But if your group is so wide that people so different as H.Clinton and Chomsky could be inside it, and you talk about their motivations instead of a specific idea, I think you deserve some criticism.
that's like suggesting that saying modern conservatives have a hard-on for forgiving/accepting aggressive foreign policy is unfair. Political wings definitely have trends.
"The modern Right is dripping with hatred for the Government - quite ironic given that we live in one the most free, prosperous societies ever created in human history. They are driven almost entirely by resentment, and lack even a shred of gratitude for the vast wealth, comfort and freedom they've been born into."
You could ask me, and rightly so, who is this "modern right" and if I'm being fair when addressing their motivations.
You could ask me, also rightly, how the debate advance in a positive way with this kind of all covering statements.
but hatred for the government isn't an archetypal right-wing sentiment. Perhaps a libertarian one, to which I would agree (or maybe not hatred, more distrust). Is your main point that the GP said "modern left" where they should have said "progressive" or "far-left"?
There's no real way of describing the Clintons as "left" that would satisfy any self-described leftist. They just have no connection whatsoever to any historical leftist movement.
that depends entirely on what you would call "left". She may not be an activist but her espoused policies were very similar to Obama's implemented policies, and she was on his cabinet after all. You can call her an opportunist for sure, but you couldn't reasonably call her a conservative.