http://observer.com/2016/09/interview-with-susan-sarandon-obama-and-clinton-silent-on-dakota-pipeline/

That totally made me spit out my coffee.

that is a Trump presidency.

about our system, and legitimate concerns about whether or not either party works for the people. She is not however a Trump advocate. Thinking that a Trump Presidency might hasten revolution is not pro Trump, it is anti-current trajectory. That said, I respect her position, even while I've moved away from it personally, and will be voting for Clinton and hoping for a landslide in the down ballot elections to give her all the tools she could possibly need to push a truly progressive agenda, if that is her will.

But Trump is going to fall big. Nothing I've seen so far suggests otherwise, and multinational corporations--those same ones that own our media--have no interest in actually letting this blowhard who can destabilize the world, become President. They do have an interest in making this a horse-race, and as little about issues as possible. They do have an interest in dividing the American populace over cults of personality and wedge issues. All of that keeps us stupid. All of that keeps our attention misdirected from following the actual money. But if he doesn't do it on his own, the media will eventually step in and ensure that he is exposed soundly as a horrible candidate. Just don't expect them to do anything that looks like their job until just before the election.

I have to stop paying attention.

...about this?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12512422701

I've been watching Charlie since the 90's. He always seems tougher on Democrats and their surrogates. He was totally inept in a recent Rumsfeld interview. But everything is relative. And he is relatively part of the whole collapse of journalism. I saw Bill Clinton with him. Bill knew how to handle him. And made his points. He was more respectful of him though than others.

Btw, I haven't seen Trump on CR. Probably because it's on PBS and that's on the chopping block in a trump presidency. CR can become part of Trump TV.

But I'm glad whenever I read that someone has decided it's important to support Hillary and to give her the Congress she needs to get her agenda passed.

Stupid and entitled shit-wit who thinks it's fine for the vulnerable to suffer while she hawks cheesy $650 Italian ponchos for these people



out one side of her mouth and then lectures us little peons out the other side of her mouth about how here in America we should just suffer through a Trump presidency because she thinks that will get HER closer to what she think she wants, namely, relevancy.

DAWG KNOWS a President Trump sure as HELL isn't going to hurt her in one of her many mansions around the US and, one presumes, abroad.

Fuck Susan Sarandon. She's a complete ass, a total hypocrite and a huckster of the very worst kind.

that straw man. The whole system has been hurting people for a long long time. Unless one party stops taking big money, they are working for the same people, just to varying degrees. Corporate interests have long benefited from the political divide between the middle class and the poor, and for the most part Democrats have refused to wage a class war that would have put both of those groups on the same side. So anybody thinking it's bullshit kabuki theater, may have a point. That bullshit kabuki theater IS responsible for Trump. It will be responsible for future Trumps. So looking into the future and seeing even darker days unless something changes now, is not callous.

I myself? I'm going to be hopeful in the democratic establishment for one more cycle, since the platform sounds more progressive than it has for some time, but I can understand people not being convinced. You could maybe, focus on why you think she's wrong, but I suppose you prefer there to be villains and good guys, then well meaning people who just disagree.

from her ivory tower.

FUCK her.

Most we can do is wait for the house of cards to fall in and catch flame.

I have zero respect for Bernie or Bust-ers, and she's obviously one of them. Bernie was absolutely my first choice, but given the possibility of tRump winning and the associated existential threat to our government and society, its inexcusable to be silent right now.

Plus, she actually admitted to liking Hillary when she was her Senator. Now her busters are busting us all.

And it would serve them right if it did not hurt us so much.

proving the horseshoe theory correct. Like every other fucking Bernie Buster in existence.

Although I've followed politics closely for decades, I had not come across the expression, "horseshoe theory." It's very interesting and it makes sense of why the fringes of both ends of the political spectrum illustrate similar behavior and even ideas:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horseshoe_theory

Thanks for learning me something this morning, Charles Bukowski. Enjoy your weekend.

and I kind of subscribe to it. Historically, extreme leftist and extreme rightist countries leave little to desire between them. Best example was Nazi Germany (far right) vs Communist Soviet Union (far left) in WWII. Many Americans don't know much about the conflict, but it was one of the most brutal in the entire war, and where the bulk of military and many of the civilian casualties were inflicted. War crimes and atrocities were common and often perpetrated by both sides.

“Some people feel Donald Trump will bring the revolution immediately if he gets in then things will really, you know explode.”

Must be lovely in her ivory tower

and the Bernie Bros think they're the last word on progressivism, but they're really not.

A true progressive will be voting for HRC on November 8th. Phony progressives like Sarandon and the Bernie Bros will be crossing their fingers and hoping she loses.

the "last word."

Some of the things she's said over the years...

I would expect nothing less. Hollywood lacks political conviction and fortitude.

Susan Sarandon is an entitled idiot.

Ms. Sarandon is entitled to her opinion. Thankfully, I don't have to hear it.

I think she went one step too far. And that was over the edge.

...couldn't resist, but I know she's an actress who supported Bernie and was convinced Hillary would be arrested by now.

and Hillary to any and all who will ask - most recently about the protests in ND - Susan has been promoting the rehabilitation of Edward Snowden (http://heatst.com/politics/susan-sarandon-is-leading-the-new-fight-to-get-edward-snowden-a-presidential-pardon/) and possibly involved with a new heartthrob (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-3775151/Susan-Sarandon-gets-chummy-hunky-pal-Open-NYC.html).

The "Google" is your friend.

About Trump looking "inevitable" ... meh, not so much. The best predictors (538 and PEC, IMO) still have Clinton WELL over 50% in the probability index. 538 (60+%) and PEC (78%). And that's after the M$M went after her in full-blown OTT mode about Trump "deplorables" - which has since become even more self-evident - and her health. There's really not much lower than that than the M$M can sink

Please do NOT keep promoting this "failure" meme on DY. You would likely feel more comfortable over at JPR, where such will be well-received.

But bringing back Bernie or Busters will maybe help get out the youth vote. And they need reminding their chances with Nuclear Donald von Trump are nil.

optimistic about BOBs than I am.

Those millennials I know best are in Hillary's camp right now - anecdotal, yes. But some of these are intelligent young ones who used to be in Bernie's camp. They moved quite happily to Hillary after the primaries. Those who still don't "get" it either have a logic screw loose somewhere or they were never true Bernie supporters at all and just wanted to overturn Hillary in the primaries. Their loyalties after the primaries would have been suspect even if Bernie had won, IMO.

Much appreciated.

President Bill Clinton signed it into law saying, "NAFTA means jobs. American jobs, and good-paying American jobs. If I didn't believe that, I wouldn't support this agreement."

Pretty weak argument, IMO. What was the Congressional vote on NAFTA? Do you even know? Was it a veto-proof majority? Would vetoing it have accomplished more than a symbolic gesture?

Sorry that Bill Clinton didn't have a crystal ball to tell him everything you now know 2 decades later, I guess? SMH

Was bUSH 41 when President Clinton signed it into law. Little details like this give fuel to rw arguments.

Bill says he wants to talk to these angry men whose companies outsourced and did norhing to help save the communities they used up. That is where Capitalism can be repaired. Where trade deals need to make people front and center and not "capital".

That is the answer to Democratic Socialism: Democratic Capitalism.

Her verbal diarrhea was nothing but a publicity stunt intended for her own enrichment. Her monetary situation matters more to her than other people's rights, which is standard operating procedure for folks who are that far to the left.

Great actress. Great activist.

I fear them all. They are either trying to hand the election to Trump or are seriously dangerous individuals unaware of the stakes.

Have a good day.

worse for the country than Donald Trump.

Not cool. At all.

doesn't mean I don't think they're cool.

Susan has always been cool. She's cool. Real cool.

As many who have nothing to lose can be. I can't say I respect that.

Which is why I really don't care for celebrity endorsements. But I am also not going to make too big of a stink when a celebrity didn't endorse, or voices opposition, to the person I voted for. I really care little about who Susan Sarandon or Justin Timberlake support.

in the face of a very nationalistic and unified country when it came to Iraq. Speaking out then was not just career threatening to at least a degree, but inviting all kinds of threats and everything else. To say that she hasn't ever risked for her opinion is absurd, and tragic that even if you don't agree with somebody, you can't at least give credit where it's due.

Then comes your interpretation of her opinion about our Political System. If she thinks its rigged; if she thinks that our two party system is a whole lot of kabuki theater, then her answer to that ... refuse to play ... isn't so unreasonable because its that very theater that has created a culture that a Trump and future Trumps can thrive in. So letting some sort of revolution happen already, because shit is going to keep getting worse anyway, and lives are going to be continued to be destroyed, is not necessarily being removed and sheltered as you want to characterize it.

We can both hope she's wrong, and I hope that I'm wrong, because I'm very afraid that that is the reality, even while I'm going to hold out hope for another cycle that it isn't, and that more democrats in Washington in an energized year where people are talking about prison reform, free education, higher minimum wage and campaign finance, that we can actually give well meaning democrats the groundswell push and support they need to enact good legislation, but I'm not sure why you have to go straight at her character.

Is it possible to disagree with somebody and still think they mean well?

Her mother is conservative and Catholic. Dealing with both when you are a liberal can really screw with your head. So it seems.

it is made out to be. The American auto industry was failing long before nafta because of foreign imports from Asia. Nafta was intended to put Canada, the US and Mexico on am equal playing field with each other to compete with these imports. (The Flint auto industry demised well before Nafta). I personally had a problem with not providing environmental and wage protections, but when you are combining multiple levels of economies what do you expect? Look at the European union and the disparity between the industrial countries to the north and the tourist countries to the south.

And Mexico lost too. Corn subsidies benefitted American farmers and decimated the small farmers in Mexico who eventually moved north (hence our illegal immigration problem). But moving factories south from America decimated our industrial base (which was already being decimated by asia) but increased salaries in mexico. This has happened countless times in our history (look at the North and South tensions) and will happen again. Agrarian lifestyles v. Industrial lifestyles are a constant tension.

Sarandon is a gadfly. I used to have great respect for her but her celebrity seems to be more important to her than her principles at this point.

Why can't any of the politicians running for office be as clear? I know the media operates via obfuscation. It didn't used to be this way. Everything apparently exists now to pit us against each other.

America the Played.

interests at the expense of small businesses and workers. I'd be interested to see if anything about the deal actually raised the standard of living in Mexico. More consolidation has not been good for us as a nation, so whether there are more jobs now, or whether we replaced the jobs lost is not necessarily as important as whether or not we reduced employer competition for that workforce, and gave big companies even more of a monopoly on our employment options, since they have more of a monopoly in their respective fields, and on capital in general.

I mean, that's no surprise, because that's what capitalism and money does, but deals like nafta are how it does it.

We have had anti-trust legislation for decades - but enforced erratically. And we keep changing our priorities.

We legislated banks after the 30's crash to just turn around 50 years later and start deregulating them again. I worked at a bank in the early 80's when the savings and loan debacle occurred. Lots of institutions went under. They tightened legislation on them but by the early 2000's we were allowing banks to do more outside investing again.

Our main problem is money in politics. And it is not just campaign donations. It is the trips and the favors etc. Politicians make more money and living a higher lifestyle working half time than they could if they had a workforce job. Also, the average investor these days cares more about current returns on the stock they own than on how the company conducts business. Too many people looking for a quick profit - and that is the majority of individuals.

Also, I would argue we really need legislation of some kind affecting corporate salaries. Top executive salaries as a ratio to their average employees salaries has increased astronomically in the last 60 years. Maybe impose an executive tax on corporations once their top executives receive a salary exceeding 100 times their average worker.

All of this stuff is cyclical. It did not just happen the last 10 years. It happens over and over again. We have the attention span of gnats.