Rosen Gaffe: Does It Really Matter?

According to Hilary Rosen, Ann Romney has “never worked a day in her life.” She has also “never really dealt with the kinds of economic issues that the majority of the women in this country are facing.” Considering the fact that Mrs. Romney chose to be a stay-at-home mom, instead of pursuing a career, these comments could be considered offensive and inappropriate. However, I believe that Ms. Rosen’s comments were taken out of context, and frankly, I’m sick and tired of both sides using poor word choice in order to savage the opposition.

It’s time that people start to focus on the issues. I don’t want candidates focusing on how much money their opponent makes every year (I’m looking at you Barack Obama) or what stupid things their supporters say. I want to hear about spending and taxes, not personal incomes. And you know what? I think Rosen had a point. If you look at what she said, and what I believe she meant, she’s right! Ann Romney married a very wealthy businessman, and she never had to worry about putting food on the table. That’s a fact that no one can deny. I won’t deny it, even though I wholeheartedly support Mitt Romney. It’s just the truth.

Don’t get me wrong; Mrs. Romney has worked as hard as anyone in her life. Raising a family is an amazing and inspiring choice. But, I don’t think that Ms. Rosen was attacking Romney’s decision to raise her family. I think she was trying to show the difference between the way that Ann Romney lived and the way that many women around the country live today.

So what’s the real problem here? Political discourse these days seems to focus too much on what people say, rather than what they really mean. Everyone says stupid things. That’s a fact. We all, Republicans and Democrats, need to start focusing on the meaning of the words rather than the meaning themselves. Sure, when Rush Limbaugh called Sandra Fluke a prostitute, people attacked him, myself included. His choice of words was disgusting and offensive. However, his main point made sense: the government should not fund the private activities that people choose to engage in. The words he used made his point irrelevant, though. No one focused on his message; instead, they focused on the words he chose.

With this new “scandal”, my point rings true. Rosen chose her words poorly, but her claim wasn’t a bad one. In the end though, the words of one Obama surrogate aren’t going to change the minds of any voter. So why are we focusing on them? Truthfully, I have no idea.