In a prior post I listed responses Harriet Miers gave to the Dallas Eagle Forum, while making a 1989 run for public office. After giving those responses it seems her view on some of the same issues changed in less than a year. I was reading over this Opinion Journal piece by James Taranto that listed her responses in a 1989 voting-rights case. Her responses do not jive with previous answers! For example, during the court case she mentioned:
(A link to the court testimony document is available in the Opinion Journal write-up.)

In the testimony document she mentions she supported it “long before now”. But as I pointed out, her responses in the Dallas Eagle Forum questionnaire did not convey that at all!

Also Taranto mentions:

And she does say in the testimony document “I was against it”. But she responded “NO” when asked if it should be abolished in the Dallas Eagle Forum questionnaire, as I pointed out previously.

Something does not “smell” right here.

I’ve been going back and forth on Ms. Miers, but I hope I’ve provided a logical flow during my time of offering my opinion of her. Basing my view totally on the facts I am able to review and considering points made by others. Till this point I was supportive of her, although I knew she was not the best candidate available. But now I’m feeling like she is inconsistent and really might be saying just what she thinks sounds most acceptable for the moment. I do not find this to be acceptable for a US Supreme Court Justice. So I have to put myself into the against camp when it comes to Ms. Miers. Her court testimony does not agree with her written responses in a questionnaire. And although it occurred in 1989 she may have committed perjury.

Given the “waffling” responses I have lost confidence that she can maintain a true Constitutional view if put on the High Court.

update (10/21/2005 10:03PM ET): Over at Captain’s Quarters Ed list some extremely damaging information regarding the Miers nomination. That coupled with this possible perjury I’ve discovered makes for a terrible set of events. Ed like myself was in support of the Miers nomination and has changed his mind based on the facts he’s put together himself.

update (10/22/2005 10:00PM ET): N.Z. Bear and Stop The ACLU are asking bloggers for their views on the Miers nomination. So just to be clear: I oppose the Miers nomination.