"Bill Kristol's New York Times column about Barack Obama this morning contains a major, prejudicial error.
The error is in trusting the source without checking.
But Ronald Kessler, a journalist who has written about
Wright’s ministry, claims that Obama was in fact in the pews at Trinity last
July 22. That’s when Wright blamed the “arrogance” of the “United States of
White America” for much of the world’s suffering, especially the oppression of
blacks. In any case, given the apparent frequency of such statements in Wright’s
preaching and their centrality to his worldview, the pretense that over all
these years Obama had no idea that Wright was saying such things is hard to
The truth is that Obama did not attend church on July 22.
He was on his way to campaign in Miami.
(Here is some video evidence.) This was before he signed an agreement forbidding himself from campaigning in Florida.
Here is the original, false, Newsmax story:Obama Attended Hate America Sermon."
You know, I thought it was cute when the NY Times put Kristol on its payroll. It's reminded me of this liquor store by Columbia Uni, that had a guard cat; an interesting gimmick but ultimately ineffective. Now though I think I need to revise my opinion. Considering that Kristol has a record of incompetence, isn't it sorta like criminal negligence to allow him to poison the media like this? Or does the Times care about their reputation?
UPDATE: My rationality just informed me that it isn't "sorta like criminal negligence" it is criminal negligence. And no, the Times doesn't care about their reputation. Mah bad.