Ann Romney aims to fluff women at RNC, appeals only to traditional republican values

At the Republican National Convention, Ann Romney delivered a speech to re-introduce her husband to the women voters. She started her speech speaking of love, not politics. American responds to great love stories. Ticket sales to great love stories should be all the evidence we need of that.

 Ann Romney reminded us that she and Mitt met back in high school and had five children, the first of which arrived when they were living married in a basement apartment at the ripe ol’ age of 22. She set a tone in those first few minutes that excluded the rest of the women, those who aren’t mothers.

 “I want to talk to you about a love so deep only a mother can fathom it — the love we have for our children and our children’s children,” Ann Romney said. It seems to be unimaginable to her that some people develop a love that transcends the “love” that arrives with parenthood. There are still a number of people in the world who never have a love that deep, children notwithstanding. 

 And what about the fathers? Can’t they feel that love too, or do they simply make money to feed the family? That’s not right.

Many men, married or single, biological or those who simply wanted the job, can often express as equal a “love” for their children. Why should they not matter? And what about  the love that adoptive parents develop for children? The declaration she made in an attempt to win women’s votes is deplorable.

 She continued pandering to the mothers, calling us glue. Women sigh louder than the men do because we have to carry the burden of much more. Ann Romney reinforced the double standard forced on women who choose to have children. Why should the mothers bear so much more of the burden? Don’t they have the right to find a cooperative partner that will share equally with not just the fun stuff but also the burdens of parenthood?

 She continued on with her differences in faith with Mitt and how when they courted, he preferred their parents not to be around. She told of a start in adulthood that was not an independent one; they were married quickly. She spoke of motherhood, the allegations of a “storybook marriage,” and how hard it was to have so many sons in the house during bad weather.

 If this speech was directed at the independent woman who rides the fence, Ann Romney failed miserably. She did not speak to the GOP stance on a woman’s right to choose. The adopted platform would reverse Roe v. Wade and take away a woman’s right to choose, no matter what the circumstances. They would eliminate the right for a young girl, whose boyfriend likes her parents not being around so he can get friskier than she wants, to have an alternative than having his baby. 

 She said her storybook marriage had chapters of multiple sclerosis and breast cancer, and she had never read a story about those before. She didn’t mention organizations like Planned Parenthood help lower income women through that same chapter will lose all funding if her husband is elected. The GOP still sees Planned Parenthood as another abortion clinic, even though they perform a low number of the procedures. 

 Ann Romney did not speak to the lesbian mothers: They must not share in that same burden with heterosexual mothers. Nor did she address the homosexual male that may also be filling a parental role. She ignored the love their stories must contain. Their love must just not be worthy enough of a vote for her husband. Not to mention that the GOP stands firm on the idea that the Defense of Marriage Act is the proper thing to do. 

 Sounds like Ann Romney, and Mitt as well, are all about excluding people behind a disguise of love. When people are different, they must just be left out, according to the way Ann Romney worded her speech. It’s been said time and time again: You should never hate what you don’t understand; you should learn about it. You cannot say that childless people are not part of the fabric holding this nation together. You cannot say that you are unique because you suffered illness that millions of other people do and then take their funding for treatments away. You cannot say that just because a person didn’t birth a baby that their love is less. And you cannot say that just because homosexual couples have a different family that their love is less than yours and shouldn’t be allowed to be solidified under God if that’s what they want to do.

 It’s sad to say, Ann Romney, but it looks like your introduction was just an espousal of all the same old poppy cock painted pink, which means it’s really just the same old hate, bigotry and lies. Good thing the pink was there to remind us to drink some Pepto Bismol.