No kidding. The wailing and gnashing of teeth has been deafening.
"How dare he! She's never been a judge before! She's got no record! We don't know anything about her!"
Yeah... just like William Rehnquist.
But Rehnquist was a law professor, which means he had the kind of scholarly experience you want in a Supreme Court justice. I'm afraid this isn't the place for "seat of the pants" reasoning. Someone who is a solid social conservative, as she seems to be, but isn't used to thinking in terms of Constitutional law, could do real damage in the long run. To give an example from the other side, Roe v. Wade is often noted as an incredibly sloppy legal opinion. It might have been easier to at least limit the right to abortion if Roe had been tightly reasoned, instead of just giving the result the court wanted.