[Do not dub me shapka broham]

Enter Harriet Miers, who has never been either a Federalist or a movement woman. Before joining Team Bush in the mid-'90s, she worked her way up the legal ladder, mixing lucrative corporate law with traditional pro bono undertakings. Along the way, we now learn, she gave campaign contributions to various Democratic campaigns. That's standard practice inside law firms, giving money to the powerful without regard to party. But that sort of get-along, go-along approach is exactly what the movement reviles.

http://www.newsday.com/news/opinion/ny-oppin044453943oct04,0,2335099.column?coll=ny-viewpoints-headlines

And:

She also said during her sworn testimony that she would not join an organization like the Federalist Society, a group of conservative intellectuals that is a leading proponent of a strict - and some say narrow - interpretation of the Constitution.

"I just feel like it's better not to be involved in organizations that seem to color your view one way or the other for people who are examining you," she said.

Chief Justice John Roberts caused a flap earlier this year by insisting he was not a Federalist Society member, even though records listed him in the group's leadership directory in the late 1990s.

Gene Meyer, president of the Federalist Society, said he wouldn't confirm whether Miers was a member, because it's "up to members themselves to say." But he said Miers has spoken to the group's Washington chapter since she became White House counsel.

http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/12836996.htm

[cyncooper]

Yes, I'm familiar with those articles.

I remember this, too, from your helpful excerpt and just made reference to it:

Chief Justice John Roberts caused a flap earlier this year by insisting he was not a Federalist Society member

People spun Roberts as anti-Federalist, too.