Sunday, October 23, 2005

Meanwhile, at the Corner

Jonah Goldberg takes down Hewitt's claim that Miers's heavy-handed diversity policies while President of the TBA cannot be considered as evidence of her judicial views on affirmative action.
So now Hugh is telling us not to worry about her private political views, they are meaningless (even as she pushed the White House to go soft on Bollinger). Meanwhile, Miers' supporters have been arguing for two weeks that Miers is privately opposed to abortion and that should be good enough indication about how she'd vote on Roe. So which is it? Why should we believe Hewitt that Miers will keep her private views to herself (even though she hasn't in the past) on race, but she'll take her private views on abortion to the bank?
Allow me to add that, because I know all about Brentwood and the state action doctrine, I consider myself privileged to enter this discussion.

See also: Protein Wisdom, Bainbridge, Below the Beltway, and Patterico (who still has not yet jumped).