Who could have thought I would love anything that Mitt Romney could possibly say? But I really liked the following:
Poor women who stay at home to raise their children should be given federal assistance for child care so that they can enter the job market and “have the dignity of work,” Mitt Romney said in January. . . “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.'”
In the environment where nobody wants to discuss the horrible damage a mother who is stuck at home and torn out of the normal functioning of society causes to her small children, it is very refreshing to see a politician who suggests that it’s more important to provide women with daycare than with cash to sit at home and gradually go nuts.
My sister has a 2-year-old and, through observing her, we have reached a unanimous conclusion that everybody in our family supports: the last thing a kid of that age needs is to be stuck at home with an adult all day long. Kids need to socialize and grow through being with other kids and not with a parent whose life is in a total dead end.
Romney will still lose the elections, of course, and that’s a good thing. But it’s great to see that even conservative politicians let slip useful things about housewifery. Let’s remember that Romney’s wife hasn’t worked a day in her life, so the guy is probably well aware of the burden of having a housewife about.