Can you imagine if this woman is the first lady? Edit: For some reason, I can't link directly to the aricle. Just go to http://www.cnsnews.com/ and it's the 2nd or 3rd down from the top. Mrs. Kerry Would Focus on 'Gay Tolerance' As First Lady As if there isn't enough gay propaganda everywhere you turn. Uhh, what?? Everytime she opens her mouth it does nothing but help Bush. Hopefully she will be camaigning hard for the next 2 weeks!
Teresa speaks to USA Today Q: You'd be different from Laura Bush? A: Well, you know, I don't know Laura Bush. But she seems to be calm, and she has a sparkle in her eye, which is good. But I don't know that she's ever had a real job — I mean, since she's been grown up. So her experience and her validation comes from important things, but different things. And I'm older, and my validation of what I do and what I believe and my experience is a little bit bigger — because I'm older, and I've had different experiences. And it's not a criticism of her. It's just, you know, what life is about. Laura Bush was a school teacher and librarian. Teresa was a rich girl who married a rich husband. This woman is such an elitist snob.
There's more: From the White House: Inspired by her second grade teacher, she earned a bachelor of science degree in education from Southern Methodist University in 1968. She then taught in public schools in Dallas and Houston. In 1973 she earned a master of library science degree from the University of Texas at Austin and worked as a public school librarian in Austin [until 1977]. [edit] I just read her bio, and there's an awful lot of verbs like 'created' and 'Helped to develop' and 'convened' in there. Teresa's full bio looks like she enjoys giving her dead husband's money away.
I would post my views on Mrs. Heinz-Kerry but I don't want to be accused of being a racist since she is African-American.
How much income to the IRS did she report? Seriously, I hate the PC notion that being a fulltime mom is a "job." It isn't. Unless a garbageman is a sanitation engineer. Being a mom is a terribly valuable role in society, but that doesn't make it a job. Calling it one makes it difficult to have meaningful discussion about the varying roles of women in today's society. That is really what's wrong with being PC...it distorts language to where it obscures issues rather than illustrates them. Geez, the last place I expected to see an outbreak of politcal correctness. Anyway, as I understand it, Teresa forgot or never knew that Laura had worked as a teacher and librarian, and was saying her background was very different. In what way is this more controversial than someone noting in '92 that Hillary and Barbara had very different backgrounds, and would be very different First Ladies? Have we gotten so polarized that merely observing obvious differences* is considered an attack? Look, I'm not a Teresa fan by any stretch of the imagination, but I don't think she did anything wrong in THIS case. *stipulating that Laura had, in fact, taught and libraried, but Teresa forgot.
How much do Nannies make per year? Last I checked, being a Nanny is about 75% of what a mom does. (and that percentage is probably generous)
SO... Is a job something that you work hard at...? ... or is a job something you make money at? If a job is not something you make money at, what is it that you call that at which you make money?
You're confusing your premises and your conclusions here. All jobs require work. Not all work requires pay. Therefore, not all jobs require pay. Sachin
Do all jobs require an employer? I would say, yeah. Sachin...I don't know if it was intentional or accidental, but it's very clever of you to quote Steve Earle and Johnny Walker in your sig. Kudos, if it was intentional.
What if you're self-employed? Both of them are intentional. I like the irony. You'll enjoy this post too: https://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showthread.php?p=3440252&posted=1#post3440252 Sachin
OK, Non-PC hat on. Back in the day, when they kicked it old-school....wives generally didn't have "jobs". They stayed at home, cooked meals, raised children, while father worked the land. So when the sun went down, the male rested, while the wife would feed him. What was the pay? Shelter, family, maybe some money from the farm, or the trade that the male provided. So who's the employer? What's the benefit? There is a huge amount of capital, but it's not in currency. You can't easily measure that capital. What's amazing is, Kerry tries to make Bush look like a "snob"...yet he and his wife make it impossible with their antics. Quite honestly, it shouldn't be very hard to do.
I proposed questions that would direct us to clarification of words and concepts for which a word should properly exist. Your position is consistent, but fails to answer what that is which is a job you make money doing. If I were to accept that "job" is work you get paid at, then "real job" in the context of the Ketchup Lady is to distinguish a job where you gain money through complete comittment of time through useful application of work from a job where you gain money, but with only partial comittment of time and without much useful work. This would be useful to serve as a distinction between "real jobs" like automobile assembly, teaching, and library management and just plain "jobs" like sitting on a board of directors, managing your interest income from your investments, or being first lady of a state or a nation.
There was a very small window when this was the norm. For a long time, of course, most people lived on farms, and women worked on them. Even as our economy was transitioning away from agriculture, enough women worked that this wasn't the norm. It was just the nature of things that the working class of that era didn't have many venues for telling their "story." The "traditional" (dad works outside the home, stay at home mom) family was only really common in the ~30 years after WW II. It coincided with the advent of television and the childhood of the infinitely self-absorbed baby boom generation, so its prevalence has been exaggerated.
I dont know where you grew up...but well over 90% of the my classmates had mothers who were at home when I was in elementary and middle school. We all thought latchkey kids were wierd.
I was the same way. If you got hurt or sick at school or whatever, they called home and your Mom came over. She didn't have to punch out. The whole "Women at home really DO have an important job" meme is a bunch of old PC nonsense. The women's movement was trying to raise women's status the same way the left does everything: by mandating speech. So the old "Do you work?" - "No, I'm a housewife" conversation now has to be "Do you work outside the home?". It's all such rubbish. It used to have to do with family: it took two people, one out making money and one at home accepting the primary responsibility for raising the family children, which society used to consider a crucial task for the continuence of civilized society. Now, Bill Clinton's lovely wife Bruno and her leftie pals at the Children's Defense Fund don't think women can be trusted to raise children. It takes a Village. Indeed, women raising their own kids is how you end up with social evils like Home Schooling, Christianity and Republicans. Much better that kids are "socialized" in child warehouses by untrained, poorly paid amateurs who don't give a crap about them as people while their mother finds personal fullfillment and spiritual completeness sitting in front of a computer screen on the 31st floor of an office building someplace. And this is what they call progress. I call it a disaster.
Bill, of course, the solution is for the gvt. to implement a variety of changes that will value work more and wealth less. Raise the minimum wage, empower unions, mandate health insurance, stuff like that. How old are you? That was sorta true for me, too, but I'm 41 years old, so that covers the period I'm talking about anyway.