If a Republican had said it...

Rick Moran
If you've been watching the Sotomayor confirmation hearing, you have probably been struck by the sheer number of malapropisms uttered by the nominee.

John McCormack at The Weekly Standard blog noticed too:

Ed Whelan writes:

Judge Sotomayor says "eminent" when she means "imminent," "providence" instead of "province," "story of knowledge" instead of "store of knowledge," and so on. Does the fact that she is a Latina immunize her from attention to that sort of (admittedly not uncommon) foible?

To answer Whelan's question: These malapropisms would only be noteworthy and revealing if they were spoken by a certain country bumpkin Republican governor of Alaska. When a wise Latina accidentally says "vagrancies of ... the moment" instead of "vagaries of ... the moment" during the oral argument of the Ricci case, we're supposed to ignore the slip-up, as the Wall Street Journal did, but make sure to inform readers that they should be impressed by the fact that "The Catholic-school-educated judge clearly knew the Latin plural of 'forum.'"

But enough about her errors of diction. I wouldn't want to get Sotomayor's reputation for writing pieces "that didn't distinguish between substantive and trivial points, with petty editing suggestions--fixing typos and the like--rather than focusing on the core analytical issues."

Update: Allahpundit has the video and a choice Sotomayor quote: "each time I see a split infinitive, an inconsistent tense structure or the unnecessary use of the passive voice, I blister."


She could fumble, stumble, stutter, and malaprop her way through the Q and A and Democrats would still tout her as the greatest jurist since John Marshall.

As McCormack points out, if Sarah Palin had made verbal gaffes like this, she would have been flogged mericlessly for it. I guess there are all sorts of advantages to being a "wise Latina."

Hat Tip: Ed Lasky





If you've been watching the Sotomayor confirmation hearing, you have probably been struck by the sheer number of malapropisms uttered by the nominee.

John McCormack at The Weekly Standard blog noticed too:

Ed Whelan writes:

Judge Sotomayor says "eminent" when she means "imminent," "providence" instead of "province," "story of knowledge" instead of "store of knowledge," and so on. Does the fact that she is a Latina immunize her from attention to that sort of (admittedly not uncommon) foible?

To answer Whelan's question: These malapropisms would only be noteworthy and revealing if they were spoken by a certain country bumpkin Republican governor of Alaska. When a wise Latina accidentally says "vagrancies of ... the moment" instead of "vagaries of ... the moment" during the oral argument of the Ricci case, we're supposed to ignore the slip-up, as the Wall Street Journal did, but make sure to inform readers that they should be impressed by the fact that "The Catholic-school-educated judge clearly knew the Latin plural of 'forum.'"

But enough about her errors of diction. I wouldn't want to get Sotomayor's reputation for writing pieces "that didn't distinguish between substantive and trivial points, with petty editing suggestions--fixing typos and the like--rather than focusing on the core analytical issues."

Update: Allahpundit has the video and a choice Sotomayor quote: "each time I see a split infinitive, an inconsistent tense structure or the unnecessary use of the passive voice, I blister."


She could fumble, stumble, stutter, and malaprop her way through the Q and A and Democrats would still tout her as the greatest jurist since John Marshall.

As McCormack points out, if Sarah Palin had made verbal gaffes like this, she would have been flogged mericlessly for it. I guess there are all sorts of advantages to being a "wise Latina."

Hat Tip: Ed Lasky