In a full page ad in today’s Newton TAB, candidate for mayor Scott Lennon takes a not-so-subtle jab at opponent Ruthanne Fuller’s less traditional history, saying:
I am the only candidate who has consistently held a full-time job for the last twenty years.
There’s already been some reaction to this on a separate thread but it seems worthy of its own discussion.
Not very flattering for Newton that this is a selling point in a mayoral race…
Is this a re-start of the mommy wars? Why is it considered work when a nanny or day care center takes care of a child, but not work when a family member takes care of a child.
Like Scott, I’ve also grown up in Newton all my life. I know that growing up, it was my mother that cut down on her hours as a clinical psychologist in order to take on the responsibilities of childcare. For this, I’ve always had the utmost respect for her and working mothers. To fault a mother for parenting her children is offensive to women like my mother who worked so hard to raise me.
I was already supporting Ruthanne, but after making such inflammatory comments, I’m going to be working extremely hard to make her the Mayor now.
Really Scott?
I’m so surprised that your #1 difference that you promote is that you have “…continuously held a full time job for the last twenty years” . None of your differences talk about the real issues facing Newton.
It is appalling you would insult me and all the Newton working moms and professional women who have given up their careers to volunteer in their community and raise their children for a few years. It is an insult to so many of us who volunteer in our community in substantial ways running Boards, Chairing Commissions or hold elective office.
I thought you were better than this. #yougotwrongadvice #Fuller4Mayor #yougolowwegohigh
You know perfectly well how accomplish Ruthanne is, but let me refresh your memory https://ruthannefuller.com/ruthannes-experience/
Scott Lennon is not insulting his opponent or any sahm women. He is running for election to the top job in our City and this is a political ad in the local newspaper. You can push back if you want, taking one sentence out of context in a full page ad. You all know better how respected he is and how respectful he is of all people, women, men, employees, city staff, colleagues on the City Council, neighbors, etcetera. He has the skill set to be our next Mayor. You can look at his opponent’s Linkedin profile, and how sparse it is. His opponent talks consistently about 30 years of direct experience. I respect any mother or father’s decision to raise children, take a break from a demanding career, and return to work when the timing is best for him or her. https://www.linkedin.com/in/ruthanne-fuller-67232a117/ Scott has my vote, and for the last 8 years, he has been one heart beat away from the Mayor. I’m excited about our next 4 years with Mayor Lennon.
*rolling my eyes*
Does he seriously think that one can only build skills if one is compensated with money? So volunteer work should not count?
It’s not the first time he is not so subtly jabbing. IMO, it’s more than off putting.
I’ve found Ruthanne’s inflation of her work experience offputting, however for me this attack is worse.
old not news – move on.
comin’ into the final stretch, let’s keep it in the larger perspectives.
It’s not an inaccurate statement, though.
Oh save me the faux outrage!
Seems to me that Ruthanne’s supporters want it both ways. Other than the HBS video where she talks about being a stay at home mom for a “chunk” of time, Ruthanne never publically owns that she was a stay at home mom. Instead she repeated says that she has 30 years of strategic planning. How can Scott be dissing her about it if she doesn’t own it? Based on her talking points the average voter would think she has worked in a professional capacity as a Strategic Planner for 30 years.
It is true that Scott has worked a full-time job, in addition to his responsibilities on the City Council for his entire tenure. His wife also works as a nurse. Ruthanne’s sons are 26 29 and 29, meaning they were in high school, college and what would assume out if the house during her tenure on CC. That is really stretching the definition of stay at home mom!
I am so disappointed in Scott Lennon’s statement. This sums up the issue of today’s society that continues to discount women, the adjustments we make to accommodate what is happening with our families and the unpaid roles we take on to help organize and improve our communities. I would never judge someone who leaves the care of their children to a nanny or refuses to assist other family members who need help, rather than quit their job to do so. Don’t judge people who make that decision. It is impossible for you to know what someone else is going through. Do you know what it is like to have a spouse who is on the road Monday morning through Thursday night? Never there for when you are consoling a baby at 3 am and you have a 7:30 meeting; never there when the nanny calls in sick and you have to give a presentation; never there when the whole house has a stomach bug and you have an interview for a new job because your boss is tired of accommodating you (and has pointed out that many jobs can’t be mommy friendly). These are things I know well, things Ruthanne probably understands too as her husband was a management consultant. Ruthanne, like me, might not always have been receiving a paycheck, but no doubt she has always had a full-time job. This job extended beyond her children into our community and we are a better Newton for that.
So, if her kids are 26-29, that means they’ve been out of the house for 7+ years. That’s not being a SAHM if your kids are adults. If she’s been able to be “SAHM” after her kids have graduated high school, she’s been able to stay home out of privilege.
Can someone point me to one instance during the course of the campaign where Ruthanne referred to being a stay at home mom?Seems to me she is the one doing a disservice to stay at home moms, who sacrifice the much needed second income to be there for the children.
As former Assistant Chief of Staff for State Auditor Joe DeNucci, I knew of the high regard Joe had for Scott Lennon as a most trustworthy, reliable and incredibly hard-working employee. To attempt to denigrate Scott’s many decades of daily financial analysis on behalf of taxpayers by equating them to the work of being a stay-at-home mother like Ruthanne Fuller is a specious argument whose goal is to inflate feminists. I too was a stay-at-home parent of 4 children for decades, but although the work of raising the next generation is incredibly important, it did not qualify me to become the next Mayor of Newton. Maria Kreeft
Way to lose the votes of many women who may have been on the fence.
Taking care of kids, especially if any of them have any special needs (don’t know if Fuller’s did or not – that’s none of our business – but it’s more common than people realize) can make it impossible to hold a full-time job. In many cases, the job also doesn’t stop when the kids go off to college (as I know from personal experience). And it can be very difficult to get a job in one’s field after having been home with the kids.
Much volunteer or part-time work uses the same skills and deserves the same credit as paid full-time work. I’m less than 100% time at my job for health reasons – no one there denigrates my skill or contributions just because I put in fewer hours, and I have a senior position. My mother commented that she went back to work when I was 11 because she was tired of doing the same things she was now being paid for but not getting credit for her work or accomplishments.
If a City Councilor can afford not to work full-time, it’s to our benefit. A lot of the strategic planning work Fuller has done for Newton may not have been possible if she’d had a full-time job at the same time.
Just because someone has the privilege of not needing a full-time job doesn’t mean they won’t be good as mayor! I would be very happy if I could afford to give up my income and spend my energy on the volunteer causes that are near and dear to me.
@Timothy “I’ve found Ruthanne’s inflation of her work experience offputting, however for me this attack is worse.”
How is stating a fact an attack?
Claire: https://ruthannefuller.com/ruthannes-experience/
“As a first-time parent juggling twins, I was fortunate that I could decide to care for the boys full-time in their first two years. These were not only some of the most meaningful years of my life, but often taught me more about management than my MBA!” Then she goes on to say that after that she worked for WGBH before transitioning to volunteering there because it offered her flexibility as a mom.
That said, I think it’s a little deceitful for her supporters to claim that this is an attack on her being a SAHM over the past few years, given her kids ages. I don’t think she’s claimed to be a SAHM in recent years, but her supporters have.
@Meredith: “If a City Councilor can afford not to work full-time, it’s to our benefit. A lot of the strategic planning work Fuller has done for Newton may not have been possible if she’d had a full-time job at the same time.”
IMO, that’s a MAJOR issue we have here in Newton. A lot of good people don’t run for city council (or school committee for that matter) because they can’t afford to with the low pay and the time required. Ruthanne Fuller is a wealthy woman who was able to be on City Council and not work full time, but I don’t think that reflects most of the councilors or candidates in a city that is economically diverse than people realize.
@Mary Mary She indicates that she was a SAHM for two years over 25 years ago.
It is impressive that Scott a.) worked full-time; b.) served as Board president; c.) served as Ward 1 at-large councilor; and d.) ran for Mayor of Newton, while e.) helping to raise a young daughter, who f.) is of school age.
That’s a lot. Why should he not be able to call attention to that?
This entire “ad” is off-putting to me. Scott has minimized and demeaned the value of volunteerism, and of the work that our incredible citizens’ groups have done to aid him in making decisions in his role on the council, making him look good by providing the background info he needs to make informed choices. To go to the expense of a full page ad in the Tab and then use it for passive-aggressive jabs at his opponent’s life choices…well, I would have rather heard about his vision of Newton. Not the style of a true leader, Scott. I, for one, respect the fact that Ruthanne took her tremendous business acumen and, while raising her children, worked in the for-profit business world, the nonprofit world, and in city government. I love that her experiences have taken her out of government and out of Newton, so that she now bring all that she has learned back to Newton, the City that she loves. There is a wide world out there, and much to be learned from outside as well as within our City and Commonwealth. Ruthanne offers an incredible width and breadth of experience! How lucky we will be to tap into this knowledge base. I will be voting for Fuller on November 7.
Claire, exactly. She said she was a SAHM 25 years ago, but Lennon’s ad says he is the only candidate to hold a full-time job in the past 20 years. And given the the fact that her kids have been legal adults for over 8 years, I think this was NOT a jab at SAHMs but a jab at her spotty work history.
I grew up in Newton, and I had the privilege of working with Scott for 6+ years at the State Auditor’s Office. His experience, his knowledge, and his ability to work with and manage a staff and a budget, were what allowed him to rise up in the Auditor’s Office, and led to him being recruited by Sheriff Koutoujian at the Middlesex Sheriff’s Office. It’s those same experiences and skills that make him the most qualified candidate for Mayor.
As a former student of the Newton Public Schools, I find Lennon’s comments completely antithetical to the principles of gender equality that we learn, teach, and value in Newton. His dismissal of the gendered division of labor in the house and more broadly in the labor market – e.g. where women drop to part-time to take care of kids (or are at least often expected to), when men do not (and are not expected to) – says a lot about what kinds of people and experiences he think are worthwhile.
This clearly demonstrates a lack of consideration on his part towards the hard work and reality of motherhood and partnership. Very disappointed to still be hearing comments like these.
“Scott has minimized and demeaned the value of volunteerism.”
That’s a very odd thing to say about someone who has given 16 years of his life serving Newton (outside of his day job).
As a professional women, who has had two children and now is taking time to raise them, this thread & comments fails to understand the perspective of the burdens women face during child bearing years.
This thread smacks of gender discrimination about women never having enough experience and systemic societal views regarding women raising children & taking time out of her professional life to do so.
Raising children does not necessarily qualify Ruthanne to be mayor but all of her professional experience points to a candidate who not only knows what the city needs from her professional experience but also understands what mothers and families want out of Newton.
Why are all of the outraged comments ignoring the fact that her children are ADULTS and have been for quite some time? It isn’t being a SAHM when your kids are grown-ups. Just own the fact that she stayed at home after her kids were grown because she has the financial means to do so.
I hate this ad, I really do. But Councilor Fuller has been asking for it. Instead of focusing on her impressive accomplishments as city councilor, she keeps talking about “strategic planning experience” while being vague about what that experience actually is.
I tend to vote for her because of her record as a councilor, but I am constantly irritated by the lack of transparency about her professional history.
Mary Mary QC- can you explain why we should be outraged?
@Claire my problem is that he is saying is disqualifying to be a stay at home parent and specifically it is an attempt to cater to a gender bias among some voters.
I never said that anyone should be outraged, so I’m not sure what you’re asking. I just find it interesting that people are so angry about this statement and assuming it’s an attack on SAHMs even though her kids are currently adults. You can’t be a SAHM to adults. I don’t even think Fuller herself has claimed that she’s been a SAHM over the past few years.
As a SAHD, I learned the technique of ‘distract & redirect’. This is merely a distraction from larger picture essence encompassing the Charter campaign. Emotional as some may seem to believe, engaged in gender identification, this ploy is nothing new, and one might question the validity of the full page ad.
Scott Lennon manages people and budgets every day. That was the message loud and clear! Period. To all those who wish to twist what he was stating as a fact – just stop. For me, I want to make sure that we elect a Mayor who has the experience to run city hall. I want to make sure I’m voting for the most qualified candidate. That is clearly Scott Lennon. This is not about gender or SAHM’s. This is about his qualifications. He has been working at the state level every day for 20 years managing budgets and people. We need that kind of experience in the Mayor’s office to make sure Newton keeps moving forward. When I go to the polls, I want to elect a Mayor who has real hands-on, day-to-day experience and skills from working with taxpayer dollars and overseeing a staff, and that is Scott Lennon. HE IS AND HAS ALWAYS BEEN qualified and committed to making this city that he loves all it can be! He is the right person for the job and he will have my vote as well as many of Newton’s votes on November 7th!
Would it be possible for the Fuller supporters to acknowledge that Ruthanne has not been a SAHM for over a decade?
Because if you did, it would be pretty obvious that your manufactured, false charge of sexism is just an unfounded smear job. It is not only beneath how both Scott and Ruthanne have run their campaigns, but this community at large.
So, please, knock it off . Let’s just focus on facts and merit.
@Bill: A little brother to brother advice if I may: It never works out well to tell any group of people who’ve been battling with inequality and discrimination to “knock it off.”
Scott Lennon is a smart guy. He has smart people helping him with his campaign. How he and they allowed these specific words into that ad is mystifying to me. (He didn’t just tout his work experience, he contrasted it with Fuller: “I am the only candidate….”). I don’t believe the folks who are refusing to “knock it off” are overreacting.
Gender and wealth issues have been quietly overshadowing this campaign since it began. The Lennon campaign has moved it front and center. Maybe they have polling that suggests it was the right thing to do. But I can’t help but think that this was the first significant campaign blunder either candidate has made in a contest that has been pretty uneventful up to now.
I was disturbed to read Scott Lennon’s statement that working continuously for 20 years was something he should note as such a positive strength. It suggests that to do otherwise evokes a weakness. We should not demean the competency of a man or woman, who for various reasons as family responsibilities or illness, to name a few, may need to work part-time at some point in their lives . A deleterious effect on retirement and career goals can be impacted by such difficult decisions for an individual. Choice of lifestyle, forced or chosen, does not reflect upon a person’s competency, especially one with a proven track record as Ruthanne Fuller.
A thoughtful Mayor must be able to understand and embrace the diversity of of all Newton’s constituents and their needs; and honor that which each may choose.
My decision was just made for me. Lennon’s statement is not only an affront to SAHM’s, but also to anyone who for unknown reasons hasn’t been continuously employed.
MMQC, it makes no difference why Ruthanne Fuller stayed home after her children were grown – you don’t know why – but she used her time well even though she did not hold a continuous paying job. It’s women like her who are able to contribute their time and money to help others, including leading citizen commissions and boards that aid the city.
You and Claire just bounce off each other saying the same thing over and over. It’s not adding anything new to the conversation. We know what you think and how you feel about Fuller. Try pointing out reasons to vote for Lennon instead.
That statement alone is why women are fighting and working harder and harder daily to prove their worth in the work space. One day it will be acceptable when each parents takes time off to be the at home parent.
But that statement alone does not make him better or worse for the job than any other human.
Would this statement be acceptable if the other candidate (female) didn’t take time off, and the male candidate did.
My point is that people claiming that this was an attack on SAHMs are off-base because she hasn’t been a SAHM since her kids grew up.
And an affront “to anyone who for unknown reasons hasn’t been continuously employed.” Well, then maybe Fuller shouldn’t inflate the experience she has. Her big selling point IS her supposed background. I haven’t been continuously employed (partially because I have been a SAHM) but I don’t go around promoting that I have decades of experience when in reality my resume has holes in it.
Also, I’ve listed my reasons for supporting Lennon in other threads. I see no reason to repeat myself here.
Speaking as someone who is undecided and not a supporter of either candidate.
First, not all women who don’t work full-time are full-time SAHMs. There are various levels, including part-time work that allows one flexibility.
Second, Fuller has been working for as long as she’s been a City Councilor/Alderperson. It may not be full-time, but it sure eats up a lot of hours.
Yes, she is very lucky to be able to afford to not have a full-time job. Why is that a negative? We shouldn’t punish people for not having money (I’m near the lower end of Newton’s economic scale and am very aware of economic diversity), but we also shouldn’t punish them for having it – especially when it has enabled them to do volunteer or low-paid work for our benefit as a city. I have admiration for our City Councilors who manage to do the job while also having full-time jobs; that doesn’t take away my appreciation of the work done by those who don’t.
What is missing from this discussion is that Scott Lennon is the only one who has consistently held a full time job in the last 20 years because he is the only one who HAD to. Given his lifelong history of public service, I am sure that he might have liked to devote himself 100% to public service and perhaps being a Stay at Home Dad at some point.
The big divide in both the Mayoral race and the Charter decision is socio-economic, not gender. That divide is clear in where we see yard signs. It is clear in the data as to tracing the campaign contribution by zip codes. And it is clear in one of the fundamental argument of the NOs that eliminating the Ward Councilors will make running for CC much more expensive and a barrier to entry.
In 1995 when Ruthanne’s children would have been around maybe 7 and 3, she and her husband were able to purchase a home in Chestnut Hill for $2,675,000. Of course she didn’t need to work and she was very fortunate to not have to. I know I wouldn’t!! In 2014 they were able to sell that house for $9,700,000 and “downsize” to a smaller house on the same street for just over $4,000,000.
Meanwhile Scott and his family live in a house that they purchase in 2006 for $510,000 in the same neighborhood he grew up in and my guess is he wouldn’t have it any other way.
(These facts and figures are all public information available on the Newton Assessor’s data base).
Personally, I feel more confident in Scott to relate to issues and challenges of those wanting to either stay living in Newton or be able to purchase in Newton because he lives it. That coupled with his outstanding experience have me confident that he will be a great Mayor for ALL of Newton.
Smear job.
I’m not sure how sharing publically available data to substantiate my point of the socia-economic divide demonstrating why one candidate needs to work full time and one doesn’t is a smear.
By definition, isn’t a smear campaign making false accusations? Like it or not, the claim is fact. (and let me be clear that I don’t actually like the ad – I mentioned it on another thread but not this one)
@Greg (He didn’t just tout his work experience, he contrasted it with Fuller)
Really? That is the criticism. Of course to hear many here his sin isn’t that he dared to compare but that somehow, he diminished her time as a SAHM which isn’t even something she highlights.
Isn’t that what candidates do i.e compare their experience? Isn’t that what people have been asking for, for the differences to be more evident?
I’ve been following the TAB’s coverage of the Newton mayoral race and today I was disappointed by reports about both candidates. Fuller claims to be progressive yet says we should consider outsourcing NPS janitorial positions (page 1 story in the TAB). How is that progressive? Lennon runs a full-page ad in the TAB promoting himself as the only candidate to have “continuously held a full-time job for the last twenty years.” Perhaps Lennon’s intention was to point out that Fuller is wealthy and to imply that as a result of that wealth she’s out of touch with people who have no choice but to work full time. Given Fuller’s position on outsourcing NPS janitors, that may be a reasonable criticism to make. But if that was Lennon’s intent then he should have stated it outright and not resorted to a sexist statement that also suggests a woman who took time out of her career to raise children shouldn’t be taken seriously as a professional. I’m of Fuller’s and Lennon’s generation, and in our generation, many working- and middle-class families faced a choice of paying most or all of mom’s salary (which was almost always less than dad’s) in childcare costs or else mom taking time off. How can Lennon be so tone deaf to the experiences of working women and yet expect us to believe that he will enact issues that support us and our families?
What Greg said.
Scott got bad advice and ran with it. Poor, poor decision. Not only the choice of words, the phrasing and placement as the #1 difference. Just horrible decision making on his part. No discussion of substantial issues facing this city going forward. #Sad
@Claire & @Mary Mary – you do realize that more than half of the supporting comments for Scott are just the two of you going back and forth. Give it up. Scott lost this issue big time.
What is the big deal? This statement also describes me except that I’ve worked consistently for 45 years, and it describes many of the women I know. And you know what? I say it at every single public event I’ve attended running for the charter commission and during this campaign and no one’s blinked an eye. No one’s ever claimed I was demeaning women who made other choices. It is merely a statement of fact.
If Ruthanne had put out a resume with dates of employment, titles, responsibilities, she could have ended this discussion months ago, but she hasn’t. The problem isn’t the lack of specific information about her work background, but the fact that she has not been transparent about it. In truth, all seven of the original candidates should have been asked to put out a resume at the get-go.
To make matters more confusing, she names her employment in a public document as a homemaker. That’s perfectly fine to be a homemaker or a stay at home mother, but having it in the public domain just muddies the waters about her work experience.
@ Jane – Gee would you have preferred that RA state in a public document instead of “homemaker” that she might have also been one of the following volunteer unpaid positions serving Newton:
Member of City’s Blue Ribbon Commission?
Vice Chair of the Citizen Advisory Committee?
President of CHA Neighborhood Association?
City Councilor?
Member of all 3 of Newton’s New School Building Committees
Vice Chair of Newton City Council Finance Committee
Chair of Newton City Council Financial Audit & Oversight Committee?
Member, Pension Reserves Investment Management Board
Congratulations Greg you got what you wanted…. a little more excitement in a boring campaign!
It is quite obvious that Scott was referring to himself as working full time and there is nothing wrong with that. Scott is what we call a mensch, constantly performing many selfless acts of kindness and filled with love and complete commitment to all the men and women in this city which is how I have come to know him over the years.
The real issue for me is not that Scott is better qualified from the experience of his full-time career in finance over the past 20 years and that his peers on the Newton City Council have elected him four times for eight years as their trusted, tested and committed leader but that he is the only consistent candidate with his words and his actions. He believes in Newton’s public schools and that is why his daughter will be a 4th generation graduate, although I am sure RuthAnn has a reason why all three of her children went to private school it is very hard for me to elect someone as Mayor in the City of Newton when she chose for her own children not to attend. I also don’t understand the many thousands of dollars donated to Republican and Democratic campaigns. There is so much inconsistency but the worst thing I am hearing from people is that they don’t recall authorizing a sign on their lawn it just shows up after they attend a meet and greet.
Scott Lennon is deeply rooted and committed to our beloved City of Newton and he will never disappoint and that’s the truth!!!
@MiddleClassNewtonMom
Ruthanne Fuller didn’t say whether she would or would not consider outsourcing the janitors. The difference I pointed out in the article was that while Scott Lennon strongly stated he would not consider outsourcing, she remained mum on the issue. What Fuller did say was that she would not take the GIC (state health insurance program) off the table during collective bargaining.
A few public facts to add to the healthy debate from the Federal Election Commission’s website:
http://classic.fec.gov/finance/disclosure/norindsea.shtml
Fuller listed her Occupation as Homemaker in the 2000s, and Alderman since 2011
Fuller has contributed over $22,000 to GOP candidates, including Bush/Cheney 2004, McCain/Palin 2008, Romney for President, and Republican Party
@Joanne
Really is it? Such a strange and insignificant thing to highlight in the last weeks of a mayoral campaign. Seems like Scott was certainly trying to make a distinction with “I am the ONLY candidate who has CONTINUOUSLY held…” sounds pretty passive aggressive to me and a lot of us on this blog.
#insensitive
PS I’m done for now. I’m doing that “homemaker” thing and preparing dinner, nagging son about homework and pouring myself a needed glass of wine 🙂
I had a tuna fish sandwich for lunch.
But really, what did I actually mean by that?
I’m personally disappointed by the ad. Ruthanne created some political vulnerability with questions about her resume. No question that vulnerability is fair game. But, Scott & Co. took the bluntest instrument to exploit it.
Whether it’s politically effective is an open question that we won’t be able to answer without polling that hasn’t been done and won’t be done. The evidence is pretty clear that Ruthanne comes into the race with a gender disadvantage. Whether ham-handed sexism offsets the gender disadvantage by turning more women (and women-friendly men) against Scott or deepens it by inspiring more sexist men, we’ll never know. But, if Scott loses narrowly, fair-minded people will point to this ad.
Oh, and Bill Brandel caught out mansplaining. Did not see that coming.
Gloria – You know that I’m a major supporter of volunteer experience. Both candidates have extensive resumes in terms of volunteer experience and are to be commended for that. The community has benefitted from their contributions. At issue is that Ruthanne has described her work experience in one way and listed it in a public document differently and has not explained it clearly.
In my opinion, all 7 of the original mayoral candidates should have been asked to produce a resume. In 2009 and 2013, we knew exactly where each candidate had worked, when, their titles and responsibilities. Instead, Ruthanne’s volunteer work is explicitly stated and impressive, but her work experience is fuzzy. This is by no means the first time she’s been asked to be more explicit about her work experience and with Election Day closing in, it was bound to become an issue. Her advisors should have suggested that she get out ahead of this story months ago.
LOL. Sean….
Not long ago, as a society, we lived in a world of facts, and judged words accordingly. Scott saying that he works full-time does not mean anything other than, wait for it… he works full-time.
Further, Ruthanne has not been a SAHM for over a decade. So, this charge is manufactured and rather ridiculous. It does make me wonder what those poll numbers indicated.
I will repeat that being Mayor is more than a full-time job. Running for Mayor requires a demonstration of being able to do that job. Or at least is should. So Scott noting that he can do his job and be Board President, while running a campaign speaks to that ability.
Bill,
Not long ago, most men were not punished for dog-whistling about women’s fitness for leadership were. But, here we are in 2017 and we’re watching women (and more enlightened men) call a candidate to task for highlighting a woman’s lack of full-time employment. It’s just a really stupid thing to say.
Ruthanne is vulnerable on the issue of her work experience. (Again, I’m coming to blame HBS.) But, Scott didn’t take the time to establish the facts that would support a criticism of her published work experience. Instead, he went for a broadside that is roundly recognized as sexist. There is a big difference between “I’m the only candidate who’s had a full-time job” and “I’m the only candidate with a credible accounting of my work history over the last 20 years.” The first is a criticism that would apply to anybody with a non-traditional work experience, a huge number of whom are women. The second applies to the facts of this race.
While I acknowledge the criticism that Ruthanne’s work history lacks clarity, I would also add that there’s a sexist tinge even to that. Men are far more likely to have the kind of work experience that is easy to list and explain.
Lennon seemed like a pretty smooth political operator. This was a very dumb thing to say to this electorate.
As a voter who will be participating in my first mayoral race, these last couple jabs before the big day have me feeling frustrated and disappointed with our candidates.
I find one candidate has had trouble the whole time being transparent about past decisions, their commitment to specific issues, and their own beliefs (past or current). They’re dicey on what they have/haven’t supported and more than willing to dodge questions.
I find another candidate that has had their name on cars, trucks, and lawns for what seems like forever and has the message “I’ve been involved in this that and the other thing for a long time and you know me, so I know you’ll vote for me”. They have the endorsement and the community BUT in these last pressing days where small decisions have a lasting impact their following the lead of questionable advisors and losing sight of their root— or I guess another option is that they’re weathered down and now their true colors are taking form?
The time is ticking y’all. I look forward to keeping tabs on how this progresses. I would appreciate some authenticity from our candidates before I head to the ballot.
I have to agree with everything Gloria and Sean wrote here. Scott’s ad made me wince. It just doesn’t seem credible to question Ruthanne’s work ethic or competence, so his ad reads as a criticism of her for the fact that, like many women, her work experience is a mix of paid and unpaid work.
What a bunch of nonsense! Ruthanne has not been upfront about her (lack of) credentials. This faux outrage is utterly annoying, just like her entire campaign. The main issue is openness, integrity, honesty and ability to get things done.
Scott has my enthusiastic vote.
@Kathy Winters “his ad reads as a criticism of her for the fact that, like many women, her work experience is a mix of paid and unpaid work.”
The ad reads however one is predisposed to interpret it. Those looking for sexism will find it. If his opponent was a man who had the wealth to not have to work a full time or even part time job while serving on CC, no one would label it as sexist.
He said nothing about paid or unpaid, or her being a SAHM which of course she isn’t. He just pointed out that he has successfully juggled working a FT job while also service as CC President. And his opponent did not. I would have phrased it slightly differently knowing that there are those chomping to throw down the gender card.
But in IMHO it was Ruthanne who threw the gender card, not Scott.
Bill you are missing the point… Scott is not just saying he worked full time but I’m pretty sure you know that. In his ad that is his #1 difference that he is highlighting vs his opponent. He is implying that because Ruthanne has experience that is volunteer it is less valued. Though it may have been awhile since she was a full time SAHM.. many moms choose part time or volunteer work while raising kids. It is clear in reading the link on her site that she has been involved in many significant volunteer efforts. Many volunteer efforts require amazing amounts of time. There are many woman who may have gaps in their work histories due to raising a family and who may have chosen non paid ways to help their community. His comment seems to imply that experience doesn’t count because it is not a real job. As someone who has done quite a bit of volunteer work I found his statement truly offensive. I was undecided and really struggling with my decision on who to vote for and this turned the table for me.
Claire I am not looking for sexism and am not one who is driven by any agenda but Scott’s statement in his ad really struck a nerve with me.
“I am the only candidate who has consistently held a full-time job for the last twenty years.”
If he was just talking about his experience it would not have been phrased as it was above.
@ Bill Brandel
“That’s a lot. Why should he not be able to call attention to that?”
Absolutely. And had he done that, nobody would be commenting. If he had written “I’ve been doing all this for the city of Newton, while working full time for the last two decades” I would be nodding and thinking “wow, what an accomplishment. But he didn’t. He basically says that working full-time makes him better suited. As if volunteer work wasn’t skill building. As if taking time to be a SAHM at some point in your career disqualifies you.
If Lennon wants to us to believe he values an inclusive and welcoming city, this ad was a jarring move in the other direction. He has just divided full-time, part-time, and stay at home working women and claimed there is only one right way to gain professional experience. He is also using his heritage as a litmus test for who is qualified to serve in office, which excludes all three candidates of color in this current election and most candidates of color who I have talked to who have considered running in Newton. Running on being fourth generation grates of a heritage test, and that combined with the working full time continuously for 20 years, would leave us with a pool of candidates that are almost entirely white, and majority male– for several more generations!! It would be upsetting to the hundreds of families of color I know in Newton to find out voters are okay with that.
Beyond the fact that Scott’s first point in his absurd advertisement is highly offensive to women and/or men who take career breaks to be there for their children at various stages of development….let’s get to the BIGGER issue. Are those points really what you are running on? Sneaky jabs at your opponent? While you’re throwing jabs, Ruthanne Fuller is addressing the issues. She takes the high road, you should follow that lead. Perhaps because she did take the time to stay home with children she better learned and managed the lesson of “Treat others with respect”.
Additionally, I was not born or raised in Newton…nor were almost every single acquaintance we have met since moving here. This is a diverse city with people of diverse backgrounds all of whom have found their way to Newton for a multitide of reasons that stretch far beyond family ties and history. Let’s elect a candidate like us….that CHOSE Newton and knows what makes it great and what can make it even better.
There’s less than two weeks left, let’s hope both of our candidates can keep it clean and honest and respectful.
“Ruthanne is vulnerable on the issue of her work experience.”
Sean, I personally don’t care much about her personal issues (such as this, her wealth, her Republican involvement, or that her “kids” did not attend Newton Public Schools). It’s small stuff. Looking for a leader, here. However, per the resume, I would note that nature tends to abhor a vacuum.
I do know that there are people in Newton who do care about work experience, or whether the candidate has a job. Remember 2009? You should. There is indeed a precedent for these resume dust-ups, which is what this is. And you certainly participated in that one. Want the link? Questioning someone’s resume or work experience didn’t make you sexist then, and it does not make Scott sexist now. It’s an ugly accusation. And as someone who has liked and respected Ruthanne, I am sincerely disappointed that this is where she has steered her campaign. It’s a Rovian tactic.
Patricia/Newton Highlands Mom: Sorry, but I don’t buy your inference. Scott was talking about the present, not ten years ago. And since Ruthanne actually is not a SAHM now, and has not been for some time, how do you extrapolate that by saying he works now, he is going back in time to insult her past, and oh and let’s not stop there, he is attacking all SAHMs? It just is not logical.
Scott Lennon has lost any chance at my vote in this election and any future elections. It’s obnoxious and personally offensive to me and millions of other Americans.
I think that Scott Lennon was not phrasing his thought well when he said, “I am the only candidate who has consistently held a full-time job for the last twenty years.” Maybe Ruthanne Fuller was doing something wonderful during the past twenty years that didn’t take the form of a full-time job. I suspect what he meant to say was that he has been a long-term member of the workforce and understands issues that affect working people. You can debate the qualifications of Ms. Fuller, but it’s clear that she and her husband, Joe, live among the elite in Chestnut Hill and are anything but working stiffs. Is that good or bad? You decide. Is Joe’s work history, which famously includes profiting from consulting to the regime of dictator Moammar Khadafy, relevant when his wife is running for mayor of Newton? You decide. I’ll end by adding that I was very favorably impressed with Scott Lennon when he spoke at a meet-and-greet.
(1) Why has no one yet asked for the W-2’s/1099’s from both Lennon and Fuller from the last 20 yrs, block out both the SSN, dollar amounts/income, to simply evidence proof of employment.
(2) If Fuller loses the mayoral race, she may attempt to run for US Senate in place of Lizzie Warren, since they seem to enjoy using the same political tactics (the “Woman Card”). After all it worked so well for HER (AKA, HRC).
FYI, I am hearing that Fuller’s press release put many undecideds over the top for Lennon.
Oh well!
The point of Scott’s ad was to highlight differences between himself and his opponent, and it made sense for him to do so. Many voters, myself included, as well as the TAB have struggled with how similar, policywise, the two candidates are. To that end, I think points 2 through 4 were clear, concise and meaningful. The fact is, Ruthanne has not served as president of the city council, lived in Newton her whole life, or attended the Newton Public Schools. Those are simply the facts. The problem with the first point was that there was too much room for interpretation. Scott didn’t define “full-time job,” and by not doing so left that up to voters to decide for themselves. Female voters might interpret it as subtle sexism; male voters might not. Personally, I don’t see why Scott needed to add the paragraph about having a “full-time job” when he could have instead elaborated on the other 3 less ambiguous points and prevented all this controversy.
@Andy Levin
“Ruthanne Fuller didn’t say whether she would or would not consider outsourcing the janitors. The difference I pointed out in the article was that while Scott Lennon strongly stated he would not consider outsourcing, she remained mum on the issue. ”
I interpret Fuller’s refusal to comment as indicating that she will leave outsourcing where it is–on the table for consideration. If she deliberately leaves her position vague, then she cannot expect everyone will interpret that vagueness in her favor. I find the tactic disingenuous at best.
WOW…I really struggle with this. Thirty years ago when my family and I moved to Newton many of my neighbors criticized me for going back to work after having stayed home with my twins from birth to first grade. Now fast forward to the 2017 mayoral race and a female candidate is being criticized for not highlighting her childcare time and being given credit for raising a family and volunteering. My only conclusion is women cannot win…no matter how hard we try.
As an HR professional, I am very cognizant of women re-entering the workforce and understanding the contribution that they can make to a business based on the their experience managing a household, workpeople and contractors, and others who provide services to maintain the household.
Also many women are the people who manage the families investments and other financial matters. Is all of this experience worthless…..sometimes it appears that people think so. Also, having participated in various non-profit organizations, being a leader or manager in this context takes great influence, collaboration and, consensus building skills…all needed to be Newton’s Chief Executive Officer.
I do have one question for Scott Lennon…how does this square with your plan to create a Women’s Advancement Council…where you state “ the Council would tackle in its first year that impact women of all ages. These include investigating pay equity, supporting paid family leave, providing resources to women re-entering the job force, providing girls with educational opportunities focusing on male dominated careers, and helping girls maintain their health and self-esteem in a culture dominated by social media.” One seems to contradict the other.
@jake I appreciate your acknowledgment that the highlighting differences between the two candidates platform is particularly challenging. Up until this up for interpretation advertisement I had more or less checked out from following up on candidate statements. That was an error on my part. What I find this publication bringing up is 1) The foundational difference of the two candidates background. Neither is right or wrong, obviously, the choices they and their families make are their choices. 2) An up-for-interpretation advertisement that begins to highlight the small ( but potentially significant) particular differences that the candidates have referenced ( I’m a bit too late on the janitor outsource, municipal employee healthcare issues). 3) I notice that this conversation is providing an opportunity for candidates to exemplify how they might handle a community disagreement/community interpretation. 4) I see that because larger issues haven’t disagreed on the candidates have kept their parties compliant because their core supporters stood up for them no matter what. BUT the citizens who may have inadvertently become undecided after the primary are coming back out of the woodwork fury as ever because NOW only a bit away from the election this issue is encouraging them to become reinvolved int he issues at hand (or maybe this is just me.)
All of this being said I would be very curious to know how/if the voter support demographics change in response to this publication. For example, Sangiolo supporters (I feel ya) who were floating and then migrated toward Lennon. Are those supporters giving themselves a pause to evaluate their ballot choice? And, what are the chances Amy acknowledges this debate?
This is such a stupid move on Scott’s part. Argh.
Even if we accept the Bill Brandel/Claire approach and accept that he was just emphasizing his own experience, why say he was the “only” candidate with a full time job. Why not just say his experience?
Self inflicted wounds are the worst.
And for the record, doesn’t this exactly tie into the little army of troll-bots we’ve had posting around here. This experience line, along with the republican donation line have been the primary ammunition, along with the private school issue. We wondered if those folks were connected to Scott’s campaign, either as volunteers or staffers. And surprise, surprise, this ad from the campaign is basically the same issues, using similar language.
Scott has a lot of positive things to talk about. Every union in town is backing him. The police, the fire fighters are backing him. He ran the council. He has a long history of good works. And from my view it was definitely working as a campaign strategy to take the high road. He got Amy’s endorsement. Why would THIS be his closing argument.
@Fignewtonville.
Very well articulated. He’s got to have his foot in his mouth big time.
Fig hit the nail on the head. Lennon should apologize for his poor wording, act mayoral, and move on. Anyone who is effective at running a large organization would know better. This looks like a desperate and petty last minute attack against someone who is successful at everything she does.
Wow. What a sexist thing to say. Not for nothing, but the last time I checked, staying home to raise kids is “work.”
I hope Scott apologizes for stepping in the poop on this one. Otherwise, I may have to rethink staying neutral in this race. Come to think of it, I may have to reconsider either way.
Is this inflating her work experience? Faux experience? a “sparse” profile? Look at her website for the unedited version:
(I’m editing….)
* In 1979, after graduating magna cum laude from Brown University with a degree in history, I took a full-time position as Manager of Education for Data Resources, Inc., an economic forecasting company in Lexington, MA. I supervised our regional education coordinators, designed and conducted professional development courses and client seminars on econometrics and computer programming, and built econometric models for clients in the consumer goods industry. After working at Data Resources, Inc., for two-and-a-half years. . .
* I returned to school to pursue my MBA at Harvard Business School.
*After graduating with distinction in 1983, I took a full-time position as Management Consultant for Temple, Barker, and Sloane in Lexington. In this role, I specialized in strategic planning, industry and market analysis, and organizational design. I worked extensively with companies in the automotive, telecommunications, health care and professional services industries. I led diverse teams that included our internal consultants and employees at all levels from our clients. From turning around Volvo North America’s declining customer service ratings, to helping companies decide where to grow in new U.S. locations, I worked with multi-billion dollar budgets and complex, heavily matrixed organizations.
*I served as a Management Consultant for Temple, Barker, and Sloane for four years — until November 1987 when I went on maternity leave with my identical twins, Mark and Chris.. . . As a first-time parent juggling twins, I was fortunate that I could decide to care for the boys full-time in their first two years. These were not only some of the most meaningful years of my life, but often taught me more about management than my MBA!
*Creating WGBH’s First Master Plan/In 1989, I returned to work in the non-profit sector, as the first ever Manager for Strategic Planning at WGBH. I was tasked with creating the first strategic master plan for one of the country’s leading public broadcasting stations. By developing the first strategic plan for WGBH, I had an incredible opportunity to help shape an organization whose mission I believe in so passionately. I met with employees in each and every department to get a sense of what was working well and what needed to be improved, developed a deep understanding of our consumers, analyzed our finances, and then used these assessments to develop a strategic plan. I created a comprehensive plan for WGBH as a whole and individual master plans for television, radio, production, etc. Leading teams from all parts of WGBH, I worked at this position in both a full-time and then part time capacity (our third son, David was born in 1991) until 1997, helping WGBH thrive even as technology began evolving toward video and the internet.
*During these years, I also served as a Board member and Treasurer of Kehillath Israel Nursery School (1992-1993), and then as a Board member and Treasurer of Temple Israel Pre-School (1994-1995). These experiences gave me first-hand knowledge of the power of early childhood education and the complexities of educational funding, cornerstones of my vision for Newton.
During that period, as a mom of three young kids, I decided that serving in the non-profit sector provided the flexibility to work non-traditional hours as a volunteer, helping organizations make a difference in people’s lives, while spending more time with my children. So, with WGBH’s initial strategic master plan complete, I transitioned to the organization’s Board of Overseers.
*From 1997-2004, I also served on various committees with the United Way of Massachusetts Bay, analyzing the effectiveness of local service organizations, such as those supplementing city services by helping seniors, special needs students, and low-income families.
* In 1998, I started serving on the National Board of Trustees (and later Board of Directors) for Facing History and Ourselves (FHAO), which brings students from diverse backgrounds together to examine racism, prejudice, and anti-Semitism, and promote acceptance and learning. I contributed to the strategic initiatives that expanded the FHAO’S effectiveness and involvement in local public schools. This experience impressed upon me, the importance of creating results-oriented programs that support a welcoming, tolerant public school environment.
* In 1999, I began serving on the Boston Advisory Board of City Year, a national youth service organization. In this role, I helped shape City Year’s impact on Boston’s youth, particularly its after-school programs.
*Simultaneously, while living in Brookline in the 1990’s, I helped make the schools more financially sustainable as Vice Chair of the School Financial Practices and Procedures Committee (1992-1993), and the town more financially sustainable as Co-Chair of the Town’s Financial Planning Advisory Committee (1993-1994). I led teams of residents and encouraged input from all stakeholders as we agreed on goals, analyzed alternative strategies, and forged a consensus. I helped implement this vision as a member of Brookline’s Finance Committee and Chair of its Strategic Planning Sub-Committee in 1994. In Brookline, I learned how to plan proactively for financial sustainability and how to use best practices of municipal management and citizen input, to get consensus on goals and get plans translated into action. I resolved to tap these lessons when we bought our home in Newton in 1994.
In Newton, I joined my local civic association (the Chestnut Hill Association), where I worked with residents, businesses, and the aldermen and city bodies like the conservation commission and the community preservation committee to provide connections among our neighbors and preserve our neighborhood.
*As President from 2004-2010, I helped shape projects along Route 9 at both the lower and upper areas of the Chestnut Hill Mall, and at Boston College to create traffic and parking plans that worked for residents, businesses, and BC’s, employees and students. I worked with our state representative, Ruth Balser, and community groups to improve the health of Hammond Pond. We knit our neighborhood together through block parties and community events.
I also served, as a strong voice, for the neighborhood in a Commonwealth Avenue project initiated by B’nai B’rith, a non-profit developer of affordable housing. My efforts reduced the project from the initial ten-story plan to four stories, while creating affordable and modestly priced housing. My work involved negotiating with the neighbors and developer to redesign the project to fit the scale of the local neighborhood while also making the economics work for the non-profit developer. . . .
In 2006, I was tasked with serving on the City’s Blue Ribbon Commission to review all aspects of Newton’s projected financial revenues and expenses.
*Then, in 2008, I was appointed to Vice Chair of the Newton Citizen’s Advisory Group (CAG) – defining choices about municipal and educational service levels, improving the city’s operational efficiency and effectiveness, and developing new or enhanced sources of funding. While a volunteer position, I worked full time as we studied Newton’s projected financial resources and expenses, and created a plan to fix our structural deficit. After thoroughly analyzing Newton’s budget and assessing ramifications- five, ten, and twenty years down the road- I played an integral role to the development of a financial analysis of the city, with recommendations to improve Newton’s fiscal standing and budget management. The final work product of the CAG remains one of my proudest achievements. Our fiscal and management recommendations subsequently formed the blueprint for many of Mayor Setti Warren’s fiscal and management reforms, which have significantly improved the City’s financial standing.
* * 2009 – I successfully ran for an at-large seat on Newton’s Board of Aldermen.
Except @Ted Hess-Mahan Scott didn’t say, in any way shape or form “staying home to raise kids isn’t “work.”
Throughout this campaign, I have had a very uneasy feeling about Ruthanne Fuller and her candidacy. This imbroglio only confirms it. In on particular order…
1. She was a mom who worked in the home? Great! I respect that.
However, I don’t think Scott Lennon pointing out his many years of experience doing the very things that are required in a mayor, and pointing out that he has more of that experience than she does, is really the match to reignite a stupid, boring, pointless culture war of moms who work in the home vs. moms who work out of the home. I really thought we were starting to be past that tired old argument, and that woman were seeing the virtue of looking out for one another. Ruthanne’s not-so-subtle exploitation of his ad is pure Trumpian “let’s rally up the base” by making them mad at the other guy. Sad!
2. As a wearer of a pink pussy hat in Washington D.C. the day after Trump’s inauguration, I think you forfeit the right to put pink pussy hats on your mailings if you donated to McCain/Palin over Obama. And that’s not even discussing Ruthanne’s contribution to the Massachusetts Republican Party. It was youge. [sic]
3. Let’s listen to the working folks in Newton’s unions, all of whom endorse Scott. You can not tell me that a woman who was fortunate enough to make the choice to work in the home, and who sent her children to private schools, is the better choice to understand the needs and concerns of working people who are more of the paycheck-to-paycheck variety.
4. So, if you were going to vote for Ruthann Fuller because you have been following the details of the election and listened to the candidates speak, and feel she is the better person for the job, fine. But please, please, please don’t vote for her because of this shameless nothing-burger she is trying to grill in the final days before the vote. I can actually hear the cackles of glee coming from her campaign as they whipped up this response. Don’t fall for it. Vote the issues.
@Claire, Scott said he is the only one who has worked full time for the last 20 years. SAHM is a full time job. But women don’t get paid for it. So I guess Scott doesn’t think it qualifies as a full-time job. Sad!
I suppose it all comes down to what the meaning of “is” is. Either way, my opinion of and respect for him has dropped precipitously because of this. I only hope he has the good sense and class to apologize and move on. Unlike that ass clown in the White House.
@Elizabeth wrote, “Ruthanne’s not-so-subtle exploitation of his ad is pure Trumpian “let’s rally up the base” by making them mad at the other guy. Sad!”
Although I do have questions about Fuller’s donations to GOP and about her attitude toward unions, there is absolutely no excuse for @Elizabeth trying to make Lennon’s dog-whistle sexist remarks somehow Fuller’s fault. Talk about Trumpian! Those remarks are not helping Lennon’s cause in any way.
Ted, Fig, and Jeffrey –
I’ve worked for 45 years and speak about it with pride. Most of my friends did the same. Some still work into their 70’s. Maybe we run in different circles from you folks. I hope you think about how this conversation is coming across to women who work fulltime or were not able to take time off after a short maternity leave.
All anyone is asking for is a clear, concise resume of work of one of the mayoral candidates. This is a typical requirement for any job, no matter who you are.
@Jane, you’re changing the subject to deflect attention from the issue that really bothers me, fig and jeffrey.
But I think you know that.
No I’m not changing the subject. I’m merely asking people to consider a demographic of women who don’t have the chices of the posters here.
You don’t have a clue as to how privileged this conversation sounds to a whole segment of women in this city.
“Choices”
I was just talking with a former colleague of mine today about what I saw as the pros and cons to both Ruthanne and Scott. Given Scott’s close ties with white male dominated groups and professions, I was sceptical about whether he’d be able to empathize with and support non-white non-male issues. However, after reading his very thoughtful responses to Progressive Newton questions (e.g. What does black lives matter mean to you?), I thought that maybe he was actually the ideal bridge on racial and gender issues.
Like others, I’m concerned about the content of this latest ad, but not enough to influence my vote. What concerns me more, though, and will influence my vote, is that the ad is an indicator of how Scott would make future decisions as mayor, including the people he’d be listening to.
I’m wary of the old boy network that has run/is running politics, so I only vote for white men who can demonstrate they are proactively listening and learning about non-white non-male issues. Based on the areas where this ad is ridiculously tone deaf, Scott’s inner group seems to unfortunately be super white and super male.
Scott can talk the talk about inclusivity, and I was hoping he could walk the walk, but actions speak stronger than words.
Scott has lived in the most diverse section of Newton his entire life. He has represented the neediest families in Newton. He knows more about living and working with diverse groups of people than anyone on this blog. Can any of the posters make the same claim? He is the candidate who is standing solidly against the school committee’s effort to outsource custodians that would result in lowering their salary significantly.
No one is concerned about whether Ruthanne stayed at home with her kids. They are adults and have nothing to do with this conversation. The concern is that she has not produced a resume for the last 15 to 20 years of her work experience outside of the home. It needs to come in standard resume form – not a narrative- dates, titles, responsibilities, metrics. The narrative is too fuzzy.
Why does this cause so much controversy? I have one question for Marcy Johnson who is an HR professional.: what would you say to a job applicant who didn’t produce a resume?
The implications of Lennon’s statement for stay-at-home or part-time employed parents has been rightly critiqued and he has responded – albeit unsatisfactorily to me. However, I would like to see him respond to the fact that his ad also stated that living here his entire life is an important qualification for mayor. Making this claim suggests that many of our city’s residents – especially those of color – who are not necessarily third-generation Newtonians like Lennon, are somehow less qualified to hold elected office. I strongly disagree with this litmus test.
Jane:
With all due respect, you know absolutely knowing of my background, where I grew up, whether I have or grew up with money. Suffice it to say, you couldn’t be more wrong. And I’d be happy to put my bonafides up against Scott or you any day of the week regarding whether I’ve fought the good fight, and whether what I do for my job and in my life to help others.
Just because you don’t happen to like what I’m saying doesn’t mean you get to make assumptions or make it personal. Your candidate did something stupid. It will cost him votes. That’s obvious. When you are explaining, you are losing.
I’m surrounded by strong, proud women who worked full or part time. You think you and your friends are the only ones? Lots of opinions out there. Lots of folks who followed your path don’t agree with you on this on. Our discussion comes across as privileged? Says who? Lots of folks sacrifice in different ways Jane. I’ve learned not to judge which sacrifice or path is better or harder or left more obvious scars. Nobody wins in that discussion.
The issue is that Scott didn’t learn that same lesson.
The direct comparison made by Scott Lennon was either thoughtless or sexist. Either way, I don’t care for his style of communication. He has not earned my vote.
@Jane Frantz –
I’m sure you’re not intending it but his all beginning to sound eerily familiar.
As has been pointed out many times, with handy links, Ruthanne’s web site has a detailed list of her work experience. If you think that experience does not qualify her to be mayor, fine, say that. Others may agree or disagree.
This is really beginning to deeply irk me. Regardless of the detailed information that Fuller has provided there’s an endless insinuation that she’s hiding some undefined something. I’ve seen this movie before and I didn’t like it then and I don’t like it now.
You’re insisting above that a real candidate that isn’t up to some nefarious subterfuge would provide the details of their work experience in “standard resume form”. You just ran for office, did you provide your experience in that form? Did any of the City Councilor currently running describe their experience that way? Here’s Scott Lennon’s page about his experience. How is that different in kind, style or format than the information Ruthanne Fuller provided?
Let’s get back to the real campaign. Let’s all take it as an article of faith that Ruth Anne Fuller is a very accomplished candidate and that Scott Lennon in no way disrespects women. Let’s just shelve all this crap.
I’ve been working since I was 16 (almost 40 years) I guess that makes me qualified to be Governor.
Regardless of who you support, this is the second big mistake from Lennon’s campaign in as many days.
I like Scott, I think he’s a good man, but this isn’t a small mistake. In a close election, which I think we can all agree it will be, this could be the difference of Scott being a Mayor of Newton or Scott being a stay at home dad.
As others have said, apologize and move on.
Fig – the reason I don’t know anything about you is that you post anonymously. That’s your right, but my bona fides include being one of a handful of women who post here under my real name. As a result, a bunch of guys often jump ugly all over me and it can get extreme – Jerry Reilly just compared me to Donald Trump.
In answer to your question, Jerry, not only did I present my work experience in detail 2 years ago at events and on my website, I do so at every presentation I do for the charter commission – where I’ve worked, for how long, what schools I’ve taught in. I suggested a resume because it’s the simplest format, but bringing clarity to the issue in some formal way would end the discussion.
Jane says ” my bona fides include being one of a handful of women who post here under my real name. As a result, a bunch of guys often jump ugly all over me and it can get extreme – Jerry Reilly just compared me to Donald Trump.”
Come on Jane! No one is jumping ugly all over you as a result of you being a women using your real name. I’ll speak for myself. I am less aggressive in tone to people (women and men) who use their real names. Being a women has nothing to do with it. You are manufacturing victimization. Jerry is correct. Stop the SL talking points. What do you want to know about Ruthanne’s work experience that you don’t already know?
Also, if anyone is evading anything it is you. You have failed repeatedly to tell us whether or not you support the NTA’s blockade of information to voters.
Speaking of information blockades. Unlike the NTA, NewtonHighSchools.com promotes transparency, and has released its candidate surveys on the V14 blog below. It is a really good blog. Really.
@Jane Frantz – I’ll ask you again. Take a look at the two candidate’s description of their experience on their respective web sites. I provided the links in my comment above.
Show us how their descriptions of their relative experience differs in any significant way in terms of format or style of presentation, or level of detail. They both present their experience in a detailed narrative form. Yet for some reason you keep insisting that for one candidate that’s not enough and is suspicious. Neither candidate for this office nor any candidates for any other office, nor you yourself when you ran, provided that information “in standard resume form”, yet you say in Fuller’s case that’s suspicious. What about all of the other candidates running for office? Why are you not insisting that they all present their experience in resume form instead of the detailed narrative form that they all are using?
For those of you who personally know Ruth Ann Fuller. and are commenting here – do you honestly believe that she lacks the experience to be an effective mayor?
For those of you who personally know Scott Lennon and are commenting here – do you honestly believe he lacks respect for women?
If the answers are No then this is all just pointless political gamesmanship.
What Jerry just said, x1000. Doesn’t anyone remember 8 years ago, when Setti’s resume – and even his service to this country – was being questioned? It was ugly then and it’s ugly now. Scott and Ruthanne are both good people who have proven through their time on the council that they are more than smart enough and dedicated enough to be mayor, and that they have Newton’s best interests at heart.
Well said Jerry. I think this ad was insensitive and demeaning, but it wouldn’t have turned my vote if I were leaning to Lennon. (I’m amused by the idea of anonymous poster “Tim” throwing down the TAB in disgust and angrily ripping up his yard sign). I am already decided on Fuller and am very comfortable that her work experience — paid and unpaid — has prepared her for the job. Indeed it is some of her unpaid experience that is most relevant for me.
I don’t know Scott personally, but I know enough about Amy Sangiolo to believe he wouldn’t have her support if he did not respect women.
A request — can supporters of both candidates stop drawing comparisons to Trump? Can’t we all agree that he is in a class all his own?
Jane, I post under my real name and have never felt slighted by anyone because I am a woman. I’ve certainly had plenty of commenters disagree with me but not because of my gender. No on this thread is attacking you because of yours either.
I firmly believe that were you not a die hard Lennon supporter you would be among the folks calling him tone deaf on gender issues.
Your saying, “He knows more about living and working with diverse groups of pepole than anyone on this blog,” is wrong and demeaning. There is no possible way you could know that.
Your saying Fuller needs to submit a resume when her experience is laid out plainly just as Lennon’s is continues the worthless discussion of complaining about Fuller’s accomplishments.
With due respect, Scott’s comment is unacceptable in 2017. I fear he mis-read (some) Newton women – and will cost him votes. I don’t doubt that he respects women, my point is that a potential mayor should have had the foresight not to run an add like this. We as a city are better than this. Scott’s other statements won’t make him a better mayor either.
This race is more about what direction we want to take Newton. Both candidates have a plan. (and both have excellent experience). We can continue to push forward, taking Newton to the next level, or not.
I value “all” Ruthanne’s work experience. She is wise, thoughtful, inclusive and objective. Qualities that would make an excellent mayor. She has the vision necessary to take Newton forward.
I cannot stress the importance of management experience in being elected mayor. Scott was setting himself apart from his opponent. This has nothing to do with being a “stay at home mom” (which Ruthanne has never described herself as). Scott merely stated facts. He did not criticizes Ruthanne’s work experience, but pointed out differences with his own. It is indisputable that Scott has more management experience than Ruthanne. Can we all agree on that? This should be very important to you all as residents of Newton. Being mayor is often not a glamorous job, but one that entails things like strategizing the most effective way to fix street lights.
As a side note, victimizing yourself gives me no incentive to vote for you. As a woman, I value strong female candidates. It would have been far more effective and helpful for the residents of Newton, for Ruthanne to respond to Scott’s ad with what she does bring to the table, rather than “My opponent is attacking me.”
Why aren’t we talking about the fact that RAF chose to send her 3 children to private schools instead of the Newton Public Schools? I am disturbed by SL’s comments but am equally concerned about RAF opting out of the school system she hopes to lead.
As a former Co-Chair years ago of the Newton Special Education Parents Advisory Committee (SPEDPAC) and as a former Special Education Advocate trained by lawyers from the Federation for Children with Special Needs, and also as a parent of a child disabled by autism, one of the most blatant claims of Mrs. Fuller that resonates with me is that she avoided placing all three of her sons in any Newton Public School because one of them has dyslexia.
Although as a Special Education Advocate, I fought for many years to improve Newton’s special education curricula and to ensure parental rights and their children’s access to its most appropriate services, never did I ever question Newton’s superiority in addressing dyslexia over that of a private, all-boys elite school known for its extensive sports offerings including alpine skiing and crew (rowing) in which her sons excelled. It is also the Alma mater of her husband, his brother, her nephew, and Mitt Romney’s son, Tagg , whose family she was also educated with in Michigan. That’s why she did not enroll her sons in the Newton Public Schools… not because one had learning disabilities.
The private school issue and her responses to inquiries about it were what initially drove me away from being a Fuller supporter. I felt that her explanations of it were BS and from there I began to feel like a lot of what she said was BS. (including her Republican history) I would prefer for a mayor who sits on the school board to have a passion for public schools but it wouldn’t necessarily be a deal breaker if they sent their kids to private. But the fact that she sent her kids to a ritzy private school and is telling us that it was because of learning disabilities tells me she’s playing voters for fools.
Correction: Joseph Fuller, Ruthanne’s husband did not graduate from Belmont Hill School as I had indicated in my previous email. He was one of the graduates with Ruthanne of the even more exclusive Cranbrook Educational Community in Bloomfield Hills, Michigan, along with Mitt Romney and his spouse, Ann Davies Romney.
Lets get some things straight:
A. Scott is not a sexist. He showed poor judgement by running the add and not understanding the ramifications of his words.
B. Where the Fuller family decides to send their kids to school is a decision that needs to be made by the Fuller family based on their experience and finances.
These issues have no bearing as to whether someone will make a good Mayor. Lets stay on track please.
I’d like to focus on substance and on real facts in comparing these two candidates — facts that would impact doing the job as Newton’s Mayor.
1. Scott Lennon advertises, as an important difference from his opponent, his budgetary experience in two government functions–the State Auditor’s office and the County Sherriff’s office. But neither of those government functions do what is required to run a MUNICIPALITY. Ruthanne Fuller’s experience (see the cut-and-paste above from Ruthanne’s website, with numerous committees she’s worked on in Brookline and Newton) deals specifically and directly with financial and operational aspects of MUNICIPAL government. This includes key Newton citizen committees set up by NEWTON’s Mayor to advise him on city finances, plus our City Council’s Finance Committee. So, actually, Ruthanne’s years of experience and knowledge of municipal finance far outstrips Scott’s.
2. Scott’s endorsement by Newton’s unions makes him beholden to them. Ruthanne has stated clearly that she will work collaboratively with our city’s employees. But she is independent of unions and can thus be a Mayor who will balance their needs with the needs of taxpayers and other factors that enter into management decisions and contract negotiations. I myself have been a member of a Newton union in the past, and value them. But as a citizen, I want a Mayor who’s independent and works for us.
3. Scott Lennon emphasizes the fact that he’s spent his entire life in Newton. Ruthanne has lived here for a mere quarter-century. Although I, myself, have been here my entire adult life, including almost 42 years in the same house, I’d rather have a Mayor who’s lived in other places and developed a broader, less provincial perspective on what a community might be and do. In this time of rapid change in our world, I worry about insularity and parochialism leading us to do or not do things so we get left behind.
So, there are three fact-based differences between these two candidates for your consideration.
As for the “where’s-the-resume?” discussion — Thank you to the person who took Ruthanne’s bio from her website and pasted it here. I had not read it before, and was blown away by her outstanding experience, effort to improve the community around her, and the social justice values reflected in that content. It doesn’t matter to me whether it’s written in a resume format, in narrative, in purple or green ink, typed or in handwriting. It’s a reflection of an incredibly capable, committed, experienced, focused and results-oriented person who I hope I’ll be lucky enough to have as my next Mayor.
maria:
Welcome to the Blog btw.
Did the Romneys harm you in a former life? 😉
I personally think you weaken your argument here when you keep mentioning the Romneys. While I don’t share the same political leanings as the Romneys, including them here is a classic red herring argument. It is guilt by association, and it is unfair in my view.
You can make your point clearly without the gossip and inference.
The private school issue as a whole seems to be unfair with one exception. You do learn a lot about our school system by sending your kids through it, for better or worse. But you can also learn a lot about the school system by being a city council person, talking to your neighbors, and serving on the building committees. I think Scott is a better candidate for having a child in the school system, although I’ve learned a lot more when my kids were in more senior grades to be honest.
I think you are also attempting to make a class/elitism argument. Look at Ruthanne, sending her kids to school at the same place as the Romneys, those Republican billionaires. Ruthanne’s family is certainly wealthy. Point made I guess.
On a side note, are you related to a Peter Kreeft at B.C.? If so, I very much enjoyed one of his books, and I’d appreciate it if you could send him my compliments. The last name and the location are unique enough so I thought maybe there is a connection.
Have a nice weekend.
@ Holly, you do realize that Scott, like Ruthanne is a Council person so they both have experience at the municipality level, although Scott has been doing it longer AND is the President of the City Council. His work at the State and County level is in addition to his experience with the City of Newton.
Claire, Obviously both Scott and Ruthanne have been on the City Council and addressed municipal budgets. Perhaps because they both did that, Scott selected his County Sheriff and State Auditor financial experience to highlight in his statement about how his qualifications differ from Ruthanne’s. and are better. My point is that the difference HE himself talks about demonstrates that Ruthanne has far deeper experience with municipal finance and, on that point, is better qualified to be mayor of a city. Newton faces serious long-term financial problems–ones that were not uncovered until the panel David Cohen established, on which Ruthanne played a central role, dug into the numbers and did its work. Scott Lennon was already an Alderman when the commission started. He was already a member of the body that kept passing unsustainable budgets with the problems Ruthanne uncovered. The fact that he’s spent more years on the Board of Aldermen is not a plus for fiscal management ability.
@Holly: Ruthanne has been on the Council for the past 8 years and we are still not dealing appropriately or responsibly with our OPEB liability. The only City Councilor who has been consistent about voting against the unsustainability (is that a word?) of our OPEB liability is Emily Norton.
Holly: When did Ruthanne address a municipal budget, and how? Being one of 24 councilors who votes on items sent over by the Mayor is not the same as Scott, who is singularly responsible for a $70 million budget, not to mention employees, management, policies, etc.?
Newton has a difficult choice for mayor coming up. Both candidates are comparably capable in their experience, both professional experience and service on the Newton City Council for multiple years. But there is evidence about flaws in both candidates of serious concern.
Fuller’s lack of response about NPS janitor outsourcing, statement to leave GIC on the table, and choice to send her kids to private schools rather than NPS all raise legitimate questions about whether she as mayor would make choices that would serve modest-income Newton residents. Given the many choices facing our community related to growing inequality, those are important questions. Fuller has not made any statements that reassure me on that score, and many of the posts here supporting Fuller only make me more concerned about these very issues.
Lennon’s ad features dog-whistle language against the nonstandard employment trajectories so common among women with children and language against people who’ve moved to Newton by their own choice (rather than their parents’ choice) as is more likely to be the case for Americans of color and immigrants. This language raises legitimate questions about Lennon as mayor would seriously engage the concerns and needs of women, people of color, and immigrants who are Newton residents.
Lennon’s “setting the record straight” statement is not only a disappointment but also a clear warning about how he would be likely to govern. Voters learn a lot about how politicians respond to a public mistake, and this response is instructive. There is no statement of ownership in having made a mistake in the language used. Rather, Lennon attacks people who have questions about him in light of the ad as “taking things out of context” and guilty of “fabrication.” That statement says “people who know me know…” and a number of posts on this site are by people who know Lennon personally but, probably like most voters in Newton, I do not know Lennon or Fuller, so I have to rely on their record. At the very least, both Lennon’s ad and his response statement’s attempt to bully through a mistake demonstrate very poor judgment. If I raise a concern to an elected official, I don’t want a condescending response telling me that I just don’t understand what’s really going on. That response, as much as the ad itself, raise red flags for me over whether Lennon will indeed engage and address the concerns of all Newton residents.
So we appear to have a choice between a candidate out of touch with the concerns of moderate-income Newton residents and a candidate out of touch with the concerns of women and newcomers to Newton.
MiddleClassNM: “Lennon’s ad features dog-whistle language against the nonstandard employment trajectories so common among women with children and language against people who’ve moved to Newton by their own choice (rather than their parents’ choice) as is more likely to be the case for Americans of color and immigrants. ”
Scott’s comments were taken out of context. All noise aside, this story is about candidate resumes. All through this campaign, Scott has emphasized his full-time employment as a differentiator. Why emphasize full-time employment? It was intended to distinguish Scott’s record from his opponents. Scott has worked in state government at the state auditor and now the Middlesex Sheriff (both Democrats). Full-time. This meant anyone could a.) understand what he actually did; and b.) know who he did it for, and c.) emphasize the suitability of his experience to being Mayor (which, btw, is a full-time job). This was the context of his remarks. He expressed that numerous times, seated next to Ruthanne and Amy. As Amy has noted, in context, there was nothing particularly remarkable about it.
Since the preliminary, a couple of things happened. 1.) Amy, endorsed Scott, which would be an odd thing to do if your accusations were true. 2.) Then there is the ad, intended to offer voters some distinction between himself and Ruthanne, which repeated the same line about full-time employment. Based on your attempted character slam, I am guessing that you are probably aware that Ruthanne tied a line about full-time employment to sexism (despite Scott being a life-long Democrat, fighting for women), bashing volunteers (despite Scott’s long record of volunteerism here in Newton), and racism, which is too stupid to even comment on. Now immigration? Or were you joking?
But I can say this: Scott has been known around Newton for a long time. We know his character. If he has something to say, he says it. Dog whistles are not part of his repertoire. Many people were out canvassing for Scott, yesterday. It went very well. Make of that what you will.
@Bill Brandel
Your response is exactly the problem. I am a Newton voter, and you are not seriously engaging my concerns. Moreover, the language you use in dismissing my concerns constitutes mansplaining, which makes it appear that you dismiss my concerns because I’m a woman. You inform me what the race “is about” as though I cannot figure that out for myself and as though there have not been many voters who are indicating that Lennon himself has made the race “about” more than resumes.
My concerns–about Fuller as well as Lennon–are legitimate voter concerns, and your put-downs of my concerns do not encourage support for Lennon.
Pay no attention to Darth Brandel’s Jedi mind tricks.
If you’re explaining, you’re losing.
I’ve remained silent to date, but the charges leveled against Scott Lennon’s supposed lack of sensitivity to women are unfair and way over the top. Bill is absolutely right about Scott’s sensitivity and demeanor. The personal respect he shows for every human being he comes in contact with, regardless of sex, racial or ethnic background and income level, is apparent to anyone who has spent any time with this thoroughly decent man. Enough already.
Bill,
Your explanation about context is useful. Problem is not everyone who read the ad would have the benefit of the context. The words need to speak for themselves. But, now I, for one, have a better idea of what he meant by “out of context.”
I know that you are getting sick of going back and forth with me on this, but I cannot in good conscience let “and racism, which is too stupid to even comment on” go without reply. I have heard from people of color who were very discouraged about Scott’s ad, particularly about the reference to his being a third-generation Newtonian.
First of all, nobody is accusing Scott of racism (or sexism). They are pointing out that the words he used in the ad are insensitive. Transforming the criticism that his words were insensitive into allegations of racism (and sexism) treads awfully close to cynicism.
Nobody is accusing Scott of epithet-hurling or practicing knowing discrimination.
Nobody is accusing Scott of failing to support policies that are pro-women or pro-people-of-color.
What people are upset about — genuinely, sincerely upset about — are words in the ad that suggest an insensitivity to structural biases against women and people of color.
And, regarding your welcome analysis on the whiteness and maleness of V14, one of the reasons that women and people of color are less likely to join the conversation here is that they don’t enjoy having their sincere concerns characterized as “too stupid to even comment on.”
As a white man, I can afford not to give a f*ck if I get attacked for my views. So, I’m gladly acting as a surrogate for other voices.
Bob, with all due respect, I heard from a lot of Newton voters who found Scott’s ad offensive. I don’t think you win elections by telling the voters they’re wrong.
I’ve had many conversations about this, including with some who were POC, SAHMs, and LGBT. All were far more troubled by Fuller’s political donation history than Lennon’s poorly worded ad.
Hi Bob. Welcome back!
Sean: Yeah, I’m done with this back and forth. People hear what they hear. I can only give my point of view. If you somehow go from “continuous full-time employment” to racism, global warming or anything else, that’s you, dude. I hear “he worked,” and must have done a pretty decent job if it was continuous.
MiddleClassNewtonMom: I am a Newton voter, too. I am not an elected official, and nor do I speak for the Scott Lennon campaign. I’m just a humble volunteer, trying to help keep my City in good stead.
Wow – step away from the blogs for a few hours and now folks are cursing?
OKAY folks – we all need to take a deep breath. Use of the terms – whether it was “continuous” or “full-time” were in my own opinion poor choices BUT they do not equate to an anti-stay at home mom or racist sentiment or intent. As a former mayoral candidate who has listened to Scott say this over and over again at each and every forum – maybe using different “words”- the intent was always clear to me (a stay at home mom, environmental attorney, community activist and longest serving Asian American elected official in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts – he is trying to differentiate himself as having the most experience of all of the candidates. That’s it. I didn’t take that as being sexist or anti-stay at home mom. People will read into each of the candidate’s statements on this issue with their own lens. That’s fine. Go out and vote. But please – let’s look at the overall candidate, the issues they stand for or the issues they don’t stand for, the votes they have cast, what they have accomplished, their commitment to our schools and our seniors, the experiences they bring to the table and how they will lead Newton forward.
And don’t forget – Vote NO on Charter!
It’s always North against South. The working class side of Newton vs The lawyers and doctors on the other. She new it was getting close. So she put the gender question in it, to get the women with her.
Not all women vote based on gender. Would I like to to see the first woman mayor in Newton? Almost as much as I wanted to see our first woman president. But only if she is the best candidate an d it isn’t even a close call for me.
Claire. You are right. We should be so grateful that in this country, we can vote for the best candidate. And be able to speak our mind, on this blog. I just hope and pray. That people will vote. Some younger people don’t seem to care about elections anymore. As you can tell by the primary vote turnout.
From Fuller’s website:
“As a first-time parent juggling twins, I was fortunate that I could decide to care for the boys full-time in their first two years. These were not only some of the most meaningful years of my life, but often taught me more about management than my MBA!”
That may be, Ms. Fuller, but I bet if you were hiring someone to manage a few thousand employees and a nearly $400 million budget, and you were weighing the qualifications of two people, one of whom had a Harvard MBA and the other of whom was a stay-at-home parent for two years, you’d probably pick the Harvard MBA every time. I’m not insulting stay-at-home parents. I’m pointing out how ridiculous it is to compare these two experiences on what is effectively your resume.
Lennon’s not putting down stay-at-home parents (moms or dads). He’s simply pointing out that his work experience directly qualifies him for the job for which he is applying. That’s what this ad is addressing: his qualifications for this particular job. It’s not an attack on Fuller, or women, or stay-at-home parents. Anyone who thinks otherwise is way too thin-skinned to be in any kind of public leadership position.
Replying to AJ Howard’s comment: “That may be, Ms. Fuller, but I bet if you were hiring someone to manage a few thousand employees and a nearly $400 million budget, and you were weighing the qualifications of two people, one of whom had a Harvard MBA and the other of whom was a stay-at-home parent for two years, you’d probably pick the Harvard MBA every time. I’m not insulting stay-at-home parents. I’m pointing out how ridiculous it is to compare these two experiences on what is effectively your resume.”
IN FACT, Ruthanne Fuller is the candidate who holds the Harvard MBA degree (Class of 1983). Scott Lennon does not hold that degree. She also holds a Bachelor’s degree from Brown.
So, based on your statement AJ Howard, you’d pick Ruthanne Fuller, the Harvard MBA.
IN FACT, Scott Lennon’s website (on the About Scott page) lists no master’s degree at all. So, I assume he has none. He lists his undergraduate degree as from Merrimack College.