This message was self-deleted by its author

[silvershadow]

This message was self-deleted by its author (silvershadow) on Wed Apr 20, 2016, 12:35 AM. When the original post in a discussion thread is self-deleted, the entire discussion thread is automatically locked so new replies cannot be posted.

[hrmjustin]

1. No she is being challenged. She is not a martyr.

[hrmjustin]

5. Challenged on her statement on Trump and Hillary.

[hrmjustin]

19. That is not what she said.

[hrmjustin]

24. She never said she would vote for Hillary if elected.

She said she did not know.

[JonLeibowitz]

27. Maybe she doesn't think Hillary is the likely Democratic nominee?

[Tanuki]

61. The question was explicitly about Clinton, in the event that she was the nominee.

[riversedge]

33. You need to review her original video or tape. You are wrong.

[riversedge]

10. So, when Sanders supports swarm Facebooks for Hillary surrogates are they Dixie-chicked??

[artislife]

23. Listen, the h supporters really aren't ready to make nice...

That is one of my all time favorite cds.

[revbones]

6. Dixie chicks said something directly about Bush

and got maligned. Sarandon says something that started with "Some people think..." and gets maligned.

Yep. Completely different.

[bettyellen]

69. she also has said thing directly about Clinton, but you KNOW that is NOT the issue here?

It's gleefully talking about the collapse. And punctuating it with a chuckle. Not too smart.

[Jarqui]

12. No but if they're going to challenge her, it should be on something she actually said.

This business of media claiming she said she would support Trump if he was up against Clinton is not accurate.

[NWCorona]

13. You hold the Dixie Chics in that high of regard?

Challenged I agree with and I hope she holds strong!

[hrmjustin]

21. yes I do and she is no Dixie Chic.

[NWCorona]

30. I'm not a "new country" kind of guy but I respect their craft.

They also went up a few pegs when they spoke out.

I wouldn't call them martyrs tho.

[hrmjustin]

32. I am not into country but I respect their work as well.

[TheBlackAdder]

48. Ahh, using a Ronald Reagan style quote, how Reagan-esque. nt

.


I keep seeing that rainbow H symbol, and reflect back on when she came around...

When it was safe, after others took the political hit.


.

[Tanuki]

59. Actually, he's riffing on a quote by Sen. Lloyd Bentsen, a Democrat, who famously originated

the line during a debate with Dan Quayle when he was running on the Dukakis ticket as the vice presidential candidate. It was a great line, and Reagan and others used it later. Are we still allowed to quote famous Democrats without being mocked and insulted on Bernie Underground?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Senator,_you're_no_Jack_Kennedy

[TheBlackAdder]

81. Ronald Reagan: I knew Thomas Jefferson, and Governor, You're no Thomas Jefferson!

.

Yes, LLoyd Bentsen stole that from Reagan too!

.

[Tanuki]

85. Nope, you are wrong. You can look it up in the Wikipedia link in my previous post.

Here is the Lloyd Bentsen tour de force, four years before your clip of Reagan. This is very well known, so there is no point in your doubling down on it. Reagan's remark was funny because by then everyone knew the Lloyd Bentsen quote.

[cui bono]

75. Challenged? No, she is being misquoted and smeared.

[riversedge]

3. Poor baby. You make her out to be a victim. ha ha.

[revbones]

8. Well, when she's attacked for now reason, then she's a victim.

Just because it's people that supposedly are Democrats, doesn't make it any less vile.

[NWCorona]

18. Why so dismissive?

[djean111]

4. Eventually, EVERYBODY who doesn't support Hillary will be Dixie-Chicked.

IMO, a badge of honor.

[tularetom]

34. Yeah, like snails

Slimy and sticky.

[DanTex]

7. LOL. I must have missed the coordinate right-wing business campaign to ruin her career.

She said something incredibly stupid, and now she's getting heat. If she doesn't like the heat, she can stop saying stupid pro-Trump things.

[Blue_Adept]

11. You mean they're finally going to take her off the radio?

Or do you mean that all her movies are now being blacklisted by the industry?

Cause if you mean that some internet posters are being mean to her, you misremember that Dixie Chicks situation greatly.

[muriel_volestrangler]

72. Aha - there's your problem. You don't know what happened to the Dixie Chicks

and that's why so many people are telling you you're wrong.

What you need to do is learn how to use an analogy - you need a situation where there is a parallel between the new situation and the one you are referring to. You have made the mistake of using a different scenario.

[Tanuki]

15. I miss the unrec button at times like this.

[BernieforPres2016]

16. I remember that the Dixie Chicks were Dixie Chicked by the Republicans

Times have changed. Susan Sarandon's progressive credentials are much more unassailable than Hillary Clinton's or any of her supporters.

[onehandle]

17. She wasn't 'Dixie-Chicked' after she helped elect George W. Bush.

So why would this do it?

Ironically, the Dixie Chicks attacked George W. Bush.

[Gidney N Cloyd]

80. As does Ms. Sarandon. nt

[7wo7rees]

29. Not quite. Similar more to Jane Fonda. Sort of.

Dixie Chicks were ruined .

Susan stands strong. The Chicks were strong, but very young. Susan, no stranger to controversy.

[Tanuki]

41. Susan's milieu is also Hollywood 2016, where her Bernie support will cost her nothing in terms

of her career, and will in fact punch her ticket to the cool kids club. No thinking person would compare that to what the Dixie Chicks faced back then. To compare a few sniping remarks from strangers on the internet to the boycotts, death threats, blacklisting and refusal of country radio to play their songs, resulting in the destruction of their once top-flight careers, is clueless and deeply offensive. Really, this is almost as classless as Donald Trump comparing his time in a military-themed boarding school in New York to combat veterans.

[jillan]

31. I don't understand why either. What she said is not nearly as offensive as what Madeline Albright

said.

[jillan]

38. I will never forget at the PBS debate when Hillary was given the opportunity to apologize to women

who support Bernie for Albright's remark and Hillary said that she cannot be held responsible for remarks made by a supporter.


The hypocrisy by those that are attacking Susan is unreal.

[Tanuki]

43. No she isn't. Hillary Clinton is the "likely" candidate. Faux coyness about Sarandon's

remarks becomes you even less than it does Sarandon herself.

[Tanuki]

45. Chris Hayes' question wasn't some vague query about "the likely candidate."

He asked specifically what she would do if Clinton is the nominee. Don't play dumb.

[beedle]

93. and she said she didn't know.

If Hillary is the nominee and come Nov she is up by 10% and there is no danger of electing a Trump, then as a protest vote it would be perfectly valid to vote 3rd party.

Or maybe the Republicans have a big fight during the convention and they nominate someone more progressive than Hillary (could happen, since Hillary is basically a Republican anyway, so she can't be the most 'progressive' Republican in the world) and Susan (and the rest of intelligent Democrats and independents) decide that the most progressive presidential candidate is not Hillary. (ok, just kidding .... maybe?)

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

36. Yep. Joe McCarthy has taken up residence on DU.

[cui bono]

37. She's actually being swift-boated since she never said what they are saying she said.

Lawrence O'Donnell had a segment about it and showed that she did NOT say what Hillary supporters are purporting. They got too emotional and didn't understand that she was talking about what other people were saying, or they jumped at an opportunity to slander someone in order to smear a Bernie supporter and then make yet another demand that he denounce something that NEVER OCCURRED.

Meanwhile, they care not that their candidate lies constantly.

.

[Blue_In_AK]

63. I keep pointing that out, as well.

She said she'd have to think about whether to vote for Clinton, not that she wouldn't. She also never said that she wanted Donald Trump to be president.

[cui bono]

76. Exactly. She said "people are saying..." about Trump bringing the revolution quicker.

The Lawrence O'Donnell piece with Nina Turner and Thom Hartmann explained the facts very well. I was glad to have caught it on satellite radio on my way home as I don't have cable tv.

.

[wyldwolf]

39. Not even close

The Dixie Chicks were effectively banned from country music radio for their statements.

Anyone banning Sarandon from anything? Has she lost work over her statements?

[Gregorian]

42. Nobody talks back. Nobody resists. Or else.

And this was a very poor "or else".

The truth is, the MSM is realizing it's own obsolescence. The real world is discussing this far from the tv cameras. We've created out own infrastructure, and as a result a new narrative. One which reflect reality.

Yes, they tried to smear her. It didn't work. We know that she's smart.

[LexVegas]

46. ...

[Bobbie Jo]

50. No she isn't.

Her life and/or career won't suffer in the least, and that's no matter who ends up in the White House.

Which is actually the point some of us are trying to make here.

No, she is NOT being "Dixie Chicked."

[senz]

51. Leftist women don't stand a chance.

Establishment males go all out to squash them. Conservative men don't like uppity women of any sort, but challenging them in the traditionally alpha male domain of politics is insubordination that cannot be tolerated.

[Downwinder]

52. Virtually tarred and feathered.

[alcibiades_mystery]

53. An untrained and careless spokeperson expressed herself in a silly way

That's all that happened. It's not that complicated. As it turns out, discussing politics in an official or broadcast capacity requires training, like everything else. You go off half-cocked, you end up looking stupid. That's all that happened to Sarandon. Same as it ever was.

[silvershadow]

54. She isn't a "spokesperson". Nice try. She is an individual voter. nt

[alcibiades_mystery]

56. She's untrained and sounded like a "Heighten the Contradictions" style dumbass

She's untrained, so it's not surprising that she stepped in a big pile of her own shit.

[silvershadow]

58. And yet, she is not a spokesperson. nt

[Bluenorthwest]

55. They are McCarthyists, pure and simple. They are the Reagan Democrats. Conservative and reactionary.

nt

[Bluenorthwest]

66. All these people fuming at Susan were sanguine about Hillary's love song to Ron and Nancy

[Californeeway]

57. She thinks people like me should suffer

Until our suffering radicalized us enough that we are ready to support her vision of a socialist utopia. I reject that as incredibly arrogant, heartless, even authoritarian.

And she speaks for a lot of people in the activist Left. Many of them root for America to dissolve into chaos and widespread suffering so it will be easier for them to jam their agenda down everyone's throat without having to win votes. I consider myself pretty Liberal and that means caring about what happens to working people -not seeing them as collateral damage in my crusade to reshape society after my own image.

The Bernie coalition can't understand why her statement was so offensive and will defend her rigorously. But in doing so they reveal how tonedeaf their zealousness has made them.

[Bluenorthwest]

65. Except she said none of that, and your candidate spent years citing her Christian faith when

demanding LGBT be refused civil rights. That faith says those who falsely present the words of another are basically condemned, Jesus himself said such verbiage comes from evil. I can't stand people who preen about claiming they have religious standards they do not follow.

I reject slime, lies and character destruction as a form of political revenge for simple opinion. You favor a candidate who opposed my rights. Shall I characterize that for you? It sounds pretty horrific when you use the right words....such as the words Hillary herself used.

[Californeeway]

82. You don't know who my candidate is

. I don't really want either of them: one is to far to the center, one is too far to the left. Neither one really speaks for me but I know I'd prefer either over our other options and my criticism of Susan Sarandon has only to do with her and comes from the heart. I don't give a shit about scoring points against Bernie. I like him but I'm being honest with myself: the Left has gotten weird over the last few years for lack of better terms. I'm really alienated by it. It's gotten so radical and just absolutely nihilist and destructive compared to how it was in the Bush years. I can't stand the way so much of this sort of Liberaltarian know-nothing anti-establishment types have dictated the tone. Too many people just spewing bumper sticker slogans and trying to pass it off as thinking. I live in SF supposedly some liberal bastion but the truth is most people here are very liberal as a pose. They don't give give a crap about working class people, they just wanna look cool. Susan personifies that heartless arrogance perfectly with her words. Try to parse it however but it just makes it look like you're ready to toss me to the wolves too. But maybe chalk it up to surrogates going off the reservation and saying offensive crap that their candidate would never say. Bernie deserves better. I mean that in multiple ways.

[liberal_at_heart]

77. How about those that have been suffering ever since Reagan and the Democrats who are

financially comfortable don't seem to care. How about those who suffer cuts to WIC, food stamps, or receive absolutely no COLA to their SS even though cost of living is going up? Democrats support spending trillions on war, refuse to talk about raising taxes, and what happens when there is not enough tax revenue to pay for social services? Social services get cut. Poverty rates keep increasing and the middle class is practically non existent. Those that advocate pragmatism and incremental change have had over 30 years to prove that it works. It has done nothing but made things worse for millions. It is time for radical change. Eventually enough people will starve that there will be a tipping point. Eventually there will be a point of no return. We, Bernie supporters are doing EXACTLY what we are suppose to do which is try to make change through our political system. But the rich and powerful that have bought our political system won't make the changes the people want. If they do not allow us to make changes through our political system it will be time for civil disobedience. And if that doesn't work, which I as a peace loving person hope it does, but if it does not work eventually it will lead to violent unrest. I really do hope it does not come to that but if we look back through history when the rich hoard all the money and the average citizens starve, the starving citizens will eventually fight back.

[treestar]

84. Good post.

Exactly.

The voting public is not as liberal as they are and rather than accept that and try to persuade people, they want to find a way to force it. And that's authoritarian.

[JoePhilly]

62. Only Hillary supporters can be attacked for what they say during interviews on TV.

Everyone knows that!!!

[JoePhilly]

70. Yea, I heard she walked her comments back some. Good for her.

[one_voice]

73. She's not being

Dixiechicked. Their careers were ruined. They were black listed. They received death threats, their kids were harassed.

She's not being attacked--opinions are being offered about what she said. That's still allowed here.

Just as when Albright & Steinem said what they did opinions were offered about what was said.

This is a discussion board. Things are discussed. Some we like some we don't.

Before I'm accused of all kinds of nonsense, this was my comment

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1604079

[bettyellen]

67. the Dixie Chicks wanted to "Bern it down"?!?! Wow. News to me.

What do they have in common with Sarandon again?

[WhiteTara]

68. THe Dixie Chicks were blackballed by REPUBLICAN/CONSERVATIVES/TEABAGGERS

Sarandon is being challenged by democrats for saying Trump would be a good thing for us. I call bullsh*t

[CalvinballPro]

71. Shouldn't her endorsement of IWR sponsor John Edwards in 2008 disqualify her opinion?

[Attorney in Texas]

74. Dixie Chicks attacked for what they said. Sarandon attacked for something she didn't even say

It is a familiar right-wing tactic to attack someone for something they didn't do.

It is disheartening but not the least bit surprising that the Hillary campaign is attacking Sarandon for saying she supported Trump which she never said nor implied (and which Chris Hayes, host of the show where the interview occurred, dismissed implausible).

Sarandon said she would wait and see how she would vote in a Hillary vs. Trump contest. If she did support Trump, that would be her own fucking business and not warrant an attack, but it is a thousand times more likely that Sarandon would either not vote in the presidential race, or would vote for Jill Stein, or would write in Sanders, or would -- no longer very likely -- come around to the idea of voting for a luke warm Hillary.

Remember, Hillary's campaign is not new to such tactics:



Clinton aides claim Obama photo wasn't intended as a smear

[liberal_at_heart]

78. And yet Bernie is the one that needs to tone it down.

[Eleanors38]

79. Let's saran-wrap this issue and stick it in the back of the fridge.

[treestar]

83. Does that mean people are not going to her movies any more?

And the movie business is now refusing to hire her?

That's being Dixie Chicked.

[MrWendel]

86. Dixie Chicks...

were attacked for challenging a conservative. Psycho Sue is being challenged for wanting to ride Trump when Hillary gets the Nomination.

[LostOne4Ever]

87. She is being swift boated

[font style="font-family:'Georgia','Baskerville Old Face','Helvetica',fantasy;" size=4 color=#009999]People are putting words in her mouth she never said to make political points.

At this point, it not even about being overly-emotional and mistakenly thinking she said those things. They know they are completely misrepresenting her and simply do not care.

It is pretty despicable, but par for course for those who only care about their tribe winning.[/font]

[RandySF]

88. She's just feeling the bern

Of her batshit remarks.

[joshcryer]

89. Most Americans remember the Bush years. They are anti-Naderism.

Anyone, and I mean anyone who mentions PUMA, BOB, it the Nader strategy is highly privileged, out of touch with reality, and generally not credible.

Everyone saying Clinton will lose to Trump, and there are dozens of them posting here, just laughable.

[KingFlorez]

90. As someone who is in the 1%, I think she can survive some critcism

[workinclasszero]

91. You are wrong

The Dixie Chicks hated Bush like all sane people do and the right wing made them pay for it.


Susan Sarandon GAVE US Bush by supporting Nader, and now shes trying to give us Herr Trump because shes a Hillary hater!

I'm sure she can comfort herself from criticism the same way she did when she got Bush elected President.

She will just go to one of her many mansions and count all that damn lovely money she has!

[beam me up scottie]

94. "Susan Sarandon GAVE US Bush" You spelled SCOTUS wrong.

History is hard.

[cosmicone]

92. She put her foot in her mouth and paid for it n/t