Doug Kmiec’s Unconvincing Endorsement of Obama

Byline: | Category: 2008 Presidential Election | Posted at: Monday, 24 March 2008

(DISCLAIMER: I am not Bob Krumm. I am Roger Abramson, who will be sitting in for Bob for a little while. This is (yet again) an astonishing misjudgment by Bob, but you’ll need to take that up with him.)

So I’m reading this endorsement of Barack Fidel Castro Obama by Douglas Kmiec, and, well, I guess I’m missing something, because he really gives no real reason for his endorsement of the guy. I found this disappointing, because I was pretty interested in hearing (reading) a conservative apologia for Obama. Instead, we got a lot of fluff.

Here is my summary of the endorsement:

Paragraph One: I endorse Barack Obama. He seems like a pretty good chap.

Paragraph Two: The only reason you should even care about this endorsement is because I’m a conservative Republican.

Paragraph Three: Here are five major things I believe in.

Paragraph Four: Obama does not agree with me on any of those things.

Paragraph Five: Never mind all that! The current administration is a disaster.

Paragraph Six: The extremist Islamic threat is a top priority. Here’s hoping that Obama will focus more attention on it.

And…that’s it. Frankly, that’s pretty lame. Now, I’m not knocking his apostasy. Lord knows I’m the last person to do that. I just have a problem with his flimsy argument.

Kmiec is usually better than that. Which leads me to believe there’s something more going on here. One possible theory: this is less a pro-Obama position as it is an anti-McCain position. But maybe he doesn’t even realize that yet.

Share this post:

13 Responses to “Doug Kmiec’s Unconvincing Endorsement of Obama”

  1. Poker Player Says:

    Paragraph 7 – And did I tell you that have lost my mind??

  2. SayUncle » On Barack Chavez* Obama Says:

    […] Inspired by Roger who has a transcript of Kmiec’s non-endorsement endorsement. Henceforth and forever, I will add some tin pot dictator’s middle name to his until Obama […]

  3. David Triche Says:

    You are so write about the “astonishing misjudgment” ont he part of Krumm. Proof is this is your childish name calling of Senator Obama. Imean my god! I would expect more from one of my kindergarten students. You did not even address this part of Kmiec’s endorsement:

    “Our president has involved our nation in a military engagement without sufficient justification or a clear objective. In so doing, he has incurred both tragic loss of life and extraordinary debt jeopardizing the economy and the well-being of the average American citizen. In pursuit of these fatally flawed purposes, the office of the presidency, which it was once my privilege to defend in public office formally, has been distorted beyond its constitutional assignment.”

    Maybe you did not see that? Or, perhaps, you would just rather call the Senator childish names. I do not normally do this but I must protect the honor of Mr. Kmiec and Senator Obama. And since you are influenced by name calling: you are clearly a petty childish lowly piece of whale shit. Go crawl back under the rock you came from.

  4. bob Says:

    Mr. Triche,
    maybe you should reread Roger’s critique. He addressed that paragraph and correctly noted that it has nothing at all to say about Sen Obama but only says that Mr. Kmiec doesn’t like President Bush. So what.

  5. Blue Heron Says:

    E. D. Hirsch, Jr., Linden Kent Memorial Professor of English Emeritus at the University of Virginia, who is famed for his writings on cultural literacy, recently remarked in a column in the Washington Post, “Studies of reading comprehension show that knowing something of the topic you’re reading about is the most important variable in comprehension.” [Washington Post, Saturday, February 16, 2008; A21]

  6. Roger A Says:

    Mr. Triche —

    Putting aside your obvious inability to comprehend what I wrote, I’m having a heck of a time getting my head around a kindergarten teacher (which you indicate you are) who calls people “whale shit” and confuses the word “right” with “write.”

  7. David Triche Says:

    Look Roger, You call Obama “Fidel Castro”.
    For the life of me I could not get my head around you calling him Fidel Castro. Explain, that one to me. I’ve learned sometimes childish people need to be treated like childish people. Calling Obama Fidel was childish.
    So let me get this straight, one of the most respected conservative constitutional lawyers in the country, the Dean of a fine law school clearly recognizes that Bush and his policies have done more harm to this country that any other administration in our history, sees no alternative in any other candidate, except Obama and you don’t understand why he supports him? Here are the choices at the moment:
    1. A broken down old man who is willling to stay in Iraq 90 years after he dies.

    2. A power hungry bitch married to a power hungry pervert

    3. Obama.

    And you just call Obama names.

  8. Roger A Says:

    Sigh. OK, David, you’re obviously an example of what Dave Barry once called the Humor Impaired.

    Anyone who reads me on a regular basis (assuming they can read at anything approaching a fourth-grade level, which in your case maybe a questionable proposition) knows that I always stick some irrelvant and vaguely negative middle name into Obama’s full name.

    It’s a little thing I’ve done ever snce that whole blow-up a few weeks ago to illustrate how silly it is–in my view–to knock the guy because of his middle name. I no more think Barack Obama is like Fidel Castro than you think he’s like Saddam Hussein. It’s something I do because on a numebr of levels–and this may come as a shock to you–I actually like Obama.

    Some of his supporters, though, well, they obviously leave something to be desired.

  9. Blue Heron Says:

    Never underestimate the zeal of a political switch-hitter! Prof. Kmiec may be attracted to Obama’s presidential candidacy because or the latter’s promise to attack, aggressively, decisively, Al-Qaeda in Pakistan, with or without the permission of the nuclear-armed Pakistani government. For example, reporter Jake Tapper of ABC News reported at the broadcaster’s website on August 1, 2007:

    “In a strikingly bold speech about terrorism Wednesday, Democratic presidential candidate Illinois Sen. Barack Obama called not only for a withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq, but a redeployment of troops into Afghanistan and even Pakistan — with or without the permission of Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf.

    “‘I understand that President Musharraf has his own challenges,’ Obama said, ‘but let me make this clear. There are terrorists holed up in those mountains who murdered 3,000 Americans. They are plotting to strike again. It was a terrible mistake to fail to act when we had a chance to take out an al Qaeda leadership meeting in 2005. If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf won’t act, we will.’”

    Maybe this is the kind of hubris a thinking-person’s convert to Progressivism like Kmiec supports, unequivocally.

  10. David Triche Says:

    As Dennis Prager often says, you can judge the character of a person by the way they treat strangers. I am not sure if you have a low opinion of kindergarten teachers, but you certainly seem to by the comment you made. However, I may be wrong. Let me know if you view yourself as superior to kindergarten teachers. What I do know is that you seem to be avoiding the the obvious, at least obvious to many, logic of Doug Kmiec’s reason for supporting Obama. In a choice between McCain and Obama, Obama is the only one who offers a path to getting out of a failed military intervention in a reasonable time frame. You may not want to acknowledge this. But anyway, getting back to character. You seem to be dismissing kindergarten teachers out of hand and also seem to judge people by their typographical errors. I do not know what profession you have and I certainly would not want to judge you by your profession, but I do know you wrote this:

    Anyone who reads me on a regular basis (assuming they can read at anything approaching a fourth-grade level, which in your case maybe a questionable proposition) knows that I always stick some irrelvant and vaguely negative middle name into Obama’s full name.

    It’s a little thing I’ve done ever snce that whole blow-up a few weeks ago to illustrate how silly it is–in my view–to knock the guy because of his middle name.

    So in the course of this discussion you, it seems, dissed kindergarten teachers, questioned my ability to read and misspelled “since”. What am I to conclude about you? You are barely literate because you misspelled since? Maybe you were confusing it with Kmiec? But, what is clear is you are engaging in argumentum ad hominem rather than sticking to the subject at hand. I can, then, safely conclude that you: 1. Use derogatory, irrelevant and sophomoric names for political candidates you so not support. 2. You engage in ad hominem attacks rather than sticking to the dicussion at hand. That is all I know about you. You might be a genius on the path to a Nobel prize or an inbred peckerwood with six fingers from some hollow in a third rate Southern state. Just the same I respect you as a human, even when you act like whale shit.

  11. Roger A Says:

    You’re obviously a class act there Dave. Please stay away from my Kindergartener. In factm, do us all a favor and stay away from all Kindergarteners. Or just children generally.

  12. bob Says:

    So what is Mr. Obama’s pan to get us out of Germany, Italy, and Japan after68 years? And out of Korea 55 years after a cease fire?

  13. Dave Says:

    Finally, got something right, but I am not sure you know anything about class. I mean think about it. What is the classiest thing in all of Tenn.? The Peabody?

    Ed: Dave is obviously a real class act.