Must one? I'll agree there's more to history than just "so-and-so was stupid", but criticisms of Goring are based on specific acts or policies of his which had demonstrable negative effects. How many specific positive contributions can we point to? His relationship with Hitler no doubt helped the Luftwaffe in the battles for funding and resources, but it's not like there wouldn't have been a German air force without him. The German military appreciated the significance of the air arm, going back to von Seeckt and the covert development program in Russia. Goring and Udet might get credit for the dive bombers, but the Germans in WWI had pioneered close air support and designed aircraft specifically for that purpose. Goring's Luftwaffe had little coherent policy in the 1930s except expansion, and it was still barely ready for war in 1939. I'd be glad to give Goring credit for any accomplishments, but what were they?
1)If one is criticizing Goering for the fefeats of the LW since Stalingrad,one must also praise him for the victories of the LW till 1943,because Goering was commander of the LW in both periods.
2) If one is saying that the LW would have been victorious between 39/42 without Goering,one must also say that the same LW also would have been defeated between 43/45 without Goering .
Otherwise (for both 1 and 2) one will fall in the trap of the German generals who claimed the victories,while blaming Hitler for the defeats (the Soviet generals were not better:they did the same,but replaced Hitler by Stalin).
A good source(one of the few) is : "demystifying the German armament miracle.