Warner Todd Huston on May 6, 2007 – NEWS BUSTERS
The New York Times didn’t even wait for the French election results to become general knowledge before they began their sniping of the new “Conservative” French president, Nicolas Sarkozy. In what is supposed to represent an analysis of his election, the Times spends more time in naked name calling than substance.
Let’s review some of the harsh words, slights and names the Gray Lady hurls at the new president-elect.
-
* Arrogant, brutal, an authoritarian demagogue…
* …one of the most polarizing figures to move into Élysée Palace in the postwar era…
* He has always been nakedly ambitious, pragmatic and calculating and not beyond betrayal to reach his goals.
* Mr. Sarkozy is a tad shorter than Napoleon was. His profile is remarkably similar to that of Louis XIV.
* Mr. Sarkozy’s brash manner and strong oratory style…
* Many people regarded the anticrime campaign as a calculated effort to win support from France’s far right in anticipation of his presidential bid.
* Mr. Sarkozy’s personal life has been less successful than his public one…
Man, it seems impossible that such an ogre could have anyone who would like him enough to vote for him… well, if you’d listen to the New York Times, anyway.
And what is the title of their “analysis” piece?
Nicolas Sarkozy: Winning the Chance to Prove His Critics Wrong
Only the New York Times can read an overwhelming election and decide that the winner has to prove people wrong!
I suppose it is beyond the New York Times’ ability to understand that Sarkozy just might want to lead his country in the style in which he presented himself to WIN the election!
No way! He has to change himself now that he has won… just to satisfy the Times.
Even more ridiculously, the Times never found space to mention that Sarkozy has insisted that an important policy for his new administration would be to attempt to heal the rift his predecessors have created between France and the USA and that France needs to become closer to the US. Do we have to wonder why that is?
One thing about this report is good though. It shows that the Times is just as wrong about politics in the rest of the world as they are about US politics!
They get points for consistency, at least
