[I didn't like her nomination, but thought the president deserved to have his nominee have her day at the hearings.]
Many people have said they believe the nominee should at least have the hearing for their fitness for the position. I'm curious why you feel that way. A nomination is not some personal holiday or constitutional right. It's just a job, and when someone clearly isn't qualified, then the process should stop immediately and begin again with a new nominee. Why do you think it's a good idea to have a general rule "if anyone is nominated, they should always have a hearing"? What beneficial standard does that set?
Because the president has the right to nominate candidates for the supreme court and there is a public hearing process to question him or her. I don't see what is difficult to understand about that. I don't see how we know she "clearly isn't qualified" until we have the hearings. I didn't like what I saw, but I was waiting for the hearings to make a final determination.