yunsi12

At first, Nader delighted in his ability to pass off his opinions, and himself, as the young and increasingly well-known "Paul Krugman." But as sometimes happens -- think Dr. Frankenstein and his monster! -- the creator began to tire of his creation and the newly forged creature began to take on a life of his own. Nader disliked the love of luxury that he saw in his alter ego -- the taste for bespoke suits, fine wines and the like, and the desire to cozy up to the super-rich and super-famous (like Enron's Ken Lay). More surprisingly still, the two began to have minor disagreements over policy issues.

You might think that one knee-jerk liberal is pretty much the same as the next, and not much different than your average dyed-in-the-wool socialist. But there are subtle differences.

Born in 1903 -- the same year that the Wright brothers flew for the first time -- Nader is more of the socialist. He has fond and vivid memories of almost everything that happened in the Great Depression. Truth be told, the Great Depression was a grand time from a Naderite perspective. He rejoiced in the equal sharing of miseries. He liked the purgative effect on so many lives of a sudden and irretrievable loss of personal wealth and comfort. Now they could live as he himself chose to live -- as hermits and holy men.

Of course, his alter ego -- and the face that everyone sees on each of his columns -- has other ideas. Without any direct experience of his own, he ("Krugman") foolishly insists on the idea that FDR could have "spent his way out" of the Great Depression -- by ratcheting up spending to the levels that would later be reached during the height of World War II. He has used that argument in urging the current administration to plunge even deeper into debt and incipient bankruptcy than it has done so far in two disastrous years in office.

Though he can plainly see that "Paul Krugman" has become a serious nut case, Nader finds that he is powerless to stop the flow of Krugmanesque nonsense from coming out every time he sits down to write another column. And so he decided to take action -- going to Bill Keller and insisting that he go public with the whole story.

Keller is prepared to do so, but other higher-ups at the New York Times are in a state of revolt. If someone's head has to roll, they are saying, it ought to be Nader's, not Krugman's. Their argument is that Nader -- who turned 107 last week -- has "lost touch with his inner Krugman." They say there are at least five or six other people at the newspaper who can continue to churn out "Paul Krugman" columns that will be as good as or better than any Ralph Nader has written.

As this article goes to press, the outcome is undetermined. But one thing is certain: You will never see Ralph Nader and "Paul Krugman" in the same room. And if there is any moral to this tale, it is this: When you sup with The Gray Lady, make sure you have a long spoon