Work?! — Maynard G. Krebs

It has often been noted that for every good point Romney makes (good for his campaign, that is) there is always at least one moment when he speaks out of the other side of his mouth and undercuts his own earlier sentiments. Of course with a candidate for the Presidency who has no convictions of his own other than greed; a candidate who will say and do anything even if he once opposed it; a candidate who makes outlandish lies sound like boring truth; what do we expect?

Last week Romney was winning points by championing the value and worthiness of at-home mothers who daily contended with the challenges of raising kids and managing a household. The meme became that Obama was waging a war on Motherhood (as if Hillary Rosen worked for the White House … which actually saw some play as a conspiracy theory from the right). So everyone from Obama down swung into action declaring stay-at-home mothers being hard-working and worthy of our respect.

Of course there was little discussion of the number of servants Ann Romney used to help her care for those children (I heard five). But now Mitt Romney has opened his mouth again and it isn’t pretty:

The Republican presidential candidate said he wanted to require women who receive welfare to work outside the home, even if their children are very young. He told a New Hampshire audience: ‘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.'”

It sounds like there is a servant threshold a mother must cross before the raising of children becomes hard work and a real job (look at it this way:  stand on your head … make sense now?). And isn’t state provided daycare ==> SOCIALISM!