Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Beach Rat

(273 posts)
Mon Mar 31, 2014, 06:08 PM Mar 2014

Bridgegate report: New crisis, different woman, same Old Boys

Wow, here's a pretty good summation of the tactic of portraying Bridget Kelly as an unstable woman scorned. Kapow Mr. Mastro, take that! Here's an excerpt. You need to read the whole thing. It isn't that long.

In a report designed to clear Gov. Chris Christie of any wrongdoing in the George Washington Bridge controversy, the characterization of Bridget Anne Kelly by Christie’s attorney, Randy Mastro, was a direct lift from “The Old Boys Club Handbook.”

As read by Mastro before a bank of television cameras, the report portrayed Kelly essentially as a woman scorned, saying Christie’s former deputy chief of state and his former campaign manager, Bill Stepien, had been “personally involved,” that she had “seemed emotional,” and that Stepien had ended the relationship.

Despite the fact the investigating attorneys had interviewed neither Kelly nor Stepien, their report implied the two were not speaking at the time the access-lane closures had been ordered, and that Kelly’s jilted-woman status may have been at the root of the order.

It’s the classic psychological profile of a woman — if you’re from the 14th century. It holds that, at times of crisis, women become emotional, irrational, unstable and unreliable.

Mastro told American Lawyer that his report had no sexist undertones. Kelly’s irate attorney, Michael Critchley, begged to differ.

“(T)he report’s venomous, gratuitous and inappropriate sexist remarks concerning Ms. Kelly,” he said, “have no place in what is alleged to be a professional and independent report.”

Venomous, gratuitous, inappropriate. Got that right.


http://www.nj.com/opinion/index.ssf/2014/03/bridgegate_report_new_crisis_different_woman_same_old_boys_opinion.html#incart_river_default
14 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

Spazito

(50,260 posts)
1. This opinion piece is right on point, the writer nails it...
Mon Mar 31, 2014, 06:17 PM
Mar 2014

thanks for posting this, it is well worth the read.

monmouth3

(3,871 posts)
2. I do hope she is really irately furious over this portrayal and really
Mon Mar 31, 2014, 06:19 PM
Mar 2014

spills it all. You want emotion???? I'll give you some GD emotion...Ahhhhh a Jersey Girl can dream

Laxman

(2,419 posts)
4. Fran Wood Doesn't Write Much Anymore...
Mon Mar 31, 2014, 06:44 PM
Mar 2014

she must be really pissed! This was a pretty good rant! Not to mention right on target.

No, Kelly’s email was clearly a reference to prior discussion — enough discussion that triggering action could be reduced to eight words. The recipient(s) required no further explanation. The recipient(s) knew what she meant, and acted on it.

Identify that circle of discussion, what they said and when they said it, and you’re a lot closer to the answers than grabbing “The Old Boys Club Handbook” and flipping to the chapter titled “PMS, Unrequited Love and Other Causes of Female Hysteria.”
 

seabeyond

(110,159 posts)
11. iama perusing replies to find the men on du that uses these comments on us, to be outraged in this
Mon Mar 31, 2014, 10:24 PM
Mar 2014

Op

not seeing them

Laxman

(2,419 posts)
8. Ods Bodkins?
Mon Mar 31, 2014, 07:30 PM
Mar 2014

I'm going to have to start using that! 18th Century language for 18th Century thinkers

cui bono

(19,926 posts)
7. The ironic thing is that by doing this Christie is painting himself as a terrible leader.
Mon Mar 31, 2014, 07:19 PM
Mar 2014

Why would he delegate so much responsibility to her then?

It also makes one wonder about what he expects to gain from this. She has no reason now to not tell everything she knows. Perhaps some immunity is in order?

Oilwellian

(12,647 posts)
9. Way to go, Republican Neanderthals
Mon Mar 31, 2014, 10:15 PM
Mar 2014

All women will identify with this story and remember your stunning stupidity while in the voting booth.

 

seabeyond

(110,159 posts)
10. yes. and that is why when duers use "a woman scorned" bullshit i call it out for the sexist crap
Mon Mar 31, 2014, 10:22 PM
Mar 2014

it is

when when a handful of duers talking about feminists issues pull out " emotional, irrational, unstable and unreliable and hysterical" most all of us call out that crap. along with shrill.

that is the old boys handbook. we recognize. we know. people used to stay quiet. we do not anymore.

garbage.

Laxman

(2,419 posts)
12. Stupidity At This Level...
Tue Apr 1, 2014, 08:45 AM
Apr 2014

almost seems purposeful. Are they really so confident of their ultimate vindication that their are comfortable to continue with retaliation as ususal? As this article points out-what the hell were the lawyers in the room-especially the women-thinking when they took the report in this direction?

Whatever Mastro’s motivation for including Kelly’s personal life in his report, it drew nearly universal condemnation as anassault on a woman for no apparent or logical reason, other than to shred her reputation and send a not-so-veiled message that she’d receive more such treatment if she decided to break her silence and reveal whatever she knows about others in the administration and their roles -- if any --- in the lane closure episode.

It all seemed so stupidly unnecessary. Mastro had the goods on her: Her “time for some traffic troubles in Fort Lee,” message and the subsequent e-mail exchanges she had with Wildstein, electronically chortling over the havoc they’d created.

He and his team could easily have pinned the entire scheme on her and Wildstein without the amateur psychoanalysis.

It raises also questions about the judgment of other members of Mastro’s investigative team, particularly the women, who apparently didn’t object to the rhetorical destruction of Kelly.

Didn’t anyone in this roomful of high-powered lawyers utter “Whoa, this is trouble,” upon reading the portrayal of Kelly? Did no one foresee the potential adverse reaction to alleging that Kelly was victimized by her own hormones and couldn’t help herself from retaliating against someone?

Even in his appearance on a Sunday morning news/talk show, Mastro was defiantly unapologetic, defending his work with the snarky observation that some people “can’t handle the truth.”

So, for a million bucks or so, Christie got a guy who can quote Jack Nicholson.


http://www.njspotlight.com/stories/14/03/31/opinion-sexist-portrayal-of-bridget-kelly-puts-bridgegate-back-on-front-page/
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Bridgegate report: New cr...