"There is only one class in the community that thinks more about money than the rich, and that is the poor. The poor can think of nothing else." ~ Oscar Wilde

Hilary Rosen certainly created quite the talking point this week when she brazenly claimed that the wife of the presumed Republican committee Mitt Romney, Ann Romney, had "never worked a day in her life". Her tweet set off a firestorm of rhetoric from the right, accusing the Democratic machine of targeting mothers who stay at home with their children as somehow being lazy, degrading their position by implying raising children was a coy way of not having to work for a living. But it seems like the old political game of taking words out of context to create a false flag issue has once again reared its ugly head.

Let's first look at the entire quote from Ms. Rosen: "What you have is Mitt Romney running around the country, saying, 'Well, you know, my wife tells me that what women really care about are economic issues, and when I listen to my wife, that's what I'm hearing.' Guess what? His wife has actually never worked a day in her life. She's never really dealt with the kinds of economic issues that a majority of the women in this country are facing, in terms of how do we feed our kids, how do we send them to school, and why do we worry about their future."

I am going to go out on a limb here and guess that the average reader of this column can look between the lines and see the intent of Ms. Rosen's comments, however poorly she worded them. What she was attempting to say is that Ms. Romney, a woman of exceptional means, has never faced the challenges that many of today's mothers face, whether they are true stay-at-home moms, women who have chosen to have both a family and a career, or, one of those millions of women who do not have the luxury of making a choice in the matter.

As soon as Ms. Rosen's tweet went viral, Ann Romney shot back with her first ever tweet, "I made a choice to stay home and raise five boys. Believe me, it was hard work."

Does Ms. Romney really believe Ms. Rosen's intent was to somehow debase the job she did raising five sons? In my opinion, nothing could be further from the truth. Ms. Rosen is herself a parent to twin girls, so the assumption that she does not know the sacrifices associated with raising children is a bit far fetched.

But both Ms. Rosen, former president of the Recording Industry Association of America and Ms. Romney are the exception to the rule. They are women who have the ability to choose professional careers versus caring for their children on a full time basis. They both have access to healthcare for both themselves and their children, with the only difference being that Ms. Romney does not support universal access to healthcare, a position that would allow parents to make better choices for both themselves and their children and ensure they remain an active parent for years to come.

Both Rosen and Romney are the 1% of women in this country who have a choice in the matter, and they should both be smart enough to recognize that. But while Rosen supports many positions that could help more women in this country make choices that are best for them and their families, Romney does not.

This author is not bashing Romney for making the choice to stay at home and raise her children with a loving parent at their side. In fact, he finds it commendable. To give up one's own personal hopes, desires and aspirations to ensure your children have a solid family foundation is extremely noble.

The difference, in this author's opinion, is that Romney supports a slew of ideas that would effectively prohibit working parents of either gender from making a similar choice. In a speech on January 4, 2012, for example, Ms. Romney husband asserted that, when he was president, struggling mothers would be required to work outside of the home in order to receive government assistance. "Even if you have a child two years of age, you need to go to work," he said. "And people said, 'Well that's heartless,' and I said 'No, no, I'm willing to spend more on child care to allow those parents to go back to work. It'll cost the state more providing that day care, but I want the individuals to have the dignity of work.'

It's clear that both Romneys believe that there is an intrinsic value in being a stay-at-home mom or dad and raising your children in a way that is all too uncommon these days. But for two people of such exceptional means to tout their choice, while advocating taking away the same choice for others of lesser means reeks of both aloof elitism and even scarier, unapologetic narcissism.

In this day and age, with so many people struggling in an economy where just having one job is a far too uncommon occurrence, the Romneys should realize just how many of us don't have the choices in life that they, and their children, have.