Jeez, guys. Stand for Something...

She was confirmed by a 16-2 vote with Democrats John Kerry of Massachusetts and Barbara Boxer of California voting no.

Other Democrats, including ranking member Joseph Biden of Delaware, had said they were reluctantly voting to elevate Rice to the nation's top diplomatic job.

As Jon Stewart said, the new Democratic slogan seems to be "A moment of resistance, a lifetime of capitulation."

Can someone explain to me what is gained here? It's not like the Republicans are going to be real nice to us later in exchange for a "yes" vote. It's been made clear that the Republicans don't give a hoot about Democratic concerns. The old courtesies and horse-trading rules are null and void. The Republican leadership is virtually cackling over its unbridled power. Couldn't Democrats at least stand for something, futile at it is?

Heck, forget about partisanship. What about the Senate standing up for itself against an executive that is over-reaching in power and fiercely refusing to be accountable for obvious mistakes? Doesn't the Senate have a responsibility to say, at least a little, "You've got to be kidding?"

Maybe one could argue that the President should get to pick who he wants, but that sort of makes the whole "advise and consent" thing moot, doesn't it? And sure, she's an intelligent woman who was provost at Stanford, and grew up in Birmingham and all, but she's a big part of the failures that led to 9/11, and all over the mess of Iraq, and she's been a failure at the couple of specific special assignments she got as PR moments from El Jefe. (Remember when she was given responsibility for rebuilding and security in Iraq? Iraq Stabilization Group, anyone?. October, 2003?) She could be rejected for incompetence, not just for being El Jefe's most faithful sycophant.

Does she have to be literally dripping blood before they say, "No."?