President Obama makes perfectly reasonable statement about the problems working parents have in finding quality childcare, which gets cherry picked by conservatives as being an attack on stay-at-home moms. Well you know who HAS to weigh in on this!

"Too often parents have no choice but to put their kids in cheaper daycare, that maybe doesn't have the kinds of programming that makes a big difference in a child's development. And sometime there may just not be any slots, or the best programs may be too far away. And sometimes someone, usually mom, leaves the workplace to stay home with the kids, which then leaves her earning a lower wage for the rest of her life as a result. And that's not a choice want Americans to make."

Clearly the President was talking about the problems facing two income families who are faced with problems finding quality childcare. It was NOT directed at families where the male earns an income which allows his wife to be a stay-at-home mother. 

However THAT is exactly how it is being purposefully misinterpreted by the Right Wing professional outrage machine. And right now the conservatives smell blood in the water and the sharks are beginning to circle.

And if there is any hint of weakness on the President's part, you know who will soon come sniffing around for a taste.

And gee the headline of her Facebook post starts off so reasonably:

Obama Declares Stay-at-Home Moms Aren't Worth a Hill of Beans; Says It's a Choice 'We Don't Want Americans to Make’

I will spare you the entire thing as I think you can already imagine how ugly and fact free it will be. 

However here are a few moosenuggets for your perusal: 

On behalf of former and current stay-at-homers, including my girlfriends who still get together to bake cookies for the bake sale (see photos in my kitchen above), and volunteer to coach kids ball teams, and man the church's food bank, and entertain latchkey kids, and all that other obnoxiously "housewifey" stuff, the President needs to be spanked. 

Number one I think most of her "girlfriends" are on the SarahPAC payroll, and number two waht kind of person suggests that the President of the United States should be "spanked?"

It seems you'd shackle us by your snobbish shunning of one traditional lifestyle choice while taking advantage of power to manifest your liberal view by manipulating public opinion and resources to diminish moms who put career on hold to raise a family. You are really messed up. And you're so 1960's. 

Now she is talking about "shackles?"
 
You really are stuck in a contorted kind of '60s feminism where you obviously don't trust women to make their own decisions, so you're frustrated. 

And now she is suggesting that the President is "frustrated?" Anybody else picking up on a theme here?

Now, I'm sure your star struck female minions in the media will writhe and wiggle in defense of you on this, they always do, even though you just marginalized a most valuable sector of American society while having the gall to admit that, for you, it's only all about the money. 

"Female minions" will "writhe and wiggle?" Well so much more subtlety.

And then Palin goes for the jugular.

Perhaps you never witnessed the benefits a "full-time mom" provides a family, a community, our schools, our nation, but you're a big boy now so figure it out yourself without me lecturing you on the beauty of a homemaker. Suffice it to say "stay-at-home moms" make the world go 'round. 

- Sarah Palin

Okay now that was just uncalled for. Suggesting that the President does not appreciate stay-at-home mothers because his worked out of the home is a low blow even for Palin.

I understand that it undermines Sarah Palin, and the conservatives, sense of outrage to recognize that the President was NOT suggesting that he did not want mothers to stay at home with their children, but the fact is that what he was saying is that he did not want either parent to be forced out of work due to poor childcare choices.

The President was making his speech  at the Rhode Island College in Providence, and the topic was "Women and the Economy."  I think THAT audience had little difficulty understanding that the President was discussing ways in which the government could assist parents and help them to compete financially with their counterparts at work who do not have to worry about also meeting the needs of their children.

Sadly that is a sophisticated message which rings hollow in the ears of the ignorant.