Sotomayor Malaprops Yet Again
The context of that statement was a question about what was perking through the legal system at the time and has been, as you know, before the Supreme Court since Buckley v. Vallejo.
Add it to the rest: the “national labor relationships board”; the “vagrancies of . . . the moment”; building up a “story of knowledge”; threats of “eminent death”; and questions of policy being within the “providence of Congress.”
This woman is Archie Bunker in a dress.
It’s funny… she looks like Archie Bunker in a dress.
ChicagoJedi (884039) — 7/16/2009 @ 6:17 pmBut weren’t the Bunkers Queens residents?
Bob (99fc1b) — 7/16/2009 @ 6:27 pm[…] woman is Archie Bunker in a dress.” Leave a […]
Adding Spice to the Menudo of Justice « Buttle’s World (44368e) — 7/16/2009 @ 6:28 pmSupreme Court Justice Norma Crosby.
Jim Treacher (796deb) — 7/16/2009 @ 6:34 pmMust be braindead. Somebody ‘splain to me please. (Not afraid to show my ignorance. But I get all the rest of the malaprops!)
ManlyDad (060305) — 7/16/2009 @ 6:41 pmUnless I’m totally misunderstanding the point, dictionary.com (citing the American Heritage Dictionary) calls this usage “informal” and originating in the U.S. in the 1930’s.
Maybe not standard, but it doesn’t sound that batty.
Nels (a474bc) — 7/16/2009 @ 6:51 pmTo be fair, my mother, who is a very intelligent woman, is prone to speak gobbledygook. But she’s also not nominated to be one of the final arbiters of the law of this country.
HowdySir (0d70bb) — 7/16/2009 @ 6:55 pmYou sound like some putz lying face down on the gridiron griping that the guy who just blew by you at world class speed was wearing pink spikes.
You got dirt on your face and the requisite embarassment. He got a touchdown.
No wonder you were an early cheerleader for Palin, and still think she’s the Messiah-ette for a politically bankrupt party that finally found success with a circular firing squad. Her entire schtick (she doesn’t do policy, she doesn’t do real work) is griping. Especially about, uh, strawpersons and straw-situations.
Do not go gently into the darkness of your loss in politics, Monsieur Patterico. Revel, revel in the dying of your spite.
Larry Reilly (45e7a4) — 7/16/2009 @ 7:02 pmManly Dad,
The way I’ve always heard it is something (an idea, money, whatever) “percolates” through a bureaucracy or system, but it doesn’t “perk” through the system. They sound alike but they don’t mean the same thing, and I’ve never heard anyone in my area use “perking” as shorthand for “percolating.”
DRJ (6f3f43) — 7/16/2009 @ 7:03 pmIf you read the section where L. Graham is questioning her, you see him use the word “percolating” in a similar context. That’s obviously where she got it from, but couldn’t use it correctly just minutes after he said it.
I’m not impressed by her testimony — but I also listened to her on the audio of the Ricci oral argument, and I posted here that there was nothing in the hour’s worth of argument that led me to conclude she was particular smart or insightful there either.
shipwreckedcrew (4a0071) — 7/16/2009 @ 7:23 pmI agree with the rest of them, but I’ve heard “the coffee’s perking” plenty of times.
Wouldn’t necessarily have used it in this context, but it’s not completely absurd.
Tanya (656cd9) — 7/16/2009 @ 7:46 pm8 “You sound like some putz lying face down on the gridiron griping that the guy who just blew by you at world class speed was wearing pink spikes.
You got dirt on your face and the requisite embarassment. He got a touchdown.
No wonder you were an early cheerleader for Palin, and still think she’s the Messiah-ette for a politically bankrupt party that finally found success with a circular firing squad. Her entire schtick (she doesn’t do policy, she doesn’t do real work) is griping. Especially about, uh, strawpersons and straw-situations.
Do not go gently into the darkness of your loss in politics, Monsieur Patterico. Revel, revel in the dying of your spite.
Comment by Larry Reilly — 7/16/2009 @ 7:02 pm”
And her turds are smarter, more competent and gosh darn much nicer than Obamy and every democrat in Congress comnined.
2010 the counter revolution begins.2012 complete victory. 2013 the treason trials of the democrat communists begin.
cubanbob (409ac2) — 7/16/2009 @ 7:58 pmWhy are you here Larry? Were you too dumb for the lefty blogs?
daleyrocks (718861) — 7/16/2009 @ 8:54 pmBuckley v. Vallejo?
nk (956ea1) — 7/16/2009 @ 8:54 pmI have heard of Buckley v. Valeo but darn if I can find Buckley v. Vallejo. Was that the companion case to Escobar v. Illinois and Miranda v. New Mexico?
nk (956ea1) — 7/16/2009 @ 9:06 pmThe most important decision Sotomayor will
make is which clerk she hires to write her
decisions for her.
Probably some young white guy who has a
jack (d9cbc5) — 7/16/2009 @ 9:40 pmdecent English vocabulary.
Does anybody know who her law clerks have been up to now and what happened to them?
nk (956ea1) — 7/16/2009 @ 9:49 pmnk – They ran out of spray paint so she had to get rid of them.
daleyrocks (718861) — 7/16/2009 @ 9:59 pmHeh! It might be the most innocent splanation for the
nk (956ea1) — 7/16/2009 @ 10:11 pmopinionsummary order in Ricci. There’s only so much you can write with spraypoint.nk,
She’s apparently had 49 clerks. All seem to support her nomination and 45 signed a letter to that effect. There are articles on the letter of support here and here. However, other Second Circuit clerks may not be as supportive.
DRJ (6f3f43) — 7/16/2009 @ 10:18 pmThis woman is Archie Bunker in a dress.
The guy from Queens actually had a bit more common sense than the “progressive” from the Bronx. And although that TV character was notorious for his bigotry, the Latina actually equals and surpasses him in that regard. Certainly when she clings to the notion that objective criteria (eg, a color-blind test of a person’s skills) used in hiring should be tossed out in favor subjective criteria (eg, giving preference based on skin color). Talk about irony of ironies.
Mark (411533) — 7/16/2009 @ 10:19 pmDRJ, I see you’re here, but I cannot read your comment unless you clear the cache.
nk (2fa2d4) — 7/16/2009 @ 10:31 pmHeh. I think you know more about how this website works than I do, nk.
DRJ (6f3f43) — 7/16/2009 @ 10:41 pmThank you, DRJ. From your link:
The most consistent concern was that Sotomayor, although an able lawyer, was “not that smart and kind of a bully on the bench,” as one former Second Circuit clerk for another judge put it. “She has an inflated opinion of herself, and is domineering during oral arguments, but her questions aren’t penetrating and don’t get to the heart of the issue.” (During one argument, an elderly judicial colleague is said to have leaned over and said, “Will you please stop talking and let them talk?”)
The lady seems to follow the philosophy that if you cannot dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit.
nk (2fa2d4) — 7/16/2009 @ 10:41 pmHeh. It looks like you know this website better than I do, nk.
Comment by DRJ — 7/16/2009 @ 10:41 pm
My Blackberry seems to penetrate Patterico’s “gateway” (whatever that is) better than my Windows Explorer on my PC, but not always perfectly.
nk (2fa2d4) — 7/16/2009 @ 10:45 pmThe special-new-gift Blackberry, right? I bet it’s pretty cool.
DRJ (6f3f43) — 7/16/2009 @ 10:53 pmMy wife saw this cartoon in one of those New York things she reads. It purports to show an AA meeting. The man standing is saying: “It has been six months since I interrupted a conversation to check my Blackberry.”
It is actually pretty cool. I bought a pair of cellphones for me and my wife when they still weighed a pound, 16 years ago, (she joked that they were our second pair of wedding rings) and I am very impressed with how far the technology and infrastructure has come.
nk (2fa2d4) — 7/16/2009 @ 11:07 pm“…2013 the treason trials of the democrat communists begin…”
Comment by cubanbob — 7/16/2009 @ 7:58 pm
Trials???
Trials???
We don’t need no stinking trials!
To The Wall!
Fidel (022cb0) — 7/17/2009 @ 5:57 amIt is obvious from the demonstrated intelligence, wit, vocabulary and repartee that this person was nominated to the highest court of the land because of her gender and skin tone. Not her accomplishments nor her ability. To hear her grope for words that will not turn out to be nooses in disguise or land mines is disconcerting. There is no natural flow nor acuity.
Terribly disappointing that the D’s could find this person to be “so qualified” as to almost deserve a halo before ascension. ugh.
tomw
tomw (a7ef55) — 7/17/2009 @ 7:06 amSo she is not very bright. We get it. What can be done to stop her confirmation? That is where this blog should be focused. I believe she is not the only public official who is English language-challenged. She is the Sarah Palin of the judiciary. Patterico, tell us how to stop her “eminent” confirmation?
The Emperor (0c8c2c) — 7/17/2009 @ 7:34 amThe Sarah Palin of the judiciary? That’s an idiotic comparison, Emperor, that shows you don’t have a clue about Palin nor Sotomayor.
SPQR (5811e9) — 7/17/2009 @ 8:45 amNo Emporer if she were the Sarah Palin of the judiciary she would have wit, common sense, and some real accomplishments. She would have at some time also had a real job doing something other than working as a government drone supporting the racist and statist policies of her bosses.
And we don’t want her nomination stopped. If she is not confirmed then Obama gets the chance to nominate and effective liberal who can make a cogent argument and possibly persuade the other members of the court. Her attitude and demeanor, as reported by others who have worked on the 2nd circuit with her, will cause her to alienate her fellows from her and possibly her views.
As to Archie Bunker, no. She is David Duke in a dress.
Have Blue (854a6e) — 7/17/2009 @ 8:47 amIn reciprocation for Patterico’s tolerance in my kerfuffle with Myron, I will show the same restraint towards The Emperor on this thread as I do on DRJ’s threads.
nk (2fa2d4) — 7/17/2009 @ 9:01 amComment by SPQR — 7/17/2009 @ 8:45 am
The Emperor (0c8c2c) — 7/17/2009 @ 1:56 pmI was actually talking about party idiots who can’t hold their own during an interview or hearing. Just like Sarah Palin was an embarrassment to her party, so is Sotomayor to hers. We are now even. Now smile for me my atheist friend. 🙂
How, exactly, is Sarah Palin an embarrassment to her party?
Links? Data? Proof?
steve miller (0fb51f) — 7/17/2009 @ 1:58 pmOh…my…god! She actually said ‘relationship’ instead of ‘relations’???
Christ, talking about reaching. What’s next, critiques of her hairstyle?
JEA (6b2ed4) — 7/17/2009 @ 5:27 pm[…] to remain anonymous, reports, “You should see Horatio singing and dancing in the ‘Vagrancies of the Moment‘ number. It’s off the hook. A real celebration of Sonia’s story of knowledge, […]
Wise Latina – la Musica! (66a989) — 7/19/2009 @ 7:42 pm¡Ay caramba!
Taco Bell Chihuahua (d83224) — 7/19/2009 @ 7:58 pm