According to The Washington Post, he says "Obama is becoming the antiwar candidate, and Hillary Clinton is becoming the responsible Democrat who could become commander in chief in a post-9/11 world." One can try to speculate that Kristol is playing some odd angles here, but I think the record indicates that he's genuinely more committed to war -- criticized Republican critics of the Kosovo War, criticized Bill Clinton for not killing enough people during the Kosovo War, backed John McCain in the 2000 primaries -- and based on the evidence thinks Clinton will be more sympathetic to his agenda than the alternatives.

We want to hear what you think about this article. Submit a letter to the editor or write to