‘That’s Not a Choice We Want Americans to Make’–Obama Slams Stay at Home Moms
What happened to being pro-choice?
The October surprises just keep on coming, courtesy of President Obama. According to The Weekly Standard, “during a speech in Rhode Island today, President Obama called for more taxpayer-spending on pre-school in order to “make sure that women are full and equal participants in our economy.”
I can respect that. But then the President followed those remarks by saying (emphasis added):
And sometimes someone, usually mom, leaves the workplace to stay at home with the kids, which then leaves her earning a lower wage for the rest of her life as a result. That’s not a choice we want Americans to make.
Um, ok. I’m interpreting his remarks to mean that women shouldn’t have to choose between lower wages or being stay at home mothers. Sounds noble, but it’s not realistic, at least not in most cases.
Condescension aside, aggravating is the constant drum beat of the modern “feminist” lie that women can have it all. It’s simply not true. Those with successful careers and families are routinely put in a place of choosing one or the other. Men with families also find themselves in the same dilemma, yet no one wants to talk about their struggles, because “feminism.”
Beyond perpetuating modern “feminist” myths is an even nastier issue with the President’s poorly worded statements: are we really in a place culturally where it’s acceptable to demonize a woman’s choice to stay at home as, “not a choice we want Americans to make”? Evidently so.
Of course, being a stay-at-home mom is not the right decision for every woman or for every family; but the blatant labeling of that choice as somehow inferior or “lesser” is just the latest statist assault on the family unit.
You can watch the video here:
Follow Kemberlee Kaye on Twitter
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Funny. That was a choice Barracula’s daddy MADE his mom make.
But he was the furthest thing from an American, so…
When a society is no longer even procreating at replacement levels, clearly a huge number of people are under the impression that their career is better than a baby, and I’ve seen no corresponding number of breathtakingly amazing careers.
Instead, I think we have a tremendous number of young girls being raised to believe that being a mom is not enough, that they must also be career-minded, and at a deep level their worth and status as people in their society depends upon academic degrees and their position in the workforce, with children being a mere possible lifestyle choice.
Go to a college campus; there may be some women there who are open about their hope to be full time moms, but it won’t be many at all (though some might cherish it as a secret hope–for fear of the scorn they would receive from their feminist classmates).
And since middle class people idolize college, what that means is the new general, societal expectation is that women must have careers and that it is mere pampered luxury to be a full time mom.
Again, it isn’t a law but a strong societal norm. Just as a woman must shave her armpits or be considered somewhat gross, she must go to college with an expectation of having a full-time career outside the home or be considered somewhat childish and pitiable.
Shamelessly stolen from http://www.alpb.org/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=567;area=showposts;start=15
Turn the children over to the state at six weeks, don’t worry, be happy.
As a stay at home mom who gladly took care of the kids, one disabled, I am sick. What ever happened to getting an education, getting married and then starting a family? What about choice? Maybe I am an old fart.
Of course that was not a choice his Mom wanted to make. She chose to move to wherever she could find some foreign dude to bang her.
So he has no experience with a loving Mother who stays home to care for her family.
There’s nothing wrong with wanting to have an identity outside of Bobby and Amy’s Mom.. but once you start a family they are your main concern until such a time they don’t need an always at home parent. And yes, that’s going to limit your choices in the job market and limit the hours you work but that’s not an outrageous price to pay for not farming your kids out for strangers to raise.
I take him at his word. He said “we”, but I know who we is and who we ain’t, and we ain’t me.
When Obama uses the pronoun ‘we’, middle class Americans are not included.
Sheesh … the mothers and grandmothers I’ve known have cherished the time with their children more highly than anything. They reflect on those formative times, right to the very end, as do their children at their old age.
Yet Barack thinks farming the kids out to some institution, and making mothers forsake their children, is “the choice government should impose on them”.
I’d argue that caring for elderly parents at home is another area that can be cheaper and rewarding, and much better for the parent than being warehoused. But the government and institutions fight home care at the beginning and ending of life.
And I know homeschooling parents that would have it no other way, especially after having observed their public system. But our choom gang president whose father and mother left him, is going to demand we all owe our souls to the company store.
Shoot, if a woman can find a man that will do some boring job to bring home the bacon, why wouldn’t she enjoy raising a family, one of the greatest joys in life? Let the man shovel the coal. 🙂
(Tennessee Ernie Ford … just for fun.
Libtards are perfectly comfortable with people making choices, as long as they (libtards) approve of said choices. Heaven forfend somebody should make a decision independent of the Collective and choose “incorrectly.”
Libtards would love nothing better than to get their grimy paws on children as early as possible – all the better for creating little drones for the State ~
If it’s a stay at home mom, it’s not a taxable asset. Perhaps it can open a womb bank and accept sperm depositors.
That said, Obama’s understanding of choice does not extend beyond the ritual sacrifice of human life in abortion clinics. He has that in common with other degenerate Democrats and, unfortunately, not a few regressive Republicans.
OK, can I call Obama a “fascist” yet?
Sure, but be prepared to be called “Uncle Tom” if you’re black and “RAYCISS!” if you’re white.
Women were traditionally tasked with building communities, as in relationships. Their responsibility did not end in the kitchen or at the front door. Perhaps the progress of government intervention has rendered or caused a perception that activity is obsolete. The latter is likely true, which would explain the progress of dysfunction throughout our society.
Oh, pro-choice is a selective doctrine. Technically, any choice is valid in a pro-choice philosophy. It really is the ideally philosophy for anyone seeking relief from cognitive dissonance.
As a stay at home mom I have to wonder what gives Obola any credibility in speaking to this subject? His own mother was a monster who abandoned him all through out his formative years. No wonder he is so screwed up.
That’s the lefties’ worst nightmare. The mom that doesn’t turn her children over to the state for indoctrination all day, every day. The mom who drops the kids at school then picks them up is a danger. The indoctrinators need those extra hours between three and six to teach your children that the state is the answer to all of their needs.
and yet his own wife has “chosen” to be a stay at home mom these last 6 years … when Obama says we do you get the feeling he means the government “we” or just he and Michelle …
this man is a perfect example of smart as a whip, dumb as a stump …
I’ve seen no evidence of him being smart, but plenty of him being really ignorant. Notice it’s just his sycophants saying how smart he is? How many other lies have they told us? In my humble opinion, all tangible evidence points to him being a fucking moron.
Hussein Obama — Now, that’s not a choice we want Americans to make.
I hate to be defending Obama, but I think the statement reflects his difficulty in expressing himself coherently. I surmise that his meaning was: “That’s a choice we don’t want women to have to make” – meaning the choice between staying at home to raise their children and getting the same salaries they’d get if they stayed in the workplace without interruption.
If he really meant that women should not stay home to raise their children, then there would be little point in insisting that women’s pay should not be affected by such a career hiatus.
So: file that under Obama garbling his speech again.
I should probably have said “meaning the choice between staying at home to raise their children or getting the salaries they’d get if they stayed in the workplace without interruption”; he thinks women should be able to take a hiatus and get the same salaries as people who don’t.
Yeah, but I’m glad he flubbed it. But it won’t matter. Who’s going to make something of it anyhow? CBS?
To a Liberal politician, the only time you should sacrifice your career to spend more time with your family is after you’ve been caught… but before you are convicted. In that case, it’s a Noble act, otherwise its a horrible sacrifice that one should not be forced into making.
The Audacity of Envy. Lesbians encourage others to abort the fruit they cannot bear. Obama would love to deny others the comfort and security of a stay-at-home mother he never had.
Women shouldn’t have to choose? More reverse psychology patronizing collectivist mack-daddy lingo translated as “let government tell you what, when and how to live your life:
“You women are too stupid to make choices, especially with regard to your own children. It takes a village like the south side of Chicago to raise a child anyway.”
Well, which way do you want it, Obama? ‘Free’ sex and single parent stay-at-home welfare moms who are totally dependent on Democrat politicians and the State or women working outside the home spending precious little time with their kids?
(Kids, if you are lucky enough to have a two parent home the sad thing is that both parents now have to work to pay the myriad taxes in this country, including, indirectly, the exceptionally high trickle down corp. tax.)
Either way ‘un-parented kids’ will be roaming the streets shooting at each other, voting with guns and rages toward their parents and society as a whole.
Well, done, Buffoon-O, the President.
Has anybody notice the dearth of recent Obama speeches ?
Remember, not so long ago, when every problem for this Administration elicited an “Earth-rocking” speech by Obama … yet another appearance of the TOTUS.
You’ve just managed to tune him out.
It’s a form of sleeping sickness that’ going around…
“Obama fatigue is setting in. Indeed, I’ve gone from Obama fatigue through full-on Obama Epstein-Barr to end-stage Obama narcolepsy. I hear him talking, or hear some MSNBC-type rhapsodizing about how misunderstood he is, and I start dozing off like a truck driver who took the drowsy-formula Nyquil by mistake. “Gotta stay awake! This is my job!” But then 20 seconds later, Jonathan Alter starts telling me how misunderstood the president is, and suddenly orange traffic cones are bouncing off my truck’s grill as I somnolently drift into a highway work zone. You could fill a cereal bowl with broken glass and barbed-wire shards drenched in hot sauce right below my face. All it would take for me to use it as a pillow is a 30-second loop of Obama saying “Let me be clear.” His speeches are like whale sounds, but with less substance. I’d say they’re all white noise, but I don’t want to get called a racist.”
I stay awake because I want to know how screwed we are going to be in the next two years.
Tune Out? Mute and or Re-Call on my remote is my go to choice for any Obama speech. For what little he actually has to say you can pick up on in a few 3 min. replays online within 4 hours and full 6/7 min. analysis in under 12. I devote about the same amount of time to listening to him as he gives thought to before he engages his mouth. Anything else he conveys is just condescending “snark”.
Kemberlee Kaye: I’m interpreting his remarks to mean that women shouldn’t have to choose between lower wages or being stay at home mothers.
It’s clear the choice is between not having children and having higher wages for the rest of her career, and having children and having lower wages for the rest of her career. Women should be able to take time off and be able to restart their careers where they left off. The President is clearly advocating for choice by advocating for policies that minimize the economic disadvantage of stay-at-home parents.
“Women should be able to take time off and be able to restart their careers where they left off.”
And dogs deserve to see in color, and cats have a right to bark.
Ragspierre: And dogs deserve to see in color
Ragspierre: and cats have a right to bark.
Yes, of course.
And horses can count.
A working mom is a tax paying mom whose children necessarily spend many hours a day with others – predominantly indoctrinated public school teachers, which is to say union members in too many states. That’s why progressives don’t approve of a mom’s choice to stay at home – tax money to spend, kids to indoctrinate into progressive philosophy, and the maintenance of the highest possible nmber of teachers in public unions to keep those campaign donations coming. Liberalism is constructed of cronyistic money engines like this. Advocating it from the equality-in-pay angle is just how they sell it, sort of like how new lotteries are sold as ‘education’ lotteries, but once enacted, the money seems to end up elsewhere than classrooms.
Standard bait and switch sales technique at its core – bait with the call for equal pay regulations for working mothers, then switch to nothing but maintaining the lie that you are ‘working on it’, but gosh, those darn obstructionists across the aisle, well… so send us more money, vote! They milk any lying promise for as long as it lasts.
Ask Latinos about Obama promises on immigration – they’re starting to figure out they are lies. Even blacks are figuring out that Democrats have milked them for decades without delivering anything but institutionalized poverty and all the social ills that come from poverty however it is caused.
“Working moms” need jobs. Otherwise, they are without a choice as to whether to work or not.
And women are among the hardest hit in the Obamic Decline. There is a terrible irony at work in everything Barracula says about employment, pay, etc.
Many of those teachers you reference have some of their biggest challenges from the stay at home Moms who have chosen to forego working during the k-8 grades to guide their children through the earliest formative years. It sets the bar higher than many want to accommodate or allowed to and they have become the largest group of challengers to “Common Core” and “Excessive Testing” in these grades. Parental involvement is wanted unless it questions the process or the program.