Why is Judicial Watch considered a conservative group?

I've blogged about this before, but this article on Judicial Watch suing for the release of John Kerry's Vietnam records I found on Wizbang makes me repeat myself. Judicial Watch is once again refered to as a "conservative" group, and in most people's minds, conservative=republican. For most people who don't know about JW, they figure that it's another republican front, sort of like MoveOn is for the Dems.

But while the Judicial Watch list of cases includes it's fair share of suits against people involved in the Clinton administration, it also include a few that don't come to mind when one thinks of conservative in the way most people do, as Republican. Like them suing Dick Cheney, or Guliani, or Republican senator Orrin Hatch, or the Army regarding Halliburton/ Brown and Root Contracts.

Is Judicial Watch a little crazy? Probably, considering that their list of lawsuits includes the Vince Foster conspiracy, a suit against Iraq claiming involvement in Oklahoma City, and multiple lawsuits against Cuba (which are probably justified but unwinable).

JW probably fits the traditional mold of Judicial conservatism, where Judges are not activists and don't make up the law as they go along - but that's not what most people think of when they see the word conservative, and I think that writers want people to see Conservative, think Republican, and dismiss the lawsuit as coming from a Republican group and thus tainted - when the actual group bringing the suit is far more complex than that.