Entry 2:

In Gotham today there is mildew aplenty. I've just come back from the Mideast not only to the excellent news that the New York Post has reduced its price by 50 percent (from 50 cents to a quarter)--"It's Here! A quarter buys you the best paper in town"--but to its juicy post-Labor Day front-page: "I'll take Manhattan:  Trump scouts 'Indian' partner for NYC casino." Of course, it would be, according to the Donald, "the largest casino in the world." I don't know about you, but it seems to me that the government's policy of legalizing gambling in off-reservation casinos operated by Native Americans constitutes serious and wickedly funny reparations. Some Native Americans have made fortunes by parting white fools with their money. With characteristic insight, Trump allows that "it would not be a very difficult thing to do to get an Indian nation interested in Manhattan. He added that it helps that the Indians used to own Manhattan." But, alas, he appears to be thinking of hooking up with the St. Regis Mohawks, operators of a failing casino near the Canadian border. I note that the stock of Trump Hotels is trading at nearly 40 percent off its 52-week high. Wall Street is not amused by this man.

Perhaps the story today that I obsess most about is the hoopla concerning the presidential debates. On its front page the New York Times announces: "TV Networks Jilted by Bush Won't Take Part in 2 Debates." There are two points I wish to make here. The three broadcast networks still appeal to nearly 50 percent of television viewers and, regarding the presidential debates, they are clearly the venue for reaching most voters. Why have they been lobbying to get in on the act exclusively? Might it have something to do with the fact that this year so far they and the broadcast stations have reaped $600 million from American politics?  And the last time I checked, Meet the Press (proposed by Bush as a venue) featured ads. Were he and Gore to appear on the show or on Larry King, for that matter, would the debates be interrupted time and again by "now a word from our commercial sponsor"? There is something rotten in the connection between television and American politics. But why is Dubya making such a fuss? Might he need the constant interjection of a third party giving him time to strategize and compose himself, if not proper English sentences? Might he need the assitance of a third party in the face of Gore's admitted policy-wonk prowess? Only the shadow knows. Mildew, mildew: nothing but mildew!