ABA Standards are Too Liberal According to the Press

According to a New York Times legal analysis, conservatives have a hard time getting appointed to the courts because the ABA has a liberal bias.

The bar association is, after all, a private trade association, not an arm of the government. It takes public and generally liberal positions on all sorts of divisive issues. And studies suggest that candidates nominated by Democratic presidents fare better in the group’s ratings than those nominated by Republicans.

So after the reactionary right (and the Federalist Society) has stuffed the court with judges that would agree with Attila the Hun on most issues, it's time to worry about whether the ABA can't give the "conservatives" (aka, the Alberto Gonzales level of judicial quality) a fair shake? Funny how Reagan didn't worry about the bias of the ABA. It's only when it came to the Bush White House when Justice took a back seat to reactionary politics did the ABA become controversial.

Evidently Mr. ADAM LIPTAK has some good sources to have such an insightful story about how the ABA can't be sufficiently impartial when assessing the quality of judicial candidates. Because we need more Clarence Thomas'es on the courts.

Does Liptak really believe this claptrap or is he just sucking up to the Washington Right?