Catholic endorses Obama

Douglas Kmiec, head of legal counsel for Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush, has endorsed Barack Obama. In a Slate.com article this Sunday, Kmiec reaffirmed his belief that life begins at conception, his support for traditional marriage, his belief in a limited judicial role and in religion's importance in the public square. Sounds like the beginning of a list of reasons not to back Obama, but Kmiec draws the opposite conclusion:

I am convinced based upon his public pronouncements and his personal writing that on each of these questions he is not closed to understanding opposing points of view, and as best as it is humanly possible, he will respect and accommodate them.

Andrew Sullivan praises Kmiec's integrity and open mind, but most conservatives find it hard to see how a president could accommodate both pro-life and pro-abortion positions, or how "understanding" a point of view is relevant if you're going to oppose it anyway. Powerline blogger Paul Mirengoff deems it "one of the most vacuous statements I've ever read," and Patterico calls it "one of the most puzzling pieces of writing I have ever read."

Some conservatives, including Shannen Coffin on The Corner, already dismissed Kmiec as "off his rocker" when he published another piece saying Obama was a natural choice for the Catholic Reaganite vote. Like Reagan, Kmiec said, Obama has empathy and a desire to make Americans deserve to feel good about themselves.

Rod Dreher said he just didn't get it: "I think the guy just loves the feeling Obama gives him … It wouldn't require so much tortuous logic simply to say, "I'm a Republican who's sick of the Republicans, and want change. Obama is a likable, decent guy, and I'm willing to take a chance on him." But as Kmiec has noted before, Catholics do hold views that make them uncomfortable in either party. They're pro-life, anti-death penalty, often anti-Iraq war, and concerned about global warming.

Will other Catholics follow Kmiec's lead? So far, they've been voting for Hillary Clinton over Obama, but the New York Times says they're a fickle group: "No other large group has switched sides so often, or been so consistently aligned with the winners."