Edwards for America... Dave Sirota, for the people...

[asdjrocky]

Dave Sirota, someone I believe we can all, at DU, respect, says this about John Edwards:

Some folks have asked me why I have written so much about John Edwards in the past few months. The answer can be seen in this short clip.

I have spent my career in politics working against what I have called the hostile takeover of our government by Big Money interests, whether it was working for people like Bernie Sanders, Brian Schweitzer and Ned Lamont; building the Progressive States Network; helping build non-corporate, independent media institutions; scratching and clawing to get a populist voice onto the op-ed pages of newspapers; or writing a book that's actually called Hostile Takeover: How Big Money & Corruption Conquered Our Government - And How We Take It Back.

When I came to the fork in the career path that everyone eventually comes to, I chose to take the harder path, as more and more progressives in politics are fortunately choosing to take. I didn't choose to sit in the peanut gallery and bitterly snipe at those in the arena, nor did I choose to become a part of the invisible culture of corruption - that culture in Washington which sees politics as a sport and ignores the immorality of the revolving door between business and government.

John Edwards, as shown by this clip, is speaking out on what I believe is the fundamental issue of our time - an issue that my book shows is at the core of every other issue, whether it is Iraq, wages, health care, retirement security, trade, immigration, global warming, you name it. That issue is what my book is all about - the hostile takeover of our government, or, as Edwards says, the fact that "powerful interests, particularly corporate interests, have literally taken over this government." And Edwards hasn't just been talking about it - he has made a crusade against this, the issue of our day, the centerpiece of his campaign. He has, in short, made it the very reason he is running (which also fits with his impressive career as a plaintiffs attorney going after corporate abusers).


For more, and to see clip:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-sirota/corporate-interests-have_b_73503.html

I've read just about everything he has written, and like Edwards, I always see Dave standing up for real Americans, and against the corporations that are ruining this country.

Attacks shall now comence...

[JNelson6563]

1. Cue the shit-flinging-monkey swarm

They show up for nearly every positive post on any candidate.

Julie

[asdjrocky]

2. I can't stop laughing....

"Cue the shit-flinging-monkey swarm"



May I use that in the future?

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[JNelson6563]

12. By all means!

Help youself! :toast:

[asdjrocky]

21. thanks!

Dems are good people!

[Beaverhausen]

7. Good one. They are predictable, aren't they?

:hi:

[Capn Sunshine]

15. Hey, that's no way to talk about my monkey

You might enjoy this link Jules.

[JNelson6563]

16. Hey Cap'n, any gift from you

I thoroughly enjoy. You know I've been madly in like with you for years, don't be coy you devil you. ;-)

Julie

[Hieronymus]

40. Excellent, vivid, and funny description of those folks.

:toast:

[Inspired]

49. I can't stop laughing! The same people who say they want change! HAHAHA!!!!!

[asdjrocky]

3. Sometimes I just kick myself.

[Ninga]

self delete

[Ninga]

4. self delete

[Ninga]

5. hey......let me in on the action too.....Kick

[Czolgosz]

26. You'd kick a fella when he's down?

[asdjrocky]

28. Wha?

[cali]

6. I do respect Sirota

but I don't trust Edwards. And all the remarks trying to ward off any criticism or disagreement, won't stop me from saying that. He's simply changed to much for me to trust him.

[Ninga]

8. You giveth with one hand and taketh away with another. I do not wish to be rude

or oppositional, but other than your personal feeling of trust....did you read the Sirota piece on Edwards and find fault?

Or did you not read the piece, have no idea what Sirota wrote, and just view this thread as an opportunity to reaffirm your mistrust.

[asdjrocky]

10. I'm picking door number 2!

[Ninga]

11. Darn, if you got it so quickly, I must have made it too obvious. eom

[asdjrocky]

13. Sorry, too much coffee today.

[cali]

19. no, i read it. in fact, i read it over on kos when he posted it.

i don't agree that Edwards' career as a trial attny is particularly germane, and I can't slough off his Senate record as if it never happened. i see Edwards as an opportunist. I realize others don't, but I'm not comfortable with his election conversion to progressivism.

[Ninga]

23. David Sirota lives and breaths politics. He is a true progressive and brings his

experience to his insights.

I would imagine that he gives his topics a lot of thought, and his piece addresses Edwards history as well.

Please believe me when I say I respect your concerns and opinions......and since you took the time in 2 posts to let us know how you feel....I think you have done a good enough job that you don't have to repeat it.

We believe you and take you at your word.

[asdjrocky]

9. Cali,

We do kind of "expect" you to voice your opinion anytime there is a positive post about Edwards. Glad to see you didn't disappoint. Also, how do you think John managed to hook wink a smart guy like Sirota?

[cali]

24. Different people come to different conclusions about things all

the time. Sirota may be right. you may be right. But in the end I have to make my own judgements. That isn't too difficult a concept for you to grasp, or is it?

[asdjrocky]

25. May I ask,

Have you decided to support a candidate yet? Honestly, I'm only looking for some clarity here. And I don't think at any point, in any reply or post, I've insulted you, or insinuated that you have a "difficult time grasping concepts". We can disagree without insulting each other.

I expect a little more from Dems.

[cali]

35. yes and no, but first I want to address your claim

that you didn't insult me: You did. The post of yours I responded to is pure snark and so was your post about me that preceded it, with it's snark about how you bet I didn't read the OP. It's disingenuous of you to claim otherwise. I responded to snark, I didn't instigate it. I too prefer an exchange of ideas that's honest and respectful. Here's the post where you snarked:

Cali,
We do kind of "expect" you to voice your opinion anytime there is a positive post about Edwards. Glad to see you didn't disappoint. Also, how do you think John managed to hook wink a smart guy like Sirota?

That's completely insulting. And as I said, it's disengenuous of you to claim you're taking the high ground. Or hypocritical, take your pick.

Now to the respond:

I'm voting for Kucinich in the primary. I realize he won't get the nomination, but if enough people vote for him, it will send a message to the party.

So I have to think about who I can support realistically, and that ends up, almost by default to be Obama. I will not vote for anyone who voted for the IWR. I decided that in 2004, and I feel just as strongly today. I'm talking, of course, about the primary. In the general I'll vote for the dem nominee.

[asdjrocky]

46. My mistake then,

Perhaps I have not read all of your posts. I'm sure you don't hate Edwards and favor Clinton. That's just been my experience when I've seen your remarks in the past. I'm just a working slob that supports my guy. And because of that, I try to post positive things about him. I do defend him, but I try not to attack others, be it a fellow DUer, or a candidate. My recollection of your postings in the past, when I've read them, is that much of what you say is, in your words, "snarky". If I'm wrong, then I'm wrong.

Someone as smart as you should be able to explain it to me.

[venable]

52. cali has a very thin skin if he/she thinks this is an insult:

'Cali,
We do kind of "expect" you to voice your opinion anytime there is a positive post about Edwards. Glad to see you didn't disappoint. Also, how do you think John managed to hook wink a smart guy like Sirota? '

Fact is, you do show up on just about every positive thread, and say some pretty gruesome, snarky things about Edwards. the post you feel is insulting simply points out this true thing, and asks a perfectly legitimate question - do you believe that someone as smart as Sirota can be hoodwinked?

Of course the implication is that he is too smart to be hoodwinked, and so you should -if you respect Sirota - consider that a smart, judicious, studious person believes Edwards when you don't.

But to call that 'completely insulting' is thin-skinned in the extreme. It's not insulting, it's a reasonable, gently stated perspective. After the kinds of things you say about Edwards, and Edwards supporters, I think you are playing a bit of a double standard here.

[Clark2008]

29. It's hoodwink... and I'm sure I don't know.

One can practically smell the snake oil emanating from Edwards. Not sure if Sirota has lost his nasal capacities or if he's been given some nose stoppers.

[asdjrocky]

30. Thanks!

I had no idea it was hoodwinked.... wow, could not have been a type-o. Have a nice day, and good luck with your personal insults.

By the way, have you ever read a word written by Dave Sirota?

[Clark2008]

34. Wasn't meant as a personal insult to you...

You know... you aren't your candidate.

And, yes, I did read Sirota (in the past tense). Once he started only shopping Edwards in his columns, I stopped reading him. Obviously, since I once read him oft, I know this.

:eyes:

Honestly, just because my opinion varies wildly from yours doesn't mean I'm not well-read. I just don't trust Edwards and think Sirota's been snookered.

[asdjrocky]

47. Then it's just me.

Sorry I'm so defensive. It's all my fault. You know how it is, you try to post a positive message about something and someone you believe, and then you see people using terms like "snake oil salesman" and you just sort of loose faith. Know what I mean? It's like, how can I even talk to this person when they start with insults? First they insult me, then they insult my candidate, and then they insult my source. My bad.

Do you actually know people that buy that kind of crap?

As far a insinuating that you are not "well read", I didn't. I ask you if you read a word of just ONE writer. Not ALL of the writers. Gee.

Oh yeah, good luck to your candidate.

[Mythsaje]

37. Now that's a surprise...

A combination of Edwards + snake oil in one of your posts.

Never saw it coming.

[JNelson6563]

14. Oh Cali, we wouldn't dream of it!

By all means, please do post any and all negative thoughts. And then be sure to go whine/lament somewhere about how everyone is just a bunch of meanies to Senator Clinton.

Oy.

Julie

[asdjrocky]

17. You are funny.

Do I have to say that I am not being sarcastic here?:shrug:

[Name removed]

22. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[JNelson6563]

32. Whatever

I've seen enough posts from you complaining of Clinton criticism (aka "haters") and enough snipes from you in Edwards' direction to quantify my comment.

The only question that remains is this: In the last primary season I called someone a liar who was blatantly lying about Howard Dean and my post got deleted, will yours? We shall see if the standards have really cnaged or if there is any kind of consistency goin' on here.

Julie--who generally enjoys Cali posts but has little patience for hypocrisy or double standards

[cali]

36. and yet more prevarications

impressive. I've never called anyone a hater so please find one post of mine where I do so, or don't make such a claim.
I defend Clinton because she gets attacked in appalling and dishonest and sexist ways that gall me. It's that simple. And she's attacked in those ways way more than any other candidate. I don't see that kind of vitriol directed toward Edwards or anyone else except on rare occasions, and when I do see it, I call people on it.

I don't do hypocricy. I don't bullshit, and I haven't posted anything about Edwards that's remotely close to being out of bounds.

[cali]

41. and just to add this:

I posted in a stupid thread saying that Edwards was always late for engagements to comment how silly such a post was:

"so what?
I don't trust Edwards one bit, but this is a silly attack."

If something's bullshit, I call it.

[JNelson6563]

42. Ah, good for you.

Yet I can't help but notice a steady stream of criticism from you re: Edwards (gosh Cali how many times have you told us you told us you don't trust him??).

Sorry but the saturation of your message belies your claim of being oh so fair and balanced. Throw in the fact how often you bemoan criticisms of Clinton...well by golly that doesn't strike me as all that fair and balanced. Pardon me for taking issue with it all.

I am no fan of Clinton and dread mightily her being our nominee and yet I have never gone so far as to state I "don't trust her". Much less to state it ad nauseum.

If you want to claim to be taking the high road than you may want to actually travel it. The occasional "calling bullshit" on the most outrageious of claims doesn't buy you that right IMO.

Julie

[cali]

44. good for you.

bit in that case, why do you dread her being the nominee so mightily? And I don't trust either Clinton or Edwards, and that's hardly a bash on either of them.

Until the past few days, I criticized Edwards very little, if at all. It's only in the last couple of weeks that my distrust of him has grown to the point where I do criticize him- and as long as it's not a personal or unfair attack, there ain't a thing wrong with that.

I've hardly said I don't trust him "ad nausem"- you'd be more credible if you used less hyperbole.

Nor do I bemoan criticism of Clinton- not at all- as long as it's not ridiculous attack. I'm sure in all your vaunted fairness you've noted that there are a plethora of disgusting attacks on Clinton- many of them sexist bullshit. I've never seen you stand up to any of it. You seem to have a high tolerance for it. I'd like to think that you're just unaware of it. Alas, that's not possible, Julie. If you've seen my posts in defence of Clinton, than you've seen the over the top attacks.

Edwards isn't immune from criticism, no matter how much you want that to be the case. And as long as it's not personal attacks, and not dishonest, you should be OK with it.

If you were actually honest.

[JNelson6563]

45. Me thinks thou doest protest too much

FYI I have no horse in this race. throw your stones elsewhere.

And hyperbole ain't my thing, just callin' it as I see it. You know, that which you like to claim.

At this point you have been reminding me of those who have had a grudge against Edwards since the 04 primaries. They are also big on the repetition and showing up in most Edwards threads. Especially their their man has thrown in with Clinton.


Julie

[cali]

48. that's such a hackneyed line- oft used simply as an attack.

nope, haven't disliked Edwards since 2004. My distrust of him is of recent vintage. I have no idea what this means: "Especially their their man has thrown in with Clinton." so I won't comment. There's nothing wrong with hoping that certain people don't get the nomination. That's what primaries are about. For someone who purportedly has no horse in the race, you certainly are defensive about any criticism at all of Edwards. Interesting.

[Nutmegger]

18. David Sirota is a good guy.

I had the pleasure of meeting him when I was doing some volunteer work for Ned Lamont.

I respect his work. Thank you for posting!

[asdjrocky]

20. I've had the pleasure as well, he's a smart guy too.

[ChiciB1]

27. Thanks To David AND Go, Johnny, GO!!!! n/t

[ChiciB1]

33. One More Thing... ANYONE Who Worked With Bernie Sanders Is

SUPER to me!! There are just a few politicians who I really really admire and Sanders is one of them. Paul Wellstone, Russ Feingold also. There are some that have been there for a long time that once led a good charge, still may vote as I would, but have lost their voice or something.

David Sirota is ABSOLUTELY correct, and his book says it ALL!! People do change with time, as he stated about Howard Dean. So to those who constantly berate Edwards about becoming so aggressive and fighting back all the time or saying he's doing it out of desperation, I will only say this man talks for me! I do believe John Edwards wants America BACK!!! And so do I!!

[flpoljunkie]

31. Sirota says in this piece he's not endorsing Edwards. Most of clip is Sirota's selling his book.

That said, corporations obviously have too much influence in Congress. That will only end when the people demand public financing of Congressional and presidential campaigns.

[Mythsaje]

38. Which will happen when people realize how much of an issue

it really is, when they understand how completely the corporate interests have taken over our political process. Which will take someone telling them on national TV day in and day out during a Presidential race. For starters.

[flpoljunkie]

39. We must have a president who leads on public financing. When Clintons had the chance, they did not.

I believe Obama will. He has said as much. He understands the source of the corruption, and has said we must demand it, or it will never happen, as Congress will resist it mightily. They do not want a level playing field. When they balked, the Clintons surrendered.

[creeksneakers2]

43. A nice positive piece from Sirota

I was skimming the Edwards news on Google News earlier and everything I saw coming out of the Edwards camp was positive. Edwards came out with a new anti-poverty program. Glad to see something positive offered. I hope this is the start of the campaign for the Democratic nomination turning more positive. The fighting is hurting everybody involved.

[asdjrocky]

50. He has a lot of positives to offer.

Glad to see you are keeping an open mind.

[illinoisprogressive]

51. Everyone knows Sirota is an Edwards guy. not news.

I like Edwards alot but, I am not seeing this as news. it is no secret he is a supporter.

[1932]

55. That's why it's in General Discussion.

[asdjrocky]

56. It may be "old news"

But when people like Dave Sirota, Ed Schultz, and a lot of the Unions, support him, then it matters to me. And I believe it should matter to the American voter.

[Jim Sagle]

53. K&R

[Life Long Dem]

54. K&R

"the hostile takeover of our government, or, as Edwards says, the fact that "powerful interests, particularly corporate interests, have literally taken over this government."And Edwards hasn't just been talking about it - he has made a crusade against this, the issue of our day, the centerpiece of his campaign."

Well said.