ArtsAutosBooksBusinessEducationEntertainmentFamilyFashionFoodGamesGenderHealthHolidaysHomeHubPagesPersonal FinancePetsPoliticsReligionSportsTechnologyTravel
  • »
  • Politics and Social Issues»
  • United States Politics

Gary Hart and Ross Perot Political Assassinations - Is Bernie Sanders Next?

Updated on November 14, 2015
Source

Conspiracy or Self Destruction?

Whether a Presidential candidate appeals to a left wing or right wing base, the trend in modern American political history appears to be that if that candidate's views significantly diverge from the mainstream platform or do not follow the approved money supply lines of their parties, events will occur that leading to the candidate's political destruction. At times these politically assassinated candidates seem to initiate the derailment of their own campaigns through personal misconduct, in other instances there appears to be a concerted behind the scenes effort to eliminate them as a threat. Whatever the case, the convenient outcome is that the entrenched old guard of both parties remains in place, and Americans are left to swallow the bitter pill of choosing between a "lesser of two evils" once again.

In the 2016 American presidential campaign cycle there are two "maverick" candidates on the slate, Donald Trump on the Republican side and Bernie Sanders for the Democrats, both of whom appear to have a legitimate chance of making a difference in the race. Although Trump has wielded a great deal of racial hyperbole to appeal to xenophobic voters, his stance on free trade agreements, which he has labeled "unpatriotic," indicates his desire to keep American jobs at home, a viewpoint that makes the Republican old guard tremble. On the Democratic slate, Bernie Sanders may approach the subject of free trade agreements from a different socio-economic outlook, but his similar stance on the subject has made members of the Democratic Party old guard, represented most prominently by Hilary Clinton, quake in their boots as well.

This then, is the story of two major Presidential candidates of recent history, by which I mean the last three decades, who came out of the gate with a burst and then ignominiously retreated from the contest after attacks upon their character and methods forced them to withdraw. Did these Presidential contenders simply self destruct, or did corporate-controlled media machinations play a part as well? Furthermore, can current outspoken mavericks such as Bernie Sanders expect the same treatment, or are they already getting it?

Will Trump survive the insidious methods often employed by the Two-Party system machine?
Will Trump survive the insidious methods often employed by the Two-Party system machine? | Source

Gary Hart - A Promising Campaign Instantly Implodes

Gary Hart is the politician of whom conservative Republican Barry Goldwater was once quoted as saying - "You can disagree with him politically, but I have never met a man who is more honest and more moral." Are such high compliments from the opposite ideological extreme beneficial to a Presidential candidate, or are they the kiss of death? Interestingly enough, Republican candidate Marco Rubio made similar remarks about Bernie Sanders recently. At any rate, Hart's "moral" character was laughingly exposed and his promising candidacy ceased to exist a few days thereafter. Was this character assassination carefully planned and orchestrated, or did Gary Hart's own political hubris bring him down? Whatever the case, this charismatic leader, often described as "Kennedyesque," was snuffed out as a presidential hopeful.

During the 1988 Presidential campaign Gary Hart was the clear front runner. As he surged ahead of candidates on both sides of the political spectrum, rumors of his marital infidelity began to be circulated in the press. In response, the Senator from Colorado challenged reporters to follow him around, warning them that they would be "very bored."

As it turns out, reporters from the Miami Herald had a very exciting time sniffing along Hart's trail. Shortly after Hart threw down his challenge, gumshoes from the South Florida newspaper discovered him entering his Washington, D.C. townhouse with Donna Rice, a beautiful young model. Five days after the initial Miami Herald report the Washington Post also threatened to run an article on Hart's past infidelities. The Colorado Senator dropped out of the race, even though Donna Rice denied any sexual relationship. In the speech he made upon suspending his candidacy, Gary Hart paraphrased third President Thomas Jefferson in saying "I tremble for my country when I think we may, in fact, get the kind of leaders we deserve."

As it turns out, on the road to becoming a very promising Presidential candidate, Gary Hart may have also made some powerful enemies. As a recently elected US Senator from Colorado, he was part of the Senate's Church Committee, tasked with investigating accusations of nefarious activities made against the CIA, including assassination plots of foreign leaders and spying on US citizens. Hart was specifically involved in the investigation that studied the role of intelligence agencies in the assassination of John F. Kennedy. In regard to his activity in this investigation, he is quoted as saying "I don't think you can see the things I have seen and sit on it." Hart concluded that Kennedy assassin Lee Harvey Oswald was a double agent, and this was why the FBI and CIA withheld information from the earlier Warren Commission investigation. Hart also discovered that the CIA had utilized Mafia ringleaders in an attempt to assassinate Fidel Castro, and found curious leads that suggested the Mafia may have also played a role in the Kennedy assassinations. During his first presidential bid in 1980, Hart said he would reopen the Kennedy investigation if elected. In response to this statement he received death threats.

Until I started researching this article, I always assumed that Gary Hart was just a victim of his own inability to keep his sexual urges under control. I am not generally a promulgator of conspiracy theories, but my simple, bonehead Internet searches uncovered curious associations between the Miami Herald, the paper that brought Hart down, and the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), the organization threatened by Hart's proposed reopened investigation.

Seven months before the disastrous Bay of Pigs invasion, in which CIA trained Cuban exiles would attempt to overthrow the Cuban government, the Miami Herald newspaper was preparing to publish a news story that would expose the plan. Allen Dulles, then director of the CIA, convinced the newspaper to stop the story, claiming the exposure of the plot would be a threat to national security.

The Miami Herald has a long, ongoing history of working with the CIA. Ex Miami Herald Editor Anders Gyllenhaal served on the Executive Committee of the Inter American Press Association, a group that supposedly fights for freedom of the press in Latin America, but also is reported to have a close liaison with the CIA and its affiliates. Roberto Suarez, the President of El Nuevo Herald, an offshoot of the Miami Herald, serves on the board of directors of this group as well. In the past, CIA agents have allegedly disguised themselves as Miami Herald columnists when working in Latin American countries. Is it just coincidence, therefore, that the Miami Herald should be the newspaper to bring down Presidential hopeful Gary Hart? Did he completely self-destruct, or did he get a push off the campaign cliff by those he threatened to expose by reopening the Kennedy investigation?

Prior to Gary Hart, politicians were mostly given a pass by the press for what they did off the clock in their personal lives. I am not condoning Hart's infidelity, it just seems somewhat irregular that he was made the crash test dummy for this new brand of unrestricted warfare on personal morality.

Gary Hart was accused of Monkey Business in his 1988 campaign, but how much of his downfall was self destruction, and how much was orchestrated behind the scenes?
Gary Hart was accused of Monkey Business in his 1988 campaign, but how much of his downfall was self destruction, and how much was orchestrated behind the scenes? | Source

H Ross Perot Exits the 1992 Race with a "Giant Sucking Sound"

Henry Ross Perot launched his independent Presidential bid in 1992 as a populist proponent of balancing the federal budget and ending the outsourcing of American jobs. Unlike Bill Clinton, the President who was eventually elected in that race, Perot opposed the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), saying "We have got to stop sending jobs overseas. It's pretty simple: If you're paying $12, $13, $14 an hour for factory workers and you can move your factory South of the border, pay a dollar an hour for labor,...have no health care—that's the most expensive single element in making a car— have no environmental controls, no pollution controls and no retirement, and you don't care about anything but making money, there will be a giant sucking sound going south."


Although Ross Perot was a successful businessman and billionaire, his message resonated with working people, but not with corporate backed politicians of both major parties; those whose financiers would greatly benefit from the cheap south of the border labor promised by NAFTA. By June of 1992, when Perot led a Gallup poll with a frightening 39 percent rating, a truly Machiavellian behind the scenes character assassination of both the candidate and his family members began in earnest. By July he had dropped out of the race.

At the time, Perot justified his departure by claiming he did not want the House of Representatives to decide the election in the event of a deadlock, but he confessed more insidious reasons later, upon reentering the campaign. Perot contended that Republican operatives had threatened to reveal compromising, digitally altered photographs of his daughter, who was soon to be married. He also claimed the CIA was threatening to hack into his computerized stock trading account to prevent him from retrieving money needed to finance his campaign. Furthermore, says Perot, the Bush campaign had plans to eavesdrop on his office in Dallas, Texas.

Ross Perot reentered the Presidential race on October 1st, but his earlier withdrawal had irretrievably damaged his hopes. All the same, on election day he came away with an unprecedented 18.9% of the vote, the most by a third party candidate since Theodore Roosevelt in 1912, making one wonder what may have been if he had resisted the assaults and remained on the ballot.

American jobs heading south of the border, and honest candidates being forced out of the Presidential race both leave a deafening sucking sound.
American jobs heading south of the border, and honest candidates being forced out of the Presidential race both leave a deafening sucking sound. | Source

Bernie Sanders - Already Reduced to Irrelevance in 2016?

The 2016 Presidential election cycle offers up a greater than usual collection of mavericks who, like Hart and Perot, threaten to upset the established political apple cart, causing their message to be suppressed by the King and Queen makers in the US media. Of course, the right always claims that the media is controlled by the left, while over there the left cries out that the media is manipulated by the big business, corporate right. The truth is that the media is a tool used by both major political parties, who skillfully manage it to create a sham image of democracy designed to fool the American people that their vote counts. Meanwhile, corporate campaign financiers continue to mold candidates who will serve their interests and maintain the status quo.

Bernie Sanders, perhaps the most troubling of these modern Presidential mavericks, came out of the gate like American Pharoah at Churchill Downs over the summer, gaining widespread grassroots support, giving Hilary Clinton a good scare in Iowa and New Hampshire, and winning the campaign contribution sweepstakes without taking a dollar of Superpac money.

But like Smarty Jones on the home stretch at Belmont Park, Bernie is now starting to fizzle, to drop back into the herd. He was a curious novelty at first that was good for ratings, and as such was allowed a few token interviews on Ellen DeGeneres and the like, but when the political machine backing Hilary observed that he was a legitimate threat with a legitimate plan, they got busy and began reducing Bernie to irrelevance. The media strategy, basically, is not to allow us to feel the Bern or even see the Bern at all, and in so doing convince the voters that he is a non entity, not to be taken seriously. Whether we want to believe it or not, television exposure has a way of legitimizing candidates. When these candidates disappear from the public eye, we conclude in our television conditioned minds that they are not to be taken seriously.

But there's always social media, right? Social media outlets like Facebook and Twitter are the domain of the people, the last bastion of democracy, and no matter how much the evil broadcast giants manipulate our political views, we can always count on social media to express our true voice, to create our own American Arab Spring style revolt against politics as usual.

Then we learn about Astroturfing, an underhanded technique employed to manipulate social media, a practice Wikipedia defines as: "...masking the sponsors of a message or organization (e.g., political, advertising, religious or public relations) to make it appear as though it originates from and is supported by grassroots participant(s). It is a practice intended to give the statements or organizations more credibility by withholding information about the source's financial connection."


In astroturfing, in other words, political organizations hire Internet trolls to post disruptive, argumentative, often insulting comments in online threads, the goal of which is to discourage support for a particular candidate and dissuade people from voicing support for a particular point of view, out of fear for being shouted down by angry trolls in an open forum.

Although the Republican party and its affiliate groups have been loudly accused of astroturfing, the Democratic political machine, no stranger to sleazy, unethical politics itself, is making widespread use of these methods to bury Bernie Sanders. An article in the UK daily mail reports that only 44% of Hillary Clinton's 3.6 million Twitter followers are real people. The majority of her social media followers come from either fake or inactive accounts. This same source reported that a large number of Hilary's Facebook "Likes" were purchased, not earned. Seven percent of these likes were generated in Baghdad, Iraq, suggesting that Hilary buys Facebook followers on a global basis to create the false impression that she is an inexorable tide that is burying the opposition, when in fact she has to pay poor students in the Arab world to create an illusion of widespread support that she simply does not have. There are also accusations that she has paid astroturfing trolls in the English speaking world to denounce Bernie supporters in online forums. A favorite technique of the trolling Hilaryites these days is to suggest that a vote for Bernie is a misogynistic vote against the idea of female Presdential candidates in general.

Meanwhile, over in the broadcast media side, Hilary's allies are quick to announce Bernie Sander's irretrievable demise, giving the impression that he has already shot his load, is a lost cause, and voting for him is a futile endeavor. To quote a CNN article of November 5th, "Bernie Sanders had a summer to remember, but as his campaign downshifts from the buzz of giant rallies to focus on the nuts and bolts of the campaign, it is struggling with that adjustment." In other words, Bernie Sanders was fun while he lasted, but now it is time to get serious, put our childish infatuation with the Vermont Senator aside, and focus on the tried and true mainstream candidates.

A Dark Tale About how the Media Validates our Existence

Like Smarty Jones at Belmont, Bernie Sanders seems to be fading down the stretch.  Or is his horse just being ignored to death?
Like Smarty Jones at Belmont, Bernie Sanders seems to be fading down the stretch. Or is his horse just being ignored to death? | Source

Benghazi Boon?

Interestingly enough, just as the Bernie Sanders campaign appeared to be gaining significant momentum, on October 22, 2015, Hilary Clinton was called before the United States House Select Committee on Benghazi to answer to her role as Secretary of State in the September 11th, 2012 attack by Islamic militants on the American diplomatic compound in Benghazi, Libya.

For eight hours Clinton was grilled with mostly kid gloves questions about the role of the State Department in the attack. If the Benghazi committee was a Republican-led effort to discredit Hilary Clinton as a Presidential candidate, it certainly did not achieve its aim. Hilary's composure under fire was well noted on social media by her Facebook fans, paid and unpaid, and committee Chairman Trey Gowdy's widely circulated perspiring face was commented upon extensively, as if Hilary had somehow turned tables upon the enemies besieging her and sent them into headlong retreat.

The timing of the charade was curious, as it came at a time when Hilary's Presidential fortunes were fading fast and the Republican party was having a difficult time finding a "legitimate" candidate to put upon the fall ballot. Hilary and the Republican party would seem to make strange bedfellows, but members of the Clinton political dynasty in general have historically enjoyed "unusual" romantic partners. Therefore, an undeclared alliance between corporate backed Republicans and corporate backed Hilary, as a hedge against Bernie Sander's rising fortunes, does not seem outside the realm of speculation.

Unholy alliance or not, The Hill reported that the hearings were "positive momentum" for the Hilary campaign, CNN said that Hilary emerged "largely unscathed," and the Washington Post declared "GOP lands no solid punches." It was great publicity for Hilary at a time when she was having a difficult time gathering any kudos that she didn't have to pay for.

Did Hilary Clinton really give Trey Gowdy a beating over Benghazi, or was this just well orchestrated theater designed to give her troubled campaign a much needed boost?
Did Hilary Clinton really give Trey Gowdy a beating over Benghazi, or was this just well orchestrated theater designed to give her troubled campaign a much needed boost? | Source

The Quality of Leaders that We Deserve

Whereas Republicans seem to be busy creating the impression of attacking Hilary Clinton, the GOP seems to be going out of its way to treat Bernie Sanders with kid gloves and play nice with him. Republicans know that showing love for Bernie will reduce his credibility with the Democrat party faithful and cause Hilary's star to rise even higher, in the event that a GOP candidate does not have the right stuff to win the 2016 election and it becomes necessary to plant Hilary's famous, unsoiled pant suits in the same Oval Office chair where Bill and Monica once dallied. As a "lesser of two evils," of course.

On Bernie's socialism, GOP candidate Marco Rubio was quoted recently as saying that while he doesn't agree with him, he rejects Bernie being herded in with the same communists that drove his family from Cuba, and "What I appreciate about Bernie is he's not trying to shirk from it...It's what he believes in. He's honest about it."

Could such touchy-feely sweetness from the conservative right spell the kiss of death for Bernie Sander's Presidential run? One thing that seems clear is that the bulldozing of Bernie is now a bipartisan effort that combines more sweet and sour flavors than an Asian buffet.

The overall result of these media engineered techniques, designed to sweep Bernie and similar dangerously outspoken candidates like Donald Trump out the door with yesterday's garbage, is that the American voting public will be left with the same tired slate of "lesser of two evils" choices once again. That giant sucking sound you hear in 2016 has to do with the quality of candidates we are left with after those who might actually represent the interests of the American people are forced out of the race through devious means. Because we the voters willingly allow ourselves to be suckered into this media trap, if Thomas Jefferson were alive today he would probably say that we are still getting the quality of leaders that we deserve.

More Hilary Astroturfing over Black Lives Matter?

Astroturfing or Self-Destruction?

Is Bernie Sanders Being Astroturfed out of the 2016 Presidential Race?

See results

Comments

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    • Mel Carriere profile image
      Author

      Mel Carriere 18 months ago from San Diego California

      I absolutely agree with your conclusion, Perspycacious. There are going to be some interesting doings in the months ahead, as the two major parties turn heaven and earth upside down to find "acceptable" candidates. Thanks for reading.

    • Perspycacious profile image

      Demas W Jasper 18 months ago from Today's America and The World Beyond

      I am persuaded that the harder "The Establishment" fights to destroy a popular candidate, the more likely it is that he or she just doesn't fit the mold (both meanings of the noun) they thrive on.

      If you want (even need) change, fight back against those who want control of their playing field.

      You won't get that with Senator Cruz of former Senator Clinton (The Teflon Donna.)

    • Mel Carriere profile image
      Author

      Mel Carriere 18 months ago from San Diego California

      Thank you Credence. Back in those days as a young man I admit I was infected by the trickle down Conservatism bug and I didn't pay much attention to Gary Hart. I didn't go into this hub thinking that I would find any sort of plot to destroy Gary Hart, I simply believed he self destructed. What I subsequently surmised from Internet searching was interesting, and although I don't think anything could be proven, it certainly appears that the Miami newspaper that took him down had an agenda. Thanks for reading.

    • Credence2 profile image

      Credence2 18 months ago from Florida (Space Coast)

      Mel, I can relate as Colorado resident that was strongly in support of Gary Hart as opposed to Fritz Mondale who represented the typical Democratic candidate dragging the same baggage up the stairs, thinking that we had a chance in an era of Reagan landslides. The party image needed burnishing badly, away from the big tax, big spending era. Bill Clinton basically tapped into the sentiment and was successful in winning the presidency. But we could have had much of this well on the way in 1984. Again, a most indepth, well researched article, Thanks...

    • Mel Carriere profile image
      Author

      Mel Carriere 20 months ago from San Diego California

      I believe you are absolutely right, Besarien. At the very least, Trump and Sanders seem to be real people who speak for themselves, whether or not we agree with their ideas. No matter how his Republican rivals denounce Trump as a horrible racist, he still seems to climb in the polls. Much less glamorous Bernie can't even get his name on the news but he is neck and neck with Hilary as the primaries approach. Thanks for reading.

    • Besarien profile image

      Besarien 20 months ago

      I think you are asking some awfully good questions. Maybe part of the appeal of Trump and Sanders is that people resent when the nominees are pre-chosen. Hey kids, do you want to talk to this puppet on my right hand or this puppet over here on my left hand? Some kids are bound to get bored eventually.

    • Mel Carriere profile image
      Author

      Mel Carriere 21 months ago from San Diego California

      Unfortunately Lawrence I think after his latest round of Muslim bashing rhetoric Don is the front runner once more. Thanks again. I wish I could say we will do our best not to get the rest of the world sick but I'm only one guy with a tiny handkerchief.

    • lawrence01 profile image

      Lawrence Hebb 21 months ago from Hamilton, New Zealand

      Mel

      I'm glad the 'Don' isn't the 'front runner' for the Republicans anymore, though I've not heard of the guy who is!

      We may not be directly involved in the presidential stakes but the old adage is true "If America sneezes the rest of the world catches a cold!"

      Have a great Christmas

      Lawrence

    • Mel Carriere profile image
      Author

      Mel Carriere 21 months ago from San Diego California

      Thank you Lawrence. I understand that being in another country you are not exposed to these people on a daily basis as we are here in the US, even though crazy hair Donald Trump seems to be getting worldwide headlines, making us Yanks look like simpleton buffoons as never before. I appreciate you dropping in.

    • lawrence01 profile image

      Lawrence Hebb 21 months ago from Hamilton, New Zealand

      Mel

      I always wondered what happened to Ross Perot.

      Enjoyed the hub but can't really comment on the candidates.

      Lawrence

    • Mel Carriere profile image
      Author

      Mel Carriere 22 months ago from San Diego California

      Nobody is trying to buy honesty, Deb, because it is not a quality that can be used as a tool for self interest. You are right that honesty cannot be bought, in the first place because there is no market for it. But it can be sold, which once again means you are right in saying politics destroys the quality of candidates, that is if they had any good qualities, such as honesty, to begin with.

      Can a truly honest man survive that dirty game with his soul intact? I don't know, but if we pick a clean candidate to begin with it might take longer for them to be completely corrupted. Thanks for reading!

    • aviannovice profile image

      Deb Hirt 22 months ago from Stillwater, OK

      To be honest, I truly believe that politics destroys the quality of candidates. Show me an honest person, and I'll show you someone that can lead with his or her heart, and no influence. Honesty cannot be bought.

    • Mel Carriere profile image
      Author

      Mel Carriere 22 months ago from San Diego California

      I thought Bernie was buried, Svetlana, but recent developments on Facebook make me think the Bern is bouncing back. The Benghazi boon seems to have been a fleeting one for Hilary, which gives me gives me hope. Thanks for reading!

    • kalinin1158 profile image

      Lana ZK 22 months ago from California

      I've noticed myself lately that people aren't feeling the Bern as much anymore, as if they grew emotionally tired of Sanders' passionate rhetoric and are now looking for a more "common sense" candidate.

      The thing is, unless things are really-really bad (like after the Bush presidency) psychologically people don't really want *change.* Real change. Maybe a few tweaks here and there, the middle class bla-bla-bla, but Bernie man with his rather radical vision of the more inclusive, more socialist America is intrinsically scary to many Democrats, not to mention the right wingers. Will he regain popularity, re-capture the momentum? Time will tell. He's got my vote, that's for sure.

      Great writing here, Mr. Carriere!

    • Mel Carriere profile image
      Author

      Mel Carriere 22 months ago from San Diego California

      Thank you Davika, your contributions always add a lot. I appreciate you dropping in.

    • DDE profile image

      Devika Primić 22 months ago from Dubrovnik, Croatia

      I watched a bit of what is going on in USA unfortunately I don't have much to contribute to this conversation. TWEETED!

    • Mel Carriere profile image
      Author

      Mel Carriere 22 months ago from San Diego California

      You don't have to vote for a lesser of evils Dana. There are always good people on the ballot, they just don't have a prayer because we are programmed to think we have to pick one of two, when there are many. Thanks for reading!

    • Dana Tate profile image

      Dana Tate 22 months ago from LOS ANGELES

      Many valid points you have made here. I must admit I haven't kept up with this political race. I have been so disappointed by the all the hopeful promises only to be let down that I stopped caring. I understand if you don't vote you can't complain so I guess I have to figure out the lesser of the evils and vote any way.

    • Mel Carriere profile image
      Author

      Mel Carriere 22 months ago from San Diego California

      Thank you Linda. I think that what is really sad is that we quietly take what they say at face value. Bernie is the only one who says what he really thinks without spinning it. He was one of the few politicians against the Iraq war at a time when being so was political suicide. I appreciate you dropping by.

    • Mel Carriere profile image
      Author

      Mel Carriere 22 months ago from San Diego California

      Eldon, I love your analogy about different hands stirring the same lukewarm pot. Your mighty mind flies to places mine fears to tread. You have now got me on a quest to study more about Michel Foucault. Thanks for reading.

    • AliciaC profile image

      Linda Crampton 22 months ago from British Columbia, Canada

      The information that you've presented is very interesting and thought provoking, Mel. The schemes of politicians are annoying and sad at the same time.

    • Eldon Arsenaux profile image

      Eldon Arsenaux 22 months ago from Cooley, Texas

      Hi Ya Mel, decided to dive into this one man, and then saw the comments.

      Always dig what you write.

      Perhaps this is encroaching upon, or restating the thoughts of others, but, I believe, that revolutions, inasmuch as we can look at them symbolically, swivel around a central axis. This axial symbol, is at the heart of our reality (since reality creates symbols, and symbols re-make realities). This symbolic approach may appear unclear. Forgive me. A direct strike is not likely.

      Politic revolves (revolutionizes) outwardly and inwardly. It is a circle of circumstance. At its center, as many men and women have mentioned already, is 'politics as usual'. I refer to this as the pot that keeps swirling on top, but below the surface is swimmingly secure and stagnant ("as it shall be").

      Carrying this sentiment further, at face value, it seems we're saying that the "order of the day" is opposable to the "disorder of the day", otherwise there would be no reason for its being order, qua order.

      That an outsider (Liberal or Conservative) can stand opposed to 'centres-of-power', is to say that they are necessarily a part and apart from such 'spheres-of-power'.

      To quote Michel Foucault: "Where there is power, there is resistance".

      That statement is rarely contextualized within his work (forgive me for striking the gavel with his words), but this short sentence, that campus kids spoon like Civic Spam 101 on revolutionary consciousness, serves as a simpler illustration of my point.

      I'm not smart enough to be simple, yet.

      Substantially, this means, that any system of principles relies upon some sort of negation; i.e., we are for this, but they are for that. Simply put, "we are this, and they are that." An argument over properties: 'Bernie Sanders is not, therefore he is', and vice versa. (Vice versa is such a syntactical sinful splurge of mine)

      But at the center of these opposing principles stems the same arguments over substance (what does it mean to hold principles of Justice? when they so often slip nimbly through our flighty, fighting fingers?). Dialectics are politician spoons stirring the same soup. And if you drop the spoon, we always have another cookie cutter.

      In summation, I believe, because political parties are constantly in the act of shifting, like hands over the same pot, they serve themselves well to make sure the contesting cook can keep things lukewarm, whilst saying things are really hot or cold. Each political party peeps over the opposing chef, checking to make sure no unclean hand (which dirties fundamental clean (food) principles) can ever creep in. It's the same damn stew every four years. Don't Bern your mouth out kid.

      Okay, okay pops, I won't, but I'm buying the apron at least (says me under breath). Will there be fewer apolitical aprons at election time? Or more? I leave that you Mel.

      -E.G.A.

    • Mel Carriere profile image
      Author

      Mel Carriere 22 months ago from San Diego California

      Thank you Larry. Everybody seems to know what you say is true, yet we continue to tolerate the system as it exists. I guess this proves that what TJ said is true, that we get the kind of leaders we deserve. I appreciate you dropping in.

    • Larry Rankin profile image

      Larry Rankin 22 months ago from Oklahoma

      When you try to offer something different, the people with all the money put all their resources into destroying you.

      As always, Mel, thought provoking stuff.

    • Mel Carriere profile image
      Author

      Mel Carriere 22 months ago from San Diego California

      Mills P I guess I just can only repeat what I replied to Bill up there. Politics as usual is probably how this will play out, but if Bernie can shake some things up and force the mainstream candidates to modify their platforms, for the benefit of the American people, then he would still be doing us a service, in my opinion. Thanks for reading.

    • Mel Carriere profile image
      Author

      Mel Carriere 22 months ago from San Diego California

      Unfortunately I think you are right Bill, although Bernie seems to be regathering the momentum he lost to Hilary after the Benghazi hearings. The debates serve him well, because he comes across as more honest, specific, and prepared. Thanks for reading.

    • profile image

      Pat Mills 22 months ago from East Chicago, Indiana

      Frontrunners at this stage of the campaign tend to not stay that way at convention time. I think Bernie Sanders will stay in the running, and so will Donald Trump, for whatever worth they think they bring, as well as all of the fight they can muster. Politics as usual, though, will likely be the order of the day.

    • billybuc profile image

      Bill Holland 22 months ago from Olympia, WA

      I love Sanders but from the beginning I didn't think he had a chance of overpowering the establishment. Big money speaks and Sanders is not big money. The media outlets don't even mention Sanders when talking about the campaigns, like he doesn't even exist. I think this will come down to Clinton vs Rubio or Bush, just as it was always planned by Big Money.

    • Mel Carriere profile image
      Author

      Mel Carriere 22 months ago from San Diego California

      Randy, I think Slick Willie beat it because he was part of the politics as usual crowd. He played himself off as a mover and a shaker, but he was just a handpicked butt in the seat in the Oval office, like Hilary will be if she gets elected. Thanks for reading.

    • profile image

      Randy Stiles 22 months ago

      The media loves to play the horse race game with these races. Herman Cain, Howard Dean, etc.it happens. But I think Bill Clinton could have had the Hart experience but he somehow beat it.

    • Mel Carriere profile image
      Author

      Mel Carriere 22 months ago from San Diego California

      Sometimes more like a dull butter knife, Eric, but I appreciate the nice words.

    • Ericdierker profile image

      Eric Dierker 22 months ago from Spring Valley, CA. U.S.A.

      Tis I who gives thanks for you. I always say to myself when reading you "a rapier wit"

    • Mel Carriere profile image
      Author

      Mel Carriere 22 months ago from San Diego California

      Eric, Teddy was a Republican who was a little too much of a progressive to get nominated a second time by his party, so he created the Bull Moose party so he could run on his own without a nomination. In appreciation, he got his face on a mountain. I don't think Bernie will ever get his face on a mountain. Neither will Donald Trump, unless he owns the mountain, of course. Thank you for taking time out from the quill and ink you use to pen your marvelous sermons and reading this hub.

    • Ericdierker profile image

      Eric Dierker 22 months ago from Spring Valley, CA. U.S.A.

      It is a wild world out there in politicalville. Mainstream is the main stream. Seems that anyone venturing out into the waters gets swept away by the current and only the fish in schools survive. How come Teddy did not go down in flames?

    • Mel Carriere profile image
      Author

      Mel Carriere 22 months ago from San Diego California

      Yes Farawaytree, Canada survived a period of temporary insanity and is hopefully on track again.

    • Farawaytree profile image

      Michelle Zunter 22 months ago from California

      Yes that's very true. I see how truly relieved, happy, and excited for the future my fellow Canadians are after their election with Trudeau, and I wish the same invigoration could take place here.

    • Mel Carriere profile image
      Author

      Mel Carriere 22 months ago from San Diego California

      Farawaytree the problem is that people have been hypnotized into thinking that they are doing well, or the media has convinced them that if they are not it is because of their own lack of intelligence or lack of drive, an inability to catch the prosperity wave of trickle down economics. Bernie promises dangerous things and there is an organized effort to convince folks he can't be taken seriously. Thanks for reading!

    • Farawaytree profile image

      Michelle Zunter 22 months ago from California

      Nice one!

      This country needs a full on revolution against the current system of government and political campaigns.

      Bernie Sanders represents that much needed change, but it doesn't appear the American people are ready. That's why Trump is so successful. He's familiar, and spouts the kind of negative propaganda a good portion of the country already believes.

      If the people truly want change that benefits their own interests instead of some overstuffed political puppet, they'll vote for Bernie. He's about as good as it gets in the current system.

    • Mel Carriere profile image
      Author

      Mel Carriere 22 months ago from San Diego California

      Apathy is a bigger problem than term limits or csmpaign financing or any other political issue, Mike. Even if people do have political opinions, they are molded by the mass media and don't deviate from approved doctrine.

    • profile image

      Old Poolman 22 months ago

      Mel, I am told there is a way we could force term limits by going around the good old boys but I have forgotten the details. It would take a very large group of citizens to make this happen and most could care less.

      A recent man-in-the-street interview had several of our citizens who thought Syria was probably in New York state. You think they would care much about term limits?

    • Mel Carriere profile image
      Author

      Mel Carriere 22 months ago from San Diego California

      I wholeheartedly agree with term limits, Mike, but the good old boys in Washington enjoy their perks too much to cut their own throats. I think of that movie Charlie Wilson's war with Tom Hanks, where he was sitting in a hot tub sipping whiskey with pretty girls, thinking of ways to arm the Afghan rebels, who turned out to be the Taliban.

      All you have to do is study Rome to see how a civilization implodes from corruption.

    • profile image

      Old Poolman 22 months ago

      Mel, as long as even a single member of the Washington "Good Ole Boy" club remains in office it will never change. Term limits would serve us well to clean out the garbage, but that will never happen.

      To my knowledge, no civilization has ever survived because they always destroy themselves from within.

    • Mel Carriere profile image
      Author

      Mel Carriere 22 months ago from San Diego California

      It will only end if we reach rock bottom and there is a complete overhaul of the current system, Mike. I don't think anybody wants that but a civilization can only sustain institutionalized corruption for so long. Thanks for dropping by.

    • profile image

      Old Poolman 22 months ago

      Those who are currently sitting in the high paid chairs are scared to death someone may run with the intent of cleaning up the corruption in Washington. Any male or female candidate who would even dare mention this intention is doomed from that moment forward.

      They will spare no expense or effort even if they have to go all the way back to the candidates 1st grade mistakes if need be. Most all of the incumbents who have been in office for more than one term are now owned by someone or some corporation.

      As you point out Mel, many of the best candidates we have ever had have been shot down just because they don't believe in the "business as usual" attitude in Washington.

      We can thank the media for taking a huge role in the character assassination of many really good people. I doubt this will ever end.

    • Mel Carriere profile image
      Author

      Mel Carriere 22 months ago from San Diego California

      Thank you Reynold Jay. This article started out as something different, but I was surprised what I found as I dug into the subject. Interestingly enough, media outlets in the UK, with no horse in the race, provided the best material.

    • Reynold Jay profile image

      Reynold Jay 22 months ago from Saginaw, Michigan

      LOTs of controversy in this. You covered all the bases. Well done, Mel.