People like Susan Sarandon make more sense when you understand their real motives.

[JCanete]

30. Democrats need an active left that challenges them. You simply cannot blame our party's failures to

do the right thing at numerous times in the past on the left. Frankly, the only reason the Democratic party still has something going for it is because there are voters and activists who refuse to give the party unquestioning loyalty, and as such, it continues to have to chase that voter base and challenge its own status-quo.

The Democratic party has been historically weak on calling out the money and corporations for the last 30 years, and that has a whole lot more to do with why we lose elections than people like Susan Sarandon, but you don't care about any of that. If you were at least being honest, you would take the strongest interpretation and deconstruct it, rather than your straw-man version of her position.

It isn't that some people think its okay for suffering to rack the world...its that they think our trajectory makes that suffering unavoidable... that unless we do wake up while we can still do something...it will be too late. You can disagree with that logic. You can try, desperately to point to the good things we've been doing as a nation over the last 30 years, but I've got to tell you, that field is pretty bleak. Still, if you focused on why her approach is too dangerous or why she's simply wrong about the state of the world, I would be able to trust your intentions.

Instead, it comes across to me that you want to vilify people on the left who don't shut up and go away. We aren't even capable of nuance any more. Sarandon and Nader bad. Screw the things they fought for that you agree with...the things they fought for when few people with a voice were standing with them...it's all about whether or not they badmouthed your beloved candidate or party.

It is possible to disagree with somebody and to do so respectfully, but these posts seem intended to shame or silence criticism.