Susan Sarandon and the Berniacs Who Wanna Watch the World Burn

[RandySF]

This week actress and Bernie Sanders supporter Susan Sarandon told Chris Hayes that she was not sure if she could bring herself to vote for Hillary Clinton if she wins the nomination. Instead of committing to backing the Democrat nominee to prevent a Republican president whose beliefs are antithetical to all socialist, progressive, and liberal ideals, Sarandon said, “I don’t know. I’m going to see what happens.”

What she is unsure about, and what she is waiting “to see what happens,” is unknown and unclear, but the apparent reasoning behind her hesitation is absurd—not only from the point of view of the Democratic Party, but also, and even especially, for the socialist revolution Sanders wants to create and Sarandon says she supports.

When Hayes asked Sarandon what she thought Sanders would do if he did not win the nomination, she said, “I think Bernie would probably encourage people, because he doesn’t have any ego in this thing, but I think a lot of people are, ‘Sorry, I just can’t bring myself to [vote for Clinton].’”

Sanders has already said that he would support Clinton if she won the nomination.

Now this statement from Sarandon displays a disturbing flaw that may be at the heart of the thinking of many Sanders supporters. Sanders may be campaigning as a true socialist on an egoless mission to create a better, more equitable America, but many of his supporters, including Sarandon, appear fully committed to allowing their egos to play a vital role in this election.


http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/03/29/susan-sarandon-and-the-berniacs-who-wanna-watch-the-world-burn.html

[Kalidurga]

1. Voting is a right

and if a politician can't win a vote it's on them not the voter.

[840high]

49. .that^ X100

[MFM008]

54. oh no.

You cant dump the responsibility for electing Donald Trump or any republican by rejecting our nominee.
A number of you have said you will never vote for HRC. She is not going to turn into Sanders to try to appeal to you. Barack Obama is a moderate, who has caved into the GOP a number of times. I voted for him twice and would do it again. You cant have the perfect, you can only hope for the good.
I dont like Sanders, HRC is not my ideal cantidate but I will vote for the nominee.

[Kalidurga]

63. Sure I can dump it on the DNC if I like.

Hillary is a terrible candidate propped up by the establishment. If a number of people have indicated they don't want the establishment to choose their candidate then the establishment should back off. If they don't it's not on them. Voting is a right and we owe the establishment nothing.

[Juicy_Bellows]

64. Perfect. Nt

[Contrary1]

67. Ditto.

Candidates earn my vote.

[Armstead]

2. Naw...Sanders supporters are unimportant so their egos do not play a vital role in this election

Unless I get the mixed messages mixed up

[jeff47]

3. The world is already burning. You're just insisting you smell incense instead of smoke. (nt)

[hobbit709]

5. What I usually tell people that aren't paying attention.

"Wake up and piss, the world's on fire!"

[Hydra]

20. Ya, and they are polishing the brass on the Titanic n/t

[virtualobserver]

57. perfect

[Hydra]

69. I stole it from Fight Club

But I find it more and more relevant every day. Our oversized and ego driven system believes it is "unsinkable." We all know how that went.

[bvar22]

4. When did Susan Sarandon become the spokesperson for the Sanders Campaign

or Sanders supporters? I didn't get the notice,
but apparently the Clinton supporters did.
They have been all over using the statement of a private citizen to broad brush slime the Sanders campaign and his supporters.

Is that the latest talking point?

[redstateblues]

8. All the BSS were bragging about having the Naderite's support.

apparently some of Bernie's supporters thought it was a good thing to have a celebrity Trump humper

[bvar22]

17. Could you be more specific?

As it is, you are just wasting everybody's time.

[Dem2]

6. *bern

God already I scanned and saw some really silly answers justifying killing us all.

[dchill]

7. Who Wanna Watch the World Burn

Asinine, IMO.

[BillZBubb]

9. It's a free country. Anyone can vote for whoever they please based on their judgment.

Not voting for Hillary has nothing to do with ego. It has to do with the fact that she is a war hawk, a corporatist, an opportunist and a dishonest money grubber. She may be the lesser of two evils, but she's still evil.

You Hillary fanatics go all hyperbolic about the end of the world. Well guess what, the world won't end if Hillary doesn't get to be president. It won't be a better place if she is elected either.

[840high]

50. Amen. Life goes on.

Hillary is just not that important.

[revbones]

10. Hillary followers are using right-wing tactics

Step 1: Distort something someone said
Step 2: Feign outrage
Step 3: Call for that person's group to disavow them.

Really sad to see Democrats using these tactics.

[redstateblues]

11. We learned them from Bernie supporters. You guys have been way ahead of us in that regard

Kudos

[revbones]

13. So without citing any examples, and given the history of Hillary followers crying wolf,

I'm inclined to not believe you. Thanks for playing though!

[longship]

12. If you want to watch a world really burn, look at Iraq.

This is just silly compared to that.

[hobbit709]

15. along with Syria, Libya, Honduras, etc.

[840high]

51. +1

[delrem]

23. Look at HRC's alignment with Kagan, Kissinger and Netanyahu. And weep for the Dem party!

Weep for it!
But don't go along with that neocon shit.

[R B Garr]

14. Bernie is nothing but ego at this point. He loves the limelight.

I had to laugh at Sarandon saying Bernie had no ego. His debate performances are just himself acting as maestro, waving his arms around to command attention. He doesn't care about the party, just himself.

[dogman]

19. Hell yes! After just hanging around for 70+ years, why not?

You have no idea how foolish your statement is.

[R B Garr]

25. Yes, hanging around for 70 years is very foolish.

He could have started a strategy back in 1976 to run for the White House, but he never bothered.

Jury: I only mentioned 70 years old in response to the previous post that mentioned it.

[dogman]

29. OK

Wonder what your life will be like at that age? Are you setting up your campaign now?

[R B Garr]

31. Bill Clinton did it. Barack Obama did it.

Bernie has been in Establishment politics for decades.

His campaign touts his civil rights creds from the 60's.

[dogman]

34. So he didn't want to then, so he can't now?

Maybe you should notify him that he is breaking the rules.

[R B Garr]

41. He obviously didn't want it bad enough to actually fight

for it. Kind of makes him look unserious, which he basically is. His stump speeches are ego fulfillment.

[brush]

53. Well, you have to admit joining the Dem party only 8 months ago and . . .

expecting to win against a long established candidate was not ideal.

He got much more exposure in the TV debates, sure, unlike if he had stayed an independent. No one would have heard of him outside of New England.

That part of his strategy of joining the Dems worked but he should have joined and worked in the party long ago. Many still see him as an independent, and quite frankly, somewhat of an opportunist.

But at least he's said that he will back Hillary if he doesn't win the nomination. We can't, unfortunately say the same about many of his supporters.

[dogman]

59. Timing is everything.

This is the year of the outsider. I liked Bernie but had no idea he would last long enough to make my Primary. My wife supported Hillary, as we both had in 2008. I told her that if he was viable when he reached our state, I would likely vote for him. By the time he reached our state she had switched to Bernie and suggested we donate. We were both able to vote for a candidate we never believed would make it this far because he actually did. We are both Democrats who were disillusioned by the Party's conduct against Hillary in the 2008 Primary. What irony, the people who slammed Hillary then, support her now. I supported her then even though she was a corporatist because I knew Obama was also. At least I felt that she was more open about it. Now we fight the same people for Bernie that we fought for her then. Politics is a strange game.

[virtualobserver]

58. He cares about the people....it is the party that does not care about the people

[dogman]

16. I think Barrett Holmes Pitner has it wrong.

Susan Sarandon would like to prevent further global warming which is more likely to burn the world. I think the danger of war is more likely to burn the world. He should join the campaign for Bernie if he cares about the world and its people.

[LisaM]

30. If she cared about global warming...

why would she have worked against Al Gore? Instead, she worked for Nader. I do think she must be attracted to egoistic politicians.

[dogman]

44. Maybe She felt Nader was the better candidate to do that.

When Sam Donaldson suggested to Nader that Gore's views on the environment were much closer to his than Bush's were, Nader said that Gore could not "conform his deeds to his words," accused him of having only "linguistic differences" with Bush, and then asked: "Has Al Gore ever fought for any of these things, really?"
"He wrote a great book," Nader said of Gore, "but he can't put it in practice."

http://www.treehugger.com/treehugger-tv/ralph-nader-talks-about-global-warming-in-2000-15-sec.html

Differing opinions are allowed, or no?

All politicians are egotistic to some degree. It would be hard to survive in the political world without one. Name a President with out an ego. Jimmy Carter is probably the least egotistical and they skinned him alive because of that. Some like Bernie and Jimmy no how to control their ego and use it to help others.

[LisaM]

45. I don't find Jimmy Carter snd Bernie Sanders remotely alike n/t

[dogman]

48. First thing comes to mind is integrity.

Second they truly care about people and their welfare. They are thoughtful and intelligent men who spend most of their life in public service.

[840high]

52. Two very honest, caring men, who

love their country.

[delrem]

18. One million dead Arabs is enough. No HRC supporter can talk about saving the world from burning! nt

[Hydra]

22. That was, as George Carlin put it:

"Bombing brown people."

They don't count, according to "serious people."

[delrem]

24. Vote for this neocon, not that, because this one is a "D". What a disgrace! nt

[Hydra]

27. The biggest laugh is that the one with the "D" has been adopted by the Bush Family

We're literally having to fight the same war DU was built on inside our own party.

[delrem]

37. It does explain the "loyalty oath OP on DU" phenomenon, though.

They've got nothing else. Nothing. They sold everything else out.

[Hydra]

43. Yes, everything going on is totally logical

Repugnant, but logical.

Keep in mind that Clinton was never supposed to have anyone challenging her polling above 5%. A lot of what we are seeing is scrambling and improvising by Team Hill, so it's no wonder it's so clumsy. The only line was supposed to be: "Vote for Hillary, she's not Jeb!'

[AZ Progressive]

21. Hillary wants to watch the world burn

She WILL start World War III, she is a bloodthirsty neocon!

[CoffeeCat]

26. So, this entire thing begins and ends with Bernie supporters huh?

The DNC started this by offering up Hillary--someone that they know the Democratic base did not want. We rejected her in 2008. So, they offer her up again, knowing this. They didn't anticipate any political competitor who would give her a serious run--but here we are.

I know you like her. Good for you. But the reality is--so many in our party cannot stand Hillary.

And for the DNC to offer up such a candidate, and to outright abuse Bernie--with the stupid debate schedule and other advantages that Hillary had--was really shitty.

Look at how the media has treated Bernie and his supporters throughout the campaign. Bernie was blacked out from the media for the first few months of the campaign. It was ridiculous--living in Iowa and reading three stories a day about one event Hillary had with 200 attendees, and finding NOTHING when Bernie held a rally in which 2,000 attended. Hillary used her corporate connections and donors (Time Warner) to curry favor with them. That was unfair. Also, the Bernie Bro crap that you guys have perpetuated and drilled into us. Taunted us with. We're sexist. We're racist. We're monsters. Yeah. We get it. And now you cry that we don't like you OR your candidate. Ummm...hello?

And Hillary employs that pig David Brock. At the end of January 2016, Brock proclaimed, "Bernie Sanders doesn't really care about black people." Bernie hadn't even participated in the Iowa caucuses yet!! He hadn't even campaigned in a diverse state. He never had a chance. Brock made it so, and once again Hillary's cohorts in the media tried to sabotage Bernie and insist that the civil-rights picture of Bernie, wasn't really Bernie. Swift boat much?

You can't act his way---for months---and shovel shit at us nonstop for nearly a year now--and then whine and complain when we don't want to have anything to do with your candidate.

Like this needs to be explained!

But go ahead...blame us. Post articles about us wanting to watch the world burn---and absolve yourselves, the DNC, your candidate and David Brock of any and all possible responsibility.

I'm sure that will be effective.

[R B Garr]

36. She won the popular vote in 2008.

"We" didn't want her. LOL,

The rest of your post is just nasty cynicism. The Sanders supporters really believe their cynicism are "issues". Ugh. It's just so oppressively dark.

[CoffeeCat]

42. I'm sweetness and light!

And I'm commenting on an OP that accuses Bernie supporters of wanting to burn the world down.

Hello???

And yes, we didn't want her. Obama won the delegate count. He won the nomination--after starting out at 10 percent in the polls. He was barely known and had very little experience. Hillary was the favorite and the darling of the DNC, the one with all the experience who could answer that 3:00 a.m. phone call.

The 2008 dynamics and the 2016 dynamics are nearly identical.

She started out with the nomination, until voters whittled it down to the point where Obama won.

So, it definitely was a rejection.

[R B Garr]

47. It's nothing like 2008. It's the exact opposite.

Obama gained an early delegate lead in the Southern states. Bernie hasn't done that. It's the opposite. Hillary has the Southern states. The exact opposite of 2008.

And I remember Obama at the DEMOCRATIC convention in 2004 (was Bernie there?...) as the Keynote Speaker. He was magnificent; I fell back in my chair watching him. So he laid his groundwork and obviously had a superior and knowledgeable campaign staff that completely dominated and out manuevered Clinton. It wasn't just that the cynics rejected Hillary, which is your easy answer.

Like Bernie all you want, but so much of this Hillary hate is purely irrational cynicism. And this thread is about the cynics completely bashing the frontrunner and other Democrats. So the attention on Sanders' supporters is earned due to their hostility and negativity.

[HERVEPA]

28. Yeh, asshole terms like Berniac certainly help.

You'll win over a lot of people that way. But you don't really care about that, do you?

[nadinbrzezinski]

32. After you got called upon

you are bringing the propaganda?

This is hilarious by the way.

[beam me up scottie]

33. Oh who fucking cares? Enough with the high school DRAMA!

Last edited Wed Mar 30, 2016, 01:42 AM - Edit history (1)

Was last weekend so worrisome that Hillary supporters have to keep inventing poutrage to deflect from the issues?

[delrem]

38. It's going to get worse as Bernie sweeps the remaining states.

[Vote2016]

35. Anyone who really wanted to watch the world burn would vote for the warmonger

[jillan]

39. Bingo!!

[drm604]

40. She's wrong. I support Sanders and I completely disagree with Sarandon.

Please don't use one person to paint others with a broad brush just because she happens to be a celebrity.

I could not bring myself to NOT vote for the Democratic nominee.

[whirlygigspin]

46. I bet Nero had the same feeling

[840high]

56. Good man.

[AgadorSparticus]

55. Couldn't have said that any better. Of course voting is a right.

No one is saying people can't vote. But to think that letting Trump be POTUS is the same as Hillary is incredibly delusional. People are blinded by their hate of Hillary. That is NOT what Bernie envisioned. Hate should never be a driving force or an accomplice for any movement worth entertaining. I am going to repost the following from that article in the OP. It could not be better stated. Especially that last part:

#NeverHillary seems to be more popular than #NeverTrump among Sanders supporters, and this immediately must make one wonder about the true beliefs of the Vermont senator’s backers. Because if they are honestly willing to consider voting for, or at the very least not voting against, an egotistical megalomaniac with no true political ideology like Trump, who has thrived in an environment of fear, violence, ignorance and ridicule that is of his own creation, then they should not consider themselves to be socialists.

[blueintelligentsia]

60. Viva la Revolution!

[Juicy_Bellows]

65. Love the gif but they drove the car into the Grand Canyon.

I agree with the sentiment though!

[cloudythescribbler]

61. sarandon's remark harkens back to many earlier statements, like Leonard Bernstein in '68 ...

... suggesting that the election of Nixon would bring about the 'revolution'. It is a meme I call "radical perversity"

We all know how well that turned out in the case of Nixon (Jimmy Carter was hardly the revolution ...).

Then in 2004, highly regarded Marxist historian Gabriel Kolko wrote in Counterpunch how re-electing W Bush would promote a less "sustainable" imperialism than Kerry.
http://www.counterpunch.org/2004/09/11/elections-alliances-and-the-american-empire/

This kind of thinking, much more sophisticated in the case of Kolko, is the absolute opposite of what any radical who wants to build a mass progressive movement in the US needs to embrace. Even as a more radical vision is put forward in the midst of union organizing or election work for someone like Bernie Sanders, ANY decent grassroots organizer knows that "radical perversity" is a dead end, not only as a matter of principle but also as a matter of political exigency. It is the view of those who have little grassroots 'feel', who put what's inside their head over what goes on in the world -- a form of "idealism" in the political confusion sense.

It is however an excellent tool for illustration, for trying to convince folk that at least in swing states, it's more important to vote to stop trump than anything else on election day

I do respect (though I disagree with) those who argue that in getting people to vote for a candidate like Obama, or like Hillary Clinton if she's nominated, or for that matter like Kerry, is misleading people into the jaws of neoliberalism, when you need to earn the deeper respect of those you organize for your 'principles'. But to prefer the worse over the better, so as to promote a radical vision, or "radical perversity" is simply wrong AND stupid

[forjusticethunders]

70. Accelerationism isn't rooted in any actual concern for the worker

But basically to show off how radical the speaker is, all the while not giving a fuck about the real death and destruction that would rain down on the victims of this "strategy".

Yes Hillary's support of militarism has ravaged the Middle East. So the response is to allow someone like Cruz, who wants to make the Middle East glow in the dark, President?

[blackspade]

62. What a bunch of bullshit.

Sarandon speaks for herself.

Now if you want to talk about the world burning, well, where is Clinton on fracking, oil exploitation, climate change, eternal war, etc?

Answer: in the pocket of whoever will make some scratch from the death and destruction.

[HassleCat]

66. Some people will not voter for any and all Democrats.

Some voters dislike particular candidates enough abstain from voting or even vote for the other party. It's not a question of ego. An individual citizen may vote his or her conscience over the party. I hope most Democrats are loyal enough to vote for all Democratic candidates, but I refuse to criticize anyone for voting a particular way, even for the other party.

[dreamnightwind]

68. The world burners are the donors who fund both parties

This is literally true. More and more, people are figuring this out.

Our party needs to stop being the smiley face of oiligarchy, and get behind people who run on public money who will no longer use the U.S. as the military arm of the global capitalists who prefer massive profits over a sustainable inhabitable and peaceful planet.

We actually have a viable candidate who is running on this exact premise, who walks the walk and has done so his whole life.

All the rest is just bullying by the establishment to get us to accept more of the same destructive policies.

[Orsino]

71. Asking Sanders supporters whether they'd vote for Clinton is stupid and premature...

...akin to our idiot media's questioning primary candidates on whether they'd accept a VP slot.

Torches and pitchforks can come out after we have a nominee.

[Cha]

72. KICK!