Newsweek Summarizes Decade in Seven-Minute Video

The folks at Newsweek attempted the difficult and controversial job of trying to summarize an entire decade -- 2000-2009 -- in a little over seven minutes by creating this video.

At the end of the video, the narrator asked what they missed. I can think of a few things just off the top of my head: Multi-kid mania (Angelina/Madonna adoptions, Gosselins, Octo-Mom, Duggars); the crazes involving High School Musical, Hannah Montana/Miley Cyrus and vampires; the Boston Red Sox breaking an 86 year curse (I still get teary-eyed at the memory), the first Latina on the U.S. Supreme Court and the skimpiness of their handling of 9/11. I think Borat got more airtime than did 9/11.

I'd love to hear what you think they left out of the decade summary.

Suburban Mom's Political Fix: Is It Sexist to Question Sotomayor's Judicial Temperament?

That was the question raised on MSNBC's Morning Joe this AM: Whether South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham would've asked a male Supreme Court nominee about his reputed tough demeanor in the courtroom and then inquire if the nominee had "a temperament problem."

Co-hosts Mika Brzezinski and Joe Scarborough asked author and former Clinton spokeswoman Dee Dee Myers -- she wrote Why Women Should Rule the World -- about whether a double-standard was at work with Sotomayor's questioning. After noting that of the 111 Supreme Court judges ever to hold office, only two have been female, Myers discussed the importance of getting more women to serve on the highest court in the land:

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Below you'll find the video of Graham's confirmation hearing questioning so you can make your own call on the matter. Citing the comments of anonymous lawyers who called Sotomayor "a terror on the bench," "abuses lawyers" and is "a bit of a bully," Graham said, "I never liked appearing before a judge that I thought was a bully . . . Do you think you have a temperament problem?"



Is this a case of holding strong, tough women -- who insist that those around them exhibit the same level of excellence as they do -- to a different standard than we do to men? The classic "she's a b*&%$" while he's a striving, high-powered executive with smarts?

UPDATE: Salon's Broadsheet blog puts an interesting twist on the "temperament" question, pointing out two examples -- questions about John McCain and John Bolton's temperaments -- which say that simply raising the issue of a hot temper doesn't necessarily make the questioning sexist.

The web site Feministing quoted a former Yale Law School dean who looked into rumors about Sotomayor being "overly aggressive" on the Court of Appeals and said he didn't find any substantial difference between her questioning of attorneys and male judges' inquiries.

Suburban Mom's Political Fix: Palin's Meta-Working Mom Tale & Women on the Supreme Court

Palin's Meta-Working Mom Tale

Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin's shocking resignation continues to generate comment, analysis and interest. An image of Palin signing a toddler's dress takes up a third+ of the top half of the front page of the New York Times, 10 days after her ambiguous July 4 Eve press conference. The Times story paints a woman who's feeling so besieged and stressed out that her hair has thinned and her friends worry that she's become underweight.

I joined the fray of analysts and deconstructed Palin's resignation in my Pop Culture column this week by saying that what you think about her and her decision to quit mid-way through her term, depends largely upon your political perspective and your life's experiences. For me, I view her story through a working mom prism.

Women on the Supreme Court

The only female jurist currently sitting on the Supreme Court, Ruth Bader Ginsberg gave a fascinating interview to the New York Times Sunday Magazine in which she talked at length about her experience on the Court and how being female has affected her experience. Among the questions she fielded was about how having only one or two women on the Supreme Court affects deliberation.

When asked why it matters to have women on the Court, Ginsberg invoked the Sotomayor confirmation hearings saying, "It matters for women to be there at the conference table to be doing everything that the court does. I hope that these hearings for Sonia [Sotomayor] will be as civil as mine were and [Justice] Steve Breyer's were. Ours were unusual in that respect."

The exchange below I found particularly intriguing:

New York Times: Did you think that all the attention to the criticism of Sotomayor as being "bullying" or not as smart is sex-inflected? Does that have to do with the rarity of a woman in her position, and the particular challenges?

Ginsberg: I can't say that it was just that she was a woman. There are some people in Congress who would criticize severely anyone President Obama nominated. They'll seize on any handle. One is that she's a woman, another is that she made the remark about Latina women. [In 2001 Sotomayor said: "I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life."] And I thought it was ridiculous for them to make a big deal out of that. Think of how many times you've said something that you didn't get out quite right, and you would edit your statement if you could. I'm sure she meant no more than what I mean when I say: Yes, women bring a different life experience to the table. All our differences make the conference better. That I'm a woman, that's part of it, that I'm Jewish, that's part of it, that I grew up in Brooklyn, NY, and I went to summer camp in the Adirondacks, all these things are part of me.

Once Justice [Sandra Day] O'Connor was questioning counsel at oral argument. I thought she was done, so I asked a question, and Sandra said: Just a minute, I'm not finished. So I apologized to her and she said: It's okay, Ruth. The guys do it to each other all the time, they step on each other's questions. And then there appeared an item in USA Today, and the headline was something like "Rude Ruth Interrupts Sandra."

Ginsberg is likely to be joined soon by Sotomayor, who's going through the Senate confirmation process where she'll be asked to defend/explain some of her more controversial statements, particularly the Latina woman quip. One thing's for sure, the Court needs women. I cannot imagine what men would say or feel if the highest court in the land didn't have anyone representing the male half of the citizenry.

Image credit: Ruven Afanador/NYT.

Suburban Mom's Political Fix: A Supreme Court Nominee from the Bronx

The nomination of U.S. Appeals Court Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the nation's highest court to fill the seat vacated by outgoing Supreme Court Justice David Souter will likely succeed, but not without some degree of controversy.

There's enough material out there on Sotomayer onto which folks with myriad viewpoints can latch and make hay. Conservatives, for example, are ticked that she described the U.S. Appeals Court as have a law-making role, not an interpretative one. (During a panel discussion she said: "[The] Court of Appeals is where policy is made. I know this is on tape, and I should never say that because we don't make law. I know. Okay. I know. I'm not promoting it. And I'm not advocating it.")

Plus there's that inflammatory comment Sotomayor made a few years ago that's been talk radio fodder this afternoon about how people's life experiences come into play when judges render legal opinions: "I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life."

The web site Politico described Sotomayor's positions on the wedge issue of abortion as "murky:" "In 17 years on the federal bench, she has issued no opinions dealing directly with abortion rights. And in two cases dealing tangentially with the issue -- involving anti-abortion protesters and the government right to limit abortion-related speech by foreign recipients of U.S. aid -- the appeals court judge's ruling favored abortion opponents. Still, anti-abortion forces are convinced that [President] Obama would not nominate Sotomayor without being confident that she supports abortion rights."

But on one thing, I think people along the various points on the political spectrum can agree: She's got a great story. Sotomayor grew up in a Bronx housing project with her parents, born in Puerto Rico, and brother. Her dad died when she was 9 and her mother, a nurse, worked like crazy to pay for parochial school for her two children. Sotomayer, who was an avid fan of Nancy Drew mysteries as a child, according to the New York Times bio on her here, went on to attend Princeton on a scholarship and then Yale Law School, worked as an assistant district attorney and a corporate litigator before becoming a judge. Then there's the story about how Sotomayer "saved baseball" during the MLB baseball strike in the mid-1990s. ("She ended a long baseball strike [in 1995], briskly ruling against the owners in favor of the players," the Times wrote.)

The most moving moment in the announcement of her nomination occurred when she tried to describe how much she appreciates everything her mother did to help make this moment possible and she teared up. No matter what happens during this summer's confirmation process -- save for a scandal, she'll almost certainly be confirmed, though not without some protest over the justices-as-lawmakers comment -- it is heartening to hear a success story like Sotomayor's. (To hear her remarks, go about 11+ minutes into the video.)