First things first, Hecht says Miers approaches the Bible and the Constitution the same way-- that she is an "originalist." (gulp) I'm not sure what that means, exactly, but it doesn't sound good.
Second, on abortion, when Olasky asks around about her position he is reassured that people need to look no futher than her conservative, evangelical, fundamentalist church because her views are in line with whatever her church says. (nudge, nudge, wink, wink) However, Olasky then adds that Heckts says they "went to two or three prolife dinners in the late 80s or early 90s." Not a huge surprise that she's anti-abortion, well, unless it was something along the lines of a White Rose Banquet. Regardless, Bush is well-assured that she is a serious social conservative as well as a pro-corporate flunky.
The bottom line is that she is exactly as we all assumed-- she is a close friend of Bush who shares his professed beliefs in living a Christ-centered life according to a somewhat inflexible view of the Bible. Not that there's anything wrong with that, but it should take more than that to become a supreme court justice.
As far as the reported right-wing opposition to Miers is concerned, I think that'll be short lived. They're all just irritated because Bush didn't give them some known right-winger like Janice Rogers Brown. They've all been daydreaming of someone like her for years, so it's a hard dream to let go. However, I don't think it'll take them very long to see that Ms. Miers is likely a fine conservative alternative who has the added advantage of not having a lightening rod strapped to her head.
So, yeah, put me on the "not-so-stealthy" candidate side.
(Sidenote: One of the more amusing comments in his comments section is this-- Miers was a democrat in the 80s so how can she be trusted when she "didn't get the Gipper?")