The past few hours have seen an astounding assault on Ann Romney, a woman who has given birth to 5 sons (to family acknoweldgement), raised six and all while battling Multiple Sclerosis and cancer. This verbal assault, carried out by DNC board member and second-in-command to Debbie Wasserman, Hillary Rosen, stated that Mrs. Romney was basically inadequate because she chose to stay out of the workplace.
So what does Ms. Rosen base this on? Does she base it on her own experience raising children? Hardly. Does she base it on what it's like to put her own needs and wishes aside so her children can have what they need? Nope.
Ms. Rosen isn't even a mother.
If she were, or if she even remembered her own mother, she would not be saying something like this.
I don't have much experience with other mothers, not nearly as much as with my own, and this lady was one of a kind.
True, she raised 6 and then 1 (I was an afterthought), and she became an exceptional cook and a very helpful ally.
But what was most exceptional in my mama's case was that, way before any of us were born, she had progressively severe rheumatoid arthritis. This dear lady would endure literally hours of pain, but that rarely escaped her lips. She would never, ever show how tired or how drained she became, but she would be.
I know that my mother also felt, oftentimes, like she was responsible for many things, and she would go through them, enduring what she had to endure.
I can't imagine the pain that she felt or the agony she often dealt with simply on the fact that she would always put up a brave front and a positive outlook.
What's more, according to what I understood, in the last week before her life ended, she was ensuring that everyone who could be around her was laughing and enjoying themselves.
And then, for someone to judge not just Ann Romney but all stay-at-home moms as being "unknowing of work," I really felt as if Rosen were attacking not just the memory of my mother but the institution that has existed since time began.
But the real question to me isn't if Rosen was in the wrong (she is, clearly, and should apologize), the question is why attack Ann Romney in the first place?
There's only one possible answer I can think of.
Mitt Romney scares Obama. Not only would the gloves be off and show the vital and irrevocable differences between Obamacare and "Romneycare," but there would also be one other irrevocable fact.
It was shown, in the Primary Elections around the country, that Obama had sent out voters who would vote for Santorum or some of the other candidates. It was also proven that there is a clear case of media editing in order to make the case they want to make (i.e. the recent example from MSNBC where they distorted George Zimmerman's calls to make him sound completely racist).
Why, then, would Obama not just wait to throw something dirty at Romney (maybe mud, but I wouldn't put it past him for something worse)? Could it be that, even despite their attempts to make Romney out to be an uncaring hypocrite, they know that there is no dirt?
So what's left? Pulling apart laws that include ID checks at the polling places? Getting something nasty on the Mormon church?
Basically, pulling dirty tricks?
That might be Obama's last line to keeping hold of a job he really has done a terrible job at.