Hilary Rosen's Comments on Ann Romney

Discussion in 'The Thunderdome' started by CardinalVol, Apr 12, 2012.

  1. kptvol

    kptvol Super Moderator

    I don't care how long she did it. The point is that she was doing it in between jobs and would probably have preferred avoiding the house mom stint.
     
  2. IP

    IP Super Moderator

    ...and....so...?
     
  3. kptvol

    kptvol Super Moderator

    The self loathing point the devil's advocate made earlier...
     
  4. warhammer

    warhammer Chieftain

    The bottom line is Rosen said something about Ann Romney in a tone that could be interpreted as being demeaning (Don't believe it? Listen again.) In sound bites, it is going to play as an unprovoked attack on someone who has been relatively quiet during the campaign. It doesn't really matter what the specific allegation was or to whom it was actually intended. She is going to spend her time in the penalty box as a result. If she doesn't learn from it, it will happen again.
     
  5. IP

    IP Super Moderator

    Seems like a masterfully-played conservative trap, to me. Nothing more.
     
  6. warhammer

    warhammer Chieftain

    You are being a bit close minded. There was no way this was going to play out well for Rosen regardless of her intention or point. I am willing to consider that her comment has been misinterpreted, but the strategy of bringing Romney's wife into the fray, unprovoked, is undeniably foolish from a strategic standpoint. Which is the simpler explanation? How did Anderson Cooper know he would bring up Ann Romney? If you want to call the spin in the aftermath a "trap", then politicians and talking heads are "trapped" all the time. Are you implying Anderson Cooper is a part of the "vast right wing conspiracy"? I enjoy watching and pay attention to Cooper's show most times I find myself stuck in front of a television over which I have no control. I would hardly consider him an arm of the GOP.

    If she wasn't intending to insult his wife, she should have chose her words more carefully. Where I grew up, saying someone, "has never worked a day in their life," is an insult. If you grew up in a working class family, that was one of the more derogatory things that could be said about somebody and equated them with worthlessness. I can believe she didn't mean for it to be interpreted this way, but you have to be pretty out of touch with certain segments of society to not understand the power of this statement.
     
  7. IP

    IP Super Moderator

    The leaps you have made in this post are amazing.

    No, I don't think Cooper or anyone else is part of a conspiracy. Why you would even spend a single sentence speculating as such is mind-boggling to me.

    I think she made a turn of phrase that was pounced on and spun around on her with such success that it probably even shocked the Romney camp how effective it was to sell it like she was insulting stay at home moms. Whether she intended for what she said to be derogatory is inconsequential, if the way she intended it to be derogatory was not referring to A. Romney's status as a stay at home mother specifically, but rather her lack of need to work or concern for her family's financial future.

    It is such a taboo to ever question motherhood, the Dems won't touch it. Frankly it isn't worth correcting the record politically. That doesn't mean the record is reflective of reality.
     
  8. IP

    IP Super Moderator

    To be clear, is insulting women really that taboo? Because we've all seen the sketches on Barbara Bush on TV, the old Hillary Clinton halloween masks and plenty of jokes, and most recently Michelle Obama has been called "Sasquatch" and worse.

    In that context, why is Ann Romney so untouchable? And please don't go back to pretending like it was her stay-at-home-mom status that was being referred to again. That's avoiding the question.
     
  9. kptvol

    kptvol Super Moderator

    Don't see how warhammer's ideas are any bigger of a leap than any of yours. The right wing trap didn't prompt the White House to blast an apology out in such short order. They recognized the idiocy of the comment instantaneously and knew they had to isolate themselves from the inevitable backlash.
     
  10. warhammer

    warhammer Chieftain

    How so? If it's this:

    How do you explain the "trap" comment?

    You can think that if you want. I don't know the exact reason why she made the statement. Neither do you. I don't really care. I agree that it has been spun heavily. That's part of the game when you get your face on the panel.

    Your are absolutely correct, in my opinion, with that first part. You are more on the side of guessing with the rest. As I mentioned earlier, saying that someone never worked a day in their life has, without exception, been used as a derogatory description in every instance I can recall in my lifetime. I will agree that I have not heard it used with stay at home moms often, but I have heard it from working moms. Either way, the comment is used in such a manner that it can generally be equated to someone being accused being worthless and lazy or it is a sign of class envy. I am not saying Rosen is envious of Ann Romney, but I would say that she had possibly been waiting to drop that line for a while. I don't know. If she had, it backfired. If her intention was to say that the Romneys were well off, there were other ways of doing that. She could have even mentioned Ann not working in a more civil manner, but she didn't. I am not that familiar with Rosen, but I would believe that, in her position, she would have learned by now be more considerate of how her words might be interpreted.

    I believe this is pretty much true, publicly anyway. The Dems would never do something like this intentionally unless there was some benefit they believed could be delivered later on. I do believe it's possible she meant to promote class envy between the public and the Romneys. That has to be near the core of their campaign. It's an easy sell because it's true that the Romneys are rich.
     
    Last edited: Apr 14, 2012
  11. warhammer

    warhammer Chieftain

    I think it's a little different from those because she has yet to be so much in the limelight as the ones you mentioned. I don't think she is untouchable so much as she has been painted as having been attacked. It is being spun such that she is the victim right now, and in America, a victim is untouchable. When she comes out with her own positions and her own verbal gaffs, she will cease to be untouchable.

    By the way, Michelle as Sasquatch? I don't see it. Personally, I think she's kind of hot.
     
  12. IP

    IP Super Moderator

    I agree with the quoted above. That is a common bottom line between us.



    As for the "trap," comment, I am merely saying she fell into a tiger pit of sorts. Not that she was lured in any way. She got herself trapped. I do not believe in conspiracies. Neither party is nearly clever enough for that.

    I don't think I am speculating very much at all in my take on the meaning of her comments. That is what she said she meant, and also makes the most sense in the context of the Dem rhetoric at the time, her personal life and history, and her initial reaction to the accusations of it being about being a stay at home mom.

    What is speculation is to actually claim that she is lying now about what she meant, that she secretly hated being a stay at home mom when she did it for a year, that the White House and other dems not rallying with her is some rare radical departure from politics, etc. I mean, c'mon. You think the White House is just like, "Whoa, whoa whoa. Timeout. Ann Romney is very in touch with American women."

    Horse shit. They are just not wanting to take any casualties on this by directly inserting themselves into the controversy. It has already cost Obama his previous edge over Romney in the polls.
     
  13. kptvol

    kptvol Super Moderator

    So we are taking people at their word now? Maybe you ought to rethink that whole charge Zimmerman to send a message stance.
     
  14. IP

    IP Super Moderator

    By Zimmerman's 911 tape, it is pretty clear he instigated that situation. Whether he is legally guilty, he killed an unarmed man that he physically confronted.
     
  15. warhammer

    warhammer Chieftain

    I agree that Rosen was pushing the angle that the Romneys are rich and out of touch. She did specifically target Ann in the way she went about it by claiming Mitt was foolish for listening to someone who didn't work. I don't really think she was going after stay at home mothers as a group. However, that was her basis for claiming Ann was out of touch with economic concerns. Enter spin, and you get where you are today. If she had stuck to what is likely the overall game plan and just pointed out how rich they are, we wouldn't be where we are. I still believe that she may probably chose that phrase in order to promote class envy directed toward the Romneys.
     
  16. IP

    IP Super Moderator

    Certainly she was trying to stoke class envy. No doubt.
     
  17. kptvol

    kptvol Super Moderator

    And listening to the tape of Rosen it's pretty hard to think that she isn't speaking in a derogatory fashion. The fact that she claims she her actual intent is something far less damaging to her reputation doesnt mean a whole lot.
     
  18. kptvol

    kptvol Super Moderator

    So you aren't sure he is legally guilty, but still feel he ought to be charged with murder? Meanwhile the case of this chick's reputation needs the beyond a reasonable doubt approach. Right...
     
  19. IP

    IP Super Moderator

    You're comparing an incident resulting in the death of a minor with the alleged insinuation of laziness of a woman. Interesting.

    How is being charged with a crime contradicting needing beyond reasonable doubt? I watched lots of Matlock as a kid, and it has left with me with a pretty solid idea of how the justice system works. For a person to be thoroughly investigated and put on trial, they must be charged with something. I fail to see the contrast you are trying to make. I also fail to see how calling a woman lazy warrants the same fervor as investigating the shooting death of an unarmed minor.
     
  20. kptvol

    kptvol Super Moderator

    There needs to be evidence implicating a guy before you can charge him, not the need to send a message. The two cases are comparable only because you have weighed in on both recently. I do find it odd that you are so cavalier with Zimmerman, whose life could be potentially ruined here, while the woman who drug Romney's wife into the political debate she herself admits will be epically nasty doesn't deserve any negative PR.

    Rosen crossed a line and there is a debate as to what manner and how far across the line she went. Zimmerman is in the same situation, the stakes are just way higher. Rosen's career will easily survive even a worst case scenario. There is a decent chance Zimmerman winds up dead.
     
    Last edited: Apr 14, 2012

Share This Page