Why is a Progressive Smearing Obama When He's Supposed to be a Progressive Himself?

[Bullet1987]

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/12/1/104639/219

That idiot Sirota!!

First of all, the article isn't even correct in some cases. It says he didn't lift a finger for Ned Lamont when Barack Obama WENT to Connecticut to campaign for him!! This is detrimental to Progressive candidates when your own "people" are mad that you're getting attention and call it rediculous. I know Obama and Daily Kos have locked horns before, so maybe they don't want to support him anymore. I don't know how many times I have to explain to people that experience does NOT determine how good of a President a person will be. Period! It seems like we're using talking points against our own people, knowing the right-wing pundits and radioheads will do the same thing IF Obama decides to run.

Critcizing someone like Clinton is understandable, but all this critism coming from so-called Democrats and Progressives about one of our hopeful members in the party is befuddling to say the least and rings of hypocrisy. We should want all the candidates we can get...no trying to dissuade the person from running. Do you think that helps our chances in 2008? If Dems don't like Obama, let them vote it out in the primary. But don't try to discourage them from voting!! That's just stupid.

[LA lady]

1. Did he actually go?

I heard he only sent emails (and campaigned for Lieberman in the spring.)

[ripple]

7. He didn't campaign for Lieberman

Like most other dems, he supported Lieberman until Lamont won the primary. I don't know if he personally appeared for Lamont or not, but he donated money to his campaign and publicly endorsed him.

[blm]

2. I believe EVERY voice is important to the process - those who demand others NOT RUN are

being anti-democratic at a time when this country needs to STRENGTHEN its damaged democracy.

I don't care what anyone's opinions or commentary are about a potential candidate's policy positions and record, but to tell them they have no right to run is just wrong and authoritarian.

And who ANYWHERE on any blog has EARNED the right to tell anyone else, especially those of deep and iimportant service, that they have no right to run?

If Obama feels he can further the debate of the issues facing this country then he is welcome to the opportunity. I hope alot of them DO RUN. The debates are ther to sort through the rhetoric, the spin and the substance - as always.

That said - Sirota's commentary is just observation - he doesn't DEMAND Obama not run the way many here and other sites do about qualified candidates.

It's the absurd demand for ANY qualified lawmaker to not run that is worth criticism and scorn.

[CTLawGuy]

3. wrong

Obama did NOT come to CT to campaign for Lamont. He sent an email after much coaxing.

I am from CT and I watched the race closely.

[dchill]

10. Thanks for clearing that up.

The OP is (deliberately?) misleading.

[Captain Hilts]

4. It's also a pretty sexist website. nt

[leveymg]

5. Sirota doesn't like Obama. DKos is 110,000 users. Don't mischaracterize

the whole board on the basis of one OP. How long have you been over there?

Hope you don't draw such overly-broad conclusions about DU, too, after only 36 posts.

:eyes:

[Dyedinthewoolliberal]

6. Your headline is deceiving Friend

Daily Kos isn't smearing Obama. There is an article ther for people to read. If we can't have this free exchange of ideas and opinions we might as well pack it in. You don't have to agree with that article or even read it but to say Daily Kos is smearing Obama is misleading and deveiving.....

[LoZoccolo]

8. Becau$e whiner$ are a $ource for buck$.

The real activists are giving their money to candidates to get elected; the grazers throw out a pittance for new grass on their pasture.

[Bullet1987]

12. Ummm...

...I wasn't talking about the posters on Daily Kos, I was talking about Sirota who claims to be a Progressive.

Daily Kos isn't smearing Obama. There is an article ther for people to read. If we can't have this free exchange of ideas and opinions we might as well pack it in. You don't have to agree with that article or even read it but to say Daily Kos is smearing Obama is misleading and deveiving.....

Sirota is a writer for Daily Kos, so therefore anything he writes is a projection of the opinion of the site. And I'm not saying debate shouldn't be part of the discussion, but smearing a potential candidate (and calling him a danger) because you have something against him and trying to dissuade him from running, THEN turning around to call yourself a Progressive is not only laughable but contradictory and hypocritical. If he doesn't stand up to the tests of a campaign...then he'll either back out OR the people will speak and won't vote for him. Let the Democratic process see it through, this just makes it appear that Sirota fears Obama's success moreso than his voting record.

[Dyedinthewoolliberal]

16. Methinks thou dost protest too much...

It is obvbious Obama is your man and that's fine. To express opinions about him as the writer did, is just that, his opinion.
And you know what they say about opinions don't you?

[dchill]

9. Honest criticism in the interest of the party...

is no smear. Sirota has a point.

[datadiva]

11. Criticizing someone like Clinton is understandable?

:yoiks:

[Bullet1987]

14. Yea...

...Criticing Clinton is understandable, she has a lot of baggage.

And anyone who looks at his voting record and what he's written can see the man is a true Progressive. The Sirota op-ed doesn't have a point, it's just misleading.

[tkmorris]

23. Hold it

Either criticism of Dems is ok or it isn't. You cannot call for an open season on some but not others because in that case you are injecting your own opinions of who is a "good Dem" into the discussion.

I say we need to critically analyze everyone because doing so will cause the strongest candidates to emerge from the fray. Like you, I don't think that person is likely to be Hillary but she deserves as much of a chance as anyone else, including Obama.

[patricia92243]

15. I caught that too. Don't say anything about Obama but Clinton is ok to badmouth - grrrrrr

:mad:

[saracat]

13. Barak did NOT go to Conn to campaign for Lamont to the best of my knowledge.

Please indidcate where he did this. Conn used to be my home and I watched this race closely as I can't stand Lieberman. And I likeObama but I think experience DOES count for President and I do feel he doesn't have enough experience and I don't think I am "smearing " him.

[Bullet1987]

19. Listen...

I caught that too. Don't say anything about Obama but Clinton is ok to badmouth - grrrrrr

...I get upset when people criticise all Dems (but again, Hillary has shot herself in the foot one too many times..so I understand that more). Because I think healthy critism is better than damn-near despising someone.

[saracat]

17. Actually this wasn't a critical piece so much as a piece

painting Obama as the political animal he has become. Obama HAS been holding back.He wouldn't support Kerry's filibuster.He doesn't seem to want to take risks.That may be smart but it isn't inspiring and is exactly what many jumped Kerry for. Obama is young. He will be more viable after some experience.

[beachmom]

18. To be fair, Obama did vote no for cloture on Alito

But the day before he went on a Sunday talk show and didn't seem happy about filibustering. So he was a mixed bag on Alito.

[beaconess]

32. He didn't object to the filibuster - he was annoyed that Dems had not done a better job

to lay the groundwork for getting public support for opposition to Alito, but instead laid back and relied on a last-minute filibuster.

"We need to recognize, because Judge Alito will be confirmed, that, if we're going to oppose a nominee that we've got to persuade the American people that, in fact, their values are at stake. There is an over-reliance on the part of Democrats for procedural maneuvers."

He was right. The Democrats totally punted on this one and Obama called them on it - but he didn't break ranks. He voted against cloture and against the nomination.

[lillilbigone]

33. And he voted to confirm Rice. nt

[davidwparker]

20. Obama is going to have to show me something other than one of the

best speeches at the Dem Convention and that's he's black. I'm all in favor of someone who is black to be president but not because he's black. That's one of the reasons about Hillary. She's been elected as a senator twice and she's a woman. Hey, let's run her for president.

Hey, Clinton-Obama 2008. That way, we'll be running one because she's a woman and we'll get Big Dawg back and we will also have someone black. Spare me.

When I saw Obama for the first time, giving his speech, my thought was that he'd be the first black president. But, after some more exposure/experience. NOT 2008.

[TankLV]

36. Thank you. My sentiments exactly.

He wouldn't be getting ANY of this exposure or praise by some here if he weren't black.

I will not vote for someone because of his color - but I will vote or not vote for what that someone based on what he says or does, and Obama deserves neither my vote or consideration...

[madfloridian]

21. This is misleading.

Diarists posts lots of opinions at Daily Kos.

Obama will be scrutinzed just like everyone else has been in our political system.

He did not go and campaign for Lamont. There was much pressure from high level Democrats not to do so.

[Bullet1987]

22. ...

He did not go and campaign for Lamont. There was much pressure from high level Democrats not to do so.

Why? And from where?

[DaveinMD]

25. there wasn't pressure

there were other races that were deemed more important because both candidates said they would caucus with the Democrats.

[madfloridian]

27. No, that is not the true picture.

Many high level Democrats failed Lamont completely. They did it because Joe was their buddy, and they could trust him to vote with them on Iraq things.

High level guys...

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/madfloridian/562

They did not consider Lamont legitimate, many failed him.

[DaveinMD]

38. I disagree

it just wasn't important because there were 7 competitive races against people who would caucus with Republicans.

[snowbear]

24. Wow.. they fight like cats & dogs over at Kos!

I thought it got bad here at times, but looking at that thread.. we're saints compared to them!

KOS members:

DU members:

[Bullet1987]

26. Maybe the Thread title is misleading...

...I'll change it.

[madrchsod]

29. that`s why i do`t go there anymore

if i want to get into a fight i`ll go to i/p or wait till some dumb assed freeper pisses me off. of course it`s much easier to apologize here if one screws up...

[lillilbigone]

34. at DailyKos, if someone lies, you can actually call them a liar.

Imagine that!

[madrchsod]

28. why does he need to run now?

this whole obama for president confounds me. he still has`t proven to me that he will be a great senator from this state let alone presidential material. i`ll wait a few more years to jump on the bandwagon

[madfloridian]

30. A concern over Obama and Ford...their attacks on Dean about religion.

While we are talking about this...

They must stop their superiority about religious stuff. Until my Southern Baptist church supported the war, I could have out religioned them almost any day of the week.

But these two guys have a whole lot to learn about real true humility. I quit my church because they touted invading another country. I am still as good a Christian as they are. Howard Dean changed churches when his sold out to corporate interests in keeping a lake from having public access. He is just as good a Christian as they are.

I don't like to link to this site, but I need to for this. Obama did not have to say this. It has been GWB who has using religion to divide, and Howard Dean was calling him on it.

Senator Obama Says Dean Using 'Religion to Divide'

Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) criticized Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean Wednesday night for using "religion to divide."

Obama told reporters gathered at the Rock the Vote awards dinner at the National Building Museum in Washington, D.C., that Dean needs to tone down his rhetoric. Dean said on Monday that the Republican Party was "pretty much a white, Christian party."

"As somebody who is a Christian myself, I don't like it when people use religion to divide, whether that is Republican or Democrat," Obama said. See Video"I think in terms of his role as party spokesman, Dean probably needs to be a little more careful and I suspect that is a message he is going to be getting from a number of us," Obama explained.

"We are at a time in our country's history that inclusive language is better than exclusive language," he added.

NOW...who else was lecturing Dean in public about religion? Harold Ford...almost same words. Hot damn, we sure do have a lot of really perfect religious folks in the party who consider Howard Dean unworthy.

Harold Ford Missed The "Get Behind Dean" Memo

June 9, 2005
Imus: "On another note here, speaking of the Democratic Party, which you are a member of, how's Howard Dean working for you?"

Rep. Harold Ford Jr.: "(Laughing) I won't have him down so many times in Tennessee on the campaign trail with me. He has made some comments as of late that really speak to a lack of understanding I think, of the country, a lack of understanding of faith and values. I'm a Democrat and I'm a God fearing one. I grew up in church. Christianity is not reserved for white males. I think perhaps Governor Dean sometimes gets a little excited at the mouth, and says things that are simply not true. It may reach a point where if he can't find a way to kind of control some of his comments, and temper his comments, it may get to the point where the party may need to look elsewhere for leadership, because he does not speak for me, and I know he does not speak for a majority of Democrats and I dare say Republicans in my home state. I know that other, even Senator Biden and others, have made some stronger comments about him. I look forward to having a chance to sit with him here in the next day or so. I think he's going to be here in Capitol Hill a little later today to meet with us. I want to ask him directly. Can he contain himself in a lot of ways, and what is his thought process in a lot of these issues because it is not representative of where the party is."

This really ticked me off with both of them. They had no right to say that, and it was wrong.

[madfloridian]

51. Still bothers me...the attitude of judging others so much.

Especially bringing religion and morality in to the equation.

[xchrom]

31. this is why i'll be waiting to see why obama would make a good prez.

thanks to dwickham for this

http://www.advocate.com/exclusive_detail_ektid39485.asp

''As a supposedly bipartisan politician who understands and reconciles opposing views, and a non-doctrinal Christian whose personal identity and life journey shaped his lens to include those on the margins, why then, I ask, is this presidential hopeful not united with lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer voters on the issue of marriage equality?
“I was reminded that it is my obligation not only as an elected official in a pluralistic society, but also as a Christian, to remain open to the possibility that my unwillingness to support gay marriage is misguided,” Obama wrote in his recent memoir, The Audacity of Hope.
But Obama’s audacity is not only his unwillingness to support the issue, but also his misunderstanding and misuse of the term “gay marriage.” The terminology “gay marriage” not only stigmatizes and stymies our efforts for marriage equality, but it also suggests that LGBT people’s marriages are or would be wholly different from those of heterosexuals, thus altering its landscape, if not annihilating the institution of marriage entirely. ''


he does not support marriage equality -- but like a politician remains open to being wrong.

obama -- it's 2006 -- you're wrong.

[TankLV]

35. You've answere your own question.

Obama a SUPPOSED progressive...

Not by my standards by everything that spews from his mouth in the past couple years, that's for sure!

[Sapphocrat]

37. He's. Just. Not. That. "Progressive". Period.

I'm not slamming him, and I'd never dream of discouraging anyone from voting whatever way they want. But I don't understand how he ended up with this big "progressive" label taped to his forehead. He's just not that progressive.

Yeah, I can back up that claim, with links, but I hope I don't have to go to the trouble. Bottom line is simply: "Progressive" is a relative term. And Obama just isn't.

[Bullet1987]

39. I guess YOU don't know his voting record then...

I'm not slamming him, and I'd never dream of discouraging anyone from voting whatever way they want. But I don't understand how he ended up with this big "progressive" label taped to his forehead. He's just not that progressive.

Yeah, I can back up that claim, with links, but I hope I don't have to go to the trouble. Bottom line is simply: "Progressive" is a relative term. And Obama just isn't.

Fact is, he's voted along the Progressive lines of nearly EVERY major issue including stem cell research, abortion, and socialized medicine. He's also very much against thed death penalty.

This is every bill and admendment he's ever voted on. Fact is, he's not what YOU consider to be a Progressive. But don't say he's not Progressive when many major liberal outlets and websites all agree that he is. I mean, even you yourself admit that it's a relative term.

Everything I've read about him says that he has one of the most Progressive voting records in the Senate (even moreso than Feingold). Are you aware of a website called 'Progressive Punch?' It's a "non-partisan searchable database of Congressional voting records from a Progressive perspective. We show the performance of members within 160 different issue categories, and detailed vote descriptions, thereby empowering you to zero in on what matters to you."

Basically, they rate every person based on their voting record to see how Progressive they are. PP rates Obama at 92.33% when all issues are combines. And there are many of these vote breakdowns on the internet and everyone I've seen has Barack Obama listed as a Progressive.

Now, maybe you should tell me why he's not a good enough Progressive for you? Because from what I'm seeing, he's probably one of the most Progressive people we have in the Senate. Maybe you'd like him more if he acted like a raving lunatic trying to protest everything?

Just in case you're lazy...he's voted for bills on,

-Wildlife/Wilderness/Land Conservation
-Global Warming
-Air Pollution
-General Education Funding
-Against the Alberto Gonzalez, Alito, Hayden, and Roberts confirmations
-Against the Military Commissions Act of 2006
-Against the first Patriot Act

Etc, etc, etc...

[jefferson_dem]

40. Obama's is the eigth most progressive Senator, more prog than Kerry and Feingold...

according to the progressive punch site.

http://progressivepunch.org/members.jsp?member=COII&search=selectScore&chamber=Senate&zip=&x=20&y=13

[cali]

48. None of those sites ratings really mean much

and I am NOT dissing Obama. I like him a lot, and would indeed consider supporting him for pres, but face it, someone who's been in the Senate for two years shouldn't be compared to someone who has been in the Senate for 20 or 20.

[Sapphocrat]

41. Don't get a pissy attitude with me right out of the gate.

If you want me to discuss it with you, I'll discuss it with you, but don't you come at me with your condescending accusations that I A) don't know his voting record, and B) am lazy.

If you can manage to put a lid on that attitude, I'll discuss the issue with you like an adult. If all you want to do is attack, then fuck it.

[Bullet1987]

42. Listen, I apologize....

...I guess I just was taken aback by your claiming that he was some sort of fake Progressive. Is he cautious? Maybe. But I'd rather him be cautious than over-zealous. Also, I wasn't calling you lazy per se, I was talking about anyone that was reading the thread and was too lazy to click the link (which I admit I'm like that sometimes myself). A lot of people claim to not know anything about Obama and that's shocking when so much of his record and speeches are a google search away!

The way I see it is like this...if Obama is all hype and no substance, then I think if he runs we'll find out for sure. If he loses, it'll be a learning experience and he can go back to the Senate when it's all over. One of the reasons I think he should run though is because IF he does lose, he can always run later down the road if he wants and won't make the same mistakes he may have made before.

[AtomicKitten]

43. I like Obama -- so sue me

He's sassy with Republicans.

You can't please all the people all the time, and pundits' words are not to be taken as anything other than entertainment. Some people here give opinion pieces way too much credence.

And I particularly like that Obama has the gravitas to give Hill a run for her money. That is just brilliant!

[Katzenjammer]

44. Sirota's a hell of a lot more progressive than Obama even thinks of being

as far as I can tell. So personally I'd support him years before I'd give BO the time of day.

[cali]

45. Sirota is a talking head

what the fuck are you going to support him for, pundit-in-chief?

[Bullet1987]

46. Well

So personally I'd support him years before I'd give BO the time of day.

Is he an activist Progressive? If so, then of course Barack will never be like that...it'll destroy his career. Look at valiant people like Ron Paul. He's a great voice for activism in Congress, but look how far he gets. Not too far, not to mention it'll be a cold day in hell before he ever becomes President. Obama is playing politics, the people who do that are the ones that get far. The polarizing people are always shut out and bastardized.

[Katzenjammer]

49. "Obama is playing politics, the people who do that are the ones that get far"

If you were in his district, and thus paying his salary and perqs, why would you be okay with him spending your money to advance his own career rather than working for your benefit? Or is there no longer any expectation that anyone in Congress is or even should be working for us rather than themselves?

[SaveElmer]

47. David Sirota is in the Democrat bashing business...

It is his bread and butter...where he makes his $$$...

[Katzenjammer]

50. Maybe the Democrat-reform business? Or do you believe that they're already doing

everything we have any right to expect from them?