Defending the President's nominee for the Supreme Court is going to devolve to charges of "elitism" and "sexism" in the hopes that liberal wussies will cave in, feeling guilty.

Is it elitism to say that you want the best? Is it elitism to define the best in terms of competence, intellectual ability, expertise and experience? Is mediocre somehow better because elite is bad?

Is it elitism to say that Harvard Law School is a better law school and has produced more legal scholars and judges than SMU? Or is it just another fact to be put into the mix? Must a public person be ashamed if she/he is intelligent, competent and experienced and must he/she hide his light under a bushel and strive to be acceptable to everyman, echewing all possible identification with the intellectual/legal elite?

And the sexism charge--is it sexist to say you want the best candidate, without reference to gender (or ethnicity or age)? When did it become sexist to say a particular male person might be more competent than a given female person?

When did knee-jerk labels become more valid than measured, thoughtful responses? What the hell is wrong with being well-educated, highly competent and extensively experienced?