David Sirota hanging up his keyboard

[jgraz]

Or at least changing it for a bit...

Friends, enemies and everyone in between:

Just a brief programming note to those who have emailed me wondering where I've been: May 31st, 2009 will be my last day as a full-time political blogger, and, really, my last day as a full-time exclusively political writer of any sort. This is (obviously) a major change for me. After long discussions/deliberations with various members of my trusted Kitchen Cabinet, I'm making a bunch of career moves/adjustments, admittedly very quickly and very abruptly (that's how I roll, I guess).

Over the course of the next few weeks, I will be Mostly Off the Grid on stateside trips to conferences (the America's Future Now conference in particular) and at the Jersey Shore with family. Towards the end of June, I will go Completely Off the Grid on a trip to China. When I get back, I will no longer be employed by the Campaign for America's Future and my role at OpenLeft.com will be reduced to the Morning Blogger - that is, I will be posting one post a day in the morning, and that's it. Additionally, I am curtailing most of - and likely all of - my direct political activism indefinitely.

<snip>

The reason for this change is fairly simple: I'm in need of something more creative, and I want to get back to the basics of writing. It is my passion, it is what I love - and I am interested in more than just the hard-core political world, whose media (blogospheric/magazines/TV shows/etc.) and activist outlets in the Dear Leader Era I believe are becoming less and less creative, more and more sycophantic, and ultimately, completely unstimulating.

I say that with an asterisk, though - and that asterisk is In These Times and OpenLeft. Those are two of the few places where I think generally creative and bold-thinking writing is still being done - by journalists, front-pagers, diarists and commenters. That's why, in fact, I am going to keep writing on a limited basis for both.

So, a big thank you for all the laughs, all the cries, and all the stuff in between. Onward.

Rock the boat,
David

I don't think I'm the only one here at DU that sees this as a huge loss for the progressive community. However, I expect this thread to be overwhelmed with "Good Riddance" posts in 3..2..1..

[MzNov]

1. Got his email also today

No good riddance from me. I really like him.

And I hope he finds some new creative happiness and comes back to us with good progressive contributions.

Good luck David Sirota! :bounce:

[Individualist]

2. I agree, huge loss.

:(

[Cleita]

3. Noooooooooooooh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Oh, he will be missed. However, I can understand his need to get back to his basic love, the art of writing. Everyone needs a break. Good luck David and I mean that in the most loving way! I know you will be back the first time some ass offends your sensibilities though.

[rwheeler31]

4. This may be a good move, any thoughts on helping

a Minnesota Senator?

[Mojambo]

5. Big, big loss. But he won't be gone forever.

Sirota's too passionate about this stuff. He'll be back after a much needed break.

[riverdeep]

6. Damn, I like him.

Even if I didn't agree with him completely. Like now, the blogosphere is getting LESS creative and exciting? OK, if that's how you see it. Sounds more like plain old burnout, and that happens. I loved his work during Bailout 1, and even started a few threads based on his stuff.

[waiting for hope]

7. He will be missed -

:-(

[Davis_X_Machina]

8. He's still pissed...

...he's not an Assistant Undersecretary of Something in the (Mrs.) Clinton administration, I see.

[babylonsister]

11. Sirota? Wrong person, I think. Sidney Blumenthal?

http://jonathanturley.org/2008/01/13/columnist-and-clinton-adviser-sidney-blumenthal-arrested-for-aggravated-dwi/

Columnist and Clinton Adviser Sidney Blumenthal Arrested for Aggravated DWI

[Gold Metal Flake]

14. +1

[dweller]

9. onward

upward.

dp

[babylonsister]

10. He's a good writer, and I wish him well. Maybe a change of

scenery might balance his opinions. I like some of his articles very much, but not all.

He's a smart man, enriching himself. Bon chance, Mr. Sirota!

[Mythsaje]

12. A break will do him good.

As I found when I took my break from political stuff.

[jefferson_dem]

13. I disagreed with Sirota from time to time but his voice will be missed for sure.

I hope he comes back with a vengeance when he is ready.

[flyarm]

15. I will miss David's writing immensely! eom

[stevedeshazer]

16. Bummer, but good for him

When Brian Schweitzer runs for President, he'll be back.

[madfloridian]

17. Progressive bloggers don't have the power now as much as before.

I like David Sirota, get all his emails.

But think about it...with a Democratic president, New Dem and Blue Dog congress we do not as progressives have the power we had previously.

I don't mean it ugly, but they only need us when it is time to vote.

We did a good job getting Democrats back in power...and trust me it WAS the progressives. But we are not needed that much right now.

[John Q. Citizen]

20. Yep, it was certainly the progressive who got Obama the nomination, and Obama

just rocked in the general. Brilliant campaign.

[Occam Bandage]

28. "The progressives," including Sirota, opposed Obama and supported Edwards.

That is of course not to say all progressives did so; I'm only referring to the self-styled arbiters of who is a "true progressive" and who is not. A great number of the people who today claim Obama won because of progressives were people who spent the bulk of the primary campaign working against Obama.

[jgraz]

32. Tell me, does Spock have a beard in your universe?

:eyes:

[Occam Bandage]

33. Sirota was completely behind Edwards, and frequently

attacked Obama as being corporatist--amusing, given the voting record and employment history of Sirota's favored candidate. Regardless, the hyperbolic claims were parroted by his audience then, and are parroted by that same audience today. To credit Sirota and his audience for Obama's primary victory is about as meaningful as crediting Hillary for Obama's primary victory.

[avaistheone1]

38. Maybe you should look up Obama here before you eliminate him as a corporatist.

Obama received more dollars from the various corporations than any other politician.
He is the number one recipient of the most lobbyists dollars across most industries.

http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/industries.php?cycle=2008&cid=N00009638

[unc70]

47. Sirota was right, still right. Obama in corp wing of party

I see way too much that reinforces that assessment and nothing that weakens it, save a few nicely delivered public statements with vague promises -- much like those from the campaign. While several of JE Senate votes fit the DLC pattern, your mention of his "employment history" must refer to the hedge/investment fund - anything else? Being dismissive of those "hyperbolic claims" being "parroted" today will not make them any less true or reason for continuing concern.

Without Edwards doing well in Iowa, Clinton would likely have won convincingly and also in NH, leaving Obama the choice of college students and blacks, the next Jesse Jackson.

[dionysus]

49. so obama would be jesse jackson if not for smoove johnny? how droll...

:rofl:

[unc70]

68. Not droll at all, deadly serious: the "next" Jesse Jackson QED can't win

Nothing funny about what I said (with NeutPOV), an obvious conclusion by anyone looking at the primary campaigns. I have been researching for some time the control of "news" by various groups and methods, with "news" now generalized to "information" and "disinformation", mostly by tracking various news/newinfo from its initial "publication" on a news site, a blog, here at DU, or somewhere else, how it propogated to other site and why some items spread rapidly and widely and others barely spread at all.

Many of the key sites, the gatekeepers, the broadcasters, and the choke points are well-known (e.g. Google in its various forms, MSM sites like CNN or BBC, the AP news wire, country-specific gatesways), but there are others that seem baffling to me. Probably what alarms me the most is how transient our access to news/info items using the Net, how limited and inadequate our efforts to create and maintain archives, and how aggressive and effective the suppression of specific information/stories on the Net.

We have already documented how the MSM suppressed the details of the Pullitzer(?) awarded to the reporting about the conflicts of interest of MSN military experts employed by CNN, MSNBC, FNS, et all. We know about similar issues. But how should one respond upon noticing that pages you had found using have now disappered from the search engine.

[dionysus]

71. now you're going from jesse jackson to bizarre conspiracy shit?

obama was a bildeburger plant i tells ya!
:rofl:

[unc70]

73. Pasted wrong section from working draft of longer article

In a hurry, I had selected a bit of text from the working draft of something else, but somehow got a piece from a general intro section about news in the Internet world rather than a bit about Obama primary strategy and tactics, pasted it into the message, hit "Post Message" without checking my work, and left quickly to attend to pressing matters.

(One section of this larger net+news research looks at examples during the primaries, what made some stories hot and mainstream while others were bottled up and limited to the "lunatic fringes" (left or right) or even disappeared completely(!), how large were the disinformation and disruption efforts, how did over-the-top stories (e.g. Obama birth certificate) start and what role did they play.)

I don't have access to that draft doc on the system I am using at the moment, so here is a quick summary.

Obama had to prevent Clinton from winning early while preventing Edwards being crowned as the non-Clinton. Axelrod knew everything about Edwards and Iowa because by lucky "conincidence" Axelrod had managed the Edwards campaign in 2004, and the opposition research would have found the affair. Removing Edwards (e.g expose his affair) before Iowa would most likely give Clinton the win.

So Edwards was needed by Obama to help block Clinton. But Obama could not afford to finish a distant third place. The supporters of Clinton and Edwards were loyal and unlikely to shift to Obama. Thus was born the strategy of attracting independents and "Reagan Democrats" and of using Republican attack messages against fellow Democrats.

[dionysus]

74. ok, that makes sense

:hi:

[jgraz]

51. Your ridiculous red-herring about primary support betrays your own political immaturity.

Like most progressives, Sirota backed another primary candidate because ... wait for it ... Obama is not a progressive. And, like most progressives, Sirota got solidly behind Obama as soon it became clear that Edwards didn't have a shot. (Something, btw, that I can't imagine the early Obama backers doing. Had the primaries not gone their way, they'd most likely have gone home to pout.)

Of course, once the primaries were over it was the progressive base who were donating and volunteering and canvassing and phone-banking. Even after Obama's betrayal on FISA, we kept it up because we thought we at least had someone we could work with.

Remind me again: what were you doing during the general election? For that matter, what were you doing during the primaries? (Besides posting here, that is.)


So you'll pardon me if I take issue with a member of the esteemed Keyboard Class as you rewrite history to justify your childish taunts. Sirota's audience, and people like us, are the reason Obama is in office today. And, if you get anything from this administration besides the measly crumbs that are currently being offered, you will, once again, have "Sirota's audience" to thank for it.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

60. Like "sheeple," "paradigm shift," "islamist," and "cytokine storm..."

I've never actually met a person who used the word "corporatist" that wasn't a complete douche.

[John Q. Citizen]

48. I'm pretty sure Sirota voted for Obama in the primary. You think he voted Edwards?

I know why Hillary lost, even if you don't.

Where are you from, Occam, and when did you sign up for DU? You haven't been here that long as I recall.

Are you here in the states, or are you from over seas?

[Raineyb]

52. Edwards was out by the end of January

Do you really think progressives were working to revive an Edwards campaign all the rest of the time? Seriously, your need to bash progressives has gone to a rather strange place.

[jgraz]

54. Isn't it amazing how fluid memory can get when the point of an argument is at stake?

In this case, I think there's a bit more at work. Occam, like many on this board, still hasn't forgiven progressives for having the temerity to choose a primary candidate who was more in line with their views. Even after we cut over to Obama in February, and stayed with him the entire campaign, we still aren't considered "real" Obama supporters.

And you know what? I'm fine with that. Let Occam do 40 hours of cold-calling next election cycle.

[dionysus]

72. no offense jgraz, but edwards was a fake-ass "populist". his campaign stance was 180 degrees from

his voting record... :hi:

[Duncan]

69. I and just about everyone I know backed Edwards because he had the most progressive message.

And when he was out of contention we all strongly backed Obama. So what? What is your point?

[mmonk]

75. So you don't think they voted for Obama in the general election?

[Bluenorthwest]

18. too bad

But I understand. Politics is sapping to creative energy and really is like a bad habit. It would be really hazardous as a primary subject if you ask me. Good luck to him.

[John Q. Citizen]

19. David is a very smart guy and he does excellent analysis. Have a good trip!

[BrklynLiberal]

21. He will be missed...

[alarimer]

22. This is unfortunate.

He is one of the few voices not cheerleading Obama. We need to hold Obama's feet to the fire to keep his campaign promises (that he is breaking left and right) and we need David's voice to do that.

[babylonsister]

26. You can't do that on your own if it's so evident? nt

[jgraz]

27. Not everyone is cut out to be a political writer

As evidenced by 99% of the posts on this board.

[babylonsister]

29. I meant finding info-no, opinions Sirota provided. Was that so difficult?

And you are so stellar, so keep posting.

[femrap]

65. He's not???

I went to Sirota's book signing...even bought the damn book. He was totally in love with Obama....naively so, IMHO. He was buying everything Obama said.

I emailed him with a question (since he left the book signing an hour early) and received a rude response. He seemed to think he was the only one who could be correct regarding an issue. I was taken aback. I had always read his articles and even told him that. I stopped then.

I knew Obama would break many hearts...maybe Sirota needs to go away and pout.

[Occam Bandage]

23. Don't let the web-door hit you on the interass.

[RetroLounge]

24. Oh, so predictable...

:eyes:

RL

[Occam Bandage]

25. Sirota? Certainly. nt

[Maru Kitteh]

43. I thought it was funny

I just love it when people on the internet who manage to get a few readers suddenly go all drama queen.

Is there anything weaker than stomping away from the field of debate because the pipettes are not following your pied piper?

[omega minimo]

55. David is one of the most lucid and you don't understand him? That explains a lot!!

:spray:

[merh]

30. No good riddance comment from me

He will be missed.

I do understand his "whys" - you wake up one morning after all of the intrigue, the drama, the passion, the fights for justice and to make a difference, after all the hours of working for a cause and working because someone has to and then you get it, you realize, there has to be more to life. Life can be simpler and the world will keep turning and maybe, just maybe if you step aside and take a breath and learn to live again, you can make a difference just by being who you are and doing something you love.

good luck to you Mr. Sirota and thank you.

[lordsummerisle]

31. I hope he returns

I've enjoyed reading him.

[omega minimo]

34. This sounds like the right move for him and he will still cast his pearls.................

[democracy1st]

35. good move David,getting frustrated when you don't have control over this crap is hard on a person

[JeffR]

36. Damn shame

though he really cheapens his point with "Dear leader Era". He's usually reliably smarter than to resort to that sort of casuistry. Of course, many people here at DU fit that description too, so maybe he's just trying to keep up with the current trends.

[merh]

39. maybe that is why he is moving on

his frustrations and disappointments have caused him to stoop to levels like that.

[JeffR]

40. Maybe. Frustrations and disappointments are rife in this miserable

last 30 years. I'm pretty damn jaded too, and older than Sirota, but it's important that we hang on to our clarity of vision. His was exceptional, but it seems it's become too much for him.

[merh]

41. I understand it

if you can understand my rambling
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=5680387&mesg_id=5681052

[JeffR]

42. That's a nice and fitting tribute.

Well said.

[leftofthedial]

37. nothing is more irrelevant in today's America

than a liberal writer.

It's a shame. Sirota is great.

[kaiden]

44. David has been filing in since February on Jay Marvin's talk show.

Jay Marvin has been very, very sick so David has been filing in most every morning on 760 am here in the Denver area. I'm sure you can stream David's show -- he's quite good. He's on from 6:00 a.m. to 10:00 a.m. MDT.

[underpants]

45. Sirota is one of the best

this is sad news

good luck David you "sexy sexy wonk"

[mod mom]

46. HUGE loss!

[aikoaiko]

50. Back i n 2006, Sirota did us a favor by writing about Schweitzer in MT, Guns, & Winning Elections

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2004/0412.sirota.html

Excerpt

“Listen to me very carefully, and get your head in the game,” he said, voice rising. “No matter what our major ad of the week is, I want that damn gun ad running under everything! I want it in every media market, and I want it on TV and radio. The next time I call, I want to know it's happening.”

The phone clicked off without a goodbye. I knew he was right. Just a few days earlier, campaign manager Eric Stern, press secretary Harper Lawson and I went out to Schweitzer's ranch to shoot clay pigeons with his 12-gauge, lamenting the fact that in 2000 we hadn't put enough money behind a gun and outdoorsmen message. We laughed about how, when I came out to Montana for the first time, some of my D.C. friends were appalled that I was working for someone who had actually criticized people like Sen. Larry Craig (R-Idaho) for being too soft on gun-ownership issues. But, four years later, I understood how well Schweitzer's stance fits Montana, where gun ownership is a way of life. People don't like to be told that their way of life needs to be changed, especially in a state that has one of the highest gun ownership and lowest gun violence rates in America.

Pollster Michael Bloomfield's numbers validated this point. He often reminded us that guns and hunting issues not only polled well among hunters, but also among women, who saw it as a “Montana values” issue. Though an August internal poll showed we were never going to beat the Republicans on gun-rights issues alone, that same survey showed more voters thought Schweitzer “shared their values” than did Brown. In other words, matching the Republicans on gun-ownership and outdoorsmen issues was allowing us to make headway on the intangible question of whether Schweitzer was “one of us.”

Our media consultant, Karl Struble, cut an ad showing Schweitzer and his brother Walt decked out in hunting gear, trudging through the woods with rifles, and trumpeting Schweitzer's A-rating from the NRA. The spot was aptly titled “Lifestyle.” We joked that, instead of the audio tracks, Struble could have put the Dukes of Hazzard theme music over the visuals and run it as is. It would end up appearing in every media market in the state, and, as the Great Falls Tribune noted, would help Schweitzer “manage to hold his own in many rural counties and Republican urban areas.” In a coup, the weekly Missoula Independent actually ran its cover with a picture of Schweitzer aiming a new rifle with a headline, “The Democrats' Best Shot.”

My only beef with the article is that he focuses too much on hunting and not enough on Scheitzer's support of 2nd Amendment rights, in general.

[otohara]

53. His Radio Show?

he's been filling in for a sick Jay Marvin for a few months now and doing a fabulous job. He mentioned last week about the China thing, but didn't mention he wouldn't be back on the radio if he was still needed. I got the impression he would be....maybe wishful thinking.

I'd like to see if and when Jay comes back, the station would bump that idiot in the PM drive and put Sirota on.

Poop, I will miss his writings and voice if he no longer is on the airwaves.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

56. Oh no, how will we even get by without great champions of justice like

David whathisname?

[jgraz]

58. Most people aren't proud of being pig-ignorant

Congratulations on bucking the trend.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

59. LOL

Fuck Sirota and his fanboys.

[jgraz]

61. "Fuck Sirota and his fanboys"? I thought you didn't know who he was.

Do you always form strong opinions about people you know little or nothing about? Oh right... you did that with Obama. Never mind.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

62. I was being facetious.

I've heard the name. Glad I didn't read any of his crap.

"Do you always form strong opinions about people you know little or nothing about?"

That bit about "Dear Leader Era" is all I need to form an opinion about him and his apologists.

[jgraz]

64. Pro tip: facetiousness works better if you're less ridiculous in your other statements

Glad I could help.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

67. Oh, I don't think it was particularly ridiculous at all.

Despite all the moaning and gnashing of teeth, nobody important is going to care that David Sirota's running away with his tail between his legs.

The guy's irrelevant.

[KoKo]

57. Glad we who appreciate his writing will still be able to read him...

even if it's once a day. Wish him well on his break. He's right about there not being much creativity out there with our Dems these days. The economy, endless war are the focus now.

Things should pick up in 2010 for the Mid-term Elections.

[autorank]

63. Thanks David Sirota. You were first rate and highly creative. k*r

Damn, hate to lose him!

[Uzybone]

66. He was an average blogger in a sea full of average bloggers

Im sure another one will take his place. Hope he finds something more to his liking in the "Dear Leader" era.

[dionysus]

70. yeah "Dear Leader" gives it away...