Democrats Declare 'War On Moms'

Originally posted by stanguilles7

Originally posted by Stormdancer777


As I tell my son, if people work hard, make money honestly, become rich and are dedicated to their profession, good for them, hey, no one stopped me, my own fault I am who I am today.

My contention with Ann Romney is not that she is wealthy. That's fine. It's that she is pretending she knows what the average stay-at-home mom goes through when, in reality, she doesnt work, her servants do.

I wouldn't know, I can't pretend to know what she does and does not know.

Is she pretending to know how the other half live, or was she just stating, yes being a stay at home mom was hard, and how many servants did she have?

I don't know.

And how do you know she does no work of any kind?

I knew it.
Based on many of the replies, it's not about women and inequality at all.

It's about class warfare and envy/animosity for the wealthy!

Grab the torches and pitchforks!

Originally posted by stanguilles7

Originally posted by xuenchen
Democrats Declare 'War On Moms'
Breitbart


They are starting to get mean .....

They are going after Mitt Romney's wife right away.

An easy mark I suppose.

Hilary Rosen, a partner at SKDKnickerbocker, the PR firm of former Obama communications director Anita Dunn, charged that Ann Romney "hasn't worked a day in her life" and suggested that Ann Romney can't possibly understand economic issues because she's a [color=gold]lowly homemaker.

"lowly homemaker" ? Ms. Rosen must be raving jealous !

Why did you place 'lowly housewife' in quotes? Those arent Rosen's words.

She just pointed out Ann hasnt worked a day in her life, which is true. She's a rich housewife with servants. Saying she cant relate to the avergae American is not much of a stretch,

repeat from prior post:

I was quoting the "quote" from the story and laughing at it (as you can see).
(in the grey box right above the quote)

It's English.

Plus that, the real issue is the attack, and the fact that Ann Romney has had medical issues, and in no way has ever hurt anyone.

They talk of her as if is some kind of criminal. Par for the course -- cast blame when you yourself are guilty.

The same old trick.

No way the Obamamites get out of this latest debacle.

Keep up the good work.

Hilary Rosen is a quirk and vermin and very much part of the Obama campaign.

Originally posted by beezzer
I knew it.
Based on many of the replies, it's not about women and inequality at all.

It's about class warfare and envy/animosity for the wealthy!

Grab the torches and pitchforks!

Are you and your bosses getting nervous yet?

Originally posted by Snoopy1978

Originally posted by beezzer
I knew it.
Based on many of the replies, it's not about women and inequality at all.

It's about class warfare and envy/animosity for the wealthy!

Grab the torches and pitchforks!

Are you and your bosses getting nervous yet?

Your statement implies that;
a) I work for wealthy people/person
b) I am wealthy
c) We would have a reason to get nervous in the first place (implying guilt)

Wrong, wrong, wrong.

Please try again.

reply to post by beezzer


Your extensive post history tells a different tale.

FACT: You are always catapulting any message that supports or defends the rich and their interests over the working class.

Therefore, you are either:

A) rich

B) profiting in some way.

C) plugged in to am radio hoping to profit some day.

D) think you're part of the elites' club because you play golf.

E) have mental problems.

Originally posted by Snoopy1978
reply to post by beezzer

 

Your extensive post history tells a different tale.

FACT: You are always catapulting any message that supports or defends the rich and their interests over the working class.

Quite true. I don't think successful people should be punished because they work hard and earn more.

Therefore, you are either:

A) rich

B) profiting in some way.

C) plugged in to am radio hoping to profit some day.

D) think you're part of the elites' club because you play golf.

E) have mental problems.

F) None of the above.
(okay, maybe E), but just a little bit )

reply to post by xuenchen


and I just love it when the republicans accuse the dems of doing stuff that they themselves are habitual offenders of!!!

stay at home moms, you talk to many conservatives, well, they seem to think that all of us moms should be staying at home, little traditional housewives....

so, well, many of us do try and achieve that, we stay at home, and fine the hubby's paycheck doesn't cover the bills, so well, off to work we go!!! and we find that our status of mom is reducing our earning potential considerably....
and then it's, nope there's no discrimination in the work force....you just don't work hard enough, you didn't plan!!!
and then they are off again proclaiming how we should all be home, with our kids!!!

outsourcing is good!! you need to adapt!!
then after we've done all that we could and things blow up and we need a little help...
it's well, no, no, no!! you should have my money!!! work two jobs.....and still stay home with the kids!!!!

and well we struggle on, and near retirement age....
and hey, we should have saved more, spent less, worked harder, planned more, and on and on................

only it's there basic presumption that we should be home with our kids, with a hubby that is working and playing king of the castle, who is making the plans, spending the money, giving us an allowance like the little kiddies, deciding when we should be working, when we should be at home....that is probably the number one reason that women in this country are the ones living in near proverty, more apt to go without healthcare, more apt to be on the gov't programs!!!
and for that we are just lazy, ignorant idiots!!!!

but, well, not if they are the wife of their soon to be elected representative!!! oh, no, no, no!!! those kinds of housewifes, hey, they work hard!! suddenly, raising kids is hard work!!!!!

but my favorite accusation is the one where we see obama as our messiah!! (or paul, or anyone else that might actually take away a little of the edge the super wealthy has built into the system).....

when in fact....
they have already crowned the messiah!!!
that's right!! right in the halls of congress, the messiah was crowned!!!

www.youtube.com...

reply to post by dawnstar


Well,

Blame the 111th Congress (2009/2010)

The beloved Democrats had control of all the committees and the White House at the same time !!

What did they do with the chance of a lifetime ?

Zero for you and me and just about everybody else.

Now just Who else will help ?

reply to post by xuenchen
they've been juggling the economy, trying to keep it on life support, since your dear bankers decided that they need that extra hundred thousand dollar bonus more than they needed a healthy US economy!!!

Originally posted by dawnstar
reply to post by xuenchen

 

they've been juggling the economy, trying to keep it on life support, since your dear bankers decided that they need that extra hundred thousand dollar bonus more than they needed a healthy US economy!!!

The Democratic controlled 111th Congress (and the 110th) could have solved the whole problem.

But guess what ..... They didn't.

They let you down.

Nancy & Harry got your goat.

I hate banks.

BTW, what did Dodd-Frank do for You ?

Originally posted by Cowgirlstraitup7
She has an excellent point. How can a woman whom has never had to deal with the real economics of say a "single mom" possibly understand what moms go through on an economic level??? And even if you take her statement as the holy truth, I still don't understand how a "stay at home" mom married to a wealthy man can possibly understand the economics of this world.

Yeah, what I'm curious about (but not really curious enough to investigate) is did the Romney's have maids and cooks and nannies? Does Mrs. Romney even do the laundry, vacuum, do the weekly food shopping?

reply to post by xuenchen


Why are people allowed to get away with bold faced lies ?

Why ?

Democrats Declare 'War On Moms' ?

That's a lie and everyone knows it.

Originally posted by beezzer
I knew it.
Based on many of the replies, it's not about women and inequality at all.

It's about class warfare and envy/animosity for the wealthy!

Grab the torches and pitchforks!

No, it's not about envy. It's about how the politicians running for office (and their families) are completely disconnected from the everyday concerns of the average citizen. As far as I can tell there are only two reasons why a wealthy individual would run for president: To be remembered throughout history, or to rub elbows with the government power players who can manipulate corporate laws in favor of the filthy rich.

I see Frank Luntz did a good job again

It's a FACT that the GOP wants to take away women's reproductive rights, and that INCLUDES stay at home moms. Also, no democrat policies harm "stay at home moms"

This entire claim is nothing but the GOP deflecting from their quest of taking away women's rights. After all, they're also the very party that nuked the "equal pay" bill a while ago...

BTW, what did Dodd-Frank do for You ?

Dodd-Frank clearly doesn't regulate enough, as it is missing crucial safeguards that could prevent a crisis like the one we're going through now. Originally it had all those safeguards, but they were "removed" by a certain party...the GOP!!! Those guys took out almost all policies that would have protected us from this crap, and all because they're paid sock puppets of the banking industry. And the Democrats didn't even put up a real fight because they too are paid sock puppets...

reply to post by xuenchen


I see you've added quotation marks where none existed, and state that people have said things when it has only be "suggested" that they "implied" things - which is another writing tactic to suggest that opinion is what actually happened.

I dislike both the Republicans and the Democrats. Both are as corrupt and self-serving as the other. We have the same divisive system here in the UK and plenty of idiots fall for it, wasting so much time cheer leading for bunch of people who will simply do everything the elites want them to do anyway. There is a plan, and BOTH parties are obliged to comply otherwise they are "out of the club" and under attack.

I would suggest that if you're going to try to use propaganda methods to influence political opinion here, please read up on some of the masters of the art and do it properly, otherwise you are insulting the intelligence of some on ATS - and we don't like it.

Originally posted by skepticconwatcher
reply to post by xuenchen

 

Why are people allowed to get away with bold faced lies ?

Why ?

Democrats Declare 'War On Moms' ?

That's a lie and everyone knows it.

The 1st amendment allows media to lie and exaggerate. Yes it does.

It's even in a court case -->

In February 2003, a Florida Court of Appeals unanimously agreed with an assertion by FOX News that there is no rule against distorting or falsifying the news in the United States.

Back in December of 1996, Jane Akre and her husband, Steve Wilson, were hired by FOX as a part of the Fox “Investigators” team at WTVT in Tampa Bay, Florida. In 1997 the team began work on a story about bovine growth hormone (BGH), a controversial substance manufactured by Monsanto Corporation. The couple produced a four-part series revealing that there were many health risks related to BGH and that Florida supermarket chains did little to avoid selling milk from cows treated with the hormone, despite assuring customers otherwise.
The Media Can Legally Lie

It's up to people to dispel and expose. Fairly of course.

Sometimes the trees hide the forest.

In this case, the Dems have acknowledged their own problem, even Obama said Ms Rosen was wrong.

Welcome to Democracy.

Did you think this would happen in China or North Korea ?

reply to post by xuenchen


The people would be soooooo much better off if NEWS outlets were forced to report facts. They'd be better informed instead of falling for opinionated garbage or flat out lies.

In other countries news outlets get called out for lying...Canada's a good example (Fox got no license there because they refused not to lie) and so is Switzerland.

The first amendment is important, but shouldn't be a license to dumb down the people

Originally posted by detachedindividual
reply to post by xuenchen

 

I see you've added quotation marks where none existed, and state that people have said things when it has only be "suggested" that they "implied" things - which is another writing tactic to suggest that opinion is what actually happened.

I dislike both the Republicans and the Democrats. Both are as corrupt and self-serving as the other. We have the same divisive system here in the UK and plenty of idiots fall for it, wasting so much time cheer leading for bunch of people who will simply do everything the elites want them to do anyway. There is a plan, and BOTH parties are obliged to comply otherwise they are "out of the club" and under attack.

I would suggest that if you're going to try to use propaganda methods to influence political opinion here, please read up on some of the masters of the art and do it properly, otherwise you are insulting the intelligence of some on ATS - and we don't like it.

So noted.

The quotes are from the quoted article, not me.

I'm glad that's all that was ""attackable""

But just the same, the Dems have apologized by the dozens.

No harm done.