Letters to the Editor

Your views in 200 words or less

PARKER: Commentator mocks those with traditional values

Letter by Gene Harvey, Puyallup on April 16, 2012 at 11:48 am with 69 Comments »
April 16, 2012 11:48 am

Re: “An issue full of smoke and noise – but not much actual fire” (Kathleen Parker column, 4-14).

Parker demonstrates her deep misunderstanding of the convictions held dear by many American, particularly followers of traditional religious values. Parker, who allegedly is a conservative, is as likely a candidate as Maureen Dowd to seriously reflect this perspective.

Conservatives, many of whom are actively religious, are understandably upset about left-brain-dominant intellectuals like Parker who minimize the effects the administration’s policies have on their religious expression. These commentators, rather than discussing the merits of issues, choose instead to make light of opposing views and mock those who entertain alternative positions.

Parker’s column reeks with self-inflation, as she perceives herself omnisciently rising above these juveniles “who take tiny utterances and inflate them into phony distractions.”

What Parker doesn’t seem to grasp is these so-called minor distractions are connected to our president’s persistent class warfare diatribes pitting interest groups against each other rather than in cooperatively searching for possible resolutions to problems that divide them.

Leave a comment Comments → 69
  1. As I wrote in response to the Parker column:

    Stupid – Rosen
    Stupid – any GOPers who claim that this is meaningful, especially after the Dems immediately distanced themselves from Rosen and Rosen apologized.

  2. BlaineCGarver says:

    Stupid – bB

    You can bet that the “apology” was planned out. “Stuff” need not stick to the wall to have a cumulative effect, and you should know that.

  3. concernedtacoma7 says:

    Now that the apology has happened the left will open the floodgates.

    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0412/75126.html

  4. Of course the GOP will drop the subject and not run ads about how great a mom Mrs. Romney was by staying home to raise her 5 sons on Mitts meager income.

  5. Apology notwithstanding, bBoy, Rosen’s comments reflect a moment of candor and thus reflect something very real that is felt among many who view traditional choices as either undesirable or somehow less challenging than more progressive ones.

    She let slip what is felt and thought by thousands of women, and perhaps you need to be a woman to know how pervasive this is. The brains of many, male and female alike have been thoroughly scrubbed of any respect for the career of mother/home-maker.

    In an ironic sense, this is amusing given the illusional “war on women” the left is attempting to conjure up.

  6. The war on women is being fought on many fronts. Rosen stood alone, isolated in a midst of criticism from the left and the right for what she said. A woman should have all opportunities open to her, including staying at home or working for equal pay in any job she is qualified for.

    No one is proposing any legislation to keep women from staying at home, so manufactured outrage about that issue is just that, manufactured. Unfortunately, equal pay and equal rights have been attacked and shot down by conservatives and choices about health care are being shot down by conservatives, so those issues are real.

    There is a huge difference, but the smoke blowing from conservatives is only blinding the eyes of conservatives. Independent women and progressive women know that conservatives would love to put their idea of the Biblical idea of women bowing to their masters, the men, into play in society at large, especially in the workl world, as well as the private family.

  7. No one is proposing any legislation to keep women from getting contraceptives, so manufactured outrage about that issue is just that.

    So is your bs about men wanting woment to bow to their masters.

  8. aislander says:

    tuddo writes: “Independent women and progressive women know that conservatives would love to put their idea of the Biblical idea of women bowing to their masters, the men, into play in society at large, especially in the workl world, as well as the private family.”

    THAT is a howler of a straw-man argument, tuds.

    And I’m missin’ you on that other thread. I’m waiting for your justification of the kleptocratic system of government that has somehow superseded our Constitution…

  9. Knowing that their likely nominee is inherently flawed, the anti-Obama folks grasp at any straw.

  10. Velmac has his cart before the horse again. The Rpots are attempting to block legislation that would require health insurance plans with drug coverages to provide contraceptives under the same rules as the plans provide all other drugs.

    Aslinder – All fundamental religions have one thing in common – Men rule, women serve.

    The name of kleptocratic system that you are looking for is Free Market Capitalism (aka laissez-faire faire or robber baron capitalism).

  11. aislander says:

    We are SO far from a laissez-faire, free-market economy, and have been for so long, xring, that your comment makes no sense whatsoever.

    And re the fundamentalist thing, I think you are replying to something I posted on a different thread. Check over there for a reply…

  12. Blocking legislation isn’t the same as passing legislation.

    Consstitutional legislation isn’t the same as unconstitutional legislation.

    What horse? What cart?

  13. Vox_clamantis_in_deserto says:

    The war on women is being fought on many fronts.

    “Apparently” tuddo didn’t get the memo – talking points memo, that is. Democrats have surrendered in the phony “war on women”… to themselves:

    http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2012/04/hilary_rosen_ann_romney_the_birth_adolescence_and_death_of_the_democrats_war_on_women_talking_point_.single.html#pagebreak_anchor_2

    I think the newest old deflection up next is the clever “fair share/ tax the rich” meme.

    Next week, who knows.

  14. Pacman33 says:

    “The war on women is being fought on many fronts.”

    Nope. Only the imaginations of the naive and duped.

    And of coarse the ‘dupers’, who hope their manipulation will distract attention from legitimate issues in the real world.

  15. Sure, Vox, I’m really going to believe an attack on Democrats by a far-right libertarian who upset conservatives because he named names of those who he did not think were hitting Obama hard enough.

    According to him, the war on women is a campaign statement by the Republicans based on unamed sources leaking unsubstantiated rumors.

    “On Thursday, the Republican National Committee issued a nine-page memo on Obama’s war against women, citing such evidence as “an unnamed high-ranking female official” who believed “Obama ‘has a real woman problem”

    I guess Republicans would think Obama has a “woman problem” when polls show a 60% Obama to 30% Romney difference among women under 50.

    http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/04/poll-women-voters-abandon-gop-in-key-battleground-states.php?ref=fpnewsfeed

  16. LornaDoone says:

    It’s unfortunate that only people like Mrs Romney can afford to live “traditional” lives. The rest of women have to work outside the home to make ends meet.

    “No one is proposing any legislation to keep women from getting contraceptives”

    Absolutely incorrect. There is legislation in certain states that would make contraceptives equal to abortion, which they are outlawing as part of the legislation. Someones is either in denial or not paying attention to current events.

  17. LornaDoone says:

    “Of course the GOP will drop the subject and not run ads about how great a mom Mrs. Romney was by staying home to raise her 5 sons on Mitts meager income.”

    I’m certainly glad she had domestic help. Who could have raised 5 kids without a nanny and housekeeper? Oh, sorry, Mom. I forgot.

  18. BlaineCGarver says:

    LD is still playing the Class Warfare card, and stressing the completely imaginary “war on women”. (pssssst, it ain’t so just because ‘Crats say it’s so, Honey)

  19. Vox_clamantis_in_deserto says:

    Sure, Vox, I’m really going to believe an attack on Democrats by a far-right libertarian who upset conservatives because he named names of those who he did not think were hitting Obama hard enough.

    Uhmm… you’re joking… right? As usual, tud, you missed wiiiiiiiiide left.

    David Weigel was caught in the infamous listserv “Journolist” scandal, whereby he repeated his disdain for conservatives – even though he had just been hired by the Washington Post as their “conservative” blogger (just goes to show how “unbiased” they are), opposite Ezra Klein who, coincidentally, I’m sure started Journolist. It had absolutely nothing to do with 0bama… well, if you don’t count the fact that Weigel admits he voted for 0bama… and Kerry. He also stated publicly his regret for having listened to Michael Moore and voted for Nader in 2000 instead of Gore.

    Comments on the listserv like hoping Drudge would set himself on fire, that Limbaugh would die, that Republicans were racists, and referring to Ron Paul supporters as “Paultards”, etc, caused the WAPo’s Executive Editor Marcus Brauchli to say “we can’t have any tolerance for the perception that people are conflicted or bring a bias to their work… ”

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/25/AR2010062504413.html

    And speaking of Ron Paul, Weigel registered as a republican in 2007 so that he could vote for Paul in the primaries… and then voted for 0bama in the general election. This is what passes for a “far right libertarian” in tud’s book, and a “conservative blogger” in the WAPo’s.

    wiki lists him as a contributor to Slate, The Guardian, The American Prospect, The American Spectator, The Washington Monthly, The American Conservative, Politico, and The Nation. He has appeared on NPR’s Fresh Air and MSNBC’s The Rachel Maddow Show.[26] Weigel has also blogged for The Economist’s “Democracy in America” blog, and guest-blogged for Andrew Sullivan’s “Daily Dish” blog.[27]

    Hardly conservative credentials, tud.

  20. Vox, who am I to question what he says about himself and what conservatives say about him. He says he is a conservative and a libertarian. The American Conservative says he is a conservative. If you don’t think he is a conservative, then speak to them about their labels, not me.

    His columns and opinions follow a conservative line, not the ultra far-right that the base of the Republican Party has turned into, but conservative nonetheless, so he has become a CINO, I guess, at least according to you.

  21. “Independent women and progressive women know that conservatives would love to put their idea of the Biblical idea of women bowing to their masters, the men, into play in society at large, especially in the workl world, as well as the private family.”

    Tuddo, this is pure, undiluted toxic waste originating perhaps from your personal history with certain religous people. Wherever it came from,it’s utter nonsense The myriad of conservative women in the workplace, holding their own against pseudointellectuals such as Rosen is evidence enough of the absurdity of your remark.

    Now, when you wrote this, you spoke the truth: “A woman should have all opportunities open to her, including staying at home or working for equal pay in any job she is qualified for.” BUT, you miss the point which is that Rosen accidentally disclosed what many progressives think and feel…that women who work outside the home are superior to those who do not.

    And Lorna, thousands of women choose to make home their career workplace without benefit of hired help. You’ve divulged a petty, parrot-like side in your remarks. Again.

  22. Vox_clamantis_in_deserto says:

    Tud, this is a really old story of an attempt by the WAPo to plant a wolf in sheep’s clothing – for which they were fully outed with the Journolist scandal. I don’t need to see what an individual whose voted in exactly three presidential elections, for the three candidates I listed above (Nader, Kerry, and 0bama) conveniently calls himself – his voting record says it all. But Newsbusters puts it better (regarding the WAPo farce):

    “It seems that the Washington Post has little interest in an objective blog-based approach to the news — something this humble blogger has noted previously,” wrote Newsbusters’ Lachlan Markay on Friday morning. “Likewise, Weigel seems to have little interest in covering the right with an even hand; he has consistently shown his disdain for the movement and its members.”

    Outside of his liberal voting record, I think the biggest tell was his registering as a Republican so he could vote for Paul in the NY primary.

    Guy’s a lib who’s tried masquerading as a conservative, only to have it all blow up in his face two years ago with the Journalist flap. Please try to stay up to date.

    But I’ll give him his props for the Politco article. (Another flaming conservative rag, ‘eh tud?) His timeline pretty much lays to waste the new Dem TP that the term “war on women” originated with Republicans. And, of course, he’s right – the phony war is over and the Dems have been completely exposed.

  23. sozo, please list a few of the “many” progressives who joined in with Rosen on her remarks or who have said that women who work are “superior” to those who stay at home. Even Rosen didn’t say that.

    I agree with Rosen that Romney has little credibility when it comes to opinions on the struggles of women who do work and have children. I know how tough 5 boys can be, but with the nannies and housekeepers she had, it pales in comparison with many working women’s labors.

    My family was lucky, like Romney’s, and my wife at least had a choice. Most women do not. They have to work.

    Speaking of Romney, now there is a conservative candidate who does epitomize what you think is the “Progressive” view on women and work. Here is what he said about the subject caught on videotape in 1994:

    “Even if you have a child 2 years of age, you need to go to work,” Mitt Romney said in a campaign stop in Manchester, N.H., in January. “And people said, ‘Well that’s heartless.’ And I said, ‘No, no, I’m willing to spend more giving day care to allow those parents to go back to work. It’ll cost the state more providing that day care, but I want the individuals to have the dignity of work.’ ”

    I wonder if he’ll apologize for that remark as graciously as Rosen did for her’s.

  24. Frankenchrist says:

    Persons of faith deserve to be mocked and humiliated. Anyone who vocally believes in an invisible superhero who lives in the sky has opened themselves up to all sorts of humorous japes, just like people who claim to have been taken aboard flying saucers and probed by little grey men. That is especially true with Mormons, since they practice all kinds of crazy stuff. Sorry, but that’s just the way it is. Grow some skin and deal with it.

  25. Remember that it was Gingrich and Santorum that started the whole class envy attack on Mitt.

    This harumphing about Rosen is just another desperate attempt to turn back the huge gender gap Romney has with Obama.

    I loved it when Mitt said that women are worried about the economy because their children need to get jobs….and the women too! He is so clueless.

  26. The GOPers are going for Mitt “Romneycare and assault weapons ban” all the while they are proclaiming the importance of the Teapeople and “real consdervatives”. The other candidates clamored for him to release his taxes.

    Have we slipped into some sort of alternate universe?

  27. Vox_clamantis_in_deserto says:

    I agree with Rosen that Romney has little credibility when it comes to opinions on the struggles of women who do work and have children.

    But you are qualified because you are (1) a woman (2) who works full time away from home, and (3) have children? Ridiculous.

    I know how tough 5 boys can be, but with the nannies and housekeepers she had, it pales in comparison with many working women’s labors.

    LMAO, yeah, I was reading a well-known liberal blog the other day where the topic of discussion was that Ann Romney “had 5 nannies in 2010″! Well… maybe since the Romney’s youngest is now 31 years old, she needed a few nannies to help her with all the grandchildren.

    The fact is the Romney’s never had nannies or house help, according to son Ben:

    “Growing up, we never had a nanny or a ‘mommy’s helper.’ Never went to daycare,” Ben wrote.

    http://www.politicker.com/2012/04/13/mitt-romneys-son-defends-his-stay-at-home-mom/

    Congrats, tuddo, your record of outstanding accuracy remains intact.

  28. Vox_clamantis_in_deserto says:

    And I see you’re parroting the hack job msnbc did on the Romney quote. Let’s have a look at THE FULL QUOTE:

    “While I was [Massachusetts] governor, 85 percent of the people on a form of welfare assistance in my state had no work requirement. And I wanted to increase the work requirement. I said, for instance, that even if you have a child 2 years of age, you need to go to work. And people said, well that’s heartless. And I said no, no, I’m willing to spend more giving day care to allow those parents to go back to work. It will cost the state more, providing that day care. But I want the individuals to have the dignity of work.”

    Imagine that… a complete change with context!!! But tuddo feels Romeny needs to “apologize” for making a statement that an overwhelming majority of Americans would agree with because… Hillary Rosen attacked his wife for something an overwhelming majority of Americans would disagree with. Guess where that puts you (assuming you really didn’t take the time to check out the full text of the Romney speach you cited).

    I wonder if tuddo will apologize for posting such a cherry-picked, out-of-context fabrication?

    Please, tuddo, we know how desperate you are, but the 7:15 post is nothing but a bunch of DNC / msnbc talking points – pure bull crap. Not your best effort.

  29. Vox_clamantis_in_deserto says:

    Remember that it was Gingrich and Santorum that started the whole class envy attack on Mitt.

    And Hillary Clinton who birthed the “birther” movement.

    But please, bB, examples on how they “started the while class envy attack”.

    Barrack Hussein 0bama and I got a good laugh outta’ that one.

  30. Vox_clamantis_in_deserto says:

    The GOPers are going for Mitt “Romneycare and assault weapons ban” all the while they are proclaiming the importance of the Teapeople and “real consdervatives”. The other candidates clamored for him to release his taxes.

    The straw man wonders if you’ve been reading too much Nostradamus.

  31. What is straw vox? Romneycare never happened? Gingrich didn’t call on Romney to release his taxes – repeatedly? Romney didn’t sign the nation’s first ban on assault weapons?

    Your strawman is made of vapour.

  32. Of course – it is Romney himself who first brought up his wife and wealth:

    “[My wife] drives a couple of Cadillacs.” –Mitt Romney, campaigning for president in Michigan (February 2012)

  33. vox – you really don’t remember this?

    And that’s the context for Winning the Future PAC’s anti-Bain campaign, given some on-again off-again amplification by Gingrich. Most conservative talkers are united in attacking Gingrich—criticizing Bain Capital as a “vulture fund” is anti-capitalism! The Washington Post and Huffington Post quickly located “a Republican donor” and “a Republican source,” both “close to” Gingrich donor Sheldon Adelson, pronouncing the Bain attacks embarrassing and un-Republican. Americans for Prosperity, the best-funded of the Tea Party groups thanks to wealthy donors like David Koch and Art Pope, condemned Gingrich’s “anti-free market, class envy politics.”
    http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2012/01/mitt_romney_south_carolina_can_romney_s_opponents_capitalize_on_his_weakness_with_blue_collar_voters_.html

  34. “sozo, please list a few of the “many” progressives who joined in with Rosen on her remarks”

    Read carefully, tuddo. I said she made a slip. These so-called progressives are usually pretty savvy politically; they are not going to say outright anything that might lose a vote for their team. But every once in awhile one of them slips, as Rosen did, and the truth is out. As I said, “a moment of candor.”

    As for all of you who find it deplorable that the Romneys have wealth, where is your outrage over the fact that Al Gore lives like a prince while urging the lowly to conserve water and electricity.

    And tell me again how many aides and assitants does Michelle need to help her with two little girls when she travels?

    This is all a bunch of nonsense.

  35. Frankenchrist says:

    Romney is a man of the people; he has an elevator in his garage and seems to think the rest of us do, too.

    The Swiftboating of Mittens is going to be a beautiful thing to behold.

  36. sozo, very simple. I asked you to justify your remark:

    “Rosen accidentally disclosed what many progressives think and feel…that women who work outside the home are superior to those who do not”.

    If you can’t justify it and think it was in error, why don’t you graciously apologize like Rosen did for her statement?

    And, is Al Gore running for president again that we should be so concerned about his possible hypocrisy? I hadn’t heard.

    I haven’t seen anyone on this thread say a word about Romney’s wealth, except to say his wife had a choice that many others do not have. Bully for them.

    Romney would not allow those receiving welfare the choice to stay at home and take care of their kids because he thinks the dignity of going to work is more important than the “dignity” of being a stay-at-home mom. At least it is if you are poor in his eyes.

    He is even willing to pay more of the taxpayers’s money for child care while forcing a mother to work than the cost of the welfare payments, so it isn’t a fiscal conservative thing, either. So who doesn’t value a stay-at-home mom, again, and thinks a working mom is “superior”?

  37. As for all of you who find it deplorable that the Romneys have wealth

    What I find is deplorable is Romney’s recurring “slips” that demonstrate that he really has no connection to the bottom 99% – not his wealth.

  38. “Rosen accidentally disclosed what many progressives think and feel…that women who work outside the home are superior to those who do not”.

    Your perception reveals your chip on your shoulder that you think you are being judged for choosing the life you chose, not what “many progressives think and feel”.

    Perhaps what you are being judged upon isn’t your embrace of fundamentalist Christian values but your consistently judgmental expressions of others who haven’t made the same choice as you.

  39. Well, scratch my paragraph about no one talking about Romney’s wealth. While I was writing, Frankenchrist had to chime in about elevators, too bad.

    I agree that Romney is out of touch with the struggles of the middle class due to decades of conservative fiscal policies, and perhaps his wealth has something to do with it, but I think it is more that he is trying so hard to cater to the far right that he has sealed off the “real” part of his brain and personality.

  40. LornaDoone says:

    “And Lorna, thousands of women choose to make home their career workplace without benefit of hired help.”

    Thousands???? Oh my!

    How many millions work outside the home because the cost of living today prevents stay at home mothers?

    The real point of the comment by A WOMAN, was that Ann Romney is no more reflective of the average woman and the challenges that the average woman goes through on a daily basis, than her husband is reflective of a guy that worked his way through college. For the Republicans to grasp at that straw just highlighted how little they are in touch with middle class America.

    I’m more than happy to debate the subject in detail, sozo. Bring it.

  41. LornaDoone says:

    “Rosen accidentally disclosed what many progressives think and feel…that women who work outside the home are superior to those who do not”.

    No, Rosen’s comment disclosed that she feels that Ann Romney is as much a pulse of American working women as Michael Jordan is the pulse of the African American community(my analogy). If Mitt’s source for the needs of American women is his wife (remember HE said it), then I’d suggest he reach in his pocket, find some chump change and hired a middle class woman to consult during his campaign.

  42. LornaDoone says:

    “And tell me again how many aides and assitants does Michelle need to help her with two little girls when she travels?”

    The same number as Laura Bush. Barbara Bush’s entourage didn’t have to take care of little boys, or am I wrong in my assumption?

  43. Sozo – no conjuring needed. The right does a excellent job of publicizing their war on women and many other things.

    Aislander – it makes no sense because you are blinded by the right. Free Market Capitalism means no government interference or regulation which is what the GOP and Neocons want.

    Re the fundamentalist thing – try re reading you 2_53 pm post above on this thread.

    Velmak – see your 2:50 pm post above.

    Pac – ‘naïve and duped’ such a good description of the right wing zombie base.

    LornaD – my in-laws both worked and raised four daughters and a son in a house with a single bathroom.

    PS I hear there are plans to change the GOP heffalump emblem to an ostrich.

    Frankenchrist – no need to swiftboat Mittens – we just have to tell the truth about him.

  44. “The brains of many, male and female alike have been thoroughly scrubbed of any respect for the career of mother/home-maker.”

    I have to wonder soso if you think any conservative brains have been scrubbed?

  45. “you miss the point which is that Rosen accidentally disclosed what many progressives think and feel…that women who work outside the home are superior to those who do not.”

    I would have to say this is,pure, undiluted toxic waste originating perhaps from your personal history with certain thinking progressives. Wherever it came from,it’s utter nonsense.

  46. Vox_clamantis_in_deserto says:

    The same number as Laura Bush. Barbara Bush’s entourage didn’t have to take care of little boys, or am I wrong in my assumption?

    Assumption? Flat-out disinformation, and that’s being generous.

    Average First Lady staff 1992 – 2008 = 17 (Laura Bush had a minimum 16 and a maximum 18 – Hillary had a minimum of 13 and a maximum of 19).

    The party-girl-in-chief had 24 as of July, 2009 (no current figures readily available, but we hear constantly how she has added staff) – that would be about a 42% increase over the average, and a 33% increase over Laura Bush’s 1-year high point.

    http://www.factcheck.org/2009/08/michelle-obamas-staff/

    And gramma Robinson takes care of the girls, so what’s Michey’s excuse?

  47. concernedtacoma7 says:

    Who gives a crap if she drives a cadillac? Lets face it, owning a car is not a big deal for most Americans. The brand she drives changes her quality of life very little.

    And he rich. So what? You little people are jealous and petty.

    I want a man who has proven himself as President. Someone who has led. No show senator, community organizer, guest speaker at a law school, those did not cut it. The left got suckered, and we are all paying the price.

    As Leno said, even Obama is doing worse under Obama (but not slowing down his rec schedule).

  48. In 1994 Ann Romney wrote about those early student years when she and Mitt “struggled”:

    They were not easy years. [...]

    We were happy, studying hard. Neither one of us had a job, because Mitt had enough of an investment from stock that we could sell off a little at a time.

    The stock came from Mitt’s father. When he took over American Motors, the stock was worth nothing. But he invested Mitt’s birthday money year to year — it wasn’t much, a few thousand, but he put it into American Motors because he believed in himself. Five years later, stock that had been $6 a share was $96 and Mitt cashed it so we could live and pay for education.

    Remind me of how Mitt didn’t get anything from his father and “worked hard” to make his money….

  49. By Ann’s own account, the stock amounted to “a few thousand” dollars when bought, but it had gone up by a factor of sixteen. So let’s conservatively say that they got through five years as students—neither one of them working—only by “chipping away at” assets of $60,000 in 1969 dollars (about $377,000 today).

  50. Vox_clamantis_in_deserto says:

    beerBs, at least we know who paid for Romney’s education – he’s been completely candid about it.

    Now maybe you could tell us who paid for 0bama’s at:

    Punahou?
    Occidental College?
    Columbia?

    And finally, but most importantly, Harvard?

    Never mind that his thesis from Columbia and transcripts in general all seen to curiously and conveniently missing. And ignoring the fact that an obvious narcissist with an ego as outsized as his would somehow prefer to hide the proof positive that he’s the smartest man who ever lived, I’d just like to now who the hell paid his way, and how the heck he even got into Harvard – “even though Obama’s Columbia grades fall below the Harvard norm, likely even below the affirmative action-adjusted black norm at Harvard”.

    Tough to make the claim that Romney’s beholden to American Motors, bB, but keep trying.

    0bama on the other hand…

  51. Vox_clamantis_in_deserto says:
  52. “Your perception reveals your chip on your shoulder that you think you are being judged for choosing the life you chose, not what “many progressives think and feel”.
    Perhaps what you are being judged upon isn’t your embrace of fundamentalist Christian values but your consistently judgmental expressions of others who haven’t made the same choice as you.”

    You are being presumptuous again, bBoy. I was worked outside the home, and I’ve never personally felt judged one way or the other. Further, I have no investment in folks making the same choices I’ve made…

    I just happen to believe in “real” freedom for women, you know, the kind that honors and respects the woman who remains on the homefront as much as the woman who works in the marketplace.

    Those of you who refuse to see the bias towards women who choose homemaking as a career just don’t want to see it.

  53. sozo, any evidence to share yet for your hypothesis that many progressives think working women are superior to stay at home wives?, like Romney’s view that I quoted?”

  54. As I suggested earlier, tuddo, those with eyes and ears see and hear what’s going on all around us. Facts can be googled, but truth is another matter. (Although I’m sure one could find a number of evidentiary articles and anectodes to make my case if they were so inclined. I am not. I have work to do.) If you choose to join the little monkeys on that branch who can’t see, hear or speak, it is your option to do so.

  55. sozo – you are doing battle with a version of feminism that was in vogue about 40 years ago. These days….not relevant.

  56. Is that so bBoy? Were you a woman, I might lend a bit of credibility to this remark, but under the circumstances I have to say you are in the dark. Trust me, the snide tone, far more than the actual words she spoke, reveal what Rosen thinks, and trust me, she represents the lion’s share of current-day feminists, both male and female. Don’t want to buy what I’m sellin’ … it’s okay by me. Buy what they’re sellin’ instead.

  57. sozo – the fact that you’re a woman doesn’t give you a special insight into all of womenhood.

    As an observer of culture – and a voracious reader of academic writing in a number of areas including contemporary feminist critique, as well as someone who listens to what a number of intelligent women have shared with me, I don’t buy what you are selling as anything more than your personal view.

  58. sozo, sadly, I see your brand of argument in the ranks of conservatives far too often:

    “The “truth” is what I believe, no matter what the facts are, because I believe it to be true. Since you do not believe what I believe on faith alone, then you are absolutely wrong and anything you say has no truth, even if you do present evidence and facts. And, by the way, I will call you names, like “monkey” if you disagree with me.”

    Fox, among others, has made a huge amount of cash from people buying into that brand of Know-nothing conservatism, and republicans currently are well-stocked with that nonsensical thinking. If anything will be the downfall of America, this line of thought will lead the way.

  59. sozo, how about we call what you are selling as “making up things that have no factual basis”, in other words, lying.

  60. Vox_clamantis_in_deserto says:

    sozo – the fact that you’re a woman doesn’t give you a special insight into all of womenhood.

    Hillary Rosen and I got a reeeealy good laugh outta’ that one.

  61. Is Rosen one of your bffs? Is she on speed dial, FaceBook or did you just commune with her telepathically? If so, I’m kinda surprised you misspelled her first name.

    More to the point – did she ever claim that she was speaking for all of womenhood? Was this before or after the Dems ostracized her and she made her apology?

    Are the GOPers really so desperate that they have to make stupid comments about a stupid Lobbyist (not a Dem staffer) making a stupid comment?

  62. aislander says:

    tuddo: Have you never heard of William James’ “will to believe” and the philosophy of pragmatism? Both are historical influences on the left-wing intellectuals.

    sozo is right. To libs, truth is what people believe to be true and it is what achieves a desired end…

  63. aislander says:

    Meant to write: Both are historical influences on left-wing intellectuals.

  64. beerBoy – not only is sozo’s version of feminism out dated, many men and women rejected it because it did not accord stay-at-home moms the same honor and respect as career women.

    (Inside joke – we used to refer to career women as working girls)

    PS: I am 67 so I lived through the early feminist movement.

    Sozo – Sight is weak; Perception is strong. All with eyes and ears may see what is about them but not everyone will be able to perceive what is really happening. This must be studied, thought about, and practiced.

    A little 5-ringish but just as valid today as when it was original written.

    Aislander – to a conservative truth is what they are told to believe and is to accepted without doubt or question.

    Do not mistake the TRUTH with BELIEF.

  65. aislander, a lot of philosophers had influence on intellectuals and non-intellectuals. If you find a liberal intellectual who equates a “belief” with “truth”, then call them out on that. Usually, that is the realm of conservatives like sozo who thinks that truth has nothing to do with factual evidence.

    I agree with James’ statement that we should continually search for the truth through emperical means while holding on to useful beliefs that affect us as individuals and as a society positively, even if they cannot yet be proven emperically.

    That is one reason why I think many religious beliefs are positive while I also think that religion is not absolutely necessary for a moral life. The religious beliefs that aren’t useful like God’s command to stone women for divorcing their husbands, have been discarded, and we need to discard other ones, like being against gay marriage, because that is more harmful than helpful.

    I also agree with James that belief is a choice, and a statement that is “true” is only derived through emperical means. Otherwise it is a belief or a hypothesis. Both beliefs and truths are helpful and necessary in living our lives.

  66. I didn’t call you a monkey, tuddo, I said you are free to join the little monkeys who see, hear and speak no evil. Didn’t know you were so sensitive AND I thought you could read what’s actually in front of you rather than through a distorted lens.

    Of course I think I’m right about things, tuddo. So do you. duh And please tell me what I “made up.” I am telling folks what I’ve observed, as a woman(and uh, bBoy, sorry but it DOES give me more credibility than you though I realize you think book-learnin’ is the ulitimate in erudition). The point is this tuddo, I’m telling you what I think, and for that, the only reference I need is my self.

  67. you think book-learnin’ is the ulitimate in erudition

    Adding anti-intellectualism to your claim that, as a woman you can speak for all woman doesn’t add any more gravitas to your claim.

    And….yes….when discussing the current state of feminism it is appropriate to consider the tone of current literature.

    You, like many conservatives, continue to harbor huge grudges over the perceived sleights you endured during the 60s (really the 60-70s). Life has moved on and yet you still tilt at windmills you imagined 40 years ago.

  68. sozo,

    By saying that the “truth” for you is “telling you what I think, and for that, the only reference I need is my self”, then my remark stands about how some people confuse the “truth” with beliefs that have no evidence or support.

    Since you think Rosen said that working women are superior, and since you castigated me for ignoring that part of her statement, could you at least share where she said that, since I missed the “truth” of that, or would you admit it is your personal belief through mind reading that it is what she meant to say but didn’t actually say it.

    I am always willing to say I am in error or that I missed something, but I have to have help sometimes. I do not follow gurus who say “I possess the truth, but you will just have to trust me that it is the truth.”

    I have not seen progressive women say that working women are superior. In fact, I have only seen the opposite. Even the “radical feminist” Gloria Steinem states in this interview that a woman can be a feminist and women need to do what they are uniquely capable of doing, including staying at home and raising kids. She says that it is an individual choice. She in no way implies that women who work outside the home are superior. They are equal in value.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/14/can-a-stay-at-home-mom-be_n_1080207.html

    It is this kind of evidence that helps me form what I think is “the truth” of things. When you say in a discussion the exact opposite of what I think is “the truth”, then I would like to see how you arrived at that.

    I am not a little monkey on that tree, or even joining the monkeys on the tree. I am using what I can see and hear in reality, not in my made up fantasy world. All I can conclude when you make such a statement without any evidence is that you made it up.

    If you want us to be persuaded that “the truth according to sozo”, is actually the truth, or even has value, then, with me at least, you will have to give me more than saying it is the truth because I can see and hear and you cannot.

  69. This is what Rosen actually said:

    “His wife has actually never worked a day in her life. She’s never really dealt with the kinds of economic issues that a majority of women in this country are facing, in terms of ‘How do we feed our kids? How do we send them to school? And why we worry about their future?'”

    What sozo – and all the other GOPapologists – are purporting that she said isn’t there. Clearly anybody who has had enough “book learning” to be able to read with any sort of comprehension can see that she did not make a statement about Ann Romney being somehow inferior due to the fact that she stayed home and raised her kids, rather, she was making a statement about the fact that the Romneys, as 1 Percenters, have not had to deal with financial stress.

    Anyone who doesn’t get that is being intentionally obtuse in order to try to score some points against the “war on women” that is clearly hurting Mitt in the polls. And, sozo, as you know – intention is as important as action when it comes to sin – those who are intentionally being obtuse in order to reinterpret the intent and meaning of the statement are breaking the 9th Commandment because you are bearing false witness……either that or you aren’t nearly as smart as I give you credit for.

*
We welcome comments. Please keep them civil, short and to the point. ALL CAPS, spam, obscene, profane, abusive and off topic comments will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be blocked. Thanks for taking part and abiding by these simple rules.

JavaScript is required to post comments.

Follow the comments on this post with RSS 2.0