Straw man rides again. Where do I say or even imply that I expect he should get on with "no examination what-so-ever"? I'm curious. Also curious as to who the appointees Bush has in place now that is apparently so awful. Please do tell.
My point is that they are asking questions that are borderline ridiculous to ask someone who will have to review cases at some later point. Judges have to look at issues on a case-by-case basis, so if a senator asks them some random question of how they would treat Roe v. Wade, what kind of question is that? What is the case that is up challenging it in the first place?
So your plan is to just drag this out forever and impede the ability of the court to carry out its mission. That's just utterly brilliant. The concept behind the hearings is to determine his fitness as a judge and will he bring a fair, impartial view to the cases in front of him to the best of his ability. In other words, is he a good judge? God forbid we just try to answer that question without turning over rocks simply for the sake of partisan politics. That has not happened in the past but it looks like it will be the case now. Yay.