December 22, 2008

"We French can only see a dynastic move of the vanishing Kennedy clan in the very country of the Bill of Rights. It is both surprising and appalling."

Wrote Paris Mayor Bertrand Delanoƫ in a letter published today by the New York Times on the subject of the impending possible appointment of Caroline Kennedy to the U.S. Senate.

Except it wasn't Paris Mayor Bertrand Delanoƫ.
We French have been consistently admiring of the American Constitution, but it seems that recently both Republicans and Democrats are drifting away from a truly democratic model. The Kennedy era is long gone, and I guess that New York has plenty of more qualified candidates to fill the shoes of Hillary Clinton. Can we speak of American decline?
Now, why did the Times fall for this? The correction says they didn't follow their own procedures, but why didn't they follow their own procedures? Were they just a little too delighted that he was saying what they hoped to hear? American decline. The French think America is in decline...

Hey, remember that time Sarah Palin thought she was talking on the phone with Nicolas Sarkozy? The NYT presented that mistake as "one of the last straws" that convinced McCain advisors that Palin didn't have what it takes:
Ms. Palin appeared to believe that she was talking to President Nicolas Sarkozy of France, even though the prankster had a flamboyant French accent and spoke to her in a more personal way than would be protocol in such a call. At one point, he told Ms. Palin that she would make a good president some day. “Maybe in eight years,” she replied.
Fake French -- it's so obvious. Except when it isn't.

35 comments:

Ratherlike said...

Double standard? Or as they say in French, double standard!

Off topic, but this is the aniversary so what the heck. When you reach into that Christmas bowl of nuts this year, think of this...

Ratherlike said...

Inspector Sullivan hard on the case of Sarah Palin!

BJM said...

Ah, yes, the newspaper of record, except when it isn't.

Bissage said...

Now, why did the Times fall for this?

Fake but accurate?

Lem said...

Would the NYT post a letter from Sir Archy our resident Ghost of a Gentleman, dead these 260 Years and more?

I wonder.

The Drill SGT said...

Ann,

You are suprised by the hypocrisy of your sometime employer?

The paper of record is only good for fishwrap, starting fires, and crossword puzzles.

A double standard about Palin, you betcha!!

blake said...

Ms. Palin's future is sure looking a lot brighter than the NYT.

jdeeripper said...

From the paper that brought you the Duke rape hoax and came up with the line about not wanting "the smoking gun to turn into a mushroom cloud" which was used to hype the Iraq war.

New Sarah Palin interview

Kirby Olson said...

The senator position should be lotteried off. It would help reduce the state's enormous deficit, and also get some new blood into office. 5 dollars a ticket.

Who cares who does the job? No one could be as bad as the senators that are actually in. And they don't generate any income.

The other alternative: highest bidder. We could make Bloomberg pay 100 billion, and that would also help with the deficit.

Or Spitzer could pay. Who cares what he does in terms of the Mann Act. It's just about the only thing happening in this state economically any more any way.

All the other industries are going to China and Mexico.

Besides, aren't there still a few Rockefellers around?

Chip Ahoy said...

We French have been consistently admiring of the American Constitution ...

That line alone marks the missive as fraudulent. This fraudulent line makes me laugh. Not a big laugh but a little laugh, and not so little a laugh that it cannot be felt. Not a shallow laugh either, but a deep laugh. A little but still significant laugh that is deep inside and that can be felt. That kind of laugh. Ha ha ha. The laugh comes out. And now the mirth has passed, and now I am sad. Sad for a newspaper that once was. Sadness for a newspaper that was once a great newspaper but is not longer as great a newspaper as it once was. Not a profound sadness but a ...

knox said...

zut alors!

(not trying to be a smarty pants, I have no clue what it really means, we just used to say it and laugh hysterically in high school french.)

Kev said...

(the other kev)

Well, if 24/7 Wall Street is right, the Times' days are numbered anyway. I'll miss their science reporting, but that's about it.

JohnAnnArbor said...

Me too, Kev. Still buy one most Tuesdays.

AJ Lynch said...

The UAW and its members ruined an industry for personal financial gain.

The MSM and its liberal writers ruined an industry for ideological reasons.

Which of the two was dumber?

Lem said...

Chip makes me laugh. Not a big laugh but a little laugh, and not so little a laugh that it cannot be felt. Not a shallow laugh either, but a deep laugh. A little but still significant laugh that is deep inside and that can be felt. That kind of laugh. Ha ha ha.

Yachira said...

Ann says, "Now, why did the Times fall for this?"

This is why the Times fell for it: "Can we speak of American decline?"

Right? That one line sums up the Times' world view. They had to print the letter for that reason, and that line explains how they ran roughshod over whatever policies they imagine they have in place to protect themselves against being punked.

Richard Fagin said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Richard Fagin said...

Instapundit linked to a report that the NY Times Co. is one institution believed to be at risk of failure in 2009. Can we talk about American decline? Yes we can!

I feel really badly for the innocent Times employees who'll lose their jobs as a result of Pinch Sulzberger's version of Bush Derangement Syndrome. It's always a shame when honest, hard working people get canned because management is full of incompetents. Over at the Times, they're all too happy to gloat over that fact at GM and Chrysler. Look in the mirror, Pinch.

Lem said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Wilber said...

Here is the giveaway:

"We French have been consistently admiring of the American Constitution, ..."

Sounds like Mrs Palin has her revenge!

Darcy said...

Chip, that was priceless.

Lem said...

If the NYT is so eager to show how rotten we are what did the Obama victory mean to them then?

How does their rush to judgement, America in decline mesh with the hope as endorsed by the paper only a few months ago?

Like sands through the hourglass, so are the days of our lives

http://tinyurl.com/6va7ph

We are rotten, when we are not.

F said...

Drill Sgt (6:32) My parakeet resents the fact that you left out what she considers the most important use for the former paper of record: lining the bottom of her cage! F

mockmook said...

Lem, that was sarcasm, no?

The NYT wants 0 to take us down the road to palsied mediocrity.

From Inwood said...

Note to a friend who claims that he’s smart because he reads the NYT & I’m missing smart things ‘cause I don’t read the NYT (except after the corrections have been published).

************

XXX

Your Bible makes zee faux pas! Ho Hum; Dog bites man.

How do I know? I read about it on what you characterized as one of my right-wing nutty blogs!

Again, why read the NYT all morning when in the afternoon you have to unlearn all the things you thought you learned that morning? Wait for the blogs to correct the errors. The National Enquirer has better fact checkers than The Gray Lady!

[Inwood]

*************

You can't cheat an honest man. OOPS, make that "person".

Lem said...

Lem, that was sarcasm, no?

I sure hope not ;)

ddh said...

Times Prints Fraudulent Letter--Women, Minorities Hardest Hit

Clyde said...

Losin' French, Losin' French,
Ya got nothin' to lose,
Ya don't lose when ya lose
Fake French.

(w/ apologies to Jett-Laguna)

Hoosier Daddy said...

I'm sure Palin is laughing her gorgeous ass off right now.

Der Hahn said...

Thanks for putting this on the front page, even though I doubt it will convince any of the True Believers that stuff printed in the NYT isn't necessarily 'extensive and well-researched'.

William said...

The French overthrew the dynastic tyranny of the Bourbons for the egalitarian dynastic tyranny of the Bonapartists....The wish for dynasties seems to be hard wired among primates. The progeny of dominant chimps get to throw their faeces at the other chimps. The beta chimps, by and large, are delighted to be so honored by the children of the dominant. The human animal is not so distantly evolved from chimps.....Equality is an ideal worth cherishing, but no one ever said it would be easy to achieve. Accordingly I would submit the following proposal to those who would seek power in a democracy: The office seeker must submit to castration or a hysterectomy and his/her children must be executed. Some will say that this proposal is too Draconian in both its scope and effects. I question whether such nay sayers are truly committed to democracy. One must crack eggs to make omelets. It is my feeling that very few present office holders would find this requirement onerous.

blake said...

As pro-castration and execution as I am, William, I suppose we could simply forbid dynasties from holding office.

X said...

my old unemployed hippie neighbor took home delivery of the Times but he's dead now so they don't have that going for them anymore. how is Pinch's mismanagment and raiding of the corporate coffers any different than Enron and how come every company that employs Paul Krugman goes belly-up?

veni vidi vici said...

"Or Spitzer could pay. Who cares what he does in terms of the Mann Act. "

Well, Spitzer did pay, cash money. However, the payments and the associated services acquired fell under the terms of the Mann-Woman Act, which is referred to in some Albany salons as the "twinkie-donut game".

Florida said...

I have a different opinion.

I believe that in fact, the letter was real. Here's why:

1) The NY Times will not say how the letter came to be printed.

2) It is not saying the email address from which it received the letter.

3) It is not saying how it came to understand that the letter was "fake." It merely asserts that it was, but doesn't quote anyone saying that it was fake. Merely an assertion.

Suppose that the mayor of Paris was, after the fact, for some unknown reason, convinced to retract his letter. What better way to retract than to disclaim authorship in the first place?

The NY Times, as we all know, isn't telling its readers everything about Ms. Kennedy's relationship to the NY Times. Isn't it interesting that a letter opposing the coronation of Ms. Kennedy is suddenly claimed to be inauthentic when it just so happens that the NY Times is championing the coronation elsewhere in Pinch's pages?

The original letter was authentic, I maintain, and any serious journalist would be asking herself why the NY Times is covering up this fact.