The contrasts of the NY Times

First, a poignant story that would never have gotten the same reach—it’s viral now—published in any other source.

From “A Beloved Bar Owner Was Skeptical About the Virus. Then He Took a Cruise

“He said, ‘Don’t you think this is fishy? Do you know anyone who has it? Do you know anyone who has died from it?’ And I said, ‘Dad, I don’t know anyone now, but give me a week and I bet I will.’”

And in a week, she did.

The same edition also features the following, from their chief Washington correspondent: “No Fight Over Red Ink Now, but Virus Spending Will Force Tough Choices“. Remarkably, in a 30-year career, the writer has not yet figured out that deficit hawks act only against Democratic Party programs, with particular vigor if People of Color stand to benefit. On tax cuts for the rich, they are silent. On the basics of what Paul Krugman calls the Herrenvolk Welfare State, they are silent. Yet I didn’t detect any sense of sarcasm or even wonder here.

Republican concerns about deficit spending — once an animating force of the party — seemed to have evaporated when President Obama left the White House.

But, fear not, the writer is not abandoning the punditocracy consensus that the budget must be balanced. He concludes,

There is no choice now, but tough decisions are ahead.

I don’t think I have to tell you who is supposed to suffer from the tough decisions. It won’t be the billionaires.

One thought on “The contrasts of the NY Times

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 )

Facebook photo

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

Connecting to %s