Thomas Sowell has historically been worthy of respect for several reasons.  I have found his economic analysis trenchant, though I find I often disagree with some of his conclusions (often because I think his assumptions are just a touch too libertarian).  I think his insight into economic history is worthwhile. His recent article in National Review, 'Why Republican Infighting Matters', has some great points about the flaw in the Republican party (many Americans list themselves as Conservatives, yet the Republican party, traditionally 'Conservative' is at an all-time low in power).  But, he then goes on to make the crazy claim that a nuclear-empowered Iran implies the following about the current US government: 

Perhaps people who are busy gushing over the Obama cult today might do well to stop and think about what it would mean for their granddaughters to live under sharia law.

Let's consider that Iran, or terrorist affiliates of Iran, get two active nuclear ICBMs, target them on NYC and Washington D.C., and pop goes the weasel.  And suddenly the US is taken over by fanatical Islamists! Of course! How could I not realise it?! The US would, of course, never launch a counter-attack, but would willingly submit to the will of the Islamic Theocracies and the superpower would CRUMBLE!

Um... No. No. No. Sloppy, sloppy logic.  Fear-mongering, Obama-slandering, sloppy 'logic'.   'With Obama as our president our grandchildren might live under Shariah law!' One could more logically say that if Shariah law ever came about in the US it is unlikely to have been the result of Obama's policy only.  I get that Sowell's an economist, I get that he wants to isolate one cause and ceteris paribus the others out of that frantic picture, but really, what about GW's policies in Iraq and Afghanistan, and his position on the Israel-Palestine situation? What about Clinton? What about George 41? Oh yes, none of them took any positions on the Middle East.  Ever. But Obama? He's to blame for your grandkids living under Shariah law.  Sigh.