After reading Paul Krugman’s DNC-sanctioned August 15th column in The New York Times, I was taken back to the mid-late 20th century stories about the largesse at Time magazine, when the onetime influential weekly, on deadline nights, had a gofer/unpaid intern traipse through the newsroom with a drinks cart for 10,000 thirsty and busting-their-balls reporters to help them make it to the finish line. Time’s kaput now, like Newsweek, aside from a minimal online presence, but the Times marches on to parts unknown.
This isn’t facetious: I wonder if Paul, once an economist, if he happens to be in the newsroom dips his inflation-busting fingers into a jar of poppers (Boomer nostalgia; never was interested myself, but who knows about carefree Paul) that’s generously provided by management. If so, I won’t judge: as a teenage babysitter in the early-1970s, one of my clients was a couple who owned a pharmacy, and while snooping in their bathroom I was bug-eyed by the jug of Black Beauties, and I helped myself on more than one occasion. Only difference was, aside from studying trigonometry and Washington Irving, my work was writing record reviews for the mimeographed “underground paper” called, unimaginatively, The Crux. Paul, on the other hand, hasn’t yet been pushed aside by Times editors (columnists never are), and makes up stories, or propaganda, for what a few people—gullible hack “traditionalists”—still call “The Paper of Record,” or even more daftly, “The Gray Lady.”
Paul’s latest column focuses on Kamala—presumably he bathes in her joyful vibes, which was just released on the market, bottled with jasmine and the scent of perfectly-ripe summer plums—and I must say, he’s off his nut more than usual. He begins: “Like everyone who follows this stuff, I’m a bit awe-struck by the polling shift since Vice President Kamala Harris replaced President Biden at the top of the Democratic ticket.” There’s nary a qualification that it makes sense Kamala’s polling well because of Democratic relief; even partisans admit it’s a quick-turnaround “honeymoon” for the woman who won’t take questions from men and women posing as reporters. Paul’s still a little sore that Biden, whom he credits for fostering a vibrant economy, was ditched last month, but does offer this How-Dry-I-Am (hiccup) toast to the incumbent: “He will surely receive a much deserved hero’s welcome at next week’s Democratic National Convention, and future historians will, I believe, rate his presidency extremely highly.” (Never mind that his less-crazy colleague, Maureen Dowd, in touch with “Bidenworld,” outlines the anger felt by the President’s family and few confidantes.)
Two notes: if Biden’s now so beloved by his Party, why was he given the Truant Officer’s speaking slot on Monday night? And, I’ll repeat a rational prediction about “future historians”: they’ll barely exist because the public doesn’t read much anymore, especially baked-over non-fiction, and almost no money will flow (unless there’s an in-kind advance) to J6 historians like Douglas Brinkley. Michael Wollf, who made a mint with three books about Trump last decade was, I think, the last to cash in.
Paul, while saying it’s not guaranteed Kamala will prevail in November—in 2004, he boasted that he was voting, between the lines, given the Times’ defunct ethical rules (such as they were), for the winner, John Kerry—he nonetheless raises for the first time I’ve seen, that this election will resemble Ronald Reagan’s landslide in 1984, if not exactly so resounding because of “political polarization.” And then Paul stuck his beak back into the jar of pharmaceuticals and drink cart. Perhaps that’s metaphorical: I don’t want to get hauled into the hoosegow once the United States follows the UK’s example of incarcerating citizens who make naughty posts on social media.
But while Paul’s hallucinatory jottings weren’t unexpected—although really crazy, man, crazy—who’d have thought The Washington Post, nearly given up for dead, would criticize Kamala’s most recent demonstration that she (or “The Team”) will say anything “populist” enough to elicit applause at rallies. (One caveat: Kamala looks smashing on a stage, an attractive woman who looks the part of a president.) The Post’s editorial zeroes in on Kamala’s pledge to neuter the “price-gouging” of “Big Business. The Post: “Never mind that many stores are currently slashing prices in response to renewed customer bargain hunting. Ms. Harris says she’ll target companies that make ‘excessive’ profits, whatever that means… Even adjusting for the pandering standards of campaign economics, however, Ms. Harris’s speech Friday [in North Carolina] ranks as a disappointment.”
I doubt Kamala, in her DNC speech on Thursday night, which ought to be extremely entertaining, will press on with “price-gouging,” as that folly has likely polled badly. My question: how many words will she say about Israel?
—Follow Russ Smith on Twitter: @MUGGER2023
