Why do Republicans object to Sotomayor's possible 'Liberal Agenda"

[ShockediSay]

How many of our conservative nominees came out of affiliation with the Federalist Society,
where the goal is to advance the 'Conservative Agenda' via the judiciary?

I think Federalist Society affiliation is an automatic disqualification for the Federal Judiciary, in addition to a violation of the Federal Judicial Ethics standard having to do with impartiality.

[liberal N proud]

1. Republicans object to anything that remotely resembles liberal policy

[HopeHoops]

2. It doesn't matter who Obama appoints - they'll oppose him or her.

He could appoint a right wing fascist like O'Reilly and they would oppose the "liberal activist judge" he selected.

[el_bryanto]

3. That's true

And self evident; the base isn't interested in policy, it's interested in victory.

Bryant

[burning rain]

4. They don't object to her "liberal agenda"; they pretty much trust her not to have one.

They felt the need to pitch a fit to please their racist base, who dislike any Democrat of color. But even Lindsey Graham admitted she had a reasonable record from his point of view, and Ken Starr endorsed her. She's an ex-corporate attorney known for deference to business interests and police. Maybe she'll at least support legal abortion.

[timeforpeace]

5. She's in. The next nominee will be the tough one.

[SCantiGOP]

6. as Lindsey graham admitted

Winning elections has consequences. Had McCain won there would be a different candidate going through the confirmation process.