« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

EDITOR OF REDSTATE

Democrats Now Say They Never Said ‘War Against Women’?

If you went to bed oblivious of the news last night, there was a mini-bruhaha over a comment Hilary Rosen, the former head of the RIAA and a DNC Advisor, made to Anderson Cooper on AC360 last night. I was on AC360 with both Hilary and Paul Begala.

Hillary said that Ann Romney, a mother of five sons who has had breast cancer and MS, had “actually never worked a day in her life.” Ann Romney made her debut on twitter to take issue with the remark. The White House and Obama campaign were quick to distance themselves and say Hilary should offer an apology.

For what it’s worth, in context Hilary was talking about the workforce and recession and I don’t think she meant to insult stay at home moms or Mrs. Romney. On Twitter, Hilary explained she was taking issue with Mitt Romney using Ann Romney as his expert on women and Ann Romney did not work both a full time job and raise the five boys concurrently.

But more than that, I actually never even heard her make the remark originally because I was still dwelling on how Hilary had started her statement. Hilary said the Democrats had actually never used the phrase “War on Women,” and that it was a Republican invention. I turned on twitter and saw all the outrage and literally said out loud, “How’d I miss that?”

Saying the Democrats had never coined the “war on women” terminology threw me for a loop.

As the other statement about Mrs. Romney was being made, I was replaying in my mind where I’d heard the “war on women” rhetoric. Turns out the Democrats started it all the way back in February of 2011 and even Debbie Wasserman Schultz, the Chair of the DNC and a congresswoman has gone all in with the rhetoric.

Hilary saying the Democrats hadn’t started it threw me for a loop because I’d played on my radio show DNC Chair and Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz on Meet the Press from March 4, 2012. From the transcript:

MR. GREGORY: Nice to have you here in studio. So let me ask you about this issue of contraception and this fight over social issues. Just as I’ve asked your–the two other guests I’ve had this morning, can you appreciate where they’re coming from, which is–this is not a war on women, which they say is a vast overstatement, or about access to contraception, but this is about religious liberty that started with the president’s new regulation about faith institutions and access and who pays for contraception.

REP. SCHULTZ: Well, if it’s not a war on women, then let’s just look at what happened this week in contraception. First, you had the Blunt-Rubio bill that was on the floor in the United States Senate that wouldn’t just deal with making sure that women couldn’t have access to contraception, it would actually say that any boss could use their own moral conviction to decide what access to health care their employees could have, making sure that women would have to have their own access to health care, whether it’s to mammograms or contraception or to amniocenteses or any other type of health care access, decided by their boss. And that was defeated in the Senate. So the Republicans actually want to go much further than just saying women shouldn’t have access to, to contraception. They want to say that bosses should be able to decide what kind of access to health care women can have.

On Political Capital with Al Hunt on April 6, 2012, there was this exchange with the Democratic Congresswoman and DNC Chair:

HUNT: You have charged that the Republicans are waging a war on women. They say that is nonsense. The gender gap issue will disappear as we get closer, at least it will erode as we get closer to the election. And that the Democrats, in fact, have a Catholic problem.

WASSERMAN-SCHULTZ: Well, it is clear in this country that the jury of women across America have ruled, that the Republicans have been unbelievably extreme and out of touch and hyper-focused on cultural issues.

I mean while we are supposed to be focusing, and should be, as President Obama has been, focused on getting the economy turned around and continuing to move us forward and create jobs, their side is obsessed with cultural issues.

Note that she does not deny using the phrase.

Likewise, there was Debbie Wasserman Schultz on CNN’s State of the Union with Candy Crowley just this past weekend pressed on whether or not there really was a “War on Women.”

“The focus of the Republican Party on turning back the clock for women really is something that’s unacceptable and shows how callous and insensitive they are towards women’s priorities,” she said. That’s not exactly a denial.

At the same time, liberal Talking Points Memo from just yesterday characterizes the “war on women” this way:

Mitt Romney has tried to turn Democrats’ claim of a “war on women” by the GOP against them this week, accusing President Obama of waging his own “war on women.” Slower job growth for female workers, Romney insists, is evidence of Obama’s war.

On just about every MSNBC show — official press organ of the Democratic Party — the hosts routinely use the phrase to characterize the GOP. For the past two weeks, it has been a consistent theme on the show. Given how MSNBC doesn’t actually read news, but DNC talking points, it’s a stretch to say the Democrats aren’t behind it.

MoveOn.org sent out a letter on February 19, 2011 (yes, that long ago) accusing the GOP of a “war on women” writing

Dear MoveOn member,

It might seem hyperbolic to say that Republicans have declared a war on women.

Sadly, it’s not.

On March 25, 2011, NARAL Pro-Choice America, EMILYs List, and MoveOn.org started a “Stop the War on Women” campaign.

The list goes on.

It is the Democratic National Committee Chairwoman, Democratic Party mouthpieces, and outside groups pushing the Democrats’ agenda that have all said the GOP is at war against women.

To now deny that the Democrats came up with the term and to say the GOP did it is not just unfair, it is factually wrong. But my guess is that this is an admission that the “war on women” approach isn’t working well for the Democrats.

In fact, we can verify that.

Just last week, Gallup released a new poll with this finding:

Eight in 10 independent women in the swing states said they were not familiar with Romney’s position on contraception, but those who were familiar disagreed with it by a 2-to-1 ratio. Independent women were more likely to have an opinion about Obama’s views on contraception (58% were unfamiliar), and were divided about evenly between saying they agree or disagree with them.

Two things stick out like a sore thumb to me on this. First, 80% of independent women in swing states have no idea what Romney’s position is on contraception despite all the Democrats’ rhetoric. Second, of those who know about Obama’s position, they are split roughly 50-50 on liking his position. That doesn’t seem like it’ll be a problem for Mitt Romney.

COMMENTS

  • Christine

    Don’t play that part off please, Erick. That was condescending and arrogant. Her tone was clear. If she “hadn’t meant to say it” she wouldn’t have gone on and on about all the things stay at home moms don’t understand.

    She is one of those “feminists” who believes stay at home moms are second class citizens. I’m NOT a SAH mom and I was incredibly offended by it.

  • http://www.political-woman.com politicalwoman

    Back in 1991, something in the vein, “well I suppose I could have stayed at home and baked cookies.” It was callous in 1991, it’s callous in 2012. When Axelrod backpedals, that equals “doozy.”

  • dajeeps

    The “War on Women” thing, at least lately, is sort of the fault of the way the debate over contraception was framed. Its rehashing was the direct result of ObamaCare that gave the government the power to dig into personal and private affairs that heretofore were off limits. It has very little to do with religious freedom, and everything to do with intrusion into the personal lives of every citizen, even those who do not need public assistance, regarding matters of health. Democrats played that hand knowing how stupid Republicans would be, having no secular aspect to their argument that would appeal to just about everybody to answer it with. I’m not saying that there is no place for religion in politics, but even those who are religious are rather pragmatic and don’t want the government sticking its nose in those places – and ObamaCare opened the door wide open for it.

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    …and it was notable that she was actually toning-down her customary stridency, throughout.

    This “gaffe” was indeed a compontent of their coordinated attack, and the R’s should muster all available resources –from Sarah to Michele–to establish a counter-beachhead.

    It starts by tying everything to the economy ["women buy gasoline, too"] and it includes both sensitivity to the jugging-act [family/occupation] and stridency to the need to ID over-the-top rhetoric.

    This should become the leading-edge of a focused effort to achieve an attitudinal-readjustment [supplanting both social issues and foreign policy as much as possible]…striking the “are you feeling better now than you did four years ago?” theme as often as possible.

    It should become manifest via communications to be emitted by GOP Congressional Candidates AND state/local political leaders…ASAP!

  • politicalqrm

    Her words said what she felt. The feminists despise SAH moms and consider them a poke in the eye to their cause.

    Erick, don’t try and give her the benefit of the doubt. Her words were part and parcel of the feminist agenda.

    To them if you don’t work outside the home, you don’t work…

  • calliegirl

    I saw the clip this morning. Honestly Eric, your excuse is quite lame. The other side will say anything. Obama’s disregard for working women has been documented at least since Anita Dunn left. Now we hear women are paid less than men in the administration.If your going to be stunned so easily stay home. It’s easy to write ,However,it’s skillful to think on your feet and react quickly. We are in the fight of our lives for the soul of this beloved country.

  • tokm908

    Sen Patty Murray
    3/20/2012 (Fast Forward to 3:15) ‘Republicans waging a war on women’
    http://cs.pn/HK9lUk

  • spinoneone

    Since 0 took office, 92+% of those loosing jobs in the U.S. were women. The “war on women” is being waged by 0 and his feminist coterie, not the GOP. Don’t give these clowns anything faintly resembling an “even break.” They deserve nothing.

  • spinoneone

    Continuing his war on women, it turns out that, on average, 0 pays his female staffers about $10,000/year less than his male staff.

    http://freebeacon.com/hostile-workplace/

  • salemst

    Erick,

    Maybe you’re too young to remember, but this is exactly the situation, climate, and rhetoric in the early 1970′s with the Women’s Liberation Movement starting out as equal pay for equal work and devolving into an angry anti male/anti stay at home mom/anti traditional family women’s self-indulgent movement. Men were “sexist paternalistic misogynist pigs.” At home moms were “barefoot/pregnant brainless parasites.” The war has never changed. These angry feminists became ensonced in the Democrat Party and traditional women into the GOP defining the parties on values.

    For all the under 45 year old readers who missed the fireworks of that 70′s war, this election will re-run the 1980 Carter versus Reagan election.

    Reagan won 51-41 on the populat vote with John Anderson winning 6%. I look for a 55-43% Romney landslide win as there are only two questions that matter,a s was the case in 1980.

    “Are you better off today than 4 years ago?” and “Is the country heading in the right or wrong direction? Today according to Gallup 20% are better off today than 4 years ago. According to Rasmussen 30% think the country’s heading in the right direction.

    These numbers make Obama unelectable in 2012.

  • 4bar40

    this is a shift to a war on Mothers. Wonder what the Avg cost of running a household is now compared to 2008. Gas, up, Milk up, Bread up, insurance costs up, electricity costs up… how much more can the household budget take?

    Z

  • edintexas

    So requiring Roman Catholic institutions to provide coverage for contraceptive and abortifacient drugs has “…very little to do with religious freedom…”? And doubling down, stating that those institutions which self insure must adhere to the “compromise” rule and provide these items free of deductible or co-pay, has “…very little to do with religious freedom…”?

    I agree that the issue is a strong intrusion into personal lives, even when many citizens welcome the intrusion. And it has absolutely nothing to do with a “…place for religion in politics,…”, government not deliberately trampling on religious beliefs is not political. It does have a lot to do with religious freedom, your personal opinion notwithstanding.

  • finishstrongdoc

    Politics is Pro Wrestling;
    The gladiators stride into the ring, shouting, “I’m gonna kick his a$$ !” and the screaming fans either cheer or boo, depending on what the announcer has fed them.. The announcer knows all the moves; it’s all choreographed. The opponents play their assigned roles, retire to the locker room,, shower and go to a bar, share a beer, and laugh about how easy it is to make money being a Pro Wrestler.

    It’s time America put away childish amusements. We have spent the moral capital of our forebears. We are broke. Resistance is Victory.

    RON PAUL 2012

  • throwback59

    “Republicans are holding the door for women.’ It was a compliment, we just misunderstood.

  • briteness

    Actually, parroting sound bytes without thought added to the mix is not all that difficult. Also, your writing style as evidenced above does not suggest that you understand what writing really involves. You think it is easy to write well?

  • beee

    Remember last Friday when Obama said at his “Women’s Forum” that Michelle did not have the “Luxury” to stay at home? ( On a side note: How DID she get that nice job at $384 K/annually..hmmm..Daley machine???? )

    Ms. Rosen’s snarky comment towards Ann Romney was coordinated and right out of the reelection playbook….class warfare and women’s issues all rolled up in one nice package!

    Everything is said for a reason…we just need to connect the dots…

  • annie54

    The McDonalds commercial about the husband who comes home and the spoiled wife smells his shirt and is accusatory, then he gives her a mint shake and she sips it like it’s a sex experience.

    Another commercial is the husband talking with his insurance agent in the middle of the night (to emphasize 24/7 service) and the wife comes downstairs and accuses him. She attacks the agent on the phone and is downright nasty.

    Neither of those women apologize to their wonderful, handsome young husbands.

    And, there are others. THAT, in my opinion is a war on women, also.

  • abeldred

    than their male counterparts are as vicious as a rabid animal. Rosen, like all feminists, despise and hold in contempt stay at home moms in particular, and Conservative women in general. She said what she said and meant it. I participated in the Twitter conversation last night, and she did not back off. As a SAH mom by choice, it’s damn hard work. Though I am college educated and was on my chosen career path, I felt that my children were my first priority. Still do. Not every woman is fortunate enough to have the means to stay home, but when the choice is available, I firmly believe it is best for the children to be there for them. I thank God that I have had the opportunity as I am sure Ann Romney and countless other women do.

    The left has no respect for traditional values, moral upbringing or family. Many feminists choose to abort their children and eliminate the need to choose career or family. It was the feminist mentality that gave us “quality time” with our kids over “quantity”. Believe me, the depth of the relationship with my sons has been as a result of both.

  • streiff

    don’t know what more to say.

  • streiff

    and I’m not sure where you get off in giving literary advice to anyone.

  • funwithknives

    {Mom was a Kindergarten teacher and I saw and heard plenty} I chose to not have kids. Parents divorced when I was 14 and early years were not pretty.

    You made your choice and I congatulate you for it. You chose the toughest job I can ever imagine. You revel in your choice and I am somewhat envious.
    I look up to people such as you, and wonder ,’what if’. But I just never felt the need and that was my warning bell.

    You lucky so-and-so……….Excelsior!!!

  • calliegirl

    I should have written writing may come easy to you Eric At least he makes it appear that way. However, he still blew the segment.I’m not a writer and I have No Excuses. Eric is a paid pundit and should have been more on his game.

  • johnt

    themselves on. Nothing.and not by accident or memorey failure.
    Can not anyone here grasp, we are dealing with psychopaths.
    Why therefore would a Normal Person be “thrown for a loop”? After years of doing politics why should this Normal Person not recognize the nature of a type of vicious dementia, more over & sadly, God help us, be surprised by it.
    There is no hope.

  • jhuster

    with another lie from Hilary Clinton.

    It brings to mind the column by William Safire that commented on her teensy little character flaw.

    That brought President Bubba before the cameras to declare that he was going to punch Safire in the mouth.

    Another Clinton lie among so many….

  • ahlondon

    Maybe the WaPo fact checker will try to cover this latest Republicans-are-right-on-the-evidence-but-we-don’t-like-that with their “rarely used label True But False”.

  • justperhaps45

    Are the feminist actually ?for? women?s interest or just jealous of the perceived leisure life? I?ve noticed that many growing family married couples choose to make sacrifices so the mother can stay home doing the critical job of raising children. Unfortunately, the feminist ideal, single moms don?t have the choice unless they choose to be parasites, on the dole.

    Never tell the child NO so they will not face rejection. Therefore; they won?t learn to handle conflict well. Therefore; they will have poor conflict resolution and cooperation skills. Hence; enduring relationships will become rare. Be surprised when single parents become the norm, duh!

    B?sticker *4 MORE & ALL CAN BE POOR*

  • Ann_W

    This was Ann Romney’s choice, and they will criticize her for it.

    Trust me, no one gets into this line of work just because they don’t want to work. There are many aspects of the job that are difficult, including the lack of respect. My kids school sent out a call for people to come in and tell about their jobs. I responded that I would tell about being a SAH mom. I was planning to talk about being on a team and dividing responsibilities, and organization and researching nutrition and other issues for my kids. They never even responded to my note, even as they continued to beg people to come in and talk about their jobs.

    My mom was a poor SAH mom, and I’ve been both poor and comfortable as a SAH mom. There is no status. Even my best growing up friend recently implied that the SAH mom’s she knows sit around and get boob jobs (we live on opposite sides of the country). It’s worth it and it’s a valid choice, but it’s massive hypocrisy to single out a woman’s choice for criticism when you supposedly want women to have choices.

  • annie54

    until my children were in Junior High School. We rarely ate out or went to movies. We always sat down at the table to eat my wonderfully-prepared meals. I continued my college education part time. My husband was a High School Basketball Coach so we went to the games and my children’s sports activities.

    Those 4 children are college graduates with multiple degrees and earning 6 figures now. I don’t regret it in the least, but a SAH Mom is rarely thanked or appreciated, so one should never expect that. It’s a personal choice that has to be done for the right reasons.

    It has always been my own personal secret of joy and accomplishment!

  • APA Guy

    And evidently, the key offender isn’t even trying to. She is standing by it…arrogantly, as usual.

    Obama can’t win with this situation. If he distances himself from it, he looks like he supports stay-at-home moms (and he doesn’t). If he embraces it, he loses a large portion of the female voting electorate in many swing states…including WI, MN, MO, NV, NC and VA.

    I should send this woman a Christmas card…she single-handedly painted Obama into a corner he can’t get out of…and she is bragging about it.

    BRAVO!

  • cacharlie

    to all who know the most worthy work in the world is the making of a successful family!

  • annie54

    The SAH moms are the ones the schools go to for cookies, etc etc. I finally had to say no. The Fellowship of Christian Athletes loved for my sons to host their meetings because of the good homemade food their mom provided!

    I took sewing lessons at Singer and even judged a contest once. I copied Jackie Kennedy’s look with suits and covered pillbox hats. . . .which could not be purchased in stores. At a sports banquet when I entered, the team whistled.

    We were really poor, but if one looks at it like a game, you can win. Through reading and creativity, alot can be accomplished with your children in the center. Of course my husband had affairs with the Home Ec teacher and the girls basketball coach, etc etc, but when my kids got into college, I divorced him.

    Oh Happy Day! Life is good.

  • azaeroprof

    I was disappointed to see Erick giving her the benefit of the doubt (perhaps CNN is rubbing off ;) ). I have no doubt that not only was it intentional, but it was orchestrated from talking points generated at 1600 Penna Ave.

    And yes, the GOP will be derelict if there is not a massive counterattack on this issue.

  • ihateliberals

    nt

  • renl57

    The problems were elsewhere:

    Rick Santorum and his intemperate statements on the alleged evils of birth control, which the Dems could easily find floating around the Internet.

    Then came those who took the Sandra Fluke bait and attacked her for her sex life instead of for the policies she was advocating.

    And with that, the Dems were able to turn the tables and reframe the issue into a defense of birth control and recreational sex.

    The piling on during the Sandra Fluke business was damaging. The problem was Fluke’s insistence that the Church had to pay for birth control for sexually active women, NOT that “Sandra Fluke is a slut.”

    Just as Hilary Rosen’s attack on Ann Romney insults all stay-at-home moms by implication, calling Ms. Fluke a slut insults all sexually active single and divorced women by implication.

    Our society has moved past the point that sexually active unmarried women are to be stigmatized. Sorry, Rick Santorum.

  • red_oakster

    Don’t worry about it.

  • renl57

    So Ms. Rosen says that Ann Romney “never worked a day in her life”?

    How does Ms. Rosen earn her pay? When she was the top lobbyist for the recording industry, she was pulling down $1 million a year to destroy Napster and oppose Internet downloading of music.

    She was being paid $1 million a year to destroy the online music industry if possible.

    I’d rather pay her $2 million a year to stay at home and take care of the kids. That’s a more positive pursuit.

  • hitthedeck

    They give the impression that aborting babies is good health care. Since when is a good healthy pregnant woman a issue of bad health. Democrats must think women are dummies to believe that contraceptives should be a prescription made to ward off the terrible disease of pregnancy.

  • Ann_W

    In the three school systems that we have been at, the volunteer orgs have been mostly run by SAH moms. Just because of time constrainst, I’m sure, but you would think that we could get some recognition that our choices are valid, too. I also bbsit for working moms occaisionally, and love to help, but now my choice isn’t valid?

    Sounds like you had fun. I can totally see you walking in with that dress. Good for you!! It is great to have time to be creative. Sorry about the hubby, though, that is the downside of being a team player, sometimes the team doesn’t come through for you. I suspect you wouldn’t change the way you raised your children, though. (Just with a different man!!) Life definitely is good, though, even with it’s trials and unpredictability.

  • AceInTX

    What kind of sense does THAT make…have they lost their ever loving minds over there?

  • uselogic

    nt

  • annie54

    repeated requests.

    I also coached the cheerleaders and designed and made the vests for the student cheer block. They looked great.

    I led a Christmas Cantata at our church consisting of children under the age of 8 and they wore red cherub choir robes with white collars and big black bows. Their parents were the shepards and wisemen who came in while they sang. I made their attire out of donated bedspreads! Really authentic looking.

    We had a huge garden and the entire family helped with the canning.

    I haven’t thought about these things for a long time. They are fond memories which involved the entire family. It really was sad about the hubby. You know, some guys just can’t be faithful but I kept it a secret until the kids were in college.

    I would encourge any mother to be a SAH Mom; however, it takes a lot of strength to nurture oneself and keep getting fed so one’s worth is recognized.

  • cbartlett

    I, too, was a SAH mom until my three kids were in Jr High and, when I did decide to re-enter the workforce, I starting in my husband’s growing engineering business to take some of the business management off his shoulders. It gave me the opportunity to have a flexible schedule to still be able to haul kids around to athletic practices, dance lessons and friends’ houses after school while they were teen-agers. I was one of the few available to help at school parties during the day and had the time to teach Bible classes and serve as Girl and Boy Scout leader, My kids learned the value of volunteering in the community with me. All three now have college degrees, good jobs, purchased homes, two have started their own businesses on the side. They are just beginning families and weighing the value of the women staying at home – not sure what they will decide. (And they all have become very conservative voters – especially since they started paying taxes!!)

    Just wanted to comment on the “luxury” (Obama’s word) of choosing to SAH with kids. I have heard many people over the years say that they would have liked to, but “just couldn’t afford” to llive on one income. I tend to think that “afford” is all relative – it’s all about priorities. We knew our first baby was on the way when we bought our first home. We were both working fresh out of college and making more money than we’d ever had before but we did not buy the big house that the salesman tried to tell us we “could afford” (he was looking at our combined income on paper). We purchased the home we knew we could afford on just his salary because it was important to both of us to have a mom at home as long as possible. We didn’t eat out and didn’t take vacations and we drove all of our cars more than 10 years. I occasionally worked some part-time jobs while kids were in pre-school making minimum wage doing things like stocking greeting cards at a grocery store and substitute teaching at the church pre-school. None of these jobs came close to making us as well-off as a job using my college degree would have, but it bought milk and bread back in the days when you couldn’t use a charge card at a grocery store.

    I’m sure this economy is limiting choices for some – having house payments requiring two salaries, losing one or both of them and not being able to sell the house or spouses with health issues or any number of other situations would require familes to have a mom in the workforce. I have lots of friends that raised terrific kids while they developed a career. I just resent it when people who are obviously choosing to live in very large, nice homes, constantly drive new cars, can’t imagine having a year go by without a “vacation”, etc. tell me they just can’t “afford” to live on one salary. It’s all about priorities.

  • naysayer

    … if it busts them out of the corner they painted themselves into.

    But no, it makes no sense.

  • garfieldjl

    I don’t think even their supporters are dumb enough to fall that song and dance that they are now trying to pull.

  • dajeeps

    I guess I didn’t make my point all that clear. It’s what wasn’t said that’s the problem and got us stuck in a trap. No, I don’t think the government should be mandating to the Catholic Church, or any other organization for that matter. But what does it say when the idea that is America is all about the individual and its relationship with government as a most basic premise and we leave out the usurpation of authority to mandate anything to anyone at anytime, for any reason or no reason at all? And what about doing the smart thing by sticking up for that ideal, something so personal to ever voter because the debate was about contraception for the moment; there’s no telling what’s coming next.

    It would have been so easy to turn the argument around on Democrat usurpers by saying something like, “Look, they said they were taking over the health insurance industry to help the needy and to control costs, but look what they’re doing with it. A government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take it all away – and is now raising the awareness that it is now a distinct possibility regarding all matters of health and wellness.”

    Instead we ended up mired in arguments about legislating morality and other such nonsense. Yes, that was the nonsense on stilts.

  • annie54

    are usually camping trips . . . . . . with a borrowed camper.

  • dajeeps

    My husband’s aunt is a really nice lady, but she’s a big lib. While this contraception debate was going on, she was passing around “War on Women” propaganda on social media. In at least one of them, it decried that a panel of all male politicians will be deciding the availability of contraception for all women.

    Naturally, my response was something to the effect of, ‘Yeah, this is what ObamaCare has done for you.” You see, these people have no clue what we all lost, and no one is telling them, except for me, a very little fish in a huge ocean full of whales.

    ObamaCare is the tragedy of our generation because it gives government the power over ALL health choices based on what’s good for politics, when the vast majority of us were doing just fine making our own choices. Of course, it’s also a tragedy that the golden opportunity to point it out and bash Obama and his Democrats about the head and shoulders with it all the way to November, and have it hang like and albatross around their necks for a decade or more, got turned into the same petty moral BS that that flies around on a regular basis.

  • cbartlett

    But since the kids left home, we have moved up to a 28 ft travel trailer with electricity, running water and a Sleep Number bed – ha!