On the one hand, we should assume this is a bad candidate for the job simply because she's being appointed by Bush. While some would call that being a bit prejudicial, others would say it's a lesson learned from hard experience (q.v. most appointments made over the last four years eight months and 13 days.) But on the other hand, any candidate who can make the Far Right howl in unison must have something going for her. Probably what troubles these fine folks is that they had been assuming that Bush would nominate an extreme Right ideologue in the mold of Antonin Scalia. It's unclear what her positions are - the only assessment that can be made at this time is "Insufficient Data" - and their fears may yet prove to be unfounded. But it sounds like this workaholic loner won't be joining DICK! and Antonin on any duck hunts in the foreseeable future.
I think Dee over at Dee's Deteriorata has what is probably the most correct take on this:
So George can screw the people who brought him to power because they don't matter anymore. He needs to cover his own ass and this nomination will serve him brilliantly. He puts a loyal crony on the Supreme Court, which protects his future interests as indictments and convictions of his staff wend their way through the judiciary. He also names a woman who is pro-business, so his friends in the corporate world can show their gratitude with Board seats after he leaves office.
Unenlightened self-interest. Hey, that's why a lot of people voted for him in the first place, isn't it?