• 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.

Well to me employment is about creating an identity for yourself: NOT just about income.

I see this as a crazy statement. If one needs work to have an identity, they are a pretty weak person, IMO. To me, a purpose of having a job is paying the bills, not much else. A means to an end.

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

I can imagine not wanting to have a job. There are so many other things one could spend there lives doing, rather than toiling away. What I don't understand is people that are so into 'work', that they never retire, or retire and fade away to nothing and die because they then feel life has no purpose. That is insanity to me.

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.

I am baffled by anyone that believes that anyone capable of having a job should have one, for no other reason than they can.

Well, that's your choice and your right, but I don't have a problem if someone doesn't work, so long as they aren't sponging off the public or charity. I think it depends a lot on how much one enjoys his or her work. If you love your work it's not really work. If you hate it, I don't see any great virtue in doing it just for the sake of doing it.

And for once I agree 100% with you. Glad to see you finally get one right. ;)

And the republicans are blamed for "A war on women"??? That's funny coming from the left after they demonize Ann Romney.

She is not the first. Dare I mention Palin.

hopefully there are not too many liberals/democrats who believe women should get off their ass and get to work if they do not need or want to, hopefully there are plenty of liberals/ democrats who understand the importance of raising children and tending to the family...
but after a cursory reading of this thread, i'm afraid my hopes are dashed.... too many people are still attacking this women for not working , but instead choosing to stay home and tend to her family.

Spot on.
 
While I'm seeing folks saying things to the effect that this is just terrible for Obama... I'm gonna say that the lady who said this looks bad and the more the Romney campaign tries to make an issue of it the more they look trying to gain ground on their woman gap and it smells of really bad desperation.

one massive non-issue that will be forgotten in a couple days.
 
personally, I think that anyone who is stupid enough to claim that a stay at home mom has never worked a day in her life is so colossal an idiot that anything they say should be ignored. I know my wife has worked her ass off every single day of her stay at home life.
 
Honestly, I don't care if she works or not. Her not having a job means somebody who actually NEEDS the work has that job instead, yes?

My boyfriend's aunt is the wife of a former marine and current military contractor. He spends 6-8 months a year overseas on assignment. She doesn't work. So what does she do with her time? She maintains the house, she works out, she goes shopping. But you know what else she does? She heads the local chapter for a group that focuses on transitioning returning soliders into the private sector and on aiding the families of soldiers who are currently deployed. She spends probably 40-50 hours a week organizing events and fundraisers, helping with administrative tasks, meeting with those who are being helped by the program, etc.

And when she isn't working with the volunteer group she's here in Texas spending time with her grand children and grown daughter. And I really appreciate that, being somebody who personally never got much time with her grandparents.

And you know....who cares if she didn't volunteer. She and her husband are perfectly okay with their arrangement, and they're the only people that really matter. They aren't using entitlement programs or sapping off the system to survive, so I say let 'em do what they want to do.

A lot of women are not going to relate to Ann Romney which is going to be The Problem, as opposed to pondering if it's a personal or character problem of Ann's for not having actually worked.
 
Someone said that Ann Romney was demonized. I disagree. She was just exposed as a woman who really doesn't get what most women experience on a daily basis.

Yes, being a stay at home parent is work but she never had to juggle raising her children, hold down a job, and have the worries that a working parent goes through 24/7.

I think most reasonable people knew what Hilary Rosen was talking about.
 
The guy is slipping. Can someone explain to me why he doesn't have a horse elevator?

Or an ego elevator, or a money vault where he can swim like Uncle Scrooge?
 
Sorry, he ain't my president. I refuse to claim him.

I don't see how this furthers solidarity among American citizens. I did not vote for Obama in 2008 and will definitely not vote for him in November. But he is, in fact, my President...and yours. Your fellow citizens elected him, and that's how it is...for now. And maybe again. I won't be happy, but I do respect the Office of the Presidency, irrespective of its holder.
 
While I'm seeing folks saying things to the effect that this is just terrible for Obama... I'm gonna say that the lady who said this looks bad and the more the Romney campaign tries to make an issue of it the more they look trying to gain ground on their woman gap and it smells of really bad desperation.

one massive non-issue that will be forgotten in a couple days.

Well, everything in our news-byte/news cycle generation seems to be forgotten once the next dramarama appears.

Has the Romney campaign made a big old deal out of this? I'm in an intense work-cycle myself and may have missed this. Do understand that the Democrat big-guns have taken pains to distance themselves; don't know what the Republican responses are.

I am sure, however, as somebody who's been a stay-at-home mom and also a working professional outside the home that there are probably a lot of mommies who are seriously ticked off right about now. What's ironic is that in my lifetime, women who had to work outside the home were once pitied...and then championed...and now here we go again.
 
ann romney's husband is a freakin millionaire. she doesn't need to work and can hardly be considered to be living freely on the hard work of others. what would you expect her to do? get a job at walmart? I can see it now, "here's my paycheck honey...now we have 200 million and 175 dollars. I just want to do my part"

My wife has a degree in accounting, and by these standards has "never worked a day in her life". I have been fortunate (and worked hard enough) that she has been able to be a stay at home mom. once the kids are gone we plan on living off my military retirement. will she then be guilty of living off the hard work of others?

Well - I read up on her

Ann Romney - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And it seems she's been extremely active with several different charities and organizations - having at one time volunteered her employment services for aposition without pay when money was tight for the organization.

Which is good - she's not just his political sidekick and she has defined herself as an individual with her own interests that she pursues. Of all things - I was afraid she lost herself.

But on the point of not-doing something with yourself just because your spouse is well off: doesn't matter to me - everyone should do something notable with their life and it seems that she's actually done exactly that.

I still don't like Romney's political quirks, though :)
 
Someone said that Ann Romney was demonized. I disagree. She was just exposed as a woman who really doesn't get what most women experience on a daily basis.

Yes, being a stay at home parent is work but she never had to juggle raising her children, hold down a job, and have the worries that a working parent goes through 24/7.

I think most reasonable people knew what Hilary Rosen was talking about.

I think so too. If you actually listen to what Rosen said, instead of the right wing overreaction frenzy, it's pretty sensible. Mitt says he relies on Ann's views about working women when Ann has about as much in common with the average working woman as the Queen of England.
 
A lot of women are not going to relate to Ann Romney which is going to be The Problem, as opposed to pondering if it's a personal or character problem of Ann's for not having actually worked.

I don't see Ann Romney having any problem with relating to women. Lots of women work outside the home and lots of women work by staying in the home. I don't know anything about her personal life, but I would think, being a Mormon, she would have been a hands on Mom.
 
I think so too. If you actually listen to what Rosen said, instead of the right wing overreaction frenzy, it's pretty sensible. Mitt says he relies on Ann's views about working women when Ann has about as much in common with the average working woman as the Queen of England.

Before I type this next sentence I will stress that I went and read up on Ann Romney quite a bit - obviously my view changed.

apparently she's quite connected - having worked in nothing but Charities and Organizations for countless years she seems well versed in the needs and struggles of single mothers, young parents and their families. I think - unlike some rich people - her involvement in these specific charities has kept her rooted on the ground. . . but that might be deceptive - maybe she's not, I don't know . . . can't really speal for her. I think I need to give up the effort on this thread altogether.
 
Last edited:
I find it incredibly stupid to say that a woman who raised 5 children hasn't worked a day in her life. I guess we all have different definitions of "work". As for her choice not to find paid work after she was done raising all those boys, that doesn't mean she does nothing all day. In my experience, these women often volunteer for charitable work and with 16 grandkids, I'm sure she's not done taking care of family. :shrug:

A middle class woman raising 5 kids is a lot different from an extremely wealthy mother raising 5 kids. I used to watch the Real Housewives a lot, and all of them had nannies and maids. I really don't think it's the same. Wealthy mothers stay home and go to work for different reasons. It's never a issue of finding an affordable babysitter or having to stay home to save money, or being forced to miss work because of kid has a common, childhood illness. Some women would love to be a housewife, but the family needs two incomes. Some women would hate being a housewife, and that creates conflict in a marriage as well.

I am not trying to talk bad about Ann Romney. All I am saying is that that there is a huge difference in being a housewife depending on a woman's economic status.
 
Does she really have MS? I wasn't aware of that. If that's true I seriously hope it didn't flare up until her children were older. Battling MS while raising children is hellacious from what I've observed.

I know it's hereditary and it looks like an awful disease to battle. There are a few hereditary diseases in my family, but I am grateful MS isn't one of them. If it ran in my family, I wouldn't have kids for fear of passing it on... again, not judging her, but I definitely would hate to pass it on to one of my future kids. I think that would be so tragic. I hope she is healthy and is doing fine.
 
:shrug:

Here's why I don't get involved in the feminist movement: For some reason, some in the movement seem to think that anything short of what the movement wants is unacceptable for individual women, regardless of what those women want. I want to stay at home with my children when they're young, but some feminists tell me I'm destroying "the movement" by "conforming to historic gender roles".

You know what? Screw that nonsense. The feminist movement should be about ensuring the woman has the choice to live her life as she sees fit. And that includes the choice to "conform to historic gender roles" if that's what she wants. We don't need to challenge every woman who doesn't burn her bra and demand more pay and insist upon being the bread winner in some march for "equality" against men. And we don't need to accuse every man of mysogyny if his wife isn't a bra-burning feminazi, either.

I have never seen any of my feminist friends burn bras or accuse every man of misogyny. One extremely outspoken feminist I know is a housewife. Perhaps you don't have a modern view of feminism or understand modern feminists.
 
My wife started working the same year our youngest started first grade.....and it helped a lot. We put the kids thru college mostly on her income. But as far as working when you don't NEED to, why take a job that someone else NEEDS...?

We both retired early, planned for it....we are still young enough to work, but choose not to, again, why take a job that someone else needs? Our jobs now are spending money to help boost the economy....

What determines if you need a job? I think that that is subjective. Paris Hilton is pretty wealthy, but she took a job on TV, tried to be a singer, acted in some films, etc. Chelsea Clinton would have been fine not working at all, but she went to college and she works.

As a woman, and since this conversation is about women, I would always want to work. If I marry a man capable of supporting me without the need to work, I'd still work because I want to make my own money. I don't want to be financially dependent on somebody else's money, nor would I always want to ask for permission before spending somebody else's money. It doesn't feel secure or safe to me, and especially not if there is a divorce and he doesn't want to pay me alimony. Where would that leave me?

I personally think it's more financially wise of a woman to work and save some money for her self. It's more secure. You can't depend on another person to care for you and provide. A marriage could sour, end in divorce, your spouse could suddenly die, etc. Not having financial independence is risky.

I'd rather invest my money and make my own financial decisions, rather than allow my husband to run my life and retirement with his money.
 
Last edited:
That's sad - I see being able to be employed as a matter of self-reliance and independence, something to succeed at, feel good about and strive for - a privilidge to be employed . . . I haven't had a job in 9 years and I can't imagine just being stuck like this for the rest of my life - I'd want to just shoot myself.

Obviously some people don't have issues being reliant on others for everything - and I have serious issues with that.

And there is nothing wrong with the way you feel either. Some women don't want to be SAHM. I am not even a mom, but I wouldn't want to be a SAHM at all. My sister is one. I have helped her many days and have seen her in action... it's not for me. She has a job now, and her husband was controlling with money too. She wanted a job for a long time, and now she has one. Financial independence would eventually seem like something everybody would crave eventually.
 
Ann Romney has had several personal struggles with her health throughout her life while also raising 5 sons. If that's not considered hard work, I don't know what is. Money aside, her health problems beat the hell out of any struggles I've had so far in my life. Say what you want about her husband (the actual candidate) but there's no benefit in bashing the unelected family members of either Romney or Obama. I've met Michelle Obama and have actually had a relatively meaningful conversation with Ann Romney; both were nothing if not 100% friendly and sincere when I met them. The fact that both are so different shouldn't be derided, it should be celebrated; They are both outstanding American women and that diversity is a huge part of it.

I don't see how this furthers solidarity among American citizens. I did not vote for Obama in 2008 and will definitely not vote for him in November. But he is, in fact, my President...and yours. Your fellow citizens elected him, and that's how it is...for now. And maybe again. I won't be happy, but I do respect the Office of the Presidency, irrespective of its holder.

Crazy talk...Different subject, but I find it's usually the people most disrespectful towards both candidates or any office holder that are the first to ask the rhetorical question "Why are kids so damn disrespectful these days?".
 
What determines if you need a job? I think that that is subjective. Paris Hilton is pretty wealthy, but she took a job on TV, tried to be a singer, acted in some films, etc. Chelsea Clinton would have been fine not working at all, but she went to college and she works.

As a woman, and since this conversation is about women, I would always want to work. If I marry a man capable of supporting me without the need to work, I'd still work because I want to make my own money. I don't want to be financially dependent on somebody else's money, nor would I always want to ask for permission before spending somebody else's money. It doesn't feel secure or safe to me, and especially not if there is a divorce and he doesn't want to pay me alimony. Where would that leave me?

I personally think it's more financially wise of a woman to work and save some money for her self. It's more secure. You can't depend on another person to care for you and provide. A marriage could sour, end in divorce, your spouse could suddenly die, etc. Not having financial independence is risky.

I'd rather invest my money and make my own financial decisions, rather than allow my husband to run my life and retirement with his money.

maybe this is the bigger issue for you?
before my wife started working, she ran the household budget...I made the money, she spent it wisely. a good marriage is a partnership, there is no dominance involved.
 
MS itself is a nightmare, whether you are raising kids or not. I used to play benefits to raise money for MS, and was a chili cookoff judge. Yes, I was certified to be a chili cookoff judge too. I donated a lot of time to this cause.

Here's the deal. People need to lay off both Obama's wife and Romney's wife, and deal with the issues at hand. I know that this is difficult because both Romney and Obama have injected their wives into their campaigns, and some will say that makes them legitimate targets. But neither wife is a candidate for President of the United States either. That is where all the ****ing dishonesty comes in, and make no mistake about it - Talking heads for both sides are doing this crap. If the American people want to fall for this game, then they have no right at all to complain that their government is not working for them. After all, it was THEY who decided to go after family instead of giving a damn about the issues at hand.

Just my 2 cents on the matter.

The dumb thing about injecting their wives is like the result with Palin. Right now, Ann Romney is offended and going off on twitter and this is about Ann Romney. It's not about all women. I don't relate to this issue. This isn't going to sway women voters, because this isn't about women. A woman is a offended, another feels misunderstand... ok, milk it, whatever, it's not going to sway women voters.

With Palin as VP, it was all about Palin and her treatment as a woman. The McCain campaign wasn't suddenly focusing on women, it just focused on Palin. This is the same result. They aren't talking to women or about women.
 
[/B]
maybe this is the bigger issue for you?
before my wife started working, she ran the household budget...I made the money, she spent it wisely. a good marriage is a partnership, there is no dominance involved.

Seems to me the comments were never meant to degrade her choice as a mother...but instead addressed Mitts comment that his wife was an economic voice to him. In that context...it does make sense.
 
[/B]
maybe this is the bigger issue for you?
before my wife started working, she ran the household budget...I made the money, she spent it wisely. a good marriage is a partnership, there is no dominance involved.

I don't think that it is a personal issue. As I said, it's risky to just depend on one person to support you. Anything can happen.. soured marriage, cheating, divorce, death, pernup, etc. Financial security involves having my own funds and my own foot in the economy. I don't know anybody could see it any differently. I would never willingly choose to never work a day in my life and choose to be supported completely by my husband.

I also think it's kind of weird to buy somebody presents and gifts with their own money they earn, and I saw a woman's husband say it on the Real Housewives of OC once. I think he made her feel awful, but she stayed quiet cause that's her life line.
 
A middle class woman raising 5 kids is a lot different from an extremely wealthy mother raising 5 kids. I used to watch the Real Housewives a lot, and all of them had nannies and maids. I really don't think it's the same. Wealthy mothers stay home and go to work for different reasons. It's never a issue of finding an affordable babysitter or having to stay home to save money, or being forced to miss work because of kid has a common, childhood illness. Some women would love to be a housewife, but the family needs two incomes. Some women would hate being a housewife, and that creates conflict in a marriage as well.

I am not trying to talk bad about Ann Romney. All I am saying is that that there is a huge difference in being a housewife depending on a woman's economic status.

Yes - good post. This really summarizes things really well.

There's a HUGE difference between the woman who works as a waitress and has five kids and barely makes ends meet - and Ann Romney who was fortunate enough to marry someone who became a Senator and are quite well off while raising 5 kids.

Regardless of what she's done with herself in the meantime - this is lightyears apart. Though she's involved with women on a daily basis - I don't think she can actively identify with what their life is in contrast. She might want to: doesn't mean she's ever experienced life in that same way.
 
Yes - good post. This really summarizes things really well.

There's a HUGE difference between the woman who works as a waitress and has five kids and barely makes ends meet - and Ann Romney who was fortunate enough to marry someone who became a Senator and are quite well off while raising 5 kids.

Regardless of what she's done with herself in the meantime - this is lightyears apart. Though she's involved with women on a daily basis - I don't think she can actively identify with what their life is in contrast. She might want to: doesn't mean she's ever experienced life in that same way.

Maybe; maybe not. Maybe moms have a lot more in common than what separates them. Consider, for example, Karen Santorum and what she has in common with other moms whose babies have trisomy 18. I don't think race or education or bank account matters when it comes to the big stuff.
 
Back
Top Bottom