Women Commentators Rake Rendell
Email"Janet’s perfect for that job," a hot mic picked up Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell saying earlier this week of Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano, President-elect Obama’s nominee to be secretary of the Department of Homeland Security.
"Because, for that job, you have to have no life," Rendell went on. "Janet has no family. Perfect. She can devote, literally, 19-20 hours a day to it."
Yesterday, the avuncular former Philly mayor clarified: "What I meant is that Janet is a person who works 24/7, just like I do. She has no life. Neither do I."
But Rendell has a wife and son.
And though he’s known for working hard, few in the know in the great commonwealth of Pennsylvania would assert that he has no life.
Today in the New York Times, Gail Collins writes that Rendell’s assertion of Napolitano’s single-ness "seemed to be the summation of Napolitano’s qualifications. Rendell himself has been on the list of Cabinet mentions, and this is a good example of the way people around the world explain why another person got the prize instead: It was all about some random characteristic I happen to lack. (‘Ted’s perfect for the job. Because for that job, you really have to speak Estonian.’) Perhaps a rather undesirable characteristic. (‘For that job, you have to be able to drink those salesmen under the table and Ted’s an absolute lush.’)
"And it sure sounded as if he was saying that single people like Napolitano exist in a state so dark and barren that the empty hours can only be filled up by guarding the nation’s borders against terrorists and preparing for the next hurricane."
Similarly, CNN’s Campbell Brown took Rendell to task.
Brown said that Rendell’s "comments do perpetuate stereotypes that puts us in boxes, both mothers and single women."
What sayeth you?
- jpt
Sen. DeMint: GOP Race Could Go Until Convention 
Obama Avoids Questions on Contraception Rule
Hysterical over-reaction while reading into a non-issue also perpetuates stereotypes that puts them in boxes as well.
Posted by: Deep Release | December 4, 2008, 9:45 am 9:45 am
Women are worse perpetrators against other women than men could ever be. What Rendell said was just another typical stereotype against women…we have seen so many this season! I think sexism runs deeper and is even more accepted than racism…we have a LOOOOOOOONNNGGGGGGGGGGGG way to go!
Posted by: samhiguchi | December 4, 2008, 9:47 am 9:47 am
Rendell’s comments are yet another example of how women and their qualifications continue to be viewed through the lens of of their marital and parenthood status. Many claim that things have changed for women in the world of business & politics, but they haven’t really, and Rendell’s comments are the perfect example of that.
I’m no fan of Sarah Palin, but Rendell’s comments are the flip side of the criticism Palin took during the campaign about whether she could do the VP job since she was the mother of small children.
I hope I live long enough to see the day when we all laugh about how provincial people were to view women through a lens of their child-bearing status and that my eight-year-old daughter will be able to laugh about how silly people were in the “olden days” to think such things.
Posted by: PunditMom | December 4, 2008, 9:47 am 9:47 am
IMO, I see nothing wrong with Rendell’s commemt. When I was single, I devoted every day, 24/7, to my job and didn’t want to do much of anything else because I loved my work. It d*mn sure beat dating ‘deadbeats’. Now I’m retired, so don’t have to worry about a job and can devote my time to my hubby, home, grown family and grandchildren.
It seems Campbell needs to get off that soapbox she has been on ever since she got married. If it wasn’t yelling at the GOP to let Palin be Palin, it was something else. Seems to me she is looking for something more in her life because I don’t recall her being quite the witch she has now become when she was with one of those morning shows.
Furthermore, I don’t believe Rendell meant anything derrogatory by his comment other than the explanation he later provided. Why isn’t that enough to satisfy Campbell? I suspect it’s enough to satisfy more than just a few females; single or married.
Posted by: InstantGratification | December 4, 2008, 9:53 am 9:53 am
What we have to say is:
To MUCH REAL news going on, we do not want to be diverted from the real issues.
In these times, do you want the American People to start a public debate about if Rendell is against women?
or do we really need to concentrate on the fact that our auto industry is just about gone, because there are no new idea people in detroit.
and many more people will be out of work.
what we need is someone to walk through the crowd today during those hearings with the big three, and pick up some hot mike “What the real story is” behind the scenes with what is going to happen with the auto ind.
I know what they will be showing us on tv, and telling us. but What is the real story on what is going on?
I hope mr. rendell has already called janet, and said sorry, and i hope she has already said she accepts his sorry. so we can move on.
I doubt now that she has a new job ahead of her, she will not want the msm and the country to focus on this issue
i am sure this issue needs to be talked about, and plenty to say
just not now.
Posted by: what? | December 4, 2008, 9:56 am 9:56 am
Where was all the outrage from Campbell Brown when the sexist treatment of Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin was flying fast and furious? She was too busy fawning over Obama at that point to even care.
Posted by: evelyn | December 4, 2008, 9:59 am 9:59 am
People say things that are often taken the wrong way. Unfortunately, this is happening far too often. What difference does it make what people say? Campbell Brown has changed dramatically since going to CNN. Reminds me of McCain’s change during the campaign… Campbell is now like Palin – boring!
Posted by: Sandi | December 4, 2008, 10:04 am 10:04 am
Evelyn,
True, True, but Campbell Brown now has a new show (you see i did not call it news) a new show that she needs to keep the ratings up for.
I don’t think we have any more real news people or journalist like the old days anymore. what we have is people in tv. that work in the news sector through a couple of cycles, build up resume’, make LOTS of money, and instead of tell us the news (because they really can only tell what the owners and sponsors say they can tell)
so they give us the diverted fluff-(withhold the real news) and then leave and write books about WHAT REALLY HAPPENED.
back to campbell, so new show, rating must be up, fluff, i guess we will soon see her show has a little cartoon segment or circus portion, (like chris matthews side show) and then she will write a book.
Posted by: what? | December 4, 2008, 10:06 am 10:06 am
Well can you blame them.
go to college
get degree
get on tv
get own show
do what you have to do to keep your job
write a book.
these people in the “NEWS” now, working on tv news programs is just a stepping stone to getting the book deal.
think about how many people in the “NEWS” business-made their fortu. off the clinton scandal.
I mean, it is better than working in the US auto industry right now.
Posted by: what? | December 4, 2008, 10:11 am 10:11 am
Women are strangling themselves just to try and prove they can do two big jobs at the same time.
Recently we saw Sarah Palin cooking in the kitchen for her family while taking the interview.
The picture did not go well to my views.
Posted by: FM | December 4, 2008, 10:12 am 10:12 am
fm,
that is right, and what about the fact that Hillary Clinton, had to be shown
being able to “Drink with the boys”
It IS a shame
and there is much room for discussion.
the conversation will go on.
but the us auto industry is falling down.
i talked with a woman who works at an auto plant, and she is the breadwinner in her family, and has kids in college
and she is worried about what is going to happen with her future.
with the us auto ind. it is to bad, and it is the ceo’ (not the workers) own fault
but the workers are the ones who will pay.
don’t let the stunt of “driving to dc in the cars fool you. they still own the pvt. jets.
the auto industry is falling down.
and the poor working class people are going to suffer from it.
Posted by: what? | December 4, 2008, 10:23 am 10:23 am
Deep Release -
Spot on. Good on you.
Posted by: Brooklyn Democrat | December 4, 2008, 10:25 am 10:25 am
There is no problem saying someone has no kids and not married and can devote time to the job the problem is that saying someone has no spouse and no kids means they have no life!
Posted by: rachel | December 4, 2008, 10:33 am 10:33 am
What:
Hillary “drinking with boys” that is what we call “socializing”. But attending the family and combing it with the job, I can call it “serving two masters at the same time”.
Posted by: FM | December 4, 2008, 10:43 am 10:43 am
you may well call it soc. but, i’ll bet the story would have been a lot different if it were Sen. Clinton and some of her girlfriends.
the whole reason sen. clinton had to do that was, because of the question
is a woman tuff enough to be able to deal with world leaders, who are mostly men.
and the whole issue of most president have hobbies such as fishing, or hunting
what will this woman do, sen. clinton does no sports, well if she had said my hobby is not hunting or fishing i like to sew, well there would have been more questions about her ability to run with the “big tuff boys”
Posted by: what? | December 4, 2008, 10:56 am 10:56 am
I feel bad for Janet Napolitano and anyone else whose personal life has become political news without then having done anything to deserve that annoyance.
Posted by: Danny | December 4, 2008, 11:06 am 11:06 am
What’s with all the Campbell bashing? She didn’t even get a hyperlinked name in the story, for pete’s sake.
Posted by: just me | December 4, 2008, 11:49 am 11:49 am
PunditMom——you are right on! Being a Conservative (why am I even reading ABCNews?) I feel that the issue here is not about a person’s “life”…nor whether that person is a Woman, Black, Jew or Morman. Politicians! That’s the problem! The issue is that Politicians play POLITICS! What we are missing is that as we post our views, the Great Nation that we live in is being ram-rodded into a Socialist form of government! Get real people…Pelosi and Reid can’t wait for Obama to get into office, as they have been the driving force with this $700 billion bailout. It’s a buy-in to our private businesses, not a bail-out! It’s a 40% buy-in where the government has no business…in private business! Read Obama’s “Agenda” then hope your little girl has a future where she can speak her mind!
Posted by: Thateldoo | December 4, 2008, 11:56 am 11:56 am
Ah, the outrage over commenting on a woman being single. Where were they when the comments were about a woman being a bad mother by running for vp? Oh, that’s right, Brown was among those questioning that decision. And where was Collins during that discussion? Absent, you say?
As a single woman who considers herself a feminist: What’s the deal ladies? Double standard, much?
Posted by: red | December 4, 2008, 11:57 am 11:57 am
The biggest problem I have is why was that even mentioned. It has nothing to do with the reason she got the job. I think Mr. Rendel was trying to say, “The reason I didn’t get this job was because I have a family.” Not that he’s not as capable as Ms. Napolitano.
Posted by: Kathy | December 4, 2008, 12:02 pm 12:02 pm
If Ed Rendell keeps clarifying himself , his foot will be non retrievable from his mouth.
Posted by: kat | December 4, 2008, 12:15 pm 12:15 pm
He is a sexist…the simple and short of it.
Posted by: Kenneth Pennington | December 4, 2008, 12:18 pm 12:18 pm
Might have been a poorly worded compliment. Or a poor attempt at a joke.
Posted by: LongT | December 4, 2008, 12:25 pm 12:25 pm
I don’t see what all the fuss is. He wasn’t complaining about her pick — I haven’t heard that from anyone. He was pointing out that her lack of family upped her ability to hunker down and concentrate on the job in a way others couldn’t. Such a high-ranking job requires many hours out of someone. How unfair is it of anyone — male or female — to have to neglect their family members (especially minor kids) to accomplish their job? Kudos to those non-singles who can get the job done, but what kind of damage are they doing themselves and others? I’m not saying we should require all major office holders and top execs to be single (and then require them to do away with their free time), but neither do I think that having a single status being used as a “plus” is anything sexist or marriage-ist or family-ist or anything. It just is. There are only so many hours in a day, period, and some jobs require X amount of hours while family requires X amount of hours.
Posted by: CarolStrick | December 4, 2008, 12:32 pm 12:32 pm
Not sure it matters. Rendell could have said the same thing about a man being designated to that position.
Posted by: john brown | December 4, 2008, 12:33 pm 12:33 pm
I’m unclear how this is sexist? It’s yet another example of selective interpretation to further a ridiculous PC agenda. People with poor ego development like to make things other people say sound racist/sexist/homophobic because it lets them feel holier-than-thou and pat themselves on the back for being such a great all around, tolerant, wonderful person. He didn’t say anything sexist, it’s as simple as that.
Posted by: John | December 4, 2008, 12:34 pm 12:34 pm
this is the most important issue you could blog about?
Posted by: Bill | December 4, 2008, 12:35 pm 12:35 pm
I wonder if Campbell Brown thinks it is sexist that her looks helped to get her the job on CNN. Look around CNN and ask yourself, how does she stand out. Also, how about Sara Palin. SNL spoofs her as not too bright and it is sexist, but they did the same for “W” and nothing is said about it. Brown is looking to make news rather than report it.
Posted by: Rick Retting | December 4, 2008, 12:36 pm 12:36 pm
erm…news huh? Some jack A$$ says some lady who just got a position doesn’t have a life accidentily on a live Mic. Really? He just said, no family or kids, so no life, basically? The only thing funnier than the fact that the “News” picked this up is the number of Feminists that appear up in arms now. I mean, honestly? When will you learn that the madder you get about trivial things, the more your cause is viewed as a trivial thing. If this was a dude with “no life” would the story be any different. Good grief. I’m going to spend the rest of my day looking for things to over interprit.
Posted by: hahawrong | December 4, 2008, 12:36 pm 12:36 pm
i think it is shameful that we have socalled news people, who make BIG BUCKS
who give us light stories, and do not dig for the real meat of the news we need to be informed citizens.
to many really serious issues happening in the world today-
when are we going to get the back story on the big three.
get us a “scoop” (as i think they once called it)
instead of waiting until we see it on the tv news, and just have it re-stewed on here.
Posted by: what? | December 4, 2008, 12:36 pm 12:36 pm
I am telling you friends,
cambell brown has a show now with ratings.
remember when she chewed up sarah palin,
that is when cambell brown “got made”
was then called “hard hitting, and tuff”
and hey, she got her own show.
she has a staff
and she has to keep the ratings UP.
what she does not need to do, is find and report the news to us.
because they all know that tonight many of you will be tuning in (ratings) to see what cambell has to say next.
all fluff.
cambell brown on cnn
rachael M on msnbc.
and a whole host of women on fox.
same for the men though.
no news just fluff.
Posted by: what? | December 4, 2008, 12:43 pm 12:43 pm
What? – What we have here is infotainment, which keeps the consumers’ mind off the truly relevant. Trivializing news on the major networks may draw in the vacuous consciousness with its shiny bytes, but so far, has contributed mainly to the news success of the alternatives, like Rachel Maddow and non network affiliated websites.
Posted by: kat | December 4, 2008, 12:50 pm 12:50 pm
Governor Rendell always has, and continues to be, a pig and a slime. Wake up Pennsylvania!! This is a reflection on you!
Posted by: Laurel | December 4, 2008, 1:01 pm 1:01 pm
Likeable Rendell made a major issue in the primaries of the election sexism against his candidate Hillary Clinton.
It is ironic that he fell in the same trap with his comments about Governor Napolitano.
His comments were very rude about the nominee for Homeland Security and a very successful female governor.
Guess it is all relative to him.
Posted by: stsabc | December 4, 2008, 1:03 pm 1:03 pm
Well, it may be viewed as an over reaction from some. But for the ones that know Governor Rendell’s personality, it’s just more of the same slimy ego and pompous stupidity. Very frustrating to see a man like this in a political office.
Posted by: Laurel | December 4, 2008, 1:06 pm 1:06 pm
I don’t know that it’s such a good idea having someone who has no life in charge of the security of someone else’s life.
Where’s the motivation?
Posted by: drjohn | December 4, 2008, 1:20 pm 1:20 pm
GET A LIFE PEOPLE!
I am not a fan of Gov Rendell. However, he later explained what he meant by his comment.
He indicated that as Homeland Security Secretary, Gov Napolitano should be able to spend
the 20 hour days that the job demands without sacrificing family time, etc, because she does not have any immediate family obligations.
Posted by: CHS235 | December 4, 2008, 1:36 pm 1:36 pm
“Napolitano should be able to spend
the 20 hour days that the job demands without sacrificing family time, etc, because she does not have any immediate family obligations.”
So Barack Obama ought to back away from that President thing as that might be time intensive, eh?
After all, he does have young children.
Posted by: drjohn | December 4, 2008, 1:40 pm 1:40 pm
Laurel said: “Governor Rendell always has, and continues to be, a pig and a slime. Wake up Pennsylvania!! This is a reflection on you!”———— Honey, lighten up and find something serious to rail about. Some of us women are tired of the constant sexist whining by women.
Posted by: jonnie36 | December 4, 2008, 2:41 pm 2:41 pm
Look! I am a woman with 2 kids and I always have those thoughts about women who do not have children or husbands. I’ve said several times that Condoleeza Rice needs to get a life. It is not sexist or stereotypical. It is just a fact that these people have more time to devote to their careers. What is wrong with speaking the truth. NO NEED TO BEAT AROUND THE BUSH OR TO BE POLITICALLY CORRECT .
Posted by: Trelawny | December 4, 2008, 3:18 pm 3:18 pm
Having a husband and kids doesn’t necessarily mean having a life. Janet Napolitano has a father who, though elderly, is still sharp as a tack. I’m sure she also has a circle of friends, a home and shouldn’t be put in a box. Rendell was wrong to say what he did — he opened his mouth and got his foot stuck in it.
Posted by: nanameow | December 4, 2008, 4:05 pm 4:05 pm
no big news here.
yes, it is something for us to talk about.
but no news the citizens can truly use.
it is all about the razzle dazzle
now.
Posted by: what? | December 4, 2008, 4:30 pm 4:30 pm
Attagirl, Treelawny, you’re right on. In general married women with kids run home at 5 and single women hang in there. Ladies, quit whining and take care of business on your own side of the street. Work hard, shut-up, make changes in your own life if that’s what you want and leave other people to their own opinions.
Posted by: Debra Congram | December 4, 2008, 4:44 pm 4:44 pm
this is not a big deal,i think mr rendell is right on. you do need a lot of time to devote to such a job. just another stupid story line,
Posted by: simplecake | December 4, 2008, 5:28 pm 5:28 pm
The liberals and the MSM (same thing) had no problems with the OBamanuts making sexist comments regarding Hillary or Sarah. But NOW! It is one of Obama’s picks, and it is a BIG thing!
Posted by: Glubber | December 4, 2008, 7:04 pm 7:04 pm
Who cares?
Posted by: Steve from Danville | December 4, 2008, 10:49 pm 10:49 pm
Campbell Brown IS WAY OFF BASE with her accusations of “sexism”. This amounts to a “cheap shot” on her part. Taking an offhand comment and then twisting it’s interpretation to “fit” her agenda
She has enough “corporate” experience to know that many factors are taken into consideration and evaluated when choosing someone for a 24/7 job. Being AVAILABLE 24/7 is one of the top considerations for those jobs.
The point Rendell was making is that because of her familty situation (no family obligations at this point in her life) that Napolitano is a perfect choice for this type of job, because she will be able to FOCUS on her job WITHOUT distractions, WHICH IS WHAT THE JOB REQUIRES! Just ilke for a man, who has the same LIFE SITUATION! His comment were NOT demeaning in any way! Of course women with a “victimization mentallity” always interpret everything as a put down!
Any MAN OR WOMAN with lots of family obligations would not be a good choice for a 24/7 job that required 100 percent of the persons attention!
So it’s beyond me how she can construe that as SEXIST!
Is it better to ignore Family Considerations, appoint the person and have them do a lousy job because of it, and then have to clean up the mess by replacing them? These are not the type of jobs that THOSE TYPES OF RISKS can be taken with. It has to be DONE RIGHT from day ONE!
They are not the kind of positions that the people responsible for filling them, have the liberty of EXPERIMENTING with the people who they appoint!
Campbell Brown’s remarks are short cited and selfserving to her Feminist leanings. They again reserrect the “poor woman being picked on, pity her” attitude that demeans all women.
As a professional and educated woman she should be ashamed of herself.
Posted by: Grapost | December 4, 2008, 11:02 pm 11:02 pm
I can’t believe people view his remarks as sexist. Come on, there are a lot of men that are successful also because they are single. If you sacrifice having a social life, you’ll have more time to devote to work and will have more things accomplished. There is NOTHING sexist about his comments!
Posted by: JT | December 5, 2008, 12:44 am 12:44 am
It’s true. I work in a office with nearly all women and when it comes to holidays and travel they’re the first to say “I can’t, because I have children”. If I try to use the same excuse I get ridiculed. So guess what? I cover for the holidays and do the travel.
Posted by: Bal Toga | December 5, 2008, 7:54 am 7:54 am
Not an issue.
Posted by: N_erdowell | December 5, 2008, 10:45 am 10:45 am
I found him refreshingly honest
Posted by: al | December 5, 2008, 10:59 am 10:59 am
What the hell? Of course Napolitano is single. Take a look at her picture and you will find the answer to that circumstance.
Posted by: BikernAz | December 5, 2008, 1:32 pm 1:32 pm
Interesting that you’re not covering the story of Obama’s chief speechwriter posting pictures on his MySpace page of himself and a friend groping a cut-out picture of Hillary Clinton while pretending to shove beer down her throat. Seems Obama is “hands off” to the media when it comes to discussions of sexism.
Posted by: cathy | December 5, 2008, 3:02 pm 3:02 pm
So where was the outrage when Palin was and still is getting smeared. It’s kind of hard to believe what you are saying now.
Posted by: USA-No1 | December 5, 2008, 3:12 pm 3:12 pm
jonnie36 – Laurel was going light on him. I honestly don’t know how people in Pennsylvania voted for him twice. I know I didn’t. He doesn’t have one redeeming quality. You should have seen him grinning when he was on television giving his “condolences” over the death of Lt. Governor Catherine Baker Knoll. He looked like he was ready to dance a jig. I had to turn off the tv before I puked.
Posted by: ellsbells930 | December 5, 2008, 8:42 pm 8:42 pm
Posted by: ellsbells930 “Laurel was going light on him. I honestly don’t know how people in Pennsylvania voted for him twice.”———You’re right, most of us probably don’t know what goes on in local politics. I am an independent and I was not defending Rendell; I know very little about him. But it seems Laurel’s language was over the top and crude. I know politics is a dirty game (that’s why I am an independent), but women don’t need to play that dirty little game.
Posted by: jonnie36 | December 7, 2008, 10:18 am 10:18 am
jonnie36 – “Pig” and “slime” are crude & over the top? It’s not like she used offensive words. I could think of a lot worse things to call him – and I’m sure Laurel could have as well. That is why I said she went light on him.
Posted by: ellsbells930 | December 7, 2008, 3:46 pm 3:46 pm
Ellsbells, you know the guy better than I do. I have harsh feelings for all politicians. That’s why I could never belong to either party. One person I did like was Ella Grasso of CT. I think I have her name correct. She died of cancer. I remember reading that she was so frugal that she crossed out the name of the previous governor and wrote her name in on the state letterhead. Boy, wish we could have cloned her!
Posted by: jonnie36 | December 7, 2008, 4:41 pm 4:41 pm
Save your fake/selective outrage campbell. You see Sarah Palin got smeared and did nothing. With zero credibility, hard to believe anything you say.
Posted by: USA-No1 | December 8, 2008, 12:25 am 12:25 am