Anyone who expects to gain any real insight from these hearings is deluding himself. The confirmation process has become an elaborate dance, whereby the nominee's supporters praise him and toss him softball questions, and his opponents try to find ways to trip him up. For both sides, it's about playing to the cameras, reinforcing their base, and asking trick questions in the hopes that the nominee will momentarily drop his guard and give them substantive answers We hear things like "What are your views on stare decesis (the doctrine that holds that precedents should be accorded a certain amount of deference?" or "Do you consider Roe v. Wade to be "settled law"?, and we get the answers any halfway intelligent person would give when he knows that he is in the hot seat.   None of this provides the Senate with information that wil be helpful to them in evaluating the nominee's qualifications, judgment, or temperament.

Alito is a conservative, nominated by a conservative President, and therefore I expect that I would prefer someone else. But he is qualified (unlike Miers), intelligent, and dignified. He will be confirmed, and everyone involved in this process knows it. Still, they play the game, and we play along.

While I tend to the liberal side of things, I think it's ludicrous when the opposition is asking Alito about what student organizations he joined in college. I find it equally ridiculous when the nominee wastes time talking about how much he liked to play baseball as a child. Come on! Either they should have a substantive, candid discussion, with meaningful questions followed by meaningful answers, or they should dispense with this nonsense and cast their votes.