I was another of those people that thought Digby was a man until she received that award and was spotted on You Tube (2005?). I will even admit I thought you were a male blogger until a five or six months back, DMD.
But that Gender Analyzer needs more work on it's "gender neutral" programming. Imagine concluding that a blog named "Feministing" is written by a man because there are no posts on fashion and shopping?
I'm always in favor of more female voices in the political blogosphere, but we do have some really good bloggers here, over at Kos and on other political sites, so I don't feel women's voices aren't being heard.
Everyone has their favorite subjects, some are fascinated with polling, others cover the war or health care, others like to delve into the politics and the back room deals.
Can those subjects be divined as being written by a man or a woman simply by their content? Evidently not.
Frankly, I think the My DD crowd is much more realistic and less reactionary than the Kos crowd about Obama's cabinet appoitnments.
Over at Kos, there's a lot of teeth gnashing, hand wringing and wailing going on among some posters about the various appointments, while here, most people tend to view things more realistically and see the brighter side of these appointments.
My view is that he seems to be hiring intelligent people that are experienced and educated (imagine, a competent cabinet filled with well educated people!) and whether or not I agree with their politics isn't really important, as that's not part of their job description.
The question to ask is not, "Are they progressive enough?", but "Can they accomplish the things Obama was elected to accomplish?".
My answer is if we can survive this economic mess (and very little will get accomplished until we do), the cabinet apppointed by Obama will be there to advise him on how to get it done, and not to get in his way.
I came over here from Kos because of the out of hand CSD raging over there. I still love reading the diaries and FPers over there, but My DD feels more like a community to me than DK does.
This was a friendly place for Clinton supporters, and I will always appreciate Jerome for providing that place during the turbulent primaries.
Instead of worrying about how it will benefit her, why don't you concern yourself with how it will benefit the US?
As for the "CDS" mentioned above, this blog was one of the friendliest out there to Clinton supporters, which is why I and many others came here.
There was a lot of bad behavior (going to other blogs to get "friends" who never post one comment to come and rec your diaries, for example?) on both sides. Get over it.
What has indicated to you that Joe Lieberman cares about looking like an ingrate?
He looked like an ingrate when he lost the primary, then changed parties to run in the GE.
He looked like an ingrate when he made campaign promises to investigate the Bush administration over Katrina and then backed off those promises once elected.
He looked like an ingrate when he campaigned against Obama, after Obama campaigned for him in the CT primary.
But you think he's going to worry about looking like an ingrate now?
It doesn't happen that way- to remove Lieberman from his chairmanship now requires a Senate resolution (IOW, Republicans get to vote on it as well).
Think Republicans are going to vote against Lieberman running the one committee that has the most power to investigate the administration?
I agree with this, there has been much concern from many people questioning Obama's every move.
There's always going to be people within our party that will be "concerned" (in this case I'm talking about NOW), but we can't jump up and start screaming "Stop attacking Obama!!" every time it happens.
Let's save our energies for the real attacks.
He's in charge of the committee with the most power to investigate the Bush administration and the Obama administration. Remember Dan Burton, who issued over 1000 supoenas to the Clinton administration?
Lieberman's counterpart in the House is Henry Waxman, who has held dozens of hearings- the Valerie Plame leak, Abu Ghraib, the Tillman killing, Katrina, the CDC, Blackwater, etc.
Who says we're going to have his vote and support, when he's been campaigning for republicans (not just McCain, but downticket as well) and calling Obama a possible Marxist?
C'mon, if he wants to stay a Democrat that's up to him (he won't be reelected anyway), but why do we need him to continue to chair a committee that has basically refused to investigate the Bush administration?
Have you seen Rachel's video yet. She lines it out pretty well.
It's not that easy. Right now, it's a simple matter of a vote among Democrats, later on, there would have to be a resolution passed on the floor, which would allow Republicans to have a say in whether Lieberman keeps his chairmanship. How do you think they would vote, with a friend in the one committee that has the power to investigate the doings of the Obama administratiom?