This Entry Is Not Titled "Crying Wolfowitz"

After Reuters' penetrating analysis on why insurgents in Iraq target Iraqis, you may wonder how the press could be less intelligent. But Paul Wolfowitz's nomination to head the World Bank offers new heights of lowness:

Norman Geras observes (in an entry titled "Crying Wolfowitz") that The Guardian continues its tradition of employing Britain's mentally impaired. "Some worry that his strong emphasis on human rights may complicate relations with China," says the editorial, without reference or logic (putting a human rights champion at the World Bank is bad?).

For out-and-out bias, though, James Taranto (in an entry titled "Crying Wolfowitz") leans into The New York Times over this:

The announcement, coming on the heels of the appointment of John R. Bolton as the new American ambassador to the United Nations, was greeted with quiet anguish in those foreign capitals where the Iraq conflict and its aftermath remain deeply unpopular, and where Mr. Wolfowitz's drive to spread democracy around the world has been viewed with some suspicion. . . .

Despite the displeasure of some diplomats who had hoped that the administration would appoint a person without the almost radioactive reputation of a committed ideologue, they said that they expected Mr. Wolfowitz to receive the approval of the World Bank's board of directors in time for Mr. Wolfensohn's departure in May.

Taranto also forwards a priceless quote from an unnamed French official: "We all know he has strong convictions, and that is a bit frightening." I'm guessing the official is from Vichy.

Update: On a related note, the gross inflation of Iraqi deaths continues in the press. This is worse than the unstoppable fake turkey fantasy.