And Sometimes, The Sexism Just Chafes

Sotomayor's Blunt Style Raises Issues of Temperament.

You know, nobody tells Scalia that maybe he should be less combative and a little nicer to the lawyers appearing before him. No one suggests that he should tone down his style of questioning. It's his calling card. It's also sometimes fun to listen to, even if you disagree with him, because he is so sharp, smart and opinionated. Nobody suggests he should just STFU and listen. No one says he should be less of a cranky conservative opinionated Catholic and not continue to interpret issues through his own viewpoint.

The woman has come from a background that's not connected to the traditional power structure of the United States to be a respected jurist and now is nominated to the Supreme Court. She is also really kinda boring--was married, got divorced, lives alone, hangs out with her family, takes care of herself. I think her temperament is proven steady by all that more than an "aggressive" questioning style IN HER OWN COURTROOM WHERE SHE MAKES THE RULES.

Seriously, did you want Harriet Miers on the bench? Apparently so.

Oh wait, there's more!

I was a little late to May's dustup between NPR's "Planet Money" host/reporter Adam Davidson and Elizabeth Warren but it it a doozy on so many points.

1) The podcast I've linked to has very little of the interview. What we are given the chance to listen to is disturbing because of Davidson's behavior. What's also disturbing is the framing of his disrespect towards Warren in the interview--an "aw shucks, I lost my temper, forgive the bad little puppy?" tone that excuses his behavior. Oh, so it's just fine for you as a journalist to be disrespectful in an interview, Mr. Davidson? All right, all's forgiven. Slap on the wrist! /sarcasm.

2) Elizabeth Warren got her post based not only on her professional qualifications, but because she cowrote a book that explained in plain language what happened in America that made sense both in terms of data and in people's experience in the past 30-40 years: that life has gotten extremely expensive for most people due to a chipping away of safety nets, that credit fueled a rise in costs and made up the gaps in personal income to cover that, and that this in part fueled some of the crazy financial system schemes that lead to the current craptastic state of the economy. It's a multilayered effect.

Mr. Davidson finds her viewpoint to be less credible because it is not endorsed by mainstream economists and she is not, in his words, "a statesman." I'm sorry that he feels that way, but it means jack. She was picked to head this panel by the administration; deal with it. That and her own ability to explain her position give her credibility.

And frankly can't one say adherence to the mainstream viewpoint is what got us into the mess?

3) At several points Davidson pulls out the bully's tricks of interrupting and shouting Warren down. She in turn adopts the low, measured tone one uses with a wild dog, because if a woman raises her voice she's automatically branded a shrieking harpy without serious thought. Listening, you can't escape how little he thinks of her, and how closeminded he is and that his behavior shows he regards her as not worthy of common respect and courtesy. It's pretty chilling.

It's great to be a thinking woman in America today!