Because only Democrats "question" the other parties nominees, and they do so only as a public service - to ensure the "radical", "out of the mainstream" views that Republican nominees have are exposed to the world.
But Republicans, as we all know, are just animals:
How the GOP will attack
How the Republicans Will Go After Sotomayor
Their lines of questioning are already being ridiculed:
They'll grill her on her interest in foreign law - in their eyes an un-American curiosity that could pollute U.S. laws. And they will fret over her Second Amendment decisions and imply she might want to take away some folks' guns
This one is a classic:
Sotomayor has used the "wise Latina" phrase repeatedly in speeches dating back to 1994. In one speech in 2001 she tagged on the line "than a white male who hasn't lived that life." Republicans, who prefer judges that claim total impartiality to the law, do not like that Sotomayor's decisions are influenced by her life experience.
Only Republicans like impartial judges? Really? Perhaps our frineds at Time (and Yahoo, who put this piece of sh*t on their home page) ought to look at these polling numbers on Sotomayor; seems like the majority of Americans perfer impartial judges.
Who prefers impartial judges? Only hard-left Democrats and the mainstream media, I reckon...
After arguing that any "attack" on Sotomayor would be precieved as racist and keep the Republicans in minority status, Time concludes pompously:
There's always the potential for unforeseen fireworks, but if Sotomayor is as well prepared as the evidence would suggest, the hearings could just as easily turn out to be anticlimactic.
We'll see, my left-wing nuts. And should she get the robe, one might only imagine the backlash against Barack Obaba as she decides case after case based on race and social class, as opposed to merit and law. After all, as Ricci has proven, that's her specialty...