And if the Senate is to so judge the nominee, does the nominee not deserve the oppotunity to stand before the body, and give testimony and explanations for those things that we DO know aout her? Does Harriet Miers get to EXPLAIN her position on affirmative action law?
The people have the right to lobby the president to rescind the nomination. There is nothing wrong with that.
This occurs all the time when president's float names and see how the reaction is. If the reaction is bad, the president claims that it was a false rumor and the person wasn't under consideration.
Bush was politically foolish by skipping this step.
To elaborate further, the hearings are just a glorified interview. The nominee can refuse to say anything definitive. She will just respond by how she was coached.
Unless she is a total idiot, the hearings won't reveal anything useful. The problem is that she doesn't have a judicial track record to examine.
If a college was looking to hire a new coach and the contract was for life, don't you think that they would go with something that has a track record as a head coach? If the contract was just for 4 years, then the school could take a gamble with someone without any head coaching experience but interviewed well.
Why roll the dice with something this important? It's not like a judicial track record is going to appear if she makes it to the hearings. She is what she is.