In this month’s Vogue article on U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, Dr. Susan Rice, author Jonathan van Meter spent far more ink describing Rice working the room at a cocktail party than working issues.  Okay, this is Vogue.  I even tried to be a good sport when Van Meter was “startled by her biceps” instead of her intellect.  But my radar went off when he said:

One of the constant criticisms leveled against Rice is that she can be a bully.

I searched Google for “Susan Rice” and “bully” to see whether there is published evidence that this is a “constant criticism”.  Nope.  To support his assertion, van Meter cites merely this quote from Stewart Patrick, “DC policy wonk”:

She can come off as a real bulldozer in policy discussions.  She’s not afraid to go to the mat; she’s got extremely strong convictions.  If there’s one thing she has to watch out for it’s that tenacity and desire to be on the winning side, which holds the risk of her either losing sight of the big picture or not recognizing shades of gray.

Is it just me, or has van Meter stretched Patrick’s actual quote, turning the description of a bulldozer —  a powerful machine, into a bully — a thuggish or cruel arm-twister?  And didn’t this just happen to Judge Sonia Sotomayer, who was called a “bully on the bench” because she asks tough questions?  And during the 2008 elections. didn’t it happen to both then-Senator Hillary Clinton and Governor Sarah Palin?  Can we not profile powerful women without calling them bullies?

As for Rice being a bulldozer, excellent.  She’s the only woman on the UN Security council, dealing with China and Russia and other countries on problems she described in the article:

two wars; persistent Al Qaeda threat; serious nonproliferation set of challenges in Iran and North Korea; Middle East peace that is increasingly elusive, it seems; a global financial crisis, which is aggravating instability; genocide in Darfur exacerbated by a man-made humanitarian crisis…

Would we really want anything less than a bulldozer in that position?  This time, I agree with Valerie Jarrett.  When van Meter asked her about Rice being ”intimidating, inflexible — indeed a bulldozer,” she said:

I think that’s a strength!

Journalists profile men who are strong, opinionated, and tenacious without characterizing those traits as flaws or liabilities.  They should do the same for women.

(BTW, the Washington Post recently published an extensive interview with Jarrett, who heads the White House Office of Public Engagement.  Reporter Lois Romano questioned Jarrett on her responsibilities as head of the White House Office of Public Engagement, on the nomination of  Sotomayor, and on Jarrett’s long-standing friendship with the first lady.  However, she didn’t ask about Jarrett’s accomplishments with or plans for the White House Council on Women and Girls, which Jarret chairs.  We’re still waiting for news on that.)