Over the weekend, the postscript to the whole “War on Moms” debacle was uncovered in the form of some video of Mitt Romney from January:
“I wanted to increase the work requirement,” said Romney. “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’ll cost the state more providing that daycare, but I want the individuals to have the dignity of work.”
Wealthy stay-at-home moms like Ann Romney are sacred, but poor moms need to understand “the dignity of work.” Got it.
So he was for women’s dignity before he was against it. Or visa-versa?
That sounds about right; the children of the poor need to learn early that they only exist to serve the rich. No one expects them to contribute to society and they shouldn’t be worried about things like love, food, or a future.
Not that I disagree with this particular article, but Constant’s political coverage seems terribly one-sided. I heard Obama hates kittens, rich and poor, how about doing something on that?