Seems like only yesterday the White House was basking in the glow of worldly feminists effusing over the president’s Grrrl Power governance.
Chaudhury: The criticism of the Obama administration seems to be particularly “male,” you know? When you say ‘why aren’t you fighting back, why aren’t you policing?’ I think we’ve been talking about having women in leadership positions, and Obama’s attitude to leadership is really a very womanly one, you know, which is consensual, which is thought through, which calms the temperature down of the world, and it’s very important to remember that, you know.
Jarrett: Thank you.
Chaudhury: Yesterday, Barbara Walters kept asking, ‘Should we police the world? You know, are we doing this? Should America fix it?’ And, I think, you know, I’m from India, and we really respect, uh, the Obama administration, purely for changing the way people speak, for changing the discourse of the world, and for bringing the temperature down, you know. This is a womanly leadership.”
Jarrett: Thank you. I’m going to tell him you said that. I think he’ll be very pleased to hear that that’s how you describe it. And I think I’m going to use that in terms of taking the temperature down. Because it has to come down if you are actually going to listen to one another, you have to take a lot of the heat out of the discourse. I think he’s very good at doing that, thank you.
Now, some of the actual women who served in the White House are bemoaning the “hostile workplace” at 1600 Pennsylvania:
Friction about the roles of women in the Obama White House grew so intense during the first two years of the president’s tenure that he was forced to take steps to reassure senior women on his staff that he valued their presence and their input.
At a dinner in November 2009, several senior female aides complained directly to the president that men enjoyed greater access to him and often muscled them out of key policy discussions.
Those tensions prompted Obama, urged on by senior adviser Valerie Jarrett, to elevate more women into senior White House positions, recognize them more during staff meetings and increase the female presence in the upper ranks of the reelection campaign. “There were some issues early on with women feeling as though they hadn’t figured out what their role was going to be on the senior team at the White House,” Jarrett said in an interview Monday. “Most of the women hadn’t worked on the campaign, and so they didn’t have a personal relationship with the president.”
…One of the most striking quotes in the book came from former White House communications director Anita Dunn , who was quoted as saying that, “this place would be in court for a hostile workplace. . . . Because it actually fit all of the classic legal requirements for a genuinely hostile workplace to women.”
Dunn says she was quoted out of context and told The Post on Friday that she told Suskind “point blank” that the White House was not a hostile work environment.
Except that, er, she did say that:
On Monday, Suskind allowed a Post reporter to review a recorded excerpt of the original interview, which took place over the telephone in April. In that conversation, Dunn is heard telling Suskind about a conversation she had with Jarrett.
“I remember once I told Valerie that, I said if it weren’t for the president, this place would be in court for a hostile workplace,” Dunn is heard telling Suskind. “Because it actually fit all of the classic legal requirements for a genuinely hostile workplace to women.”
Unfortunately for the rest of us, Obama compensated by elevating extremist radical women like Kathleen Sebelius, Jane Lubchenco, and Carol Browner — all of whom have employed Beltway business-as-usual tactics to run roughshod over the rule of law.
In the end, Obama’s gals will be brass-knuckle boys to secure their agenda and power.
It’s not just a “hostile workplace” for a few grumbling women left out in the cold.
It’s a hostile workplace for all American taxpayers and job creators.blog comments powered by Disqus
Of course: DOJ advises employers to ignore this immigration law to avoid discrimination charges (Sunday open thread)
August 28, 2016 10:09 AM by Doug Powers
What could go wrong? Candidate the FBI director called ‘extremely careless’ with classified info given even more classified into
August 27, 2016 02:46 PM by Doug Powers
August 25, 2016 08:59 PM by Doug Powers
August 25, 2016 07:50 AM by Doug Powers
August 23, 2016 08:18 PM by Doug Powers