Edgar Allan Poe, who blended fact and fiction in his dual careers as journalist and horror writer, would have had a field day working at the New York Times.
For what other reason than fear-mongering would the Times conduct a premature Bernie Sanders burial service right on its most coveted plot? (top left corner of its homepage)
In what macabre liberal pundit Paul Krugman gleefully calls a "premortem," the newspaper has grimly collated several Bernie eulogies from Canned Obituary Central.
However, to avoid any appearance of hackery or complicity, the news ghouls were very careful to use the smarmy passive voice in the headline: "Early Missteps Seen As Drag on Bernie Sanders's Campaign."
The morning after he lost the Nevada caucuses in February, Bernie Sanders held a painful conference call with his top advisers.
Mr.
Sanders expressed deep frustration that he had not built a stronger
political operation in the state, and then turned to the worrisome
situation at hand.
His
strategy for capturing the Democratic presidential nomination was based
on sweeping all three early-voting states, and he had fallen short,
winning only New Hampshire — to the consternation of his wife, Jane.
Actually, he did build a good operation. And he has ended up winning Nevada after all, a factoid which the Times conveniently doesn't see fit to print. The truth might take all the fun of out its exercise in S & M. It might take the fun out the premature burial festivities. It might even relieve the pain from the editorial torture.
So, although Sanders is gaining ground and "campaigning more effectively," he is still the Walking Dead as far as the media establishment is concerned. The subliminal message in the Times article is this: "Don't even bother to come out for the primaries, Wisconsinites and New Yorkers and Californians. It's over before it's even over."
But to be fair, The Times does have a point when it chides Bernie for not attacking Hillary in the very first debate, when he so gallantly claimed that Americans are "sick and tired of your damned e-mails!" He had been polite to a fault, always careful to criticize the corrupt system rather than the corrupt Clinton machine. And, I suspect they're right when they posit that at the outset, Bernie's main goal had been to spread the social democratic message without seriously expecting to win contests and raise more money than any other presidential candidate in history.
And Cornel West, his surrogate from the Black Left, is right that Sanders should have engaged sooner with Southern black voters.
But the Times is revealing itself as a passive-aggressive propagandist, criticizing Sanders from two separate directions. He's not nearly mean enough. He's way too mean. Reading his political obit reminds me of the Pushmi-Pullyu character from Doctor Doolittle. His critics, their toxic centrism so deeply ingrained, seem to want to have it both ways.
Doctor Krugman the Undertaker, meanwhile, is forging ahead with his own obsessive-compulsive smear campaign against both Bernie and his progressive supporters. He, too, thinks we don't know our brains from our asses. So he pulls and he pushes and achieves diddlysquat for his efforts.
As I see it, the Sanders phenomenon always depended on leaving the
personal attacks implicit. Sanders supporters have, to a much greater
extent than generally acknowledged, been motivated by the perception
that Clinton is dishonest, which comes — whether they know it or not —
not from her actual behavior but from decades of right-wing smears; but
Sanders himself got to play the issue-oriented purist, in effect taking a
free ride on other peoples’ character defamation. There was plenty of
nastiness from Sanders supporters, but the candidate himself seemed to
stay above the fray.
Facts are such troublesome things. It is so much easier to bury someone than to damn him with even the faintest of praise. Krugman actually sounds like a Grand Inquisitor here, purporting to know the inner workings of the minds of vast numbers of people. Whether we know it or not, our asses-for-brains have been taken over by the Republicans. We are no longer capable of reading books and even thinking for ourselves.
He is sounding more and more like his fake nemesis, David Brooks, all the time. He even indulges in a little liberal colorblind racism with this verbal belch:
But it wasn’t enough, largely because of nonwhite voters. Why have these
voters been so pro-Clinton? One reason I haven’t seen laid out, but
which I suspect is important, is that they are more sensitized than most
whites to how the disinformation machine works, to how fake scandals
get promoted and become part of what “everyone knows.” Not least,
they’ve seen the torrent of lies directed at our first African-American
president, and have a sense that not everything you hear should be
believed.
And now the hidden thoughts of Sanders are coming out in the open, endangering the chances of the Empress of Waiting even when Bernie himself hasn't the faintest chance of survival. Does it get any meaner, more gruesomely political than that?
My published response to Krugman:
I suspect that black and brown people ("non-whites") have a lot more on
their plates than honing their sensitivity about the fabled Clinton
Disinformation Machine.
Black Agenda Report has run several
pieces about the lack of enthusiasm of Blacks for Bernie Sanders. Its
leftist writers posit that black voters from the South were settling for
Clinton out of sheer terror of what the GOP would do to them. At least
Hillary wouldn't go so far as to overturn the Civil Rights Act. She
doesn't hold rallies like Trump's, which actually resemble racial
cleansing sites more than political rallies. She's a relatively safe
bet.
That said, black (or as Krugman euphemizes them,
"non-white") voters are not some sort of monolithic block. Northern
black voters are supporting Bernie in higher numbers. And that includes
Northern black politicians. James Sanders (!) of New York is primarying
Hillary supporter Greg Meeks for his seat in Congress, and both
Sanderses are giving each other support. So much for Bernie allegedly
not caring about down-ticket races.
Vile as the vast, right wing conspiracy is, the Clintons have always
paradoxically thrived on it. It helps to tamp down and delegitimate
fact-based criticism of them from the left. That Krugman is now accusing
Clinton's progressive critics of enabling the Republicans is the oldest
trick in their political grimoire. It's as anti-democratic as the
super-delegate system.
The coronation of Hillary is as premature as Bernie's funeral.
***
So, contra Krugman and the Times, who is to say where exactly the boundary lies between political life and political death? As Poe wrote in the fictional version of "The Premature Burial,"
To be buried while alive is, beyond question, the most terrific of these
extremes which has ever fallen to the lot of mere mortality. That it has
frequently, very frequently, so fallen will scarcely be denied by those
who think. The boundaries which divide Life from Death are at best shadowy
and vague. Who shall say where the one ends, and where the other begins?
We know that there are diseases in which occur total cessations of all the
apparent functions of vitality, and yet in which these cessations are
merely suspensions, properly so called. They are only temporary pauses in
the incomprehensible mechanism. A certain period elapses, and some unseen
mysterious principle again sets in motion the magic pinions and the wizard
wheels. The silver cord was not for ever loosed, nor the golden bowl
irreparably broken. But where, meantime, was the soul?
The coverage of the endless presidential horse race of death by the Times and other corporate media outlets does indeed seem incomprehensible to us mere mortals.
And then Wisconsin happens. (tomorrow) And that unseen mysterious principle known as the Living Electorate sets in motion those magic pinions, those wizard wheels which have so befuddled the pundits this season.
Unlike most of Poe's fiction,"The Premature Burial" actually does have a happy ending.
The narrator, used to being declared dead due to a condition called catalepsy, (or in modern times, burial deep within the pages of the Paper of Record) lives in constant fear of being interred alive. And then one night, his fears come true. He has been entombed despite taking what he had thought were all the necessary precautions.(telling the truth to anyone who would listen.)
And then he wakes up. He dreamed he was moribund because he was actually aboard a ship, sleeping in a very cramped space quite similar to a coffin.
My soul acquired tone—acquired
temper. I went abroad. I took vigorous exercise. I breathed the free air
of Heaven. I thought upon other subjects than Death. I discarded my
medical books. "Buchan" I burned. I read no "Night Thoughts"—no
fustian about churchyards—no bugaboo tales—such as this. In
short, I became a new man, and lived a man's life. From that memorable
night, I dismissed forever my charnel apprehensions, and with them
vanished the cataleptic disorder, of which, perhaps, they had been less
the consequence than the cause.
Hopefully, Bernie and his supporters have already given up reading bugaboo Weird Tales of the Times, so full of the charnel apprehensions of Paul Krugman and the whole banal coven of hack writers.
And hopefully, any new "tone" that Bernie acquires will not be of the politically correct variety being urged upon him by Clinton surrogates, whose own campaign talking points seem to be suffering a cataleptic disorder of their very own. And temper? Bernie has never lacked it. You don't bellow about how sick and tired of the corruption you are without possessing a very healthy temper.
