The NYT To Take The Next 5 Years?

Says Craig Smith of the New York Times of Nikolas Sarkozy:

Arrogant, brutal, an authoritarian demagogue, a “perfect Iago”: the president-elect of France has been called a lot of unpleasant things in recent months and now has five years to prove his critics wrong.

Try this is on for size, Mr Smith: The New York Times has also earned the right to be referred to as brutal, authoritarian and a bastion of leftist demagoguery. In addition, the New York Times has proved it’s preference for deceit when needed and deliberate disregard for the truth as a matter of course.

Perhaps the New York Times can use the next five years to prove their critics wrong.

Mr Smith goes on to note that

Mr. Sarkozy’s personal life has been less successful than his public one: in 1996, he divorced his first wife, with whom he has two sons, and married Cécilia Ciganer-Albeniz, with whom he had another son.

For years, Ms. Sarkozy acted as Mr. Sarkozy’s closest aide, but she left him to have a very public affair with another man in 2005. The couple have since reconciled, but Ms. Sarkozy has been notably absent from her husband’s presidential campaign, fueling rumors that he will inhabit Élysée Palace alone.

Has Mr Smith referred to Hillary Clinton’s private life as ‘less than successful’ than her political life? Has Mr Smith or anyone at the New York Times made note of the former President’s absence from Senator Hillary Clinton’s campaign trail? Is Bill Clinton’s invisibility on the campaign trail meant to imply that if successful, the Senator will inhabit the White House by herself? Does appointing the former president as ‘Ambassador to the World really mean there are irreconcilable differences between Senator and former president? Or do those kind of inferences selectively applied by the New York Times?

Some leftists pundits are claiming that Sarkozy prevented the election of the first woman of the French Republic- as if that were meant to be a significant rationale for electing the leader of a demicratic nation.

Newsflash- it was the voters that rejected the election of Segoline Royal. Over half the women voters in France rejected Royal.

Any bets on which side the New York Times will come out on this?

Several locals predicted that the 2005 riots would revisit La Courneuve.

“With Sarkozy, the riots will be permanent,” said Farid, 25, a delivery man.

Mohamed Mechmache, the head of AC le Feu, a grassroots suburban association set up in the wake of the violence 18 months ago ago, told reporters after Sarkozy’s victory that France “had failed to understand the message” of 2005.

Everyone who did not vote for Sarkozy is breathing a collective sigh of relief that it was he, and not Royal, who won the election.