Any justice who gets appointed who is on record saying that abortion is constitutionally protected is not an originalist. Such an appointment would be a betrayal of a promise to appoint only strict constructionists.
I'd rather have Gonzales than that.
Seriously, it seems like people were just waiting to b**ch about the choice, and pay no attention to the facts. Read the quote (and the context) again -- she says that the USSC says that abortion is constitutionally protected, she does not present her own view on the subject, which is only proper in a confirmation hearing.
All she says is that the Supreme Court has ruled that way.
Do I wish she had added, like Pryor, that their ruling is a legal abomination?
Yes.