Coming in late, I know. my blood was reaching the boil… until I got to this:

I understand that she has the reputation for being tough and doesn’t suffer fools gladly.

I understand some of those fools may not be happy about that.

{I once had a reputation for not suffering fools gladly, either, nor did my father, who taught me to argue at the dinner table. Tells you a lot about why I ultimately was unsuccessful in the telephone customer service biz.)

There’s no doubt whatsoever – what’s good for the goose is NOT good for the gander in many people’s eyes. (well, switch the sexes in that proverb)

Has anyone seen the “How to be a good wife” excerpt from an old home-ec textbook that circulates about here and there? I wonder if that’s really what a lot of these openly sexist pundits really still believe.

Even if Judge Sotomayor had one, far from certain, she would not be the first or only judge to have an acid tongue. Even among the manicured and the courtly, they spring like mushrooms in the manure shoveled at them daily in court, even by the whitest white shoe firm lawyers in town.

Keeping control of her courtroom is as important as getting the law right. If she ceded it to anyone, whether forthright and competent or negligent, narcissistic and corrupt, she would be finished as a competent jurist. She has not. She uses a mix of humor, chattiness, directness and command to make her points clear.

I would favor a more progressive voice. I fear Ms. Sotomayor may sometimes miss the legal forest for the statutory trees. But her demeanor is not a problem; it’s an asset, and one thing the Right is afraid of. It may feign apoplexy that she doesn’t look divine in pumps and pearls, but what it’s afraid of is that the most important part of her day is not looking good and having those two martinis ready for hubby when he comes home from a hard day’s work.

What I got out of the Times article (&, yes, I had to read between the lines) is that a number of attorneys think Judge Sotomayor should act more like their maid who’s always so polite.

The Constant Weader at http://www.RealityChex.com

Sharp-tongued observer that you are, you point out that the language the Right is using, like my parody, above, is about as archaic, sexist and vituperative as their attitudes. It’s about them, not who they purport to describe. Soon, I expect to hear them tell of visions by three anonymous of soothsayers dancing round a bubbling cauldron of trouble, giving Newt his political fortune over a broth of newt’s eye and frog’s toe.

The good thing is that Cheney’s damned spot will not out and that his successors’ fortunes will fare no better. I’m optimistic that blogs such as yours can be the substitute carriers of the Birnam woods to Capitol Hill.

The Right has no shame, no restraint, no context for its angst, just greed and lust for power, diapers and no accountability. It will be up to citizens and their pitchforks to make clear whether those are sufficient attributes for high office and the control of their courthouse, state house and White House.

Substantively, I have worked in the appellate court system for 30 years, and the worst, hack-ridden panels of judges I have seen are those who ask no questions or who are overly deferential to the attorneys. The law is a tough business. The tougher the questioning, the more the truth will out.