Mr Greenwald of Salon actually cited, in these(e)pages, personal experience with her having a temper... before going on to say such is not unusual for judges.

This is not to say the whole discussion on the news is not silly... what, after all, is terrible about a little edge? As long as you can work with colleagues I see no problem.

I think there is some silliness in the kneejerk reactions herein. Was there not some case where 'racism' was cried when a whitepundit/politician/lawyer/judge used the phrase 'is no cakewalk' in discourse with a black pundit/politician/lawyer/judge? Absolutely absurd... I would hope we would agree.

ugh, the 'read up on lecture.' That is the most grating of condescending slights.

For the record, a point you skipped over, I did not say there are not some items of concern especially in the media coverage of Sotomayor. I was addressing the point of temperament. Many folks here have stated unqualified judgments that this would 'never' happen to a man. This is, of course, observably untrue following an election period in which the opposition candidate (from the media party as far as I am concerned) was almost daily questioned as to his temperament.

It is clear some people have already made up their minds that antapproach to Sotomayor is clearly a case of bias. This is to engage in... ahem... hysteria.

With a nod to possible bias in the media, and some in the legislature, exaggerating the truth and fondling each other in congrats for how unbiased and/or observant we are is not of merit.

Her Honor has been asked questions as the opposition has the right to do. She has answered in turn. We have seem other justices receive comparable grilling. Not to say some language in places has been free of guilt, but I think people are exaggerating otherwise dull interfaces for effect.

I agree with your premise, but some points:

- more than a sliver of transgender people engage in hetero sex ... a point which is offset by the fact that, obviously homosexual individuals use their gender identified restroom.

- I do think that many women will be put at disease by a 6'0+ obvious male ambling about the restroom

- The possibility that some people will dress to impress assault is a possibility. Really to offset this, hardly any public restrooms are monitored of course.

What abooout... no big-room public restrooms? Perhaps more investment in the facet of completely enclosed bathroom units is the best idea. Frankly, already, more than a few male friends of mine have found themselves on the end of rather aggressive 'approaches' in men's rooms. Men have no more desire to find a lurking man outside a stall, peeking between the cracks or drilled in holes in the walls while they are trying to take a crap than women are. A friend of mine was sodomized in a public restroom at the age of about 11. Of course, any enclosed space is a potential prison. But this might allow for security cameras in the main space of the restroom area with a panopticon of all individual units. Bentham should have been a restroom attendant.

On the other hand... open air porta-potties for all? It's nice... you can look out the grill window while you resist the retch. And especially stimulating on a cold winter morning after a long night on the town!

Had Mr Henderson, of whom I have no knowledge, not laughed his ass off, Mr Sessions might have found himself in a well of speenin' ta da.

You are arguing about a topic barely limned in allusion by the article. Ms Forman gave limited moral discourse on the matter of the rescucitation. Immediately you have jumped the gun to what you really want to troll about. The book is about parents who have to deal with these matters, not a treatise. Now, I know we live in the era of 24-news, Dick Cheney and Fox, but not everything is about spoiling for a fist fight. some subtlety should be expected. Brightstar - you are a true lunatic. Your first post had next to nothing to do with the article or book. The term primitive?: http://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/primitive

"I know a woman who in her single days would wear her grandmother's wedding ring because it allowed her to read a book in a bar without being mobbed by guys on the prowl."

Hey! I don't drink in your library. Stop reading in my bar!

"...people have a tough time getting beyond the dissonant image of a buxom bombshell with a sweetly dimpled smile climbing into a fighting cage, going for blood and loving it."

What? Who? Where? Cite a case of someone finding this troublesome? Further proof the Gorgeous Ladeez of Broadsheet are living in a fantasy word and are tilting at windmills... all the more tragic and wasteful as there are real menacing giants out there in the world. Posts such as these make me understand the internal debate among feminists about 'white feminist' cultural closedness, a debate I previously found to be itself wasteful, or even somewhat contrived. Too much time is wasted on these trivial souffles relevant to only a sliver of the world's women.

She makes a good point... just not for her team. The objective of the health care rioters is to obfuscate any proper discussion of the material. I am not sure why one might make critique of this comment, unless she can be shown to have contributed to patternof confusion.

death panel.... nevermind.

Or when they write for broadsheet! ha ha! Just kidding, I think. But this is exactly the thing to set Pat Buchanan off on another 'breed while you can' frenzy.