It’s interesting to watch the foreign press try and explain away American  politics.    The Guardian today is running two pieces that caught my attention, one entitled “The phony In American politics – How voters turn into suckers.”   The other is “Bernie Sanders / 10 reasons why voters are turning to the Democratic candidate.”

Yes, our campaign seasons are far too long.   Yes, something must be done to control campaign contributions.   And yes, much of our public is poorly informed.  If we have a common failure, it’s that many of us seem to vote with our hearts instead of our heads, that more than ever before we tend to read and listen to those who  agree with our personal biases, which is bad.  No question about it.  But there’s something else.

In the U.S.,  it isn’t enough to go for the whole pie or even one slice.   Here, you have to go after the whole damn bakery.   If you do, you might end up getting a fraction of a slice.    Maybe an eighth of a slice if you’re lucky.   Or possibly nothing at all.

Consider President Obama, elected for eight years but getting only two for effective governance before being stonewalled by an increasingly intransigent and hopelessly deadlocked Neocon-influenced and shrinking but well financed Republican Party as the ineffectivness of our two party system becomes ever more apparent while the government is bought out from under our very feet.

If someone has a solution to that one, I’d love to hear it.   Oh wait.   Fixing that very problem is at the heart of Bernie Sanders platform, isn’t it?   Another of Bernie’s positions HRC recently adpoted in an attempt to make her campaign seem more progressive  than it really is.  Never mind.  (With thanks to Emily Litella)

Hillary Clinton, should have blown Bernie Sander’s campaign train right off the tracks.   Didn’t happen.  Instead, she beat herself up trying to win the state of Iowa, and ended up in a virtual tie with a candidate who just months ago was down more than 30 points.

According to “Politico,” Sanders drew 84% of the vote of caucus-goers under the age of 30.   If that holds, and if the kids, many of them motivated by the crushing cost of higher education and an absence of decent jobs once they earn their degrees, turn out in significant numbers, then this is going to be very interesting – beyond the hills, hollers and evangelical backwoods vote of South Carolina and those who put their trust in emotionally-charged blind faith rather than the issue-oriented reality of what actually is.

Wasn’t it wonderful to see the cable news channels obessing about something other than ISIS, Boko Haram and the gospel of fear?    Some months ago,  a friend posted a note on Facebook, claiming that any American is more likely to die from being hit by a falling branch, than at the hands of a terrorist.  He’s a solid journalist, so I think it’s probably true.  Of course, that kind of balanced thinking wouldn’t drive the ratings like fear-based rhetoric does.   What a relief to have the political process wash away all that fear, if only for a while.

As for the Donald, I’m no David Brooks fan, but Mr. Brooks wrote a wonderfu piece in today’s NY Times, reminding his readers of Trump’s background in professional wrestling.  Brooks’ contention is that Trump has simply taken the verbal abuse technique used by wrestlers and applied it to the political arena.  He may be right.  He also contends, that “Donald Trump, isn’t real.”  He may be right about that too.

The thing about Bernie Sanders, is that he’s the real deal.   The genuine article, who came from so far back in the pack that he was barely even visible on the horizon.    And now he’s nose-to-nose with the Clinton Machine and her good friend Debbie Wasserman Schultz.

After being discounted for months by both the Democratic Party and the pundits, Bernie Sanders has arrived, and he’s sounding more and more like FDR.  I see it as cause for hope.   A shot at a new day for America, trending towards egalitarianism and away from the neo-feudalism the Republican heirarchy so badly wants.

The more America gets to know Bernie Sanders, the more his support is likely to grow.  At the very least, it is going to be a very interesting contest.

A few specifics keep rolling around in my head, refusing to leave.   If I write them down maybe they’ll stop demonizing me.

Disinformation.   Misinformation.  Lies.  Dissapointment. Disgust. George Orwell’s ghost.    Emotional and intellectual exhaustion.  Resignation.  Failure.

I had stopped watching the pundits in favor of concert videos, international news and British shows on PBS and was dealing with it pretty well in my own way until I read about the upcoming demolition of the old Washington Post building.    A former cathedral to the truth that is being torn down to make way for what will surely be a more “cost-effective” structure, far more suitable for the digital age we are being thrust into with little or no regard for the outcome.

Why waste all that paper and ink, not to mention blowing millions on investigative reporting?   It takes up so much time and costs so much and besides, nobody really cares about any of that heavy duty crap in our current environment, anyway.   We’re all about feelings in this era of “citizen journalism” on the Web and the super-hyped 24 hour news cycle on commercial tv.   Emotion and not reason is the driver of ad-rates.   It also wins elections.   People vote because of their feelings, not the facts.

In the words of Donald Trump, “People want to believe that something is the biggest and greatest and the most spectacular.”   There it is,  exactly the kind of moderate and well-reasoned thinking we need in a chief executive.

I thought about the old Los Angeles Times building and all it represents and wondered how long it will last.  I’ve been told the Chandlers used an extra-heavy mixture of concrete on the structure, to ensure that it would stand forever in spite of SoCal’s numerous quakes.  I’m sure it won’t, but they’ll have one bitch of a time knocking it down.   Which eventually, they probably will.   A developer will come in with a pile of money and numerous projections on how much more profitable the property will be if they tear down the Times and put  up some aesthetically mind-numbing mixed-use structure entirely lacking in tradition and therefore with little or no cultral meaning.

Traditon and culture only define who we are as a people.  Who needs that?  Let’s knock it down.   Just like the old Washington Post.  Nobody knows who Woodward and Bernstein are anymore, anyway.   Ben Bradlee?   Who the hell’s Ben Bradlee?

Leave me alone and tear it down.  The Republican debate is about to come on.  God knows what Trump will say next.   That’ll be fun.  Bernie who?  Oh, that old white commie guy from Vermont?

People don’t know all that much about Bernie Sanders, because he’s being largely shut out by the corporate-owned media which is tearing down the Washington Post and offering yet another round of buyouts to older and therefore more experienced reporters and editors at the Los Angeles Times .   The death of our great newspapers is a critical problem for the Republic, because most of our real news (other than meaningless fires, local crime and entertianment) originates from newspaper reporters who go out and dig it up in the public interest.   However, most of America gets most of its news from the tube which is more about profits than serving the public good.    This is frightening, because, as the Sander’s campaign recently pointed out, Bernie Sanders continues to be largely shut-out by network news operations-

 “Sen. Bernie Sanders has made big gains in Iowa, leads most New Hampshire polls and fares better than Hillary Clinton in general election matchups against Donald Trump and other Republican White House hopefuls.

But the insurgent campaign that has drawn the biggest crowds on the presidential campaign trail has been all but ignored on the flagship television network newscasts, according to Tyndall Report, which tracks nightly news coverage by NBC, CBS and ABC.

“The corporately-owned media may not like Bernie’s anti-establishment views but for the sake of American democracy they must allow for a fair debate in this presidential campaign,” said Jeff Weaver, Sanders’ campaign manager. “Bernie must receive the same level of coverage on the nightly news as other leading candidates.”

ABC’s “World News Tonight” has devoted 81 minutes to Donald Trump’s campaign so far this year compared to a mere 20 seconds on Sanders through the end of November. NBC’s “Nightly News” afforded 2.9 minutes of coverage to Sanders since January. The “CBS Evening News” provided viewers 6.4 minutes of coverage on the Vermont senator.

“The network newscasts are wildly overplaying Trump, who regularly attracts between 20-30 percent of primary voter support, while at the same time wildly underplaying Sanders, who regularly attracts between 20-30 percent of primary voter support,” according to a report Friday by the journalism watchdog group Media Matters for America analyzing the Tyndall report data.

Media Matters called the lack of coverage of Sanders a “rather stunning revelation.”’ – Sanders for President Campaign

Dissapointment.  Resignation.  Failure.

How little people know  and how badly misinformed they’ve beome hit me the other night when, following dinner, I was informed by an acquaintence that “Obama, hasn’t done well by us at all!”  She couldn’t provide any specifics.   She just doesn’t like the man, who, she charged, has gotten away with political murder by signing executive actions.  She had no specifics, she just knows that’s what Obama has done.  When I pointed out that George W. Bush signed more executive actions than Barack Obama, she had nothing to say.    Just that I was entitled to my opinon.  I told her it wasn’t my opinion, it is fact.

Resignation.  Failure.   Saying the hour was late, I excused myself and left.

The thing about talking to people who are being misinnformed by a corporate media that’s far more interested in profits than in keeping the public adequately informed, is that after a while, you begin to doubt yourself.   You start to think that maybe they’re right and you’re wrong.   Even though through years of training and discipline you try and dig down to the truth by using legitimate sources rather than corporate newspeak which, in our current environment, dictates that calling out  a politician for being an abject liar is a type of “thoughtcrime” that must be avoided.  So you look it up again, and find the following with regard to the number of executive actions signed by the various presidents.

Ronald Reagan    381

George H.W. Bush   166

Bill Clinton   364

George W. Bush    291

Barack Obama   147

The number for Mr. Obama, is through the first 40 months of his presidency.   At the time it was being claimed that he had signed 923 executive orders.  It was a widely distributed lie.  Some out there continue to believe it.    Just as they continue to believe that thousands of Muslims cheered in New Jersey, when  the World Trade Center fell.   Or that Mr. Obama, was born in Kenya, and on and on.

With such a vast pool of ignorance supported by some, but not all of the media, it’s difficult not to be resigned to failure.   This is particularly painful for those of us who can remember that not so very long ago our government was held accountable for providing a level playing field for all.   One wonders if that’s even possible at this juncture in our technological and ideological march towards the unknown.

The first great Democratic Party debate has come to a close and former Labor Secretary and now Professor Robert Reich is probably correct in his assessment when he says he doubts that it “changed any minds.”   Well,  some, maybe.  This, after all, was the first time many Americans got a good look at Bernie Sanders and were able to at least begin to get a grip on his thinking, even if he came up short on explaining exactly what a democratic socialist is.   That’s a pretty big deal, proclaiming you’re a socialist who is running for president in a country where many have been programmed to believe that Socialism is a dirty word.

What’s Bernie really about?   Does he favor a so-called “mixed economy,” with Socialism and regulated Capitalism standing side-by-side?   If so, then he needs to point that out to the American people, many of whom have no idea what a mixed economy is.

Beyond that, Bernie’s biggest problem is that Ms. Clinton has adopted many of his long-held policy positions, leaving the difference between the two negligible at best.   That’s a very smart move for Clinton, which isn’t surprising, since she and hubby Bill are famous for making smart political moves.

With her lead in the polls, this primary contest is hers to lose, and it’s impossible for Sanders to point out his differences with her when she is in lockstep with him on almost everything, with the possible exceptions of how the government should go about reigning in Wall Street and what can realistically be done to control gun violence.    Other than that, she’s coming across like a Sander’s clone, parroting positions Bernie has taken for years,  like increasing taxes on the rich to help balance the income gap.   She’s even contradicted her old boss, Barack Obama, and flipped on the TPP trade agreement.   She’s also flip-flopped on same-sex marriage, the Iraq war and the Keystone pipeline.

If Sanders has an advantage, it’s that he’s held his positions for years, while those same policy ideas have only very recently been adopted by Hillary Clinton out of an obvious desire to win the Democratic primary.   She’s pulling a classic Mitt Romney flip.   Remember how radically different Romney’s positions were after he won the primary and moved on to the general election?   Sanders had better use this to his advantage, or come up with something to highlight the differences between himself and Clinton, or that gap in the polls that currently favors Clinton,  probably will not close.

Bernie’s going to have to go on the attack, getting personal with Hillary Clinton,  talking about donations to the Clinton Foundation and the  degree to which she and Bill are in the pockets of Wall Street bankers and other high-rollers who currently dictate terms to the Congress,  which is something Sanders has said he will not do.   At least, not at this point in the process.   He may change his mind if the poll numbers refuse to move.