You "were demanding an originalist scholar" by denying the importance of an originalist reading of the Constitution.
That is the crux of the problem and the precedent set up by the defeat of Miers by the "conservatives" who no longer are originalists themselves.
Huh? I don't deny the importance of an originalist reading of the constitution. I am simply saying that "constitutionally qualified" means nothing. Pee Wee Herman is "constitutionally qualified" yet he is still unqualified. Now, if all that you thinks matters is being "constitutionally qualified" please tell me, why have advice and consent at all? If the Framers intended for the President to pick anybody who is "constitutionally qualified" then what would the Senat have to advise and consent on?