Teresa Heinz Kerry has issued an "official" apology to Laura

[in_cog_ni_to]

(Stepford wife) Bush for asking if she (Laura Stepford) had even ever held a job? The media has been pushing this story for hours. Teresa then came out and said she had forgotten that Laura Stepford had been a Librarian and teacher and apologized. Karen Hughes then said, (paraprased) "That doesn't excuse the fact that THK insulted every stay at home mom, making them think raising their children isn't important enough to stay home. All she did was pit working mothers against stay at home moms." What a wench that woman is! Anyway, Blitzer will be doing a story on this in a few minutes. Teresa has issued an "official" apology. :eyes:

[2Design]

1. oh PPPllllllleasseee laura is such a wimp

[dennis4868]

2. But is Laura....

a lesbian? That is the important question to ask these days.

[in_cog_ni_to]

4. hehe

Why I do believe she IS! Yep, Mrs. Stepford is a dope smokin', car crashin', boyfriend murderin' LESBIAN!

[ClassWarrior]

21. Don't forget... worst of all...

...a cigarette smoker!!

24.

[Anakin Skywalker]

18. LOL!

[2Design]

3. laura has the symptoms of the battered woman

[sandnsea]

5. Teresa was a stay-at-home mom

What in the world does having a job before you get married have to do with being a stay-at-home mom? Karen has lost her cookies on this one. Teresa made a mistake and apologized.

[in_cog_ni_to]

6. I know and the witch Hughes REFUSED

to accept that apology. She WANTS this story to keep going for the "security moms." :grr:

[DrZeeLit]

11. Teresa didn't apologize to Hughes...

...so who the hell is Hughes to "accept" the apology? Sheesh... I really don't think a Hughes-spawned cat fight at this point would be productive for * .... and let's face it... does anybody vote on the basis of the spouse (I'd say "wife" but I'm hopin' someday for a Woman as President)....

[in_cog_ni_to]

20. She was asked if the "Bush Campaign" would accept the

apology and then gave her pathetic spiel.

[Iris]

22. Not only that, but Karen is the one pitting "stay at home moms" against

working moms with this statement.

[Jane Austin]

7. I had a fun conversation with an old friend at a dog show

last week, who used to teach school with Laura Bush.

Can't tell you what my friend said about meeting Bush, but I believe she thought she'd found a prize.

Apparently the young Laura was a ton of fun.

[jimshoes]

8. Way to make shit up

karen. BTW did you know your boss said his war wouldn't have any casualties? Ya bint.

[napi21]

9. I doube stay at home Dem moms (if there are any) will take offense

at Teresa's remark. I don't remember it really hurting BS when Killary said she didn't sat at home and bake cookies! The media and the Pubs made a big deal out of it, but BS supporters didn't care.

[in_cog_ni_to]

14. Nope, THAT just energized the DEM

women! The repukes will never learn. The only people this will bother are the repuke stay at home moms who hate Kerry and Teresa anyway.

[jhain]

61. there are PLENTY of us

and we LOVE Teresa!

and we are manning your local Democrat Headquarters

[dave123williams]

10. Right - are they just dropping the Pat Robertson thing? You know,

the idea that * thought there would be no casualties, so why prepare for them?

[noiretextatique]

12. who gives a flying &%$^?

:argh: stupid snooze media

[Malva Zebrina]

13. Stay at home Mom=rich Stepford wives

others cannot afford to stay at home, or do not squander away the money they spent on an education, by working for three years , marrying a rich man, and doing nothing after that. Some enjoy their career choices. In a recent interview Laura said that she and George used to argue over what to spend money on, but they don't have that argument much any more--and she thought it was probably because they do not buy as many things. Well when taxpayers pay for your lodging and food and entertaining, and your vacation trips to Europe, there is less to spend money on. Her big deal when asked what she planned to do in Europe she said "shop and eat"

THK comes out of this looking smart. No wonder she forgot about Laura's "work". It was thirty years ago when Laura last worked.

[mcar]

19. Excuse me...

stay at home mom does not equal rich Stepford wife. That is an insulting generalization. The women's movement was supposed to give us choices, not put us in another box (work or you're a loser).

I quit my job 3 years ago to stay home with my kids and start a home-based writing business. I spend more time being a mom than I do a writer, so I'm not making too much money.

My husband is a high school math teacher -- rich? Who are you kidding?

Oh, and I have been a Democrat and voted Democratic for 27 years now.

My friend left her job 4 years ago to stay home with her kids. Her husband is a self-employed engineer. Rich? Again, who are you kidding?
She is a registered Independent but is actively campaigning for Kerry.

We made choices that we felt were right for ourselves and our families. I'm no fan of Laura Bush, but you are totally wrong to tar us all with the same brush. That's a Republican trick.

[Longhorn]

25. You're exactly right.

I spent my first 14 years as a mother home with my children, although I often worked from home or had part-time jobs after they started school. I'm as feminist as they come -- it was all about choices and I refuse to judge what's best for another woman -- or man, for that matter.

[China_cat]

65. The very idea that stay at home moms

don't "work" is insulting. And Laura Bush didn't even have to do that. She had maids and cooks and nannies and I'd be totally surprised to find out that she even knows where the washing machine is or how to turn on the dishwasher.

[Malva Zebrina]

27. There are multitudes of poor women who must work

in order to pay rent, food and other costs for themself and their children. They do not have the resources to work at home and do not have the option of supplementing their salary from a husband. They are poor and single moms or have husbands who do NOT have a job, or who have lost a job, or who havehusbands that can only work at a job that pays minimum wage--not enough to pay the rent, food and clothing etc.

If you have the option then that is fine. Consider the many, many women who are on their own, or who are without a supplemental salary from a husand, with children to take care of and do NOT have the option/choice to stay at home with their children. Definately do not have the same access.

Most of the women I know who choose to stay home, are supported by their husband. It is a luxury position to many who wish they had that option--who would like nothing better.

On edit

Before the feminist movement in the sixties, the societal assigned role of women was one of the caretaker, who stayed at home, had babies , cleaned the house, and no matter what other talents she may have had, she was expected to assume that role . ADditionaly, the man was expected to support the whole family. Obviously those roles were examined and resisted by the feminist movement of that time. Women had few choices--but soon shed that assinged role, and discovered they had the power to become more than nurses or secretaries--they could become lawyers, doctors, CEO's, Accountants, or whatever they chose to become. I lived through that movement,and know how it evolved. Before that, a college education, on the whole, was considered wasted on a woman. Laura Bush is a prime example of that wasted education.

The choice to stay at home to raise children is still one many women cannot choose because they simply cannot afford it. The choice to stay at home and raise children is one which many educated and talented women choose not to do. Further, women who stay at home to raise children and do additional work are working harder. I wonder why it is not the father staying home and the mom going out to work to supplement his salary although there are probably a few examples of that. Most likely, though, it is the father who is able to make the higher salary.

[Scout]

45. "I wonder why it is not the father staying home "

Because if raising children were REALLY such a great job, men would have it. :evilgrin:

As far as people talking about it being the most important thing a woman can do ... well, unless an individual woman is raising the individual child who will someday cure cancer, solve world hunger or some other great good to society, I'd be willing to bet her time might be better used working outside the home. Maybe SHE will be the one to cure cancer.

I don't think we are doing the world any great amount of good by continuing to breed and raise more "average" human beings.

And before anyone flames me, no I don't believe in forced sterilizations or eugenics. I just wish more people would voluntarily choose not to reproduce.

[iverglas]

51. and the women's movement that *I* signed on with in the 60s

was NOT about this phoney "choice" to stay in the home doing this phoney "job" of rearing children.

And I'm pretty sick of people telling me what the women's movement is/was about.

I will absolutely agree that it is not entirely unreasonable, in our North American societies at present, for someone to stay home with preschool children -- since decent affordable universal childcare is still way over the horizon, and since many of the jobs that women would otherwise have are shit jobs paying shit wages anyhow.

But I'm damned if I'm going to be told that all my years of effort for women's rights were spent so that a bunch of deluded women can "choose" to remove themselves from the adult world and do this imaginary "job" of theirs.

Childrearing was NEVER a job, never in human history. Poor women always worked -- although yes, this was often in the home ... at a time when much work was home-based anyway, or when working in the home meant making the soap and the candles and the bread and the clothing for the entire household. Rich women's husbands hired other people to rear their children ... and clean their homes, and make their clothing, and wash their clothing, and so on. Ordinary women produced goods and services, whether they did so within the household or in the broader economy.

UNTIL women are ABLE to secure, and retain, decent well-paid jobs on equal terms with men and have families at the same time just as men do, leaving the workforce to rear children and handle the consumption activities of the household (households now being units of consumption, not production, for the most part) cannot be called a CHOICE, and I won't glorify either the coerced withdrawal from the workforce by ordinary working women or the indolence of the wives of wealthy men by calling it a choice, or a job.

[Kanary]

52. No wonder the "women's movement" is dead.

None of the women I struggled with in the 60's would recognize this insulting rant.

Attacking and dividing women is an ego trip.

:thumbsdown:

Kanary

[Dorian Gray]

87. Thank you, Kanary!

I was about to rant at the last ranter, but your post calmed me down! :) Thank you!

[Kanary]

92. Can't imagine how what I said calmed you down.... are you sure it was *my*

post? ~~gigglesnort~~

Thanks, Dorian Gray!, for posting. I guess I've come to the end of the line with what I can handle here. I never understood from the first time I came here, why the attacks on each other, and I get it even less now. I guess Dems really are self-destructive. Sure appears that way.

Ok, so you have anything to offer that would calm *me* down? ~~snicker~~

Be good to yourself, eh?

:hi:

Kanary

[Pithlet]

57. I'll be damned

If anyone else tells me what I have to do to have any worth in this society. I can't believe you would post something like this. I didn't figure you for the judgmental type.

Indolent, indeed.

[noiretextatique]

69. "poor women have always worked

and raised kids."
the more i read your post, the more i find myself in agreement with it.
what are now called stay at home moms were virtually non-existent in my family and in the neighborhood i grew up in.
in the 1950's, many black women were still doing "day work" aka raising the children and doing the housework of white women.
i support any woman's right to make whatever choices she makes, but i agree with you too...
and frankly...i don't think your post is insulting to women who have the financial means or the desire to devote themselves exclusively to raising their children...those who can make that choice.
but...most women still have to work.

[Pithlet]

71. And I don't think

That there is anything wrong with someone who could afford to stay home, but wants to work. I just don't think that the feminist movement should be "Women should have a choice, but only if it's employment that brings home the paycheck".

What insulted me about that post was that when those of us who choose to stay home do so, that somehow we aren't exercising choice, but being lazy. Most women still have to work. Some women still WANT to work. I did, until I had the baby, and changed my mind. I wish that everyone could afford to make that decision, including working. Some stay home out of financial necessity, because daycare is outrageous in many areas. I hate the judgment from BOTH sides. The ones who think the working mothers are neglecting their parenting duties, and the ones who think that stay at home wives are affluent stepford wannabes who wouldn't have a clue about feminism if it walked up and slapped them in the face.

Perhaps I'm overly sensitive. But I've been smacked with that mentality too many times. I shouldn't have to defend myself or prove my feminist non-stepfordian credentials to anyone. And posts like that make me feel that way.

[noiretextatique]

85. i understand the sensitivity

because the post was harsh.
but i can understand what she meant in this sense: what is being called a choice is not even an option for so many women...including those who can't afford to work and pay daycare. i know a few women in that predicament...work and live and lose benefits and barely break even, or not work and barely break even. what kind of choice is that?!?! it's NOT a choice, imho. i think that's what iverglas was talking about...it is about pay equity, affordable child care, etc.

as to laura bush...she has the means to have other women do her dirty work. perhaps it's time for feminists to start talking about them.

as to the choices individual women make...i think that's something entirely different than what karen hughes is talking about with her rw code language. she is not talking about the nannies and the maids.

[Pithlet]

90. I know that the choice isn't there for many

Not for most. And I wish that weren't so. There are many issues underlying that. My sensitivity is probably do to the SAHM/WOHM wars on the parenting boards that drove me away. I apologize for overreacting so harshly.

[Dorian Gray]

88. Of course there is nothing wrong

if a women can afford to stay at home but CHOOSES to work. I know many women like this, and they make GREAT mothers! I think it only becomes a problem when both parents work too hard to spend ANY time with thier kids.

I taught English in Hong Kong, and I had a handful of students who saw their parents for a total of five hours every week. (Combined time with mother and father!) Their parents worked very hard (admirable). It was so bad that when one of my students broke his arm, we had to stay in the hospital with him overnight because his parents never showed up. They coudln't put a cast on him or treat him until they came the next morning to sign out on his treatment.

But, I don't delude myself into thinking that the vast majority of working parents are so care-less about their children. Just as I don't fool myself into thinking that most stay-at-home mothers are Stepford Wives, rolling in the money so much that their only aim is to please their hard working husband.

[iverglas]

91. that's real big of you

"Of course there is nothing wrong
if a women can afford to stay at home but CHOOSES to work."

Actually, it's one of those "with friends like those ..." situations.

There's nothing WRONG with a woman working?

Pinch me. I must have fallen asleep 35 years ago and forgotten to wake up. The fact that someone could even still be saying this in the 21st century is pretty good evidence that I'm trapped in a nightmare.

The only way that a woman can "afford to stay at home" is pretty much if she has a man supporting her. The flaws in this particular system were actually obvious to a lot of us, a long time ago.

Things like what happens when said man decides he's tired of the deal, and the woman finds herself trying to re-enter the workforce with skills that are a decade out of date, having foregone all of the on-the-job training and seniority that she would have accumulated had she stayed in the work force.

Not to mention things like women staying with abusive men because the alternative is the poverty that comes with being unskilled and unemployable.


But, I don't delude myself into thinking that the vast majority of working parents are so care-less about their children. Just as I don't fool myself into thinking that most stay-at-home mothers are Stepford Wives, rolling in the money so much that their only aim is to please their hard working husband.

I wouldn't call the parents you described "careless" unless I knew a lot more about them than you have told us. Low-income working people don't tend to have a lot of wiggle room when it comes to unforeseen events like their children's illnesses. And I certainly never characterized anyone but the wealthy women I referred to the way you say you don't "fool yourself" into thinking of them.

There are so many things that could be said ...


Someone says she "worked" real hard while at home with four pre-schoolers. Well excuse me all to hell, but why the fuck does anyone in an over-consuming society like yours/mine think it is acceptable, let alone a good excuse for something, to have four children?? Has no one really ever heard of things like, oh, the depletion of non-renewable resources and the degradation of the environment?

Cripes, I could choose to have 40 cats and 50 dogs, and I'd "work" real hard to look after them, too. It's the choice that might be the issue here, hm?

A whole lot of this "work" is the work of ferrying children around to the vast number of things that have been invented to fill children's time ... and to give them a leg up in a competitive world. Sports teams, dance and aerobics classes, various para-academic activities ... all need money, and a spare parent handy to manage it all.

What if kids just did what kids used to do -- and what low-income kids still do? Play??? In parks and schoolyards and at one another's houses. What if there weren't all these artificial things for kids from comfy backgrounds to do, that they needed their mawms to manage for them?

What if the mawms in question put their feet down, and said that they were entitled to the same benefits of being an adult that the dads are entitled to -- that they were not robomoms programmed to the agenda of a few over-indulged kids (who are certainly also subject to excessive expectations and demands)?

What if a few more of us said that ALL kids are entitled to more from this society -- to the social and intellectual benefits of pre-school programmes, to athletic and para-academic and recreational opportunities outside of/after school? That our societies have to start organizing themselves so that the opportunities available to women and children don't depend on their husbands'/fathers' income and status?

Good affordable accessible childcare is the absolute minimum that must be in place if any woman other than the wealthiest is ever to be said to have a CHOICE between working and not working.

Good affordable accessible extra-curricular activities for ALL children, that are not dependent on parental income and the virtually full-time availability of a parent (which is of course also largely dependent on a father's income), is pretty much also essential.

Essential for both women and kids.

And then come the changes that need to be made to the work world, so that working parents do have time to spend with kids when they're needed. The work world in North America is really no different from what it was two generations ago. Work is organized for men who have wives to look after their homes and families, not for parents who work and have children. That's not what we were aiming for 35 years ago. We wanted childcare facilities in workplaces, flexible schedules, parental leave without loss of security.

In Canada, we have made some gains. The unemployment insurance plan now permits parents to take a total of a year out of the work force (divided as they choose between them) with benefits and without losing their employment -- and this leads to fewer women "choosing" to remain out of the work force, because they are actually able to return after a brief interlude. And while we here keep talking at the federal level about that some-day universal childcare plan, Quebec has a program that makes childcare available for $5 a day.

We haven't got anything like what is available some places in Europe. But in the US, these things are not even present in the political discourse. And the glorification of the stay-at-home mawm, well, it looks a lot like 1953 down there. If the women's movement is dead where you're at, there are a lot of apologists for the current abysmal state of affairs, which they call "choice", who need to answer for it.

Women who "stayed home" in previous generations (back before the glorious 1950s, when women were driven back into the household for reasons having nothing to do with children's interests) didn't do it so that they could spend their time driving the kids to soccer practice, or spending "quality time" with them. There was real work to be done in the home. Those women really weren't souped-up nannies. And it's insulting to them for anyone in this decade living in North America to pretend that they're "working" when they make this "choice".

And I really don't give a shit who doesn't like what I have to say. I and a whole lot of other people really didn't do everything we did in the cause of women's rights to have to listen to such crap about "choice" from people who apparently don't know, and don't give a damn about, the stupendous absence of choice in most ordinary women's lives. The day when every woman has the opportunity to obtain a good education and a good job and participate in the big wide world on equal footing with men -- which of course will mean men assuming their share of the family responsibilities that so many women are so eager to relieve them of now, and society making it possible for all parents to do so -- is the day when you might want to talk to me about "choice".

[avatar4321]

39. Well said

I am amazed at how some people have disgust for stay at home moms. Almost like they don't do anything useful in life. The fact is they are doing the most useful thing anyone can do. They are raising the next generation.

Why is it people seem to think that if your a stay at home mom your wasting your education? I would think one of the best uses of an education would be to use it to teach the next generation. And if the unthinkable happens, well at least the stay at home mother would have a way to provide for her family.

Kudos for you for choosing your children over a fancy car or big house.

[rasputin1952]

78. Welcome to DU avatar4321...

:hi:...:)

[Kanary]

49. Completely right, mcar! These generalizations damage our choices, and our

spirits.

Insult, indeed. And, it hurts worse coming from our own "side".

The "women's movement" has been boiled down to "shoulds", and is just as insulting and damaging as the "shoulds of the 60's.

"I'm no fan of Laura Bush, but you
are totally wrong to tar us all with the same brush. That's a Republican trick. "

Exactly right. We would do well to start looking at our own selves.

Thank you for speaking up. It needed to be said.

Kanary

[noiretextatique]

64. oh c'mon people she did not "tar you with the same brush"

she did comment on the fact that this option is generally only available to those women who are being financially supported, or have the means to support themselves without a job. that means it's a choice that a lot of women still cannot make.

and if i am not mistaken, she was also commenting on the rw image of the role of women...and who that image applies to. and it's certainly not the women they expect to clean their houses and nanny their kids. no stay at home moms among that group

i can truly understand this because all the women i grew up with never had this option, and most of the ones i know now don't have this option.

is it "wrong" to say that? no. is it insult to women who can make that choice? no.

is laura bush remotely like any woman in my world? hell no.
she's privileged in a way that few women are. do i consider her option to stay at home as coming from some sense of enlightened feminism? considering who she married, perhaps i would...god knows what if might have done if she wasn't around her kids most of the time. and certainly had access to women who couldn't stay at home to do all her dirty work for her.

[Pithlet]

73. She did not make that very clear

Stay At Home Mom = Rich Stepford wife? Come on.

The option is generally available only to those who are being financially supported isn't always true. Many women stay home because they can't afford day care. They scrimp and they save and they live very frugally. At any rate, the =Stepford Wife sentiment is very typical of people who think that the only way to be respectable in the feminist movement is to work and draw a paycheck. That is bullshit. Only rich right wingers stay home with their kids? Again, bullshit.

Laura Bush is privileged. She would be living a privileged life even if she hadn't had kids. A majority of stay at home moms are not privileged. And that generalization is a slap in the face to us. It is a judgment that is divisive, unfair, and unnecessary.

[noiretextatique]

84. i think it's very clear that she's talking about laura bush

and the rw use of language, and their image of perfect womanhood.
hint: it does not apply to the women who clean their toilets and take care of their kids.

[Kanary]

79. C'mon yourself. Her angry sermon was *very* clear.

And, why was this addressed to me?

there were MANY who took exception to her harsh words of condemnation.

Ppppppppppphhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhffffffffffffffffffffftttttttttttttt

Judging other women in this harsh way ISN"T FEMINISM.

[noiretextatique]

83. she was clearly talking about CLASS

class, and the fact that this *choice* is not an option for MOST women in the world. that is not dissing anyone...sorry if you feel that way.
i just jumped in along the way...didn't mean to single you out.

[noiretextatique]

56. she's talking about "code language"

as in what is meant when some people use that term...which is not entirely inaccurate, historically speaking. some women never had, and never will have this "option."
i'm not placing value on the choices any women make, but i am commenting on the fact that some choices are still not available to all women.

[underpants]

26. I am going to defer to my mother on this one

Luckily a neighbor had paid for her to get a college degree (Librarian oddly enough).

As she tells it when my father left she had $1,000, a car, and two kids (Me and my brother).

She hates when people say that being a housewife is a full time job-her point is that it is all about organization and if there is one thing she is that would be organized. I never knew that other mothers didn't work (except for June Cleaver) and didn't understand (still don't) what is supposedly so hard about paying bills and keeping the house clean-whew boy did I open myself up there- I mean the daily stuff that needs to be done.

I am going with what she says. I wouldn't say they are ALL "rich Stepford wives" but it isn't rocket science either.

[sandnsea]

29. I've done both

Being a working mom is much harder. However, when you stay at home, you do other things that you didn't do when you worked. You cook more to save money on meals, whether fast food or instant. You shop differently. You do more restoration projects instead of buying new. You put in a garden. You volunteer more. You have neighborhood children over more. A stay at home mom can be very busy making a life for her family too, especially since she's got less money to do it with. For most Americans anyway.

[underpants]

38. Well she did both

the gardening didn't take with me though.

Every night was a cooked meal except on maybe Fridays when we might go out to a fast food place.

[sandnsea]

72. Oh, one of "those" women

That somehow manages to do everything. I hate them. :)

You were a very lucky kid.

[BamaGirl]

30. I'm not a stepford wife

And my husband is a cop, who is also in the Guard, so we are definitely not rich. What we are, is very good managers of our money and very picky about where we spend it. I paid my way thru college for myself, not for a job. I resent the implication that that is squandered money. It was mine to spend, and the education mine to do with as I see fit. We are just too diverse to be making these kind of blanket statements.

[mcar]

32. Amen to that

we are too diverse to be making blanket statements. I've been on both sides and the one thing that has always bothered me is the "mommy war" issue.

There's no right or wrong here; there is choice and ability. My husband and I have made a tremendous financial sacrifice to have me stay home. Other families unfortunately don't have that choice. Having been on both sides, I have tremendous admiration for both "working" and "stay at home" mothers.

There's no need for bitterness and meanness here. We're all DUers.

The main thing is that THK apologized for her comment. The Kerry campaign should use that to point out that adults sometimes make mistakes, and the mature person acknowledges that mistake and apologizes or makes amends.

Unlike some usurpers we know.;-)

[mindfulNJ]

44. That is just plain insulting.

I stayed home with my kids and was happy to do it. It also meant a lot of sacrifice, scrimping, and doing without to make it work. I didn't sit around eating bon bons and going to lunch...God, when are women going stop this stupidity and respect each other for their life choices?

[Kanary]

50. Women fighting each other over who is doing it "right".

Isn't that just .......swell?

Just like much of life, both choices have their positives and negatives. You made your choice and I'm so glad that you were able to do so. It's the choice I would also make. There is no reason for anyone making this choice to be criticised.

At least Theresa apologized when she stepped over the line.

:hi:

Kanary

[Pithlet]

60. I don't understand it.

I should be used to being insulted and denigrated for what I do. But it still hurts, especially coming from people on DU.

[Kanary]

80. Please don't get "used" to being insulted and denigrated.

Becoming desensitized to insults and harshness is the way towards sociopathology.

We can't let it become "OK".

Yes, it hurts more from those who claim to be so much more aware than the "freepers".

This is part of our country we have to take back.

It's not the sole province of the RW.

Kanary

[Pithlet]

53. Were you trying

to figure out how offensive you could be? Just wondering.

[mark11727]

15. How did Hughes get involved in this....WTF?

Dear Laura, I'm so sorry you married an idiot.

[napi21]

16. That's Karen's job! She has to cover for the boss who can't do it

for himself. He really keeps her busy all the time too!

[in_cog_ni_to]

17. She was a guest on Inside Politics (?)

One of those shows and that's when she made the comment. She was asked if the Bush campaign accepted the apology and she went off on her tangent.

[Octafish]

23. In college, Laura had a job selling weed.

Now she's just married to a dope.

[Iris]

24. hee! hee! n/t

[LaReservaPr]

28. Another question

Has Bush ever had a job? before he became governor of Texas , a real one, besides being Head Cheerleader at Yale, because thats probably really tough and very useful when running for president.

[Octafish]

77. Poppy's pals paid princely sums to prop up Smirk's failed pyramid schemes.

Totally serious. The guy's Midas in reverse: Everything Smirko touches turned to rot. Here's a great overview of how he lost millions of investor's dollars -- and cheated big names by selling $650k's worth of HARKEN Energy stock on inside knowledge a few weeks before it crashed -- without ever being accountable. Shoot, if he were a Democrat, he'd be doing hard time along with Martha Stewart.

The REAL Dirt On Bush/Harken Scandal!!
by Mediafilter.org Friday July 05, 2002 at 08:46 PM


The REAL Dirt On Bush/Harken Scandal!!

Arbusto is an oil company Bush ran into the ground and it was acquired by Spectrum which, Bush ran into the ground and it was acquired by Harken. Bush is as "inside" as a trader gets.

GEORGE JR.'S BCCI CONNECTION

"This is an incredible deal, unbelievable for this small company," energy analyst Charles Strain told Forbes magazine, describing the oil production sharing agreement the Harken Energy Corporation signed in January 1990 with Bahrain.

Under the terms of the deal, Harken was given the exclusive right to explore for gas and oil off the shores of the Gulf island nation. If gas or oil were found in waters near two of the world's largest gas and oil fields, Harken would have exclusive marketing and transportation rights for the energy resources. Truly an "incredible deal" for a company that had never drilled an offshore well.

Strain failed to point out, however, the one fact that puts the Harken deal in focus: George Bush, Jr., the eldest son of George and Barbara Bush of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, Washington, DC, is a member of Harken's board of directors, a consultant, and a stockholder in the Texas-based company. In light of this connection, the deal makes more sense. The involvement of Junior-George Walker Bush's childhood nickname-with Harken is a walking conflict of interest. His relationship to President Bush, rather than any business acumen, made him a valuable asset for Harken, the Republican Party benefactors, Middle East oil sheikhs and covert operators who played a part in Harken's Bahrain deal.

In fact, Junior's track record as an oilman is pretty dismal. He began his career in Midland, Texas, in the mid-1970s when he founded Arbusto Energy, Inc. When oil prices dropped in the early 1980s, Arbusto fell upon hard times. Junior was only rescued from business failure when his company was purchased by Spectrum 7 Energy Corporation, a small oil firm owned by William DeWitt and Mercer Reynolds. As part of the September 1984 deal, Bush became Spectrum 7's president and was given a 13.6 percent share in the company's stock. Oil prices stayed low and within two years, Spectrum 7 was in trouble.

CONTINUED...

http://sf.indymedia.org/news/2002/07/136245.php

BTW: A hearty welcome to DU, carlaivette! Welcome aboard!

[Jose Diablo]

31. Teresa has class.

Far more than that trash in office. Thats for sure.

Teresa will be a very good First Lady. Just what we need to mend some broken friendships around the world.

[6000eliot]

33. Too bad

I'm sure what she meant to say was that George Bush has never done a real job. A reasonable error.

[Shiraz]

35. Hey Karen,

I'm a stay at home mom and I'm not insulted.

[theboss]

34. As I mentioned before, who is letting Teresa keep talking?

God love her, I think she's a fascinating person. But she is a disaster on the campaign trail. Everytime she talks, a fucking firestorm erupts. Shut her down for a few weeks. Then - after we win - turn her loose and let her say all the bat-shit crazy stuff she wants.

[sonicx]

36. firestorm?

the last 'firestrom' was 'shove it' and that was months ago.

this new "story" will die today.

[FredScuttle]

41. In other words...

SHUT UP! SHUT UP!

Thanks...I'm sure the campaign and Teresa, in particular, will give that careful consideration.

[theboss]

74. Way to put words in my mouth

First of all, I have never understood why first ladies have to campaign in the first place. I frankly don't care about them.

And secondly, I like Teresa but she is rich, eccentric, foreign woman and says a lot of things that sound whacky on first instance. She is simply not good at this.

[FredScuttle]

89. In other words, SHUT UP! SHUT UP!

Sorry if you disagree with my interpretation, but it sounds like you'd like to put her in a box for a week and a half so that none of her "rich, eccentric, foreign" soundbites are sprung on an unsuspecting public.

Oh, by the way, you forgot "terrorist sympathizer" to your list of RW smear points about Theresa.

[Bluebear]

42. Firestorm??

Well, OK...

[bloom]

67. well that is some real support there...

:eyes:


You probably missed her on Cspan, yesterday - where she was speaking in New Hamshire.

I was quite impressed at her range of knowledge - and glad that she was out there speaking about the environment, etc.


------

If anything - I've noticed quite a few political wives who speak quite a bit better (are more interesting and seem more knowledgeable) than their husbands....

[stopbush]

37. A hear Laura quit the library job because she was getting too run down.

Oops...that was an old boyfriend. My bad.

[Cat Atomic]

40. Oh, c'mon. That's news? That's not even campaign coverage.

This shit is ridiculous.

[in_cog_ni_to]

43. Indeed.

It's just the kind of crap the RW,WH ass-kissing media shills LOVE to spend HOURS dishing to the sheeple. Anything to make Teresa and John look bad, or so they hope. :grr:

[Name removed]

46. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[IowaGuy]

54. Jeez - get a grip

If you've really put all that much time into this, I would think yoou would have figured out what we are dealing with for opponent by now. It doesn't matter what Theresa or anybody else does...this is what Rove, Hughes and the other merry band of repukes do...it is in their DNA...if you let yourself start getting jerked around by their spin, you're going to drive yourself crazy...

[Bunny]

70. Let's put the muzzle on you instead.

You are the loose cannon. You cannot have possibly put any time into winning this campaign if you are going to refer to Teresa as a "spoiled heiress". You don't know jack shit about her. I don't think "we" are all on board. Now, why don't you toddle on back to that other board, huh?

[porphyrian]

47. The point lost on these assholes...

...is that apologies are not a sign of weakness. They indicate that an individual has the strength and maturity to admit when they are wrong.

[Name removed]

48. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[bloom]

68. Well I think you three guys

need to shut the fuck up.

If you keep it up - you're and sexist friends are going to drive away the women's vote.

[Name removed]

55. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[drunkdriver-in-chief]

75. True - but just try and get the media to talk about that

Actually there are two huge scandals re the Midland Mash. First is laura blowing a stop sign in front of witnesses and killing a guy she was mad at, and second, laura never being charged with anything!!!

If this was hillary when she was first lady we all know what the media would have done with this story.

[PROGRESSIVE1]

58. Stepford Laura gets sympathy because the media is owned...

by Rethulinazis!!!

:grr:

[Name removed]

59. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Pithlet]

62. TKH did not insult stay at home mothers.

The quote was taken out of context, for one thing. All Karen Hughes wants to do is re-ignite the Stay at home vs. work outside of the home battle that has been raging now for some time. I really don't know what she hopes to accomplish by doing so. I'm a stay at home mom and solidly Dem. I'm not impressed with Karen Hughes.

[BUSHOUT]

63. Accuracy question: Did she make a statement or was it a question...

As in "I don't know if she's had a real job" rather than "she's never had a real job"??

[Dees]

66. At least she has the decency and courage to

admit she made an error. Better than any Bu$hbutts.

[jn2375]

76. Christ, everyone get off this subject we're just feeding the media

and there will be days and days of this shit from them. Everyone Stop talking about this now!!!!!

[allalone]

81. laura's jobs

I doubt she could get a job as a librarian now since her experience was back in the days of card catalogs. Technology has passed her by.

[Barney Rocks]

82. THK has nothing

to apologize for. It isn't like she MURDERED someone.

[Bridget Burke]

86. Laura was a "stay at home" years before she was a "Mom"

In fact, she dropped her librarian job when she got engaged--although it was not a long engagement. And she continues to get credit for her teaching & librarianship "career"--although she was apparently just passing time until she nabbed a hubby.

Staying at home while the kids are little is great for those who can afford it. But I know quite a few women who worked--especially after their children were in school--& reared well-educated children without police records.