Didn't Mark Levin have something to do with recommending O'Connor and Kennedy while working in the Reagan Administration? If he was wrong about them why would his judgment be any better now concerning the current SC pick?
I'm not certain your factual claim is correct, but let's assume it is. Why would it invalidate Levin's current criticisms of this nomination? If I fail to pick a winning hand one time, does that mean I never will?
He learned from his mistakes? OU picked John Blake as a head coach a few years ago, should we believe they will always choose that poorly? In fact, they learned from their mistake, and they are the better for it. Except for this week of course.
Everyone on the right has learned from the mistakes of the past, that's why this is such a crucial time. We don't get many shots at the SCOTUS, and no one wants to "F" it up with another Souter or Kennedy. We also don't want the disappointment of another Bork. Hence, the disagreement.