find and return to jobs, than men are. The whole conversation may have been about economic woes, but the context of the commentator's "She's never worked a day in her life" was in regards to finding employment, something Ann Romney has never had to do. So being an involved mother, or worrying about her children or what not has little to nothing to do with the conversation. The issue at hand is that Ann Romney has never once had to find a job, so her commentary (and thus Mitt's commentary according to him) is beyond useless. She doesn't understand the issues that formerly working women have trying to find new employment, because she has never had employment in the first place.
2012/04/12 14:21:18
Subject: Political hack attacks wife of a candidate
Grakmar wrote:That being said... this was a rather dumb comment on his part. People can understand, sympathize, and want to correct the plight of others without having to go through it themselves.
"His" part? Are you referring to Romney or did you mean "her" part?
I 100% agree that you don't need personal experience of social misery to be passionately committed to alleviating it. The argument that this commentator made was premised on the idea that a sign of being committed is listening to the people who do have that personal experience. The commentator pointed out that Romney substituted talking to his wife for this, which shows (and I think this is a great point) that Romney thinks "being a woman" in 2012 has nothing to do with, for example, holding a job. For Romney, a woman who has never held a job can apparently speak competently on behalf of the great majority of women who have done.
She has volunteered much of her time to raise awareness of the disease as a Board Member of the New England Chapter of the MS Society, and has been awarded the Society's Inspiration Award. By raising the profile of MS, as well as raising funds for advocacy and research, she is determined to make a difference in the lives of people who suffer from the disease.
Mrs. Romney is a strong believer that faith-based and community organizations can reach some members of our community better than government can. As such, Mrs. Romney served as the Governor's Liaison to the White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives. As a dynamic community leader, she has been a long-serving supporter and leader in the United Way of Massachusetts Bay. One of her priorities within the United Way has been as initiator, co-chair and now member of the Faith and Action Committee, a coalition that provides funding to urban church programs designed to serve at-risk youth. She has also served on the Board at the United Way, as well as on their Executive Committee and Community Impact Committee.
Mrs. Romney is dedicated to improving the welfare of children, locally and internationally. She's involved with Right To Play, formerly Olympic Aid, an international nonprofit organization that uses sport and play as a developmental tool for children in the most disadvantaged areas of the world. She lends her time and leadership to equine therapy programs for physically challenged children, literacy programs for children including the annual Scholastic Reading event, as well as organizations such as Partners for Youth with Disabilities, the American Red Cross, and the Perkins School for the Blind. As First Lady, she also served as a board member of the Massachusetts Children's Trust Fund. In recognition for her efforts, Mrs. Romney was the recipient of the 2006 Lifetime Achievement Award from Operation Kids.
Previously, Mrs. Romney was a director of Best Friends, an organization that addresses the special needs of adolescent, inner-city girls by providing educational and community service opportunities. She also worked as a volunteer instructor at the Mother Caroline Academy, a multicultural middle school serving young girls from inner city Boston and served on the board for Families First. She also formerly served on the Women's Cancer Advisory Board of Massachusetts General Hospital.
Obviously she is nothing but a stay at home mom and a slacker....
Every time a terrorist dies a Paratrooper gets his wings.
2012/04/12 14:38:06
Subject: Political hack attacks wife of a candidate
What "never worked a day in her life" actually means in this case is clear from the context of the conversation. That Mrs. Romney is "a slacker" is clearly not implied. Again, the implication is that Mrs. Romney is not representative of American women.
CptJake wrote:I thought the Obama policy was family members were off limts?
From ABC
“I could not disagree with Hilary Rosen any more strongly. Her comments were wrong and family should be off limits. She should apologize,” Obama campaign manager Jim Messina said in a tweet.
Avatar 720 wrote: You see, to Auston, everyone is a Death Star; there's only one way you can take it and that's through a small gap at the back.
Powder Burns wrote:what they need to make is a fullsize leatherman, like 14" long folded, with a bone saw, notches for bowstring, signaling flare, electrical hand crank generator, bolt cutters..
2012/04/12 14:45:31
Subject: Political hack attacks wife of a candidate
Manchu wrote:What "never worked a day in her life" actually means in this case is clear from the context of the conversation. That Mrs. Romney is "a slacker" is clearly not implied. Again, the implication is that Mrs. Romney is not representative of American women.
And it is clear from the context of my post that she HAS worked. So it is inaccurate to claim otherwise, regardless of the context.
Every time a terrorist dies a Paratrooper gets his wings.
