« Walrus: your new best friend. | Home | The misogyny of numbers, rules, and mathematics. »
May 20, 2008
Truthiness meets wronginess.
It bites.
Right-wing bloviator William Kristol is a nasty piece of work with a creepy jack-o'-lantern grin that frightens small children. He's also one of the current go-to guys for Republicans trying to paint a hopeful face on John McCain's presidential candidacy.
Since Kristol has a hard time coming up with things he actually likes about McCain, this effort pretty much boils down to undermining Barack Obama in any way possible. What it doesn't involve, apparently, is even perfunctory fact-checking.
From yesterday's Kristol column in the NY Times, listing developments he considers "problematic for Obama":
On Tuesday night, while the G.O.P. Congressional candidate was losing in a Mississippi district George Bush carried in 2004 by 25 points, Barack Obama was being trounced in the West Virginia Democratic primary — by 41 points. I can’t find a single recent instance of a candidate who ultimately became his party’s nominee losing a primary by this kind of margin.
If Kristol is the standard of excellence among conservative thinkers, it's no wonder the Bush years have gone so well; as Think Progress and anyone capable of using this newfangled "Google" can point out—
On Feb. 5 [less than four months ago—diligent research, Bill!], former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney beat presumptive GOP nominee Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) by 85 points in the Utah primary:
In fact, on the same day, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee beat McCain by the same margin Kristol touted as unprecedented — 41 points — in the Arkansas primary. As did Mitt Romney in the Colorado caucus.
This is at least the third time that Kristol has gotten the facts wrong in his Times column. In his debut column, Kristol misattributed a quote by Michael Medved to Michelle Malkin. Later, Kristol falsely claimed Obama was in church on a day that he was not.
Keep this in mind the next time you see Kristol's disturbing leer on the teevee, because he's not really all that great on the facts.
