So--going exclusively from this--basically she's a bit right of Rehnquist in her judicial activism for the authoritarian right when it comes to federal police powers, and a stickler for legalism to reduce docket size. On the other hand, that sort of judge would be infinitely preferable to O'Connor (with her #@$!%#@!%@! multi-tiers juggling acts, er, "balancing tests").
So it'd be at least marginally better to have Williams than a get-along-ist tabula rasa, which is what we seem to have in Miers from the minimal public statements she's made on constitional topics (affirmative action--for it, gays--agin' it, abortion--probably agin it, suppression of free speech for Klansman--for it). I'd still rather have JRBrown or Alex Kozinski. But two Rehnquist-maybes are better than one Rehnquist-maybe and an All-over-the-place-gamble.
I am looking forward to Roberts' votes trickling out soon.
I might agree with the Bork/Scalia model-when it comes to legislative and executive discretionary powers not being encroached upon by the courts-and the Thomas/D. Ginsburg model-as far as upholding core Constitutional values is concerned, e.g. property rights, the correct interpretation of the commerce clause, etc.,-but I don't believe that either approach is wholly meritless.
However, I can't say the same of the ad hoc, politically expedient, self-absorbed approach taken by the Breyer school on ALL of these issues.