I saw an email message come across my Blackberry about 20 minutes ago. I found it unbelievable, frankly. When I was able, I opened Daily Kos to see if anyone else had written about it. When I saw The shocking email I wish I'd never seen by KeepingItBlueKrstna at the top of the rec list (as of this writing), I clicked on it, assuming she had written about the same message I had received.
She wrote - brilliantly - about something totally different. Which means that my shocking email was something else altogether. Time to write. Follow over the fold.
The email, from Democrats.com, is excerpted with comments below. You can also find a duplicate blog post here.
From: Democrats.com
Date: Thursday, July 03, 2008 11:53 AM
To: RenaRF
Subject: Let's Escrow Our Money to Keep Obama Progressive
Let's Escrow Our Money to Keep Obama Progressive
Last week, we asked 1,000 of you to contribute $10 to raise $10,000 to help progressive Democrats like State Senator Regina Thomas defeat "Bush Democrats" like Rep. John Barrow (GA12) in upcoming primaries. Your response was amazing: over 1,300 of you contributed over $60,000! Senator Thomas and our other "Replace Bush Democrats" candidates were thrilled by your support, and so are we!!
Now we are asking you to use your money to ensure that Barack Obama lives up to his promise to deliver "change we can believe in. "
How? By creating a progressive "escrow" fund that you control.
http://www.democrats.com/...
I need to state categorically - I generally do not/did not have a problem with the email up to this point. I understand the issue many have with FISA, and further understand that money does talk. An escrow fund isn't a bad idea in that regard.
The next part, though, was simply unbelievable:
Many progressives were shocked last week when Obama flip-flopped on wiretapping immunity for the phone companies with this simple explanation:
"My view on FISA has always been that the issue of the phone companies per se is not one that overrides the security interests of the American people."
So if a President unilaterally decides it is in the "security interests of the American people" to defy the Constitution, the Law, and Congress, (s)he can do whatever (s)he wants?
George Bush believes that, as do Dick Cheney and John McCain - and every dictator in the world. How is that progressive? And how is that change we can believe in?
Listen - I don't want to the chew meat of the the merits/demerits of Obama's FISA statement again. That has been well-covered and well-argued here at Daily Kos. I don't ascribe to the idea that we can't criticize Obama's choices, only that we endeavor to do so in a way that doesn't damage his ability to win in November.
One of my clearest issues with Hillary Clinton's campaign during the primary season was their attempt to "build up" McCain while knocking down Obama. This email goes WAY beyond that offense, which now seems totally mild in comparison. It uses Republican framing-language - FLIP FLOPPING - to describe the candidate it purports to support. I don't know who the ringleader is over there, but I find it offensive beyond BELIEF that s/he, having lived through the attacks on John Kerry, would adopt the very language - EXACTLY - used to knock Kerry down. I've also heard every single Rethug talking head use the phrase. I can't support a Democrat who characterizes it in this way. There are other ways to criticize without playing into the opposition's hands.
Ditto for the digusting and reprehensible comparison of Obama to Cheney, Bush and McCain. What is wrong with these people??
The email then takes a rather schizophrenic turn and nears closing with this:
Don't get me wrong: we fully support Obama and will do everything we can to elect him President. But will also do everything we can to protect the Constitution and hold Obama to his promise of real progressive change.
My emphasis. As to that, they could start by not placing Republican framing language on Obama and by not comparing him to Bush, Cheney, and McCain. Ya think?
And that's why we are launching our Obama Progressive Escrow Fund. We're asking you to put some of the money you plan to give Obama "in escrow" until he demonstrates progressive leadership on the issues we care about, like warrantless wiretapping.
http://www.democrats.com/...
We are absolutely not trying to hurt Obama - we'll give him our money at some point. We're just asking for a little R-E-S-P-E-C-T like Aretha Franklin sang about.
Again, my emphasis.
We can get Obama's respect because needs our money - he turned down $85 million in taxpayer dollars because he believes small donors like us will contribute $300 million. And now is the best time to use our modest leverage, before the campaign goes all-out after the convention.
The author (ringleader?) then goes on to say that he has pledged $2300 on his own.
The entire section where he called Obama a flip-flopper and compared him to Bush, Cheney and McCain was unnecessary. He could have made his appeal for the escrow fund - not a bad idea, frankly - without sinking to that level. And for that, I'm removing myself from his mailing list and blocking emails from his site. Not for nothing - the top-left graphic on the site states "Democrats.com Unity".
Unity indeed.
In Chris Bowers' diary last week, Geekesque made a comment that spoke for me:
Here's my take, Chris: (16+ / 0-)
Sure it helps if the criticism is done ON POLICY GROUNDS. Saying "Obama is wrong here" and "Obama is not taking a progressive stand here" and even "maybe Obama isn't as progressive as we thought"--that's fair game.
But, stuff like "he's just showing that he can't be trusted" and "he's just another lying, pandering politician" and "he'll say anything or do anything to get power"--that's stuff that the Republicans are using RIGHT NOW against him. It reinforces their themes.
I'm not accusing you of doing the latter, btw. But some are.
So, critiques based on policy and ideology are healthy dissent. Trashing the man's character is doing John McCain's dirty work for him.
My emphasis again. Comparing Obama to Bush, McCain and Cheney is saying that he can't be trusted. Calling him a flip-flopper is saying that he's a panderer. And a bunch of other negative interpretations, all fodder for the Republican noise machine to use. Which means also that it IS playing into McCain's hands.
Do you what you must, folks - what your conscience dictates. But I won't and can't support willful attacks that use hateful Republican tactics and language again my own candidate, regardless of how flawed he may or may not be.
Update [2008-7-3 15:56:28 by RenaRF]: Damn - you guys comment fast. I'm trying to keep up, but am falling behind!