• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Ann Romney Never Worked a Day In Her Life.

Do you have any proof that the sun is bright? I demand links!

Yes, and I will give detailed instructions. Go get a telescope out when the sun is up, point it at the sun and look through the telescope for the evidence. :) J/K please don't do that hehe.
 
I think pointing out that either Democrats or Republicans are hypocrites is pretty much like stating the obvious "The sun is bright".

Both sides have proven themselves to be hypocritical on certain issues and situations. So what is the point of you stating the obvious again?
Because apparently there are some that dont get it. Like...Oh...I dont know...go to any rally where the pres talks about how rich Romney is and he cant relate to average folks. Or every time a democrat spokesman on TV brings up Romneys tax bracket without mentioning all those dems...the same ones they never deemed it important enough to discuss before.
 
And yet many of our esteemed Presidents and party nominees came from such wealthy and/or governmentally-elite circles since childhood. You aren't exactly going to see many rant about the Roosevelts and the Kennedys, are you?

I don't see where I'm ranting.

I actually felt like I've been led completely off the path of the subject. No you're not going to see rants about those two since they've already served as President and it's their record that speaks for them. No it doesn't mean that every yacht club 100 millionaire is an FDR or Kennedy.

If you run for President of the United States it's your burden to prove you are "X" and in Romneys case that's proving his policies aren't formulated from someone that has no idea what Americans deal with. Last I checked Gingrich and Santorum both used his out of touchness to attack Romney.
 
I don't see where I'm ranting.

I actually felt like I've been led completely off the path of the subject. No you're not going to see rants about those two since they've already served as President and it's their record that speaks for them. No it doesn't mean that every yacht club 100 millionaire is an FDR or Kennedy.

If you run for President of the United States it's your burden to prove you are "X" and in Romneys case that's proving his policies aren't formulated from someone that has no idea what Americans deal with. Last I checked Gingrich and Santorum both used his out of touchness to attack Romney.

I didn't accuse you of ranting, I was speaking in the general narrative.

You haven't been led off the path, I'm just questioning your thought process. We have seen the movement from because candidate X and spouse is rich and hasn't had to work or live a comparable life to average American, candidate is unfit for leadership of Americans. Then when presented with contrary evidence from the past, we are now lead to believe that candidate is rich and hasn't had to work or lead comparable life, but his policies speak for themselves (liberal or progressive policies being preferable to understanding the plight of Americans). Yet, the focus of the thread has been exclusively on Ann not working or Mitt coming from a rich and powerful family.
 
Last edited:
I didn't accuse you of ranting, I was speaking in the general narrative.

You haven't been led off the path, I'm just questioning your thought process. We have seen the movement from because candidate X and spouse is rich and hasn't had to work or live a comparable life to average American, candidate is unfit for leadership of Americans. Then when presented with contrary evidence from the past, we are now lead to believe that candidate is rich and hasn't had to work or lead comparable life, but his policies speak for themselves (liberal or progressive policies being preferable to understanding the plight of Americans). Yet, the focus of the thread has been exclusively on Ann not working or Mitt coming from a rich and powerful family.

They aren't unfit for leadership. In the case of Ann Romney....I don't see where questions as to whether she's an accurate barometer of what most women are concerned with are unfair. You don't go to a yacht or country club to get an estimation of what most Americans are concerned with.

As for leadership in general. Romney's success and upbringing is a double edged sword. Yes he has experience in the business community. Yes he was very successful at Bain Capital as well as saving the Olympics. He's brought them up constantly. Why is it unfair to ask that he prove that he's not completely out of touch with most Americans?

If someone that I'm unfamiliar with comes from a billionaire family it's pretty rational to expect them to be out of touch. They may not be, they may have life experiences that make them different. As a person running for President it's his job to prove that.
 
Why would anybody care about any of this? I feel like I'm taking crazy pills here!
 
They are going to give someone **** for not working when her husband makes enough money to provide for both of them? I do not fault anyone for not working if her or even his spouse makes enough money to provide for both of them.

But when confronted with this, they shift to the 'but they are rich, so she had nannies and housekeepers and thus doesn't know what it's like to work as a mother/homemaker!"

It's an ever moving field goal that shows the lack of standards and principle on their part.
 
Hey I didn't write the story but she was described as a "DNC strategist and CNN analyst". Sounds like she's on the team to me.

Yes she was described that in the Fox news story you linked. lol
 
Why would anybody care about any of this? I feel like I'm taking crazy pills here!
I know...right? So is the gal that said it. She said pretty much the same thing. Well...what she said was the equivalent of So what if I called your mother a ****, what really matter is your dad isnt a good plumber.

Its going to make for intriguing drama this election cycle. you think this is bad...wait til the attacks on his religion get in full swing. And its really a shame too because I am SURE they would rather talk about unemployment, the debt, gas prices, failed energy policies, turmoil in the ME, terrorists still in GITMO, expansion of black ops prisons in other countries, etc etc etc...
 
But when confronted with this, they shift to the 'but they are rich, so she had nannies and housekeepers and thus doesn't know what it's like to work as a mother/homemaker!"

It's an ever moving field goal that shows the lack of standards and principle on their part.


The green with envy crowd will often piss, bitch, and moan how the rich have lots of money and they don't while rich democrat politicians will pretend to cater to the green with envy crowd. Romney's wife not working is a non-issue
 
They aren't unfit for leadership. In the case of Ann Romney....I don't see where questions as to whether she's an accurate barometer of what most women are concerned with are unfair. You don't go to a yacht or country club to get an estimation of what most Americans are concerned with.

As for leadership in general. Romney's success and upbringing is a double edged sword. Yes he has experience in the business community. Yes he was very successful at Bain Capital as well as saving the Olympics. He's brought them up constantly. Why is it unfair to ask that he prove that he's not completely out of touch with most Americans?

If someone that I'm unfamiliar with comes from a billionaire family it's pretty rational to expect them to be out of touch. They may not be, they may have life experiences that make them different. As a person running for President it's his job to prove that.

Again, I don't see the relevance. Many of our First Lady's/Presidents also featured from prominent families, and indeed, were members of exclusive clubs. It was more abnormal that they should not be.

Why must they prove that they are not out of touch? Do we need to feed ourselves to the mass democratic mob so often that we cannot see the primacy of policies? Have we forgotten that the elite have historically ruled not only us, but the rest of humanity for as long as we can record, and with success? Enlightened policies are a better judge.
 
Last edited:
Hmm - I think what this thread has *really* brought to light are the views of employment in general.

A lot of people who said they don't have a problem with Ann being a housewife - said that if they didn't have to work they wouldn't work OR that since he made so much money she didn't need to bother.

Well to me employment is about creating an identity for yourself: NOT just about income. I had a crap job and after paying for chidcare I didn't have much else ot go around - but I wanted to work anyway because employment, for me, was solid and I could put effort into it and get recognition for it.

I can't imagine not *wanting* to work.

so it's not about Ann at all - or Romney: it's about our views on employment in general: pleasure or burden.

Right now - I'm in school.
When I graduate I will get a job - and if we go through with business plans I'll be employed and in school.
I don't even intend on retiring. I thoroughly loved to work, be employed, go places, do things, be somebody - be needed, called up on, fix people's issues, and bring home a portion of our income that is "my earned portion" - even if my husband earns considerably more than I do. It's a source of pride . . . I loved what employment brought to me.

Apparently a lot of people just think of employment = money . . . and it ends there.
 
Last edited:
Honestly I don't see what the big deal is. My wife and I both worked and when I made enough, she stopped working and stayed at home.

This person making a big deal of it is quite petty and ridiculous.
 
Yes she was described that in the Fox news story you linked. lol


Well since I'm not a mind reader, I posted what I read.

Don't worry. Come the 8 o'clock news the Administration will have thrown her so far under the bus, she'll probably be looking for work, like the rest of the unemployed in the country. :2razz:
 
Honestly I don't see what the big deal is. My wife and I both worked and when I made enough, she stopped working and stayed at home.

This person making a big deal of it is quite petty and ridiculous.

Well that's how it was for me - sort of. . . but him making enough money wasn't the sole reason there.

I guess I'm just baffled as to how people can look at a capable person and say 'don't work, that's ok - it's one thing to be a stay at home mom - but Ann's not a stay at home mom anymore. . . that should simply be a temporary status.

But whatever: I never liked him as a candidate even without this housewife thing.
 
Again, I don't see the relevance. Many of our First Lady's/Presidents also featured from prominent families, and indeed, were members of exclusive clubs. It was more abnormal that they should not be.

Why must they prove that they are not out of touch? Do we need to feed ourselves to the mass democratic mob so often that we cannot see the primacy of policies?

They have to prove they aren't out of touch just like they need to prove they are good family men/women. That they are energetic. That they are tough. That they are decisive. These all are attributes people find important in a President.

It's important to be sympathetic to the concerns of Americans....which is pretty closely linked to understanding the concerns of Americans. There is relevance. It's the core of what dictates what policies they push.
 
They have to prove they aren't out of touch just like they need to prove they are good family men/women. That they are energetic. That they are tough. That they are decisive. These all are attributes people find important in a President.

It's important to be sympathetic to the concerns of Americans....which is pretty closely linked to understanding the concerns of Americans. There is relevance. It's the core of what dictates what policies they push.
Why we have such a massive disconnect in our country. The president doesnt need to be 'sympathetic' or be governed by 'fairness' and 'feeeeelings'. The president needs to lead a country, to be decisive, to be strong, and to promote strong ideas with regard to economics. We dont need to have a national election for the nations nanny or big borther...we need a President. We need someone that understands business and industry. We need a government that is fiscally responsible. So far...both major parties have failed this country miserably. If you want a buddy...if you want a pro tem daddy...fine...do that on your own time. The country needs a LEADER.,
 
I just find Hilary Rosen's comments bizarre.

Instead of nit picking at whether or not Ann Romney should have been working in the coal mines as punishment for being wealthy, more attention should be focused on the actual implications of Rosen's quote. She brought up Romney's employment history as a means to prove how out of touch she is with women when she says the economy is the most important issue facing them today.

Fine. Well what does the Democrat strategist believe is the biggest issue today if not the economy?
 
I'm sorry...what's the outrage again? Has Mitt Romney's wife ever worked? Is it an insult to state that fact? I've only seen partial quotes but does Mitt Romneys wife know much about what most Americans deal with much less working women?

just because we haven't heard about it, doesn't mean it wasn't done....
like I said, I know more than a few rich Mormons, and they DON"T have nannies.....
 
Why are the Obama people backing away from this?

Michelle went to Law School, worked in a law firm...

Ann has a staff of nannies, maids, butlers, house boys, caterers...

Someone should tell Ann Romney to STFU and go to a Swiss Spa...

"I made the choice to stay home"... Go to hell, Ann.
can you source your opinion? I doubt it...
butlers? nobody has butlers anymore.....
 
On that note - I don't think ANY of our candidate can ever relate to what the average American knows and deals with. . . they're ALL the 1% - they're all the elite.
 
Well that's how it was for me - sort of. . . but him making enough money wasn't the sole reason there.

I guess I'm just baffled as to how people can look at a capable person and say 'don't work, that's ok - it's one thing to be a stay at home mom - but Ann's not a stay at home mom anymore. . . that should simply be a temporary status.

But whatever: I never liked him as a candidate even without this housewife thing.

I don't understand your problem with it. Do you think people should never retire if they're still physically capable of working? Why is it better for someone who doesn't need the money to take a job that could go to someone who does need the money?
 
No offense, but how do you know what involvement she had? Are you making assumptions and passing judgment against her without legitimate knowledge of the facts? Why? What do you solve or accomplish by doing this?

It strokes his little liberal ego.
 
I don't understand your problem with it. Do you think people should never retire if they're still physically capable of working? Why is it better for someone who doesn't need the money to take a job that could go to someone who does need the money?

Retirement at least denotes that you worked hard and achieved something.

But I don't see myself wanting to do so - I'm 31 and have yet to get back into my career as management.
 
Back
Top Bottom