David Sirota claims no one has criticized Obama for the message of hope. In the same post, he criticizes (in fact in the title) hope as a theme.
Of course, it’s also a smack back at Edwards who said
“Identifying the problem and talking about hope is waiting for tomorrow.”
All this is, is two candidates talking a little smack and I like both of them, one more than the other, but both of them. Suggesting that Obama is setting up a strawman is silly. He’s specifically addressing something Edwards said and the implication is clear. I don’t want this to turn into a Edwards bashing thing here because if Edwards or others win the nomination (other than Biden (lol) or Clinton) I would hate to eat my words, especially when the field has some great candidates.
There are several issues here. First, Sirota holds Obama to a higher standard than say Edwards or Montana Governor Brian Schweitzer–both great guys and great Democrats. He also gives ammunition to the right wing every time he pulls this crap and his stuff shows up on right wing blogs like Illinois Review often distorted using his own words. It’s fine to criticize other Democrats, and all of us say things that can be misconstrued, but Sirota has made a one-sided pattern of this with Obama for some reason so let’s reprint the open letter to David from a while ago:
I can’t claim credit for the following, though, I have to say, I pretty much agree with it. If you need someone to ’sign it’, I’m fine with me being that person. And for the record, I think Schweitzer is a political stud.
OPEN LETTER TO DAVID SIROTA
Dear David:
I enjoy reading your blogs and opinions. However, as I read your recent
post about Barack Obama?s speech on faith and politics, it got me to
wondering.You start by saying, ?One of the most infuriating behaviors among some
Democrats these days is their willingness to create fake straw men that
undermine progressives and reinforce false narratives about the Democratic
Party.?Leaving aside for the moment that if blogs couldn?t do this it?s likely
they would go out of business, I read a story just two days before Obama?s
speech about another Democrat whom I think you are very familiar with ?
Montana Governor Brian Schweitzer. You live in Montana and you?ve been
paid by Schweitzer during his past campaigns.Governor Schweitzer told Paul Nussbaum of Knight-Ridder newspapers that
?Democratic presidential candidate with hopes of carrying Montana would
have to tap into that independence and speak frankly to the gun issue,
Schweitzer said? ?I’d tell him to tell people he respects their Second
Amendment rights?.?While you scold Obama for allegedly setting up a straw man to falsely
display courage saying Obama ?doesn?t offer any names to tell us who
constitutes? the ?we? who ?fails to acknowledge the power of faith in the
lives of the American people.? ?Why? Because there are none. What
Democrat of any prominence at all in America ?fails to acknowledge the
power of faith in the lives of the American people?? I can?t think of one.
It is a straw man – one that might make Obama look like a man of ?courage?
or ?principle? – but one that dishonestly reinforces right-wing
stereotypes about supposedly ?godless? liberals/Democrats.?David, can you tell me ONE recent Democratic Presidential candidate that
didn?t respect the Second Amendment?For that matter, can you tell me ONE Democrat of any prominence at all in
America that doesn?t ?respect their Second Amendment rights??Or is Schweitzer setting up a straw man to portray himself as
?independent? and ?not some East Coast liberal? that dishonestly
reinforces right-wing stereotypes about Democrats as people who want to
take guns away from citizens, not respect the Second Amendment and as the
party that doesn?t even recognize the lawful rights of hunters?You give Obama credit for the idea of reaching out to religious
constituencies as I give credit to Schweitzer for wanting to reach out to
those that own guns. But in your next sentence you say ?individual
high-profile Democrats need to stop regurgitating false right-wing
storylines just to promote their own individual ambitions.?Did I miss your critique of Brian Schweitzer?s straw man arguments? I
hope your professional relationship with the Governor hasn?t caused you to
become intellectually dishonest.You say ?it doesn?t help the Democratic Party?s efforts to better connect
with evangelicals when a high-profile leader like Obama gives a speech on
that very subject that implies that Democrats (again unnamed) supposedly
don?t care about religion.?Does it help when Brian Schweitzer implies that Democrats want to
confiscate the guns of law abiding citizens?Again, maybe I missed your critique of your former employer.
One aspect you failed to mention in your post is the section in Obama?s
speech that chastises the leaders of the Religious Right who threaten the
separation of church and state or who use faith to divide people or those
that use faith to cynically justify the political result they want. Yes,
Obama had the courage to put that in his speech even if you failed to
acknowledge it (maybe you didn?t read the entire speech?).I noticed in the article about Schweitzer that was proud to be both a
member of the NRA and happy to have the endorsement of the NRA.
?Politicians in Montana are extremely skittish about crossing swords with
the NRA, and that’s why it’s a coveted endorsement? said Montana State
University political science professor Craig Wilson.I wonder if Schweitzer agrees with everything the NRA says? Does he
believe that those who enforce gun law are ?jack-booted thugs? as the NRA
once called them? Even Former President George H.W. Bush disavowed that
statement. Maybe Schweitzer believes there aren?t enough guns in America
or that terrorists who bought guns at unregulated gun shows shouldn?t be
subject to a criminal background check?Maybe Brian Schweitzer has the ?courage? to speak out against the NRA? Or
maybe I missed that courageous speech and your blog post scolding him too.More likely, Brian Schweitzer believes that guns don?t kill people, people
kill people ? the regurgitating of the same false right-wing storylines
just to promote his own individual ambitions.
Every time I see one that jackass’s posts, it reminds me that we use the do-gooder phone service that gives him that outlet, and inclines me to cancel.
Sirota has been attacking Obama for months. I don’t know why anyone even answers him. He has no regard for the facts or the truth.
His agenda will become clear at some point. What’s clear right now is that he has one.
I wonder why Sirota has such a problem with Obama. Part of the criticism on some blogs as they worship at the feet of Sirota and quote him like a god. Then, they start doing it as they think Sirota word and thought is gold.
And, like you point out, this just feeds to the right wingnuts. Maybe they do not care if it does so long as it helps their candidate.
But, they miss the Obama bashing Sirota does. It is not honest criticism for something Obama has done. It is simply because, for some reason he only knows, has a problem with the Senator.
His agenda is that Obama didn’t come to Connecticut to campaign for Lamont. Many of the Lamont-heads have an axe to grind with Obama. Like Obama could have saved the Lamont campaign. They can’t come to grips with Lamont losing because Lamont blew it. Who decided that the campaign should go dark? Who decided that Lieberman would just implode on his own? Who hoped and prayed that the guy who is technically a Republican could draw enough votes from Lieberman to allow Lamont to win?
Obama worked his rear end off to help candidates win. He helped put Jim Webb over the top. He tried hard to get Harold Ford over the top. Heck, he was out fundraising for other democrats in 2004, when he could have been trying to boost his own ego by campaigning more in state to crush Alan Keyes even harder.
Doesn’t matter to the Lamont heads. Doesn’t matter to the Lamont-heads that Obama is far to the left of Lamont. They think Obama screwed them, and they want his head on a pike. And Sirota, as good as is otherwise, is the lead Lamont-head.
/rant
Sorry for ranting, but it gets really an
Oh, and once Obama said something to Sirota about Paul Wellstone that Sirota interpreted as an insult to Wellstone. That also pisses Sirota off.