Kraziness unleashed

By Michael J.W. Stickings

More Krazy Kristol for you.

On Fox News Sunday yesterday, Bill "he's so insane I can't think of a suitable nickname" Kristol said that Obama would have supported Stephen Douglas in the 1858 Illinois Senate race, not Lincoln (whom Obama mentioned in his announcement speech on Saturday). Which is to say, he would have been on the pro-slavery side, an appeaser of the slaveowners.

What's the connection? Kristol apparently thinks that Obama is an appeaser of Islamic terrorists and hence an enabler of Islamic terrorism. Therefore, he would have been an appeaser of the slaveowners and hence an enabler of slavery.

This is not just disingenuous and unfair. It's vile. First, one may disagree with the opponents of the Iraq War, such as Obama, without calling them terrorist-enabling traitors. But, then, the proponents of the Iraq War seem to have nothing left but the use of ad hominem attacks. Defending the Iraq War on the merits is no longer a credible position. Second, Obama is, for all intents and purposes, a black man. However complex his identity, he is seen as a black man not just in the U.S. but around the world. To suggest that he would have essentially supported slavery is simply outrageous and disgusting.

But there's Bill Kristol for you. And, just to prove that I'm not making this up, because it's so krazy you might think I am, Think Progress has the video and transcript here.