The NYTimes has an analysis piece on Sotomayor today...describing Sotomayor as "sharp-tongued:" "Sotomayor's Sharp Tongue Raises Questions of Temperment."
Have you ever heard a man described as "sharp-tongued?"
(Have you ever heard of a "handbasket" that wasn't on the way to hell?)
The comparison is to Justice Scalia, but the language, to describe him, changes to "ascerbic, " without the Homeric overtones.
And why, in her case, is this indicative of a "temperment" problem? ("She's whacked, that's why!" Oh, I see. Not.)
As the article unfolds, it turns out that other, more careful observers, say her questioning pattern is no different than her male colleagues. But this qualification does not appear until you've read halfway into the article (and, of course, the damning phrase is in the big font).
I'm jus' saying.