Republican talking points re: Sotomayor leaked

Wow. I didn't think the Republicans could look any more dickish than they do now, but once again, I was wrong. The Hill has a copy of the RNC's SCOTUS talking points, and they manage to exceed my expectations. Here are some examples:

Until we have a full view of the facts and comprehensive understanding of Judge Sotomayor's record, Republicans will avoid partisanship and knee-jerk judgments--which is in stark contrast to how the Democrats responded to the Judge Roberts and Alito nominations.
Of course, in those two cases, Democrats were voicing concern about two proven conservatives whose views translated clearly to their legislative styles. And those concerns were voiced after a full view of the facts and comprehensive understanding of the then-nominees. So, the Republicans are basically saying they're going give Sotomayor a good, hard look...and then say no.

Republicans look foward to learning more about Judge Sotomayor's legal views and to determining whether her views reflect the values of mainstream America.
"Mainstream America" has become a euphemism for white Christian conservatives as surely as Republicans believe "empathy" is a euphemism for activism. Were they to use an accurate definition of "mainstream America," they'd find that Sotomayor's views do indeed reflect those values--and they'd find that "values" can no longer be used as a euphemism for for the Ten Commandments. In a country whose citizens share a spectrum of colors, religions, and socioeconomic backgrounds, it's important that we are all represented--and that means that sometimes there will be decisions that not everyone agrees with. Republicans need to accept that.

Republicans are the minority party, but our belief that judges should interpret rather than make law is shared by a majority of Americans.
True. Republicans are the minority party, and judges should interpret rather than make law--and given the conservative bent of the current SCOTUS, appointing a moderate/liberal justice will temper the current right-wing legislative influence. I'm glad we all agree!

Obama said he believes Supreme Court justices should understand the Court's role to protect people who may be vulnerable in the political process.
Like Loving vs. Virginia, or Brown vs. Board of Education, or Roe vs. Wade, or Tinker vs. Des Moines? Apparently, those cases were superfluous, since the rights of women, minorities and chldren have never been abused in America.

Further eroding the rights of the unborn and property owners
No issue is more important than abortion. By the way--does the Constitution address the rights of the unborn? Also, it's important that rich people keep all their money. And why put these two issues together? Are babies property? Can a woman's womb be considered a commodity? Those GOP'ers and their sensitive touch...

In summary: Republicans plan to oppose Sotomayor based on how Democrats acted a decade ago, and they think using the law to protect the vulnerable is horrible. Keep it comin', folks.