The Bernie riddle

imageThere are few genuine people in politics. Someone once suggested that politicians wear insignias on their suits for their sponsors, like race care drivers. That’s a clever thought, but pointless, as in real politics the insignias would be lies too. Real sponsors would remain hidden.

Politics is not just duplicity, but double and triple duplicity. Thus if a mystery is uncovered, it was probably planted and meant to be uncovered to further the mystery. Politics a most fascinating avenue of inquiry. What is real?

Take Bernie Sanders, for instance. He is one of a dozen or so Jewish senators. He is a self-proclaimed socialist. That’s all fine, and he could as easily be a Mormon and self-proclaimed Randian. That is all window dressing. There are no ideologies in politics. There are only interests.

Who is Bernie, really? We should always hold out for the possibility that he is really what he says he is. But in addition, we should always hold out for the possibility that he is not. It is, after all, politics.

“Socialists” are not allowed to survive in real politics. While socialism is widely practiced here and abroad, we do not like to describe ourselves as such. So normally a self-described animal of that stripe would not attain the necessary stature and name recognition to survive even in the House of Representatives, much less the U.S. Senate.  For Bernie to make the jump from obscurity to the senate required some juice.

That probably means he is something far more common in politics than a genuine person, “controlled opposition.” In real politics, where power comes only from money backers, the players are stationed like pawns in a chess board.

Bernie decided to run for president. It’s quixotic. What possible good comes of it? When genuine people run, say a Dennis Kucinich, they are marginalized. They are not mentioned by name in the polls (“others”). They are never, ever, allowed to “surge.” If they do gain momentum, they are taken down.

It might help the reader to follow the candidacies of two people who might indeed have been genuine, Gary Hart and Howard Dean. Each was gaining favor, running well. Each was taken down, Hart by scandal, Dean by power of suggestion, an organized medial blitz where a common exhortation speech to followers became his undoing.

So in following the Bernie campaign, keep this in mind: If he is genuine, he will be taken down. If he is not, he’ll be promoted. But his purpose is something other than what is apparent. He is not running for president. He is serving another purpose.

Then we have a mystery to solve: For whom doth Bernie toil? It will became apparent with time. Presidential selection always precedes presidential election in our fake republic. In my view, and of course I do not see all or know all, Jeb Bush has been selected as our next president.

But I can be fooled, think too much, make reaches. I could be wrong. It could be that the selection is waiting in the wings, another savior awaits coronation.

This much I know: Bernie receives high notoriety, mention in the polls and news coverage. That does not happen to genuine people.
PS: The reader might infer from this that I am claiming we have not only bought politicians, but also a controlled news media.

Well, duh.
PPS: A commenter makes the point that Bernie could be running merely to bring progressives back into the system after having dropped off the voting roles in the eight years of Obama’s brand of right winging his way. Bernie gets them to register, and then they will be available to vote for Hillary after he drops out. Could be. What do I know?

10 thoughts on “The Bernie riddle

  1. The illusionists have a problem: voter turnout. The illusion of democracy, or The Republic, must not be revealed — at least not yet. I’m guessing a large percentage of Bernie’s active supporters have not participated in recent elections. After the 2000 Bush v. Gore spectacle it’s become harder and harder to fool a majority of eligible voters to care about electoral politics, or government in general. What the Tea Party did for the Right, Bernie will serve the not-so-right who imagine themselves as “liberal” or “progressive.”

    It is hard for me to think of recent events in Cyprus (bank “bail-ins”) and Greece (fake liberal-left party wins election– then loses everything to EU central banks and IMF) as isolated events. Could these be harbingers of our own post-another-meltdown fate?

    ps. I do not believe “socialism” exists as it is commonly defined. The “Third Way” or corporatism seems a more appropriate definition of what, in fact, is.


  2. Both Hart and Dean were doomed by their own stupidity. Hart said to the press follow me around town, I’m not a sleaze. The press took the challenge and caught him in the act.
    Dean screamed at the end of one of his speeches during the campaign and it was played continually on the new and old media. Made him look deranged.

    Both men would’ve been elected if they’d been more discrete.


      1. He says of course the theories are bunk. But how would he know this without looking at evidence? He is just another person who cannot think properly but imagines that not thinking is the proper way to think. He is stupid.


    1. That’s surface features. All politicians are vulnerable. Many are called, few are chosen. It is the “chosen” that is the subject of real politics. Do you really think that Gary Hart is the only guy chasing easy women in a world that offers two before breakfast?


    2. For instance, Larry Craig, it had to be understood that he was closet gay, so that that weapon could always be held over his head. Then the proper question is “What did he do to bring it down on himself?”

      It is understood that most male politicians are chasing skirts, as it is a cesspool. Most members of congress have, I assume, been honey trapped.

      So that when one gets caught, like Gary Hart, and all the others skate free, the proper attitude is not to demean him for getting caught, but to ask who took him down and why.


      PS: Max Baucus, notorious skirt chaser, using his staff on his staff, was never called up on it. Why?


  3. Hart confronted and chastised the media, poked the tiger with a stick. Max did neither. That and it was in ’87, a different time.

    “It was in April of 1987 that former Senator Gary Hart announced the beginning of his second presidential campaign. Less than a month later, the Miami Herald published a photo of a young woman leaving Hart’s residence. The candidate expressed outrage at the paper, but within a week the Herald received tips that Hart had visited Bimini with a woman who was not his wife, then published photos showing a 29-year-old model, Donna Rice, sitting on Hart’s lap. Less than a week later, Hart announced he was dropping out of the race (he would later re-enter, unsuccessfully).”-Times


    1. Try as I will, I cannot explain politics to you! Of course all of that happened. You’re reading newspaper articles as if they are connected to anything true.

      But you do not get politics at all. Anybody in politics can have a scandal. They all have skeletons, girl friends, boyfriends, secret bank accounts … am I reaching you at all?


      1. She most likely moved her email correspondence to a personal server to keep her ass out of jail. But in our fake republic, officials rarely have to follow the law. Something strange going on here – not her behavior, as she is corrupt as can be. That the news media is actually following the story … Hmmmm. They are on a tight leash, and someone loosened it.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s