President (To Win Colorado) See Full Big Line

(D) Kamala Harris

(R) Donald Trump

80%

20%

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

(R) V. Archuleta

98%

2%

CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*

(R) Marshall Dawson

95%

5%

CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(D) Adam Frisch

(R) Jeff Hurd

50%

50%

CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) Lauren Boebert

(D) Trisha Calvarese

90%

10%

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Crank

(D) River Gassen

80%

20%

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

(R) John Fabbricatore

90%

10%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) B. Pettersen

(R) Sergei Matveyuk

90%

10%

CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(R) Gabe Evans

70%↑

30%

State Senate Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

80%

20%

State House Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

95%

5%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
March 26, 2009 11:22 PM UTC

Bennet Has Time for D.C. Reporters But Not for Colorado Voters?

  • 51 Comments
  • by: davidsirota

I’ve been hosting the drive-time progressive radio show here in Colorado for the last month, as regular host Jay Marvin has been out sick. In the last two weeks, callers have been increasingly venting their frustration with appointed Sen. Michael Bennet (D-CO), both for his refusal to take a public position on the Employee Free Choice Act, and with his decision to join the “Conservadem” caucus whose “stated goal is to protect business interests,” as the Wall Street Journal reports. Every day, AM760 producer John Turk has been calling Bennet’s office, asking him to come on the show – even for 5 minutes – and explain his rationales to the audience. And unfortunately, everyday Bennet’s office has told us he’s too busy with Senate business.

That’s fine – I get that senators can be busy, and even in a relatively small state where the press corps is manageably small, not every request can be fulfilled. However, what I don’t get is an appointed senator in a swing state who has never faced voters having plenty of time to schmooze with Beltway reporters, but no time to explain himself to his constituents.

What am I talking about? Check out this Twitter note I caught from Chris Cillizza, the Washington Post blogger, just now:

Just back from lunch with Sen. Bennet (Colo.).

So evidently, Bennet has no time to get on the phone and join a public, 50,000-watt forum for tens of thousands of Colorado voters, but plenty of time to lunch with a Washington Post blogger.

Obviously, this is pretty telling on a number of levels.  

First and foremost, it’s bad politics. Bennet is likely facing a Democratic primary in 2010 from a top-tier candidate like former House Speaker Andrew Romanoff, and judging by the response to the show we did today all about the prospect of a primary, there’s a lot of interest among rank-and-file Democrats for a primary challenge to Bennet. Indeed, even state Rep. Mark Ferrandino (D-Denver) said he saw the potential value of a primary. So, you’d think Bennet would want to spend time explaining his positions on the state’s biggest progressive radio station – a station whose listenership is disproportionately Democratic primary voters (listen to the podcast of today’s show on a possible primary challenge to Bennet here, here, here and here).

Second, it seems to confirm the suspicion that Bennet, a lifelong Washington insider who has never run for office in Colorado, really isn’t all that focused on the state he was appointed to represent.

Let me conclude by saying the invitation remains open to Bennet – I want him to come on the air and answer a few questions from listeners. I’m going to be keynoting the Larimer County Democrats dinner up in Ft. Collins on Saturday, and I will say exactly that in my speech. The fact is, Colorado voters need to know where their appointed senator stands on these issues – we don’t need him spending more time schmoozing D.C. bloggers than answering our questions.

Tweet
Share

Comments

51 thoughts on “Bennet Has Time for D.C. Reporters But Not for Colorado Voters?”

  1. I’ll bet that’s a whole lot of tears!

    I’m a CO Dem primary voter, and I had never listened to your show, or to your station.  I do, however, read the Washington Post often, in particular Cillizza.  So, please don’t assume that talking to the WaPost, rather than you, is equivalent to avoiding Colorado voters.  Man, the EGO in here.

    1. I think your point about his false dichotomy went over his head. No surprise.

      Luckily, this isn’t the Republican Party, where all must flatter and pander to vain radio hosts. And of course it’s to hard right radio hosts that politicians must kow-tow and pretend idiotic bloviations pass for wisdom. Thank goodness in the Democratic Party, an elected official isn’t beholden to a faux-outrage machine.

      Sirota’s obliviousness to such an obvious parallel is pretty hilarious. Keep thumping that chest, tough guy.  

  2. You’re right – there are more people reading Chris Cillizza’s blog in Colorado than listening to the 50,000 watt triumvirate of Clear Channel stations here in Colorado…good point. Makes perfect sense, really.

      1. True…but again, it makes perfect sense. An obscure Washington Post blog is a more effective way to reach – and interact with – Colorado rank-and-file voters than taking a few minutes on a set of major in-state radio stations. I’m a fool for thinking otherwise.

    2. Anyway, I didn’t say that more Colorado people read the WaPost than listen to your show.  I have no idea what the numbers are.  You keep throwing out the 50,000 watt number as if it translates exactly into some sort of audience level for your particular show.  Don’t they have ratings for that question?  In any event, I responded to your ludicrous, megalomanical notion that avoiding you = avoiding CO voters.  That is utter bullshit.

      1. Nah, it’s not megalomaniacal. Thousands of people listen to the radio network everyday. Asking him to explain his position on some major issues that people want answers on is avoiding voters. That you feel the need to throw a temper tantrum about that basic statement of fact is rather funny, actually. That you felt the need to insist that an obscure Washington Post blog has a bigger audience of Colorado voters than local radio raises questions about whether you do, in fact, live here in Colorado, or whether you are fibbing.

        Is that you Sen. Bennet?

          1. David Sirota’s argument about Bennet appearing on the Jay Marvin show,

            it is very valid to point out that the 2 main reasons that the Democratic Party has finally whooped up on the GOP during the midterms and last General Election, was because of 1) blogging on the internet and equally as important 2) the rise of liberal radio talk show hosts.

            Heck, Ed Schultz (and David Sirota) are being discussed as possible tv show hosts on MSBC.

            I had not heard of Ed Schultz or David Sirota as little as 4 years ago.

            The advent of Air America, and more importantly for Colorado, AM 760, brought these different viewpoints to the confront the blowhards like Rush Limbaugh.

            Belittle David Sirota if you want, but belittling AM 760 or liberal talk media (without whom we also would not have Rachel Maddow) is serious and stupid underestimation of its importance. It only makes sense if you are a republican or are just trying to kick up dust to get mr. Sirota’s goat.

            Either way i would be willing to bet that we would not have had such a remarkable win in Colorado for Barack Obama if AM 760 was not refuting right wing talking points and supporting our Presidential Candidate.

            If Barack Obama can appear on AM 760, shouldn’t Michael Bennet be able too?

            BTW David, if you are reading,

            this is all they have got, arguing that our only Progressive radio station is not that important.

              1. It’s rather predictable…and boring, really.

                Listened to AM 760 for about six months. Stopped listening in the morning when Jay Marvin took over.  Stopped listening in the evening when Randi Rhodes started sounding like the Rush of the left.

                Never hear Sirota on air, but if he DJs like he writes, well, good luck with all that…

            2. Once again, I will say that I did not say that more people read the WaPost than listen to the fabulous (and fabulously defensive) “progressive radio station.”  But Dabee points out below that the ratings, you know, the ratings!, are not so fabulous.

              My point, again, again, is not to say that no one listens to “progressive radio shows.”  Rather, my point is very different.  Pay attention, you Rachel Maddow-wanna-be’s:  it is bullshit to say that to avoid your particular radio show is to avoid Colorado voters.  Which is what Sirota keeps saying.  Guess what, there are OTHER ways to reach them, some of them even more effective.

              So, give your egos, and everyone else, a rest.

              1. I’m a CO Dem primary voter, and I had never listened to your show, or to your station.  

                If you don’t live within range of AM 760

                or live in Colorado Springs (where they jam it)

                then it makes sense that you wouldn’t have listened to Am 760.

                However, along the Front Range in the Denver – Boulder – Ft Collins – Greeley area, I would say the Majority of Democrats have at least listened to AM 760 once or more.

                we don’t know why Bennet would turn down talking on a station where Mark Udall, Barack Obama, Betsy Markey, Diana DeGette and many other elected officials have appeared numerous times, but it may have something to do with his recent choices and the way the base feels about those choices…

                but we won’t know until he appears.

                1. …because we have Sirota to conjure up the reasons.  

                  I live in central Denver.  And I don’t listen to that damn radio station.  Why is that so hard for you to understand?  Is it because radio is your preoccupation and occupation?   Try stepping out of that tiny place for a while, and you will notice that MOST people don’t give a shit about talk radio.

                  1. Try stepping out of that tiny place for a while

                    You have never listened AM 760 – Ed Schultz, Jay Marvin, Rachel Maddow?

                    i believe if you talk to dems and  compared notes, you would find the tiny space is the one you are standing in.

                    1. …I’ve listened to her, and watched her, on the teevee.   But neither I, nor any of my Dem friends, listen to talk radio.  It’s so passe.  I’m not saying that no one listens, obviously, but that your audience is not nearly as grand as you assume. But, continue to believe that everyone knows and loves you.  That will get you far.

                2. nor have any desire to. But in the interest of explanation, I quit listening after Franken went off the air. I can’t stand Ed Schultz–he’s too bombastic and the same goes for Jay Marvin.

                  I have a feeling I know why Bennet has turned down speaking with Sirota on the radio–because since the day he was appointed Senator, Sirota has continuously written scathing editorials about him and continuously calls him a “DC Insider” which is just flat out crap.

                  Why would Bennet go on the radio with someone who treats him as the enemy? Isn’t that like asking Obama to be interviewed by Bill O’Reilly?

            3. Please tell me that you can actually provide some fucking proof of what you just asserted, besides the fact that you are a blogger so you think the rest of the world actually has a fucking clue who you are, Wade.

              it is very valid to point out that the 2 main reasons that the Democratic Party has finally whooped up on the GOP during the midterms and last General Election, was because of 1) blogging on the internet and equally as important 2) the rise of liberal radio talk show hosts.

              Heck, Ed Schultz (and David Sirota) are being discussed as possible tv show hosts on MSBC.

              And you wonder why people dismiss your views. When you write completely unprovable bs, it becomes sort of difficult to take anything you say seriously.  

                  1. Bennet should appear on Sirota’s guest show precisely because Sirota is such a raving black helicopters prick! To prove Bennet’s not the “unknown aristocrat” Sirota baselessly claims! Don’t you know, when people are unreasonable assholes, you have an obligation to kiss their ass, even if nobody listens to the show!

                    I can’t keep this up.

                    We are making an assumption here, of course, that a self-serving blowhard like Sirota could ever possibly be convinced he was wrong about something, much less admit it on the air. Doubtful that would help either KKZN’s ratings or his MSNBC prospects, and like Rush Limbaugh says, “this show exists to make me look good.”

                    2. Instead I’ll just have to blockquote JeffcoBlue.

                      Don’t you know, when people are unreasonable assholes, you have an obligation to kiss their ass, even if nobody listens to the show!

                1. You’re confusing the messengers and the tools of message delivery for the movement. This is a supremely arrogant mistake, the Pols (for example, there are others) are quite humble about this from my experience and do not believe they rock the cradle that rules progressive politics.

                  And yes, absolutely 100%, I will assert that Schultz, Marvin, Moulitsas, Sirota, ALL OF THESE, are considerably less “substantial” to Democratic wins than they imagine themselves to be. And now they’re ready to tear down everything we built out of spite and a sense of personal entitlement to the position of “thought leader.”

                  Sorry, fuck that. They’re narcissist twits with severely inflated egos, many of them when you get right down to it are just not very good communicators and leaders, and you just never had a chance to learn that back when we all had our rage commonly focused on Bush. And that’s the problem: though we didn’t know it before, tearing things down is all these people are capable of.

                  1. Unfortunately it will have about as much effect as Schultz, Marvin, and Moulitsas had on bringing the Democrats back into the majority.

                    So, you know, TONS!

                2. I don’t have much hope for you, but I’ll try regardless: self-righteousness, ideological bullying, and mouth-frothing stupidity is 90% of what brought the Republican Party to its knees. Bloggers sitting around pointing it all out was .05%. Radio “personalities” trying to fight Rightwing Jerks by being Leftwing Jerks was .000005% at best. A pissed off public, good candidates, and good people who put in sweat equity accounts for the rest.

                  Therefore, emulating the Republican myopia, smugness, and hypocrisy that destroyed their party and wrecked the country is exactly the wrong way for a coalition of folks to move good policy forward. As for you, casting yourself in the mold of a slightly dimmer David Sirota is the wrong way for you to make your mark.

                  David Sirota has a sanctimony addiction, and it’s why even most of the choir thinks he’s both daft and an egomaniac. He may want a disciple, my friend, but he won’t stand for someone who will compete for his attention supply. Fair warning.  

                3. Not substantial. One of many, many tools in the clog.

                  And let’s face it–don’t you fucking backpeddle because that is not what you said in your first comment. Think before you write or open your mouth and maybe folks woudl start to value what you have to say.  

                4. A couple of things. First off, I’ve never listened to any talk radio. I don’t think I’ve listened to a radio even for music in about 10 years. And I’ve never watched PBS or listened to NPR (I have watched DVDs of PBS shows like The Civil War). The size of your market is what it is – no larger and no smaller. And based on what people here are writing, you are much like Rush in that you are preaching to the choir.

                  Much of the blogosphere falls into the same category. It’s a small market and it’s a bunch of people either agreeing loudly with each other or arguing vehmenently over minor divisions of policy.

                  ColoradoPols is something of an execption to this rule (which is why I like it) because while it is majority liberal, it has a strong conservative contingent. And many of the liberal voices here are loudly independent which also makes for interesting discussion.

                  I do think blogs have 3 strong advantages over every other media.

                  1) It’s a discussion here. An interview on talk radio is either a stroke-fest or an argument. But it’s rarely a discussion, and never with as many voices and as wide ranging as what we get here all the time.

                  2) It’s uncontrolled & timely. David Sirota got a wild hair up his butt and without needing air time, column inches, etc – justs posts. And we’re off arguing this immediately.

                  3) It’s out here forever thanks to Google. And the younger a voter the more likely they are to use Google as their sole source of info on the candidates.

        2. If The Fix is an “obscure Washington Post blog,” it raises questions about whether you do, in fact, ever turn on the TV or read the ridiculous number of places Cillizza is quoted on a regular basis.  

          But seriously, you might want to note the thoroughly unspectacular 1.3 rating KKZN had last quarter.  That’s pretty mediocre.  If you in fact had Bennet on for the 5 minutes he won’t agree to, you might actually be in a race with Cillizza for the number of people in Colorado who heard from the Senator…

  3. The more I keep glancing at this thread, the more I start to think that maybe…just maybe…Sirota has a point.

    Once you get past the sanctimonious whining side of it, it is bad politics (or at least PR) not to take free airtime when it’s on the table.   Yes, of course Bennet would take a little heat from our resident wannabe liberal god…but maybe that’s a good thing.  The folks listening, few as they may be, are indeed the very folks that may be inclined to support a potential Romanoff primary, should it come to that.  Not all, obviously, but some.

    So, while not going on Marvin’s (Sirota’s) show really doesn’t have anything to do with the aristocrat elitist angle Sirota keeps trying to spin, our boy from New Haven does have a point:  avoiding going the show isn’t necessarily the smartest decision in the world.  

    1. Every blowhard behind the mike (or teleprompter) whines about politicians dodging their show.

      Sirota’s conceit is that his show is important enough for Bennett to care. AM 760 is not a

      public, 50,000-watt forum for tens of thousands of Colorado voters

      . It’s grievance radio for the left, with a tiny listenership, dominated by extremely un-talented hosts.

      Sirota is not really interested in learning what makes Bennett tick. He just wants to bloody up Bennett with a petty laundry list of left wing infractions.

    2. to walk in the World’s Most Obvious Ambush.

      And let’s face it, listeners wouldnt’ have opportunity to hear from Bennet, since Sirota would be monologuizing and plugging his books. So what’s the point?  

  4. Fidel has some time for an interview tomorrow.  I have to clean part of the garage and want to get some sledding in, but in between that I’m all yours.  

    I’ll hit the AB down to 16th st. – maybe we could get some tea at the Brown Palace and some of those really small sandwiches.

    Oh, and BTW if you don’t respond to my granting of this rare interview you are an elitist bastard.

      1. If I’m giving the goddamned interview of the year I want tea at the Brown.  I want the spout and kettle of the teapot always facing the pourer, lemon in thin slices (no wedges) and refreshments in their traditional 3 tiered platters.  Savories on the bottom, scones in the middle and sweets on top.  (sigh) David should know this.

          1. It’s probably not even dijon, but being the man of the people I humbly accept.

            “the populist” – that sounds a little like the soup nazi.

            2. What, did you go to Yale, rescue companies for billionaire Phil Anschutz, and have the temerity to accept an appointment that should have gone to someone I had actually heard of? It’s mustard mustard, not whatever it is you aristocrats eat.  

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

58 readers online now

Newsletter

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!