Look, Bush and the GOP lost in the big picture of things because this "spat" occurred at all. But who nominated this person in the first place? I would suggest, that act initiated the process. Only time will tell how much long term effect it actually has, but a good incator may be seen in Bush's next try.
This nomination had all the down sides of Roberts (no track record) with the addition of extremely dubious credentials and the potential charge of cronyism. It simply wasn't smart. IMO.
On the other hand, the issue of "didn't even allow an up or down vote" - admittedly not your claim in the comment cited - and the quote above - are way off the mark. Ever heard of free speech and democratic (in the good sense) process? These were exercised and appropriately. Admittedly, the debate grew hot, but haven't you been watching what Coulter et al do/say about Democrats on a regular basis?
She could have had her up and down vote, nothing ANYONE not elected to the Senate can do or has done to avoid that...except her "withdrawl." (Speech impediments are a terrible thing.)
Free speech. Great. All for it. I'm exercising mine right now. When a person who has led an exemplary life is called a pig; and has her sexuality called into question (just look earlier on this very thread); and is characterized as dumb and not from the right schools, etc., THAT is not appropriate.
I may be the last person standing who wants to CONSERVE the role of the "common man" in government, but so be it.