Doug Kmiec Jumps Shark

Friday, January 24, AD 2014

For Wales.

 

 

Richard Rich Doug Kmiec, who betrayed the pro-life cause in 2008 by endorsing the most pro-abort President in our nation’s history, is back in the news.  Following his resignation from his Malta ambassadorship, his 30 pieces of silver from Obama for his support in 2008, after being criticized in a State Department report for spending his time on private writing instead of his ambassadorial duties, Doug has apparently taken leave of his senses.  The Weekly Standard gives us the details:

Last week, Kmiec took to his Facebook page (where all the old folks go on the Internet these days) and announced that he’s running for Congress. Kmiec has targeted California’s 26th district, where freshman Democrat Julia Brownley won a reasonably narrow victory in 2012. The district had been represented by David Dreier for the preceeding decade, so it’s not crazy for Kmiec to think a Republican might have a shot to unseat her. But Kmiec isn’t running as a Republican. He’s running as an independent. Still, not entirely crazy. This is California, after all. Stranger things have happened.

No, the crazy comes when Kmiec explained to the Pepperdine student newspaper exactly why he’s running. He was inspired to run, he said, by Pope Francis. But don’t worry, his candidacy won’t make him some kind of congressional holy roller. Because, as he further explained, he merely sees the House of Representatives as a stepping stone to, well, let’s let Kmiec explain:

Kmiec said that if he wins the election, he would hope to be considered as an option to become the vice-president in Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign. “I see it as an outside possibility. .  .  . The idea of running for Congress is to put myself in a position where I’m able to both lead in the interim while she’s running for president and be ready for greater responsibility should that be God’s blessing and his wisdom,” he said. Kmiec’s blog further explains how the U.S., in his opinion, is “Ready for Hillary.”

Continue reading...

28 Responses to Doug Kmiec Jumps Shark

  • I once lived in what is now California’s 26th congressional district. I expect Kmiec will be Krushed after the June primary.

    P.S. The Archdiocese of Los Angeles, in which Ventura County is trapped, should be broken up.

  • Kmiec’s marriage of 40 years ended in divorce last year. He is 62 years of age. I seem to recall that Sandra Day O’Connor’s husband began losing his reason at age 59 and Gov. Carroll Campbell at age 61. Something is not right with him.

    Remember Jeffrey Hart, the retired Dartmouth English professor, erstwhile cog in Richard Nixon’s public relations apparat, and contributor at National Review? He went on a binge of conspirazoid musings conjoined to pseudo-Burkean ramblings during the period running from 2004 to 2008 which culminated with an endorsement of Barack Obama as the ‘real conservative’. As far as I can tell, the man has not published a word in nearly three years and has said very little in the last five years and change. You think maybe his children took charge of him?

  • My only comment:

    Asinus Maximus

    No translation required.

  • Don

    The Ambassorship of Malta is worth about one piece of silver. Maybe he is trying to get the other twentynine.

  • Donald McClarey’s bilious ad hominem against Professor Kmiec–and the other comments that follow– is dense with conservative boiler plate and uncommonly weak with regard to any intellectual content. Conservatives wedded to the idea that President Obama is somehow “pro-abortion” will never acknowledge the data that now shows abortions falling significantly faster under Obama than under his Republican predecessor. Doug Kmiec is too much a gentleman to ridicule the errant musings of his conservative critics. But he is one of the country’s few great “public Catholics.” I think the kind of criticism of him that we are seeing in the blogosphere now fits squarely in the category of the blather described well by Jonathan Swift when he said, “When a true genius appears, you can know him by this sign: that all the dunces are in a confederacy against him.”

  • I am now confirmed in my previous assessment regarding the worthless of degrees from today’s Academia.

    A more sterling example of Judas Iscariot than Doug Kmiec cannot be had. If this is American Catholicism then get ready for God to raise up sons to Abraham from the stones themselves.

    As for Obama, he had best beware lest as he follows his predecessor King Manasseh in infanticide he also follows him into captivity. God’s justice will not be indefinitely delayed. God save the President from himself!

  • “Donald McClarey’s bilious ad hominem against Professor Kmiec”

    Oh surely a Harvard MD Phd can do better than that.

    “Conservatives wedded to the idea that President Obama is somehow “pro-abortion””

    Why the scare quotes about pro-abortion Doc? I am sure that Obama would embrace it, based upon his statement celebrating Roe this week:

    “Today, as we reflect on the 41st anniversary of the Supreme Court decision in Roe v. Wade, we recommit ourselves to the decision’s guiding principle: that every woman should be able to make her own choices about her body and her health. We reaffirm our steadfast commitment to protecting a woman’s access to safe, affordable health care and her constitutional right to privacy, including the right to reproductive freedom. And we resolve to reduce the number of unintended pregnancies, support maternal and child health, and continue to build safe and healthy communities for all our children.

    Because this is a country where everyone deserves the same freedom and opportunities to fulfill their dreams.”

    “will never acknowledge the data that now shows abortions falling significantly faster under Obama than under his Republican predecessor.”

    Nice try Doc. The abortion rate has been declining since 1990, no thanks to pro-abort fanatics like Obama:

    http://www.abort73.com/abortion_facts/us_abortion_statistics/

    “But he is one of the country’s few great “public Catholics.””

    Because he supported the most pro-abort President in our history? What a warped view you must have of greatness and of Catholicism.

    In regard to Swift, I have always regarded his A Modest Proposal as the perfect satire of the pro-abortion, better living through mass death, mentality.

  • Whelan presumably showed up because he and Kmiec are associated with a group called Catholic Democrats which supported Obama:

    http://www.catholicdemocrats.org/Barack_Obama/

    Supporting the slaying of a million innocents a year is small potatoes for “Catholic” Democrats like Whelan and Kmiec so long as they can pull the lever for the party of the Jackass.

    Go to the link below for background info on Catholic Democrats and other fake Catholic groups of the left.
    http://capitalresearch.org/2012/07/rallying-the-catholic-left/

  • Patrick just admit you voted for a guy who doesn’t have a qualm about doctors crushing the skulls of preborn children at any point of gestation. You may have some impressive letters after your name, but you’re still slimy.

  • The Jonathan Swift quote used above can certainly be understood in the opposite of its intended use. Sad to see that the content of the post was taken as ‘intellectual’ divorced from any moral underpinning.

  • “When a true genius appears, you can know him by this sign: that all the dunces are in a confederacy against him.”
    I am not against him. I am only against the devil and the evil he does: enabling and supporting human sacrifice, Benghazi, unnatural cohabitation, leaving us without a prayer and at Christmas time, taxation without representation, overturning the will of the people, and legally castrating every American male, not to mention the lies about keeping one’s own insurance.

  • Donald McClarey’s bilious ad hominem against Professor Kmiec–and the other comments that follow

    Can someone tell the rheumatologist who ‘writes on medical ethics’ that the term ‘ad hominem’ does not mean what he thinks it means?

  • Dr. Whalen states, ““When a true genius appears, you can know him by this sign: that all the dunces are in a confederacy against him.”
    .
    Amazing how full of yourself you are Patrick Whalen….so conceited and oafish in your craven effort to be counted among the politically correct that you betray your own Faith. Remember who you are and where you came from.
    .
    Mr. Kmiec’s support of an abortion advocate makes him no genius; merely a weak and little man lacking in the fortitude necessary to stand firm against those who support the horrific act of child murder that is abortion.
    .
    I stand proudly among those you label as “dunces” who oppose Mr. Kmiec actions ansd who are remarkably unimpressed by you.

  • I keep hearing that “abortion rates are falling.” I looked at that website and I’m not exactly impressed by how much it has fallen. I also wonder if the abortion rates have fallen due to 1) increased abstinence/chastity among some populations,2) increase in infertility due to STDs and multiple abortions, 2) and aging population. Don’t get me wrong–the modest declines we’ve had is a good thing, but we’ve a l.o.n.g. to go for anyone celebrates. And yes, Obama is a very strong supporter of abortion.

  • Normally I would say that Art may have been a bit out of line, then I followed the link in the update, and yeah, something is not right. I mean Kmiek has always been a social climber, thus why he took the CUA gig in the first place, but that’s just way out there.

    -Paul Zummo, BA, Ph. D. PGK, DD

  • “I am now confirmed in my previous assessment regarding the worthlessness of degrees from today’s Academia.”

    Fun fact: Kmiec has the somewhat dubious honor of teaching in the same law program from which former Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich (long before Kmiec’s tenure) earned his law degree, and where Blago famously boasted of having only earned a C in his constitutional law class.

  • “the data that now shows abortions falling significantly faster under Obama than under his Republican predecessor. ” Hmm . . . an ever-quickening rate of falling abortion rates has anything to do with who’s in the White House? Harvard must have stopped teaching Logic 101 to its PhDs.

    “There are more bears in the California woods that ever before, and look how much acreage is burning! We need to stop these pyromaniac bears!”

  • @WK Aiken:

    PhD = Piled Higher and Deeper.

    I have been a nuclear training instructor for decades and have received into my initial training classes the most abominably ignorant college degreed people from Academia to train. Give me a Navy nuke tech or operator any day of the week over arrogant self-filled PhD’s from today’s godless liberal Academia.

  • Pingback: More on Andrew Cuomo's Bigotry - BigPulpit.com
  • Just because Hilary is the early favorite does not mean she will even win the Democratic nomination. She has too little charisma and a long record with too many blemishes.

  • I am suggesting that Doug Kmiec apply for the position of valet for Le Roi Soleil – His Royal Highness of the Kingdom of the Empire State of New York. They have much in common in their profound understanding of and practice of Catholicism. Kmiec, Obama, Sibelius, Pelosi, Brown, and the rest of their ilk would be laughable if they were not so dangerous. Recommended reading for this crowd: The Divine Comedy.

  • “Just because Hilary is the early favorite does not mean she will even win the Democratic nomination. She has too little charisma and a long record with too many blemishes.”
    That is what ambition without principle does. Hillary Clinton tried to steal the White House china with the presidential seal on it. I say “tried” because she was caught and made to put it back. Then there is Whitewater and Vince Foster, who committed suicide and then walked a quarter of a mile.
    I know too many voters who will unabashedly vote for Hillary because she is a woman and another group who will vote Democratic because their grandparents and parents did. Any money in the campaign spent informing the people of their civil rights is well spent.
    Then there is Bill Clinton who used the office of President of the United States to seduce women, Jennifer Flowers, Monica Lewinsky but not Hillary. If Bill Clinton did not want Hillary, why should I?

  • Patrick Whelan MD PhD:

    Did your mother not-abort a “normal” whelp?

    FYI. That would be an insult, imbecile.

  • Patrick Whelan MD PhD: God will arrest him.

  • Kmiec was a professor of mine and head of my law school for 1.5 years. He seemed…normal then, and poised to take the law school more Catholic, more conservative, and to stand boldly forth, etc.

    Then he resigned 1.5 years in and went back to Pepperdine…almost 6 months after telling the faculty and students that he was there to stay. There were many rumors as to why that happened. Failure to get a judgeship, wife didn’t like D.C. weather, Pepperdine offered more money….who knows, in the end.

    I am saddened that his life has taken so many problematic turns, and saddened still more that many of them can be laid at his own feet.

  • The video “political ad” that the “genius” Kmiec produced has mysteriously disappeared. Here is how Josh Blackman describes it:

    “Then came this surreal video with some eerie voices touting Kmiec as an “independent voice” in 2014. He is apparently also running for Congress in 2014 before being Hillary’s VP. (I don’t know how many campaign finance laws were ignored here).”

    I saw the video before its untimely demise, and I can tell you that it doesn’t take a confederacy of dunces (or a Harvard M.D. and a PhD) to conclude that it wasn’t produced by someone in his right mind.

  • Tragic. The man is not well.

  • “The abortion rate has been declining since 1990, no thanks to pro-abort fanatics like Obama”

    I wonder about these statistics. Abortion as has always been measured has gone done, but does that mean there are fewer abortions? There are so many ways to kill a child these days that I wonder if the victims of these new methods are counted. Example: The morning after pill is available over the counter. No doctor. No paperwork. How do you count those children not allowed to implant?

Doug Kmiec Says HHS Policy May Cause Him To Oppose Obama

Monday, February 6, AD 2012

In the future, everyone will be famous for fifteen minutes, however in the mean time, you can always try to get a reprise of your brush with newsworthiness. Self anointed high-profile Obama supporter (and now former ambassador to Malta) Doug Kmiec seems to be trying for this dubious honor by getting back into the national political scene to announce that unless he hears a very good explanation out of the Obama Administration for their HHS policy refusing religious conscience exemptions to Catholic institutions, he may not be able to support Obama in 2012.

Douglas Kmiec, Obama’s former ambassador to Malta, is strongly opposed to Obama’s new mandate that Catholic hospitals and universities provide contraception in their employee health plans.

Kmiec, who served in the Reagan administration, noted that he urged Obama last year to grant an exemption, explaining that such a move “would be an opportunity to be more sensitive to religious freedom than the law requires.”

Asked whether he will back Obama in 2012, Kmiec replied in an email, “Until I have an opportunity to speak with the president, I am for now (unhappily) without a candidate.”

Continue reading...

24 Responses to Doug Kmiec Says HHS Policy May Cause Him To Oppose Obama

  • This sudden feeling of betrayal over an issue which, while grave, is certainly less shocking than Obama’s strong support for far more pernicious evils almost makes it appear that it was, all this time, the window dressing that they valued.

    No doubt! My thoughts exactly. It’s like condemning a rapist for not wearing a condom.

    BTW, we heaven’t heard from Bart Stupak as far as I know. I did a google search and found that Benjamin Zycher at NRO was wondering him about him too. I’m curious to see what he has to say. Not that it matters much because the damage is done, but you know…

  • Being with the herd is safe, warm, cozy.
    Identifying with the teachings of Christ is hard.
    ‘Hard’ meaning ‘ridicule from lefties’, not real financial or physical harm though.

  • Yeah, daledog, it’s one thing to fold when you’re threatened with being fed to the lions or shipped off to a concentration camp and quite another to fold because you want to be invited to the chi-chi Georgetown cocktail parties.

  • Does Kmiec actually think anyone from either political party cares in the very least who he “endorses” at this point? I certainly don’t. This story reminds me of something from the movie “Legally Blonde” or similar, except that the main character from that movie was actually very clever. He isn’t.

    Doug Kmiec was a lifelong Republican with a strongly pro-life reputation going back to the Reagan era, as well as a 2008 Romney supporter who then jumped ship quite suddenly and totally when Obama began rising to fame. To be fair a lot of us were taken in by this guy for awhile (the current President, that is). But most of us were not professors of Constitutional law at Pepperdine University who wielded the kind of political and moral influence he once did. How could he have not known better?

    He thus sold his apparent soul with the expectation of becoming ambassador to the Vatican, and after that didn’t work out ended up in Malta, eventually clashing with the Administration he helped elect after being chided for supposedly speaking out and writing “too much” on moral issues while there. Yet even then Barack was still his man. The fact that he was still even considering supporting President Obama for another round after that telling flap is truly mind-threatening. Even to me. Even at my blondest moments.

    And now that his man Romney is again on top or close, he “threatens” to switch sides yet again? Hooplah. No one is scared, Doug. I am pretty sure that the Obama team has already long forgotten you and could not give a Chicago rat’s poor little behind if you do so, since, by now, on a pretty total level, you have managed to successfully alienate everyone who ever trusted you due to your complete spinelessness and personal ambitions over the past 3 years.

    When a wife comes home and finds the woman next door undressed and in bed with her husband, and he then tries to tell her he was just “showing her around the neighborhood,” she should probably find an attorney and quickly, rather than giving him 2 or 3 more chances to give more “neighborly tours.” Kmiec is a bit late on his hollow banter here. But never fear, Doug, Notre Dame may yet hire you.

  • Doug, Obama’s just not that into you, anymore. None of us are into you. Please just
    go away and most of all, stop talking. How can one man be so naive?

  • The problem with being a turncoat is that after you have turned the coat once, no one on either side really cares what you think or say. Doug will have to remain content with his former ambassadorship as his solace.

  • Stupid is as stupid does.

    Kmiec needs to apologize to the American people and go away.

  • Does that mean he doesn’t have a Obama 2012 sticker on his Prius?

    I love those stickers. I know whom to blame.

  • If I recall correctly, Benedict Arnold found a similar reception awaiting him in England after the Revolution.

  • You are correct G-Veg. No one has any use for a turncoat, even those who they are temporarily useful to. Scorn on all sides is always their ultimate reward.

  • I’m not, you know, an Obama supporter, past or present, but I may venture one theory as to why this issue matters to Catholic supporters of Obama in a way that other graver issues did not: regarding the latter, his supporters perceived that Obama would be more or less maintaining the status quo or the seemingly inevitable social and cultural movements of the day. The former, however, was a break with the the staus quo, not to mention Obama’s promises about respecting religious liberty, and an advance into a new area of tyranny or abuse of power.

  • Kyle,

    I agree that that seems to be the line of reasoning. I guess what confuses me (in a “how could you think that?” kind of way) is just that this seems so clearly in keeping with what I’ve always expected out of an Obama administration, it staggers me that someone would have supported him and not feel like this was the kind of thing he was signing up for.

    Of course, that’s because I’ve never had a very positive view of Obama in first place.

  • Pingback: Convert Journal – Obama’s war on religion (update #1)
  • would be an opportunity to be more sensitive to religious freedom than the law requires

    Please tell me he is not a lawyer. The law (meaning the Constitution) requires this as a minimum.

  • His being a professor of Constitutional law had to be what kindled the cynical romance and now he sees their aborted baby, probably.

  • It’s actually a very common phenomenon. You justify your political support for a candidate by constructing a very elaborate house of cards, then when a good wind comes by you’re forced to realize how wrong your spin on events was. I think a lot of conservatives overlooked Bush’s expansion of Medicare and rated him highly until his economic interventions of 2008. I think that a lot of liberals had come to terms with Clinton’s extramarital activities but couldn’t wrap their minds around his lying about Lewinsky.

    It reminds me of a movie from a few years back called Swing Kids, about German youths in the late 1930’s. A lot of people condemned the movie because the kids didn’t seem to mind Nazism until it started interfering with their dance clubs. But I think that’s kind of the way human nature is. You accept greater and greater wrongs for a long time by modifying your thinking, until you find the one thing that you simply can’t reconcile with your beliefs.

  • I have not really analyzed it, but I’m inclined to agree with c matt. I find it hard to believe that forcing Catholic institutions to do something that flies directly in the face of Catholic moral teaching cannot be squared with Wisconsin v. Yoder.

  • Sorry, “cannot” should have been “can,” obviously.

  • I understand how a genius like Kmiec bought into it.

    He took the demon’s bait “hook, line and sinker.” He gave less moral weight to abortion, contraception, gay privileges, the destruction of the family, public school moral destruction of children, etc. than he gave to his beef with whomever or whatever. It surely has to do with the nature of evil.

    He has time to repent, Confess, do penance, amend his life, etc. Otherwise, pretty sure when Doogie assumes room temperature he will share a ditch with ed kennedy in eternal justice.

  • Thanks T. Shaw for listing some of the moral degradations in which the USCCB has done little except provide politically correct lip service. I, for one, see a glimmer of hope because this mandate is bringing Truth to the forefront where for too long the voice of Truth has been silent. If the Catholic Bishops of the United States will lead the Catholic flock by getting on their knees and begging God for forgiveness for dissenting from Pope Paul VI ‘s HUMANAE VITAE, if they will pick up the banner of Truth and shepherd the Lords’ flock by their courageous and authentic witness to Truth speaking Truth to power—perhaps, only perhaps, this witness will spark the laity to live authentic Catholic lives in full communion with the Church and the New Evangelization to which Blessed John Paul II dedicated his pontificate to promote, will catch fire and change this country and the world.

  • The thing that gets me is that THIS is what makes him “unhappily without a candidate”? Is he saying up until this issue he was STILL an Obama supporter?

  • Pingback: TUESDAY POLITICS EXTRA | ThePulp.it
  • The problem with Doug Kmiec trying to pull his pants up now is that he isn’t wearing them anymore. He took them off 4 years ago amid the wild party and just didn’t bother to figure out what happened to them. He didn’t make any sense back then and he barely makes sense now. He says that he needs to speak to the President like he’s confused about this. Well, the Bishops aren’t confused, and we’re not confused. The HHS mandate couldn’t be clearer. But Doug’s confused? That’s what happens when you fall in love, I guess.

  • They are upset (those that are) not because of the nature of the issue or what is at stake, but because their opponents have been shown to be right about Obama. Obama let them down. The progressive Catholics had argued that Obama was the most Catholic candidate around and that he was a deeply spiritual man with great sympathy for religion. He’s made them a laughingstock. So they’re furious.

    Simple.

Ambassador to San Marino?

Thursday, June 2, AD 2011

12 Responses to Ambassador to San Marino?

  • Yes! America needs more and longer wars against muslims (the open-ended Gaddaffi cont. op.), higher food and fuel prices, more jihadi Mid East regimes, more job strangling regulations, more under-employment, more weak GDP growth, more people on food stamps, more falling home prices, more bureaucrat-rationed medical care, leaglized gay marriage, National Harvey Milk Day, more condoms for second graders, more abortions soon to be paid with taxes, etc.

    My third kid just graduated from a big name jesuit U. I was mildly impressed with at the first. By the third, the academics waned banal. Or, did I wise up?

  • You do realize that it brings liberals nothing but glee to see conservatives devoting so much time, energy and emotion to bashing conservative dissenters? Conservatism 2012 — smaller and more orthodox! 🙂

  • Considering the election results in 2010 Kurt, and the current dismal state of the economy, I think it is rather liberalism that will find its 20% of the population, as opposed to conservative 40%, diminished at the polls next year. In any case Kmiec ceased to be a conservative when he signed on to be a mouthpiece for Obama’s abortion-uber-alles agenda.

  • I think it is rather liberalism that will find its [itself] diminished at the polls next year.

    And my hope and prayer is that conservatives will keep acting based on that assumption. Go Paul Ryan!!!!!

  • Go Paul Ryan!!!!!

    The first intelligent thing ever written by Kurt!

  • Keep hoping and praying for victory at the polls of the Party of Abortion next year Kurt. While you are at it, you might consider sending Kmiec a fan letter. I doubt if he gets many of those these days.

  • Go Paul Ryan!!!!!

    The first intelligent thing ever written by Kurt!

    Loving every minute of it! 🙂

  • ” . . . glee to see conservatives devoting so much time, energy and emotion to bashing conservative dissenters?”

    KurKommie definition of “conservative”: One who actively campaigned for and voted for Obama; and vows he will do so again.

    bwahahaha

    Bashing Conservatives Talking Points:

    Vote for Obama!
    Vote for:
    more and longer wars
    higher food and fuel prices
    more bank bail outs – banks that gave him campaign $$$
    More money for Soros – gave him campaign $$$
    more jihadi Mid East regimes
    more job-killing regulations
    more under-employment
    more weak GDP growth
    more people on food stamps
    more falling home prices
    more bureaucrat-rationed medical care
    legalized gay marriage
    National Harvey Milk Day
    more condoms for second graders
    more abortions soon to be paid with taxes
    more tax $$ to PP

    November 2010 NEVER HAPPPENED!!!!!

  • t shaw —

    luv you, dude. Keep on keeping on!

  • Maybe Kmiec could get appointed to Macedonia or Serbia and fill the spot that another notable Pepperdine Law School alumnus, Rod Blagojevich, had hoped to receive?

  • Another reason for Kmiec to again campaign for Obama: the CST preferential option for the poor.

    May 2011 job growth mysteriously decelerated, the Obama Labor Regime reported today. Total nonfarm payrolls weakly increased by 54,000, 57% lower than the anticipated 125,000 Obama propaganda estimate. That is the weakest increase in nonfarm payroll since September 2010. Worse, the unemployment rate unexpectedly deteriorated to 9.1% from 9.0% in the previous month, despite additional obfuscation with the statistic’s denominator, i.e., removing people from the work force.

    Jeff Carter nails it. “The effects of the crony capitalism economy are being seen in unemployment numbers. Obamacare, Dodd-Frank, huge unchecked runaway bureaucracy. Obama created ‘The Great Uncertainty’. We are seeing people get frustrated and drop out of the work force. If you are a history major, check out charts from 1937-40. They might repeat themselves.”

    Obama is making more people poorer!

  • Pingback: MONDAY MORNING EDITION | ThePulp.it

Prayers for Kmiec

Thursday, August 26, AD 2010

Although almost all of us here at TAC disagree with the direction Kmiec’s politics have taken of late, I think we are all saddened by the news that he was involved in a serious car accident on Wednesday. The article says he appears to be in good condition, but information is limited. Let us all pray that Kmiec is healed physically and spiritually from this accident.

Continue reading...

4 Responses to Prayers for Kmiec

Doug Kmiec on the Death of Kennedy

Sunday, August 30, AD 2009

Doug Kmiec, betrayer of the pro-life cause, future ambassador to Malta and spiritual descendant of Richard Rich,  the subject of few posts on this blog, see here, has taken the opportunity of the death of Ted Kennedy to engage in some predictable spaniel like fawning over Obama and ObamaCare.  The ever cogent Erin Manning at her ever readable blog and sometimes tea, fisks the resulting mess here, so you don’t have to.

Continue reading...

10 Responses to Doug Kmiec on the Death of Kennedy

  • I see Cardinal McCarrick has even shared with the world the late senator’s deathbed letter to Pope Benedict–the one that begins with a tribute to Obama’s “deep faith” and ends with a pitch for government health care. The cardinal describes this bit of self-serving political propaganda as “deeply moving.” Richard Rich had almost all the bishops of England on his side; I suspect Doug Kmiec may have the majority of our bishops with him.

  • Ambassador Kmiec is a deeply confused man with the ability to do either great good or great harm to the Church and its values by virtue of his God-given intellect. It’s terribly sad that he has chosen, of late, to turn that intellect against crystal clear teachings related to social issues ranging from abortion to same-sex marriage. We must pray for his re-conversion and may he publicly refute his errors and the damage they have caused to this nation and most especially to the souls of those he has helped lead astray.

  • Pingback: Doug Kmiec on the Death of Kennedy | Pelican Project Pro-Life
  • Cardinal McCarrick brings to mind one of the most intriguing quotes from the Council of Nicaea when debating the Arian heresy.

    Saint Athanasius was quoted as saying, “The floor of hell is paved with the skulls of bishops.”

  • This scene from ‘A Man For All Seasons’ is one of my most favorite.

    It’s interesting that Richard Rich doesn’t blink an eye when Sir Thomas quotes the Bible in reference to his Medal-of-Office.

  • I actually thought he seemed rather hesitant throughout the scene Tito. Note that the bailiff had to remind him “So help you God, Sir Richard”. I thought John Hurt played well the role of a man who has subdued his conscience, but still feels faint pangs of shame.

  • I agree that he played the role very well. He could’ve have been grappling within himself and only later realized the gravity of what he had done.

  • I hope both you gentlemen are well aware of the fact that hagiography was not really the intention of the Scriptwriter; indeed, the man himself was actually an atheist.

    I admit that the movie remains top on my list of favourite films; yet, I’d place more historical accuracy in Roper’s own account of More’s life than this, however poetically it depicts More.

  • Actually e, Bolt was an agnostic. He wrote plays and screenplays about characters in conflict with their society. Although he did not share the Faith of More, he obviously greatly admired him and that shines through the play.

But For Malta!

Thursday, July 2, AD 2009

Douglas Kmiec, betrayer of the pro-life cause, has received his reward for his slavish support of President Obama.  He has been nominated to be ambassador of the proud, small and Catholic country of Malta.  Malta has a very strong and active pro-life movement, so this might get interesting!   Bon Voyage Doug!  We’ll stay in touch, and so, I am sure, will our colleagues in lovely Malta!

Other Kmiec related posts on American Catholic:

1.     Kmiec on Kozen…

2.     Archbishop Chaput Weighs in Again

3.     Douthat Puts Kmiec in His Place

4.     Ross Douthat:  Not Backing Down

5.     Dedicated to Douglas Kmiec

6.     To the “Traitor” Go The Spoils?  Kmiec & The Ambassadorship

7.     Another Day, Another Kmiec 180

8.     Shameless

9.     Bag of Silver

10.   More Commencement Controversy

11.   Heee’s Back!

12.   What’s Empathy Got To Do With It?

13.   Kmiec Lectures Fellow “Conservative” Catholics

14.   Is There A Common Ground on Life Issues?

Continue reading...

10 Responses to But For Malta!

  • Only goes to show that Mr. Kmiec was interested in the ambassadorship of the Vatican or at least he was considered. Pretty pathetic and sad that he sold his soul for the devil’s cause.

    We need to pray for his soul.

  • Malta was a stumbling block to Islam in the middle ages, and the Axis forces in WW 2.
    Will this insignificant island prove a stumbling block
    to Obama’s war against the unborn?

  • Indeed Don, Malta has a proud fighting tradition. Throughout the ages it has been a bastion of the Faith in the Mediterranean and during WW2 the entire island was awarded the Victoria Cross, Britain’s highest award for gallantry. I think this appointment, which is obviously Obama’s way to fob off Kmiec with something Obama considers insignificant, may come back to haunt both Kmiec and Obama.

  • Malta is one of the most, if not THE most, pro-life country on earth, according to an article I read some years ago in Our Sunday Visitor. It is also one of the most Catholic countries on earth, outside of (of course) Vatican City State. And don’t the Knights of Malta still exist today as a Papal honorary order?

  • I am relieved. he can do little damage there and hopefully he will be there the entire 2012 election season

  • As a side note, Malta has a few fantastic ancient Churches. If you ever get a chance to travel Europe include Malta on your itinerary.

  • I am not sold on the idea that Prof. Kmiec knows anymore whether he is coming or going. I would not be the least surprised if he were compelled to resign from his position in Malta ‘ere long to ‘spend more time with his family’ (under their watchful supervision).

  • Pingback: Malta and Doug « The American Catholic
  • Malta is hosting more and more prominent people and it’s becoming the hub of lots of important meetings. Hope you enjoy it on our island!

  • Malta is definitely on my top ten list of places to visit!

"Is There a Common Ground on Life Issues?" — A discussion with Robert P. George and Doug Kmiec, moderated by Mary Ann Glendon

Friday, May 29, AD 2009

Robert P. George and Doug Kmiec engaged in a discussion of the topic, “The Obama Administration and the Sanctity of Human Life: Is There a Common Ground on Life Issues? What is the Right Response by ‘Pro-Life” Citizens?” at Washington, D.C.’s National Press Club, Thursday, May 28, 2009. The discussion was moderated by Mary Ann Glendon.

You can watch the video on CUA’s website here; or on C-Span here.

Continue reading...

8 Responses to "Is There a Common Ground on Life Issues?" — A discussion with Robert P. George and Doug Kmiec, moderated by Mary Ann Glendon

  • You can find the transcript of George’s opening remarks at Public Discourse: http://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/viewarticle.php?selectedarticle=2009.05.29.001.pdart

  • I’m into the first 20 minutes and Kmiec is clearly showing his true colors by believing in the farce of global warming and embracing the radical environmental agenda. He’s now belly-aching about being denied Communion.

  • Kmiec is complaining about Chaput and Burke and accusing them of not being Catholic. He’s sounding more and more like Deacon Kandra where he holds his conscious above that of the teachings of the Church.

  • 30 minutes into the “discussion” he is still belly-aching about being denied Communion.

    He finally stopped. He finished with pretty much saying he’s still a good Catholic.

    He doesn’t even believe his own lies.

  • Robert George just finished a very well articulated pro-life position for opposing Obama’s anti-life policies. Unlike Kmiec, he spoke confidently, he didn’t belly-ache, and he spoke with purpose.

    Kmiec on the other hand spoke as if he had the wind knocked out of him. You could plainly see the difference between the two in how they spoke and carried themselves. Kmiec has obviously felt the burden of supporting evil. Kmiec’s speech was that of “intent”, ie, his intentions are pro-life even if he supported Obama.

    George spoke with substance on where we can find common ground and where we differ. Completely different from Kmiec’s narcissistic diatribe.

  • Kmiec just denied that science supports that life begins at a very early stage. He’s clearly gone off the deep end. I believe he’s so vested with the most pro-abortion president that he has reconciled himself to his fate.

  • Kmiec fielded a question about why he calls denial of Communion “intimidation”. Kmiec basically belly-ached that he is pro-life and called those bishops that deny Communion and I quote, “wrong-headed”.

    What arrogance.

  • Wow. Kmiec has admitted that ESCR is ok. WOW! He is a regular Richie Rich. Kmiec is going against Church teaching. He rests his case on “intent” and “conscious”. Pretty sad.

    It was a pretty good panel discussion.

What's Empathy Got To Do With It?

Friday, May 8, AD 2009

Doug Kmiec has a rather bizarre article up at America entitled The Case For Empathy: Why a Much-Maligned Value Is a Crucial Qualification for the Supreme Court. If the article is any indication, I suppose we should be thankful Obama didn’t make any off-hand remarks suggesting ‘creativity’ or ‘imagination’ were traits he would look for in a potential Supreme Court justice, if only because it might have lead to more essays like this one. After some preliminary gushing about, you guessed it, empathy, Kmiec explains what an empathetic justice would accomplish:

To do this, it is possible that [Obama] will mine for legal talent in unusual places, but it is more likely he will attempt to find a nominee with appellate court experience whose skill set also shows the capability of challenging methods of interpretation that otherwise wouldn’t give empathy the time of day. If Obama succeeds even with this more limited challenge,he will have exploded the notion  that swapping out a Souter for a new, most likely younger and intellectually energetic, justice is without effect.

Continue reading...

11 Responses to What's Empathy Got To Do With It?

  • Nice job dismantling what is just a mess of a column. Kmiec manages to somehow sink further and further. It’s truly remarkable.

  • I assume that Kmiec believes all of this intellectual prostitution he is currently engaging in, repudiating wholesale intellectual positions he held throughout his adult life, will ultimately gain him a federal judgeship or some other plumb from the current administration. Trading self-respect for advancement is always a poor, not to say pathetic, bargain.

  • I think it’s time we simply stop paying attention to Mr. Kmiec. To call him a hack would be generous. Far too many words have been wasted on him already.

  • Don,

    I am not sure what Kmiec’s purpose is, and I would like to think he is not just angling for a spot on the federal bench. People do change their minds, and sometimes those changes are dramatic.

    That said, based on my (admittedly limited) observations of legal academia, Kmiec’s arguments are an embarrassment to the profession. I can’t imagine any of the professors I’ve had over the past three years writing this type of nonsense, regardless of their political persuasion. Kmiec should be extended some sympathy given that he is writing for a non-specialist audience, but even that is no excuse for the type of misstatements and shoddy argumentation on display here, particularly since these views are diametrically opposed to views he held less than two years ago.

  • Until he starts making the barest acknowledgment that he’s done a 180 on principles and views held until the Adventus Obamus, he’s not entitled to the benefit of any doubts.

    And I agree, John: this essay is absolute pablum. The principle of “empathy” is entirely situational and subjective. Take Heller: “Well, you know, Doug, I empathize with people who don’t have efficient police protection and private security forces guarding their gated suburban communities. Whose empathy is entitled to more weight in the law?”

    Oh, and I love how he refers to Obama’s record as a law professor without giving any examples to bolster his point. This essay is embarrassingly empty propaganda for Obama. Which is probably why America was so eager to publish it.

  • Where is all his talk of Natural Law!!! DO people recall in many of his Catholic Online articles and other places Kmiec would always put in several paragraphs that he believs the law should the Natural Law as seein the Declaration of Independence and esp Right to Life as being inaleiable

    Where is that here? Now it was nonsense to think that Obam would give us a Natural law judge in the first place and Kmiec never explined how it would happen

    But looking through this entire article where is the natural law theme.

    In fact as to SOuter , who was a huge postivist and did his thesis on Justice Holmes) there is no mention of that.

  • In reading through comments on another blog, I learned that Prof. Kmiec has Parkinson’s disease. Here is a link and some excerpts to an article he recently wrote about Parkinson’s and embryonic stem cell research:

    http://www.catholic.org/politics/story.php?id=32655

    Over time, however, all Parkinson’s patients know that after a short span the medication fails and we also know what that means. We have uncomfortably witnessed our future in the lives of longer suffering brothers and sisters…So you would think that when President Obama, for whom it was my privilege to campaign, gives permission for embryonic stem cell research that some say holds a Parkinson’s cure that I would be grateful and encouraged. Yet, I am not. While I believe the President’s desire to separate science and politics is well considered, there can be no separation from ethics,

    To avoid cooperating with an intrinsic evil, this trembling hand is not to take hold of any medicine or participate in any medical treatment advanced by research involving the destruction of a human embryo. Easier said than done – or by me, even written down. But then, in this Easter time we are reminded that we belong to a Church where the very son of God allowed himself to be put to death so that others might live.

    The article contains, naturally, some defenses of the Obama administration, but I think perhaps I will make a conscious effort to display more sympathy for Prof. Kmiec (if not for some of his arguments) in the future. Anyone with such a difficult and debilitating illness is in need of prayers for their physical, psychological, and spiritual well-being. Our Lady of Sorrows, ora pro nobis.

  • “Empathy” [Einfuehlung] is one of those German make- believe emotions; an attempt to displace the more obvious and traditional word “sympathy”.

    It’s a faker’s word. As in Mr. Clinton’s “I feel your pain”.

  • This analysis makes vastly more sense than Kmiec’s article, and you didn’t even get to the part where he explained how lacking in “meaning or lasting effect”–not to mention empathy–is “coerced morality” of the sort some villainous people propose as a solution to the problem of abortion in America. It’s too bad your analysis can’t also be printed in America, but it seems they only accept submissions from prominent pro-life Catholics like Douglas Kmiec.

  • Isn’t justice supposed to be blind anyway???

  • Pingback: How Long in the Wilderness? « The American Catholic

4 Responses to Sorry Doug!

  • Yeah, so sad for Doug’s being snubbed for a regifted Laetare Medal.

    But there’s always a Supreme Court vacancy to which he can hold out some delusional remote hope of being nominated.

  • My guess for SCOTUS is Kagan. I’d be willing to bet Kmiec isn’t even in Obama’s top 50.

  • Kmiec’s not even a remote consideration. Not even on Obama’s radar screen. I’d be shocked if Obama views Kmiec with anything other than the the same disdainful contempt with which the British viewed Benedict Arnold.

    I agree with Feddie that it’s likely to be Diane Wood. Although Kagan is a good guess, as well.

  • It would be interesting to have Mr. Noonan’s analysis of the actual working of the contraceptive methods. Condoms are contraceptive – preventing the union of sperm and egg. Pills, IUDs, and other methods are abortifacient – preventing a created fetus from installing itself in the uterus.

The Rejected Ambassadors: The Plot Thickens

Friday, April 17, AD 2009

A couple weeks ago, Tito posted on the Washington Times report claiming the Vatican has rejected several candidates for the position of U.S. Ambassador to the Vatican. It appeared the report had been satisfactorily debunked by the Catholic News Service, which quoted a statement by Father Federico Lombardi to the effect that the rumors were unreliable. Now, however, the Times Online has received confirmation of the story from “Vatican insiders”. This confirmation reconciles the two statements to a certain extent: no candidates have been officially rejected, but apparently informal rejections have taken place. Ultimately, this type of story is of little significance, but it’s always interesting to watch the interaction of the Vatican and the media. Here are some excerpts from the Times Online story:

Caroline Kennedy, the Roman Catholic daughter of the assassinated President, has been rejected by the Vatican as the next US ambassador to the Holy See because of her liberal views on abortion, stem-cell research and same-sex marriage, according to Vatican insiders.

Andrea Tornielli, the biographer of Pope Benedict XVI, said that at least two other potential ambassadors put forward by President Obama have also been blocked because they did not share the Vatican’s views on “pro-life” issues. A Vatican spokesman said that no candidates had been formally submitted “and therefore it is not true that they have been rejected”.

Continue reading...

8 Responses to The Rejected Ambassadors: The Plot Thickens

  • John Henry

    The problems I have seen with this remain.We don’t really have the names of so-called Vatican officials saying things “unofficially,” but we do have names of those who have said nothing official has been done. Asking what a former ambassador thinks is not itself an answer, either. I don’t even see any Vatican official naming Caroline Kennedy (btw, I wouldn’t want her as ambassador, either). I just think this is still on the level of rumor and gossip until something substantial is shown.

  • Henry,

    In this type of story, there will not be official confirmation because it’s not in the interest of any of the parties. If you think AC, and MOJ, and dotCommonweal, and First Things, etc. are all out of line in posting on this story, you are entitled to the view, but I think it’s a minority position. I wouldn’t have posted on it with only one source that had been contradicted, but at this point there seem to be a number of different sources corroborating it. While I think the story can be (and has been) overblown as a cheap partisan point-scoring opportunity, I think there is a legitimate issue at stake here: specifically, how is the process of appointing the next U.S. Ambassador to the Vatican going, and what does it tell us about the Vatican under Benedict XVI and the Obama Administration, respectively?

  • I think we can discuss the process without naming names, and necessarily trying to read more into it than what the facts suggest. The facts only say that talks are being had, and names perhaps are being asked about, not why the names are being asked, nor what, if some objection has been given, it actually is, nor if it would be seen, if the person truly was pushed forward officially, that the unofficial suggestion would lead to official rejection. There are many factors involved here (and we must remember,the Vatican itself, in history, has often given quite bad ambassadors to other nations without it reflecting upon the Catholic Church as a whole, or even the Popes who had those ambassadors). It’s to me being turned into too much a political story, and goes beyond prudence. Maybe it is a minority view, but I stand by it.

  • It’s to me being turned into too much a political story, and goes beyond prudence. Maybe it is a minority view, but I stand by it.

    Fair enough.

  • Speaking for myself, it appears to me there is one anonymous source that has gotten closer to the inner workings over the past year. He seems to be cited in a number of stories. If I were to be grossly speculative, I would guess the source is an assistant to one of the highly placed American officials. I have the one source theory, because the rumors eminate from the same reporters. I don’t put much credence in the source, because the source’s predictive value has been terrible. Specifically, I think the source is taking the head person’s opinion as policy and the head person isn’t involved in these particular areas.

  • Obviously, your speculations are even harder to evaluate for accuracy than the reporting in question, which isn’t your fault, it’s just a fact. I will say that the Times Online article claims it is citing more than one source, and when reporters are willing to go on record with something, they usually have evaluated the credibility of the sources involved. They also have a strong incentive to get thing right, or their relationship and credibility with other potential sources within the hierarchy will be badly damaged. All of which is a long way of saying, you may be right, but where there’s smoke, there’s usually fire.

  • Unless/until Vatican media operations come into the 21st Century, we are left with rumors and insiders and buzzbuzzbuzz on these matters. Only states the tension between this administration and the Holy See. Besides- thought of Caroline as Ambassador makes me fraidy-scared. Too much likelihood of things going poof. All a reminder of title of trashy women’s novel/movie title- He’s Just Not That Into You.

  • Nonetheless, names have been proffered a the Vatican has expressed disinterest in certain candidates.

    Caroline Kennedy and Douglas Kmiec are rightly to be rejected for their antagonistic views in regards to abortion.

    I’m quite satisfied with what has come out.

Heee's Back!

Wednesday, April 15, AD 2009

kmiec-obama

Our old friend and Obama-phile Doug Kmiec, a subject of a few posts on this blog:  here, herehere, here, here, here, here, here, and here, has come out with a column in defense of the Notre Dame decision to honor Obama on May 17, filled with Obama fawning that would disgrace any self-respecting canine.  Father Z here does the task of fisking the rubbish so I don’t have to.

Continue reading...

7 Responses to Heee's Back!

  • That was the most over the top apologetic for Obama Kmiec has done yet

    The Obama administration has assumed the mantle of Catholicism? What?

    I really would like to know what was behind this “conversion” of his on a host of issues. I have a feeling that someone someplace hurt his feelings and he has been on rage ever since

  • JH,

    Kmiec reminds us every chance he gets what event huwt his wittle feewings and caused him to “convert” on a whole host (no pun intended) of issues.

  • Jay

    I suspect it was earlier and had to deal with the Romney camapign. Maybe he is upset that more Catholics dod not see his wisdom and flock to Mitt. Maybe somebody from the McCain group failed to do the necessary adoration to him after Mitt failed to win California.

    I don’t know it is all so bizaree

  • I think it’s a combination. Surely the Romney thing played a role and got Kmiec looking at Obama over McCain. But I believe the Communion thing seems to have almost radicalized him.

    Prior to that, he was at least making an effort to portray himself as a “conservative”.

  • Kmiec’s conversion to caesaropapism is complete.

  • LOL , Dale that is right.

    Perhaps next week Kmiec will be advocating that Bishops be confirmed and approved by Our Emperor

  • Dale,

    When he left us, he was but the learner. Now he is the master.

6 Responses to Congratulations American 'Catholics'

  • Do I see little pentagrams on the altar tablecloth? How appropriate.

  • By the way, Casey cast a pro-life vote in the last week. Perhaps he heeded his Bishop’s advice and repented.

    Just in continuity with my already mentioned (I think) desire to be more optimistic, I think we should spend twice as much time praying fervently for these people than we do criticizing them because the latter involves a huge temptation of succumbing to internal negative energy and focusing on the faults, however grave, of others and doesn’t reap as much good for humanity as the other option.

  • Perfect example of why this blog cannot be taken seriously.

  • Michael,

    Please, if you cannot find anything positive to say, none whatsoever, perhaps you should refrain? What does it gain you? It only manifests as negative energy and people fight and argue, throwing ad hominem attacks and calling each other pseudo-Catholics while we all say we’re so in love with Jesus.

    Resist the temptation. If it’s so horrible, then pray.

    I also think that you should potentially reflect on your words — for if they were true, ask yourself, why then do you frequently visit and feel compelled to not only engage, but occasionally — not always — do so in a manner that is negative, which seems to be something that you’re condemning at the moment.

    I would happily discuss criticisms with you constructively.

  • Eric – I don’t know what you mean. My comment was positive.

  • I agree. They are all Republicrats first. For Brownback, being from Kansas is 2nd. Catholic is so far back in distant 3rd place, it doesn’t register unless it’s election year.

    We’ll know Brownback is running for national office again when he shows up at a pro-life rally.

Bag of Silver

Monday, January 26, AD 2009

bag-of-silver

Doug Kmiec, the subject of a few posts on this blog, here, here, here, here and here, has indicated , hattip to Jay Anderson at Pro Ecclesia, that he believes he is still in the running to be ambassador to the Vatican, presumably his reward for turning his back on the pro-life cause and shilling for Obama last year.  Professor Kmiec has also been apparently been glancing at some of the blogs that have taken him to task, hattip to Jeff Miller at Curt Jester.

Continue reading...

3 Responses to Bag of Silver

  • The one thing to watch out for is boredom. At this point, the only things that’s news about Kmiec is that he’s a sell out whose arguments are fallacious, and that’s a story which can only remain interesting for so long.

    Which is all the more reason to hope that he now fades into well deserved obscurity.

  • Bigger issue triggered by the bigger mouth of Nancy Pelosi. On ABC yesterday, said increased birth control programs would be nice to assist the economy. Not quite sure what she meant. Let her explain after extracting her Jimmy Choo from her pie hole.

  • I saw that! I love how it’s masked as “family planning services.”

13 Responses to Shameless

  • Mr. McClarey,

    Did you major in outrage as an undergraduate?

  • No Mr. DeFrancisis, although I would say that Doug Kmiec, based upon his “eulogy” for Father Neuhaus, must have minored in chutzpah.

  • Dr. Robert Royal, editor-in-chief of “The Catholic Thing” and President of The Faith & Reason Institute, will be my guest tomorrow on “Catholic Radio 2.0” to discuss Fr. Neuhaus’ work and legacy. You can either listen live at 11:00 AM ET or download the archive of the show later that day by going to http://www.blogtalkradio.com/CommanderCraig.

  • I suspect that if Kmiec’s conscience was entirely clear on this matter, he simply would have praised Fr. Neuhaus in general terms without having to get in the last word in an argument.

    May Fr. Neuhaus enjoy his reward in heaven.

    And Donald McClarey, it is a pleasure to find your blog. You are a sensible man and an eloquent writer.

  • OK, I’ve just had more of a look-around and I see it is a group blog. Well, this is good news. I’ve just bookmarked it.

  • Thank you Donna V. I hope our comboxes will often be graced with your always insightful comments.

    Kmiec is still desperately trying to convince people that he simply did not switch sides on the abortion issue last year. Perhaps if he repeats it often enough he will believe it someday. I doubt if he will ever convince anyone else.

  • Don’s getting a little desperate. Kinda like Alger Hiss for the last 50 years of his life- No I Wasn’t Stalin’s Sock Puppet. Welcome Donna V. We have big fun at this playground. Y’all come back any ol’ time.

  • Don as in Kmiec. Not the always sensible Mr. McClarey.

  • It is good to see you here as well, Gerard E. and your very unique writing style, which always brings a smile to my face. I look forward to your reports from the city (the one of Brotherly Love, if I remember correctly) and all it’s pomp, works 🙂

  • Here’s First Things Editor Joseph Bottum on Doug Kmiec’s “obituary”:

    Finally, there is Douglas Kmiec’s odd obituary. I’m tempted to say a reasonable response can be found here, but some readers may not appreciate the profanity. Anyway, Kmiec’s attempt to pose himself as a friend and dialogue partner of Fr. Neuhaus may be the saddest and most pathetic of all the responses to this recent death. “It absolutely delighted Father John that the Holy Father gave American Catholics credit for resisting the secular trends of Western Europe,” Kmiec writes—to which the only response is: Who the hell ever called Richard by the name “Father John”? Only people who didn’t actually know him and want, after his death, to pretend that they did.

    Ouch.

  • And I must admit, I did indeed find the linked blog’s assessment to be pretty much all Kmiec’s piece deserves.

  • I concur.

  • Pingback: Bag of Silver « The American Catholic: Politics and Culture from a Catholic perspective

Another Day, Another Kmiec 180

Wednesday, January 7, AD 2009

Apparently Doug Kmiec’s change of heart last year was not limited to topics pro-life. As noted at the Volokh Conspiracy, he also reversed his position on the recent Heller decision, which overturned the DC handgun ban, in a span of about five months.

In February, Prof. Kmiec joined an amicus brief to the Court which argued “the [Second] Amendment secures to individuals a personal right to keep and bear arms and that the decision below correctly interpreted and applied the Amendment in this case.” When the Court affirmed the lower court decision overturning the ban as the amicus brief he joined suggested, Kmiec took to the pages of Slate to criticize the decision, arguing that the Heller majority misconstrued the Second Amendment, and their ruling had no basis in “Constitutional text, history, and precedent”. Here is Kmiec’s explanation for the switch as provided to the popular Volokh Conspiracy legal blog:

Continue reading...

4 Responses to Another Day, Another Kmiec 180

To The "Traitor," Go The Spoils? Kmiec & The Ambassadorship

Friday, December 5, AD 2008

kmiec

There has been some talk in Catholic circles recently of Douglas Kmiec being appointed U.S. Ambassador to the Vatican. Many American Catholic contributors have expressed their opinions of Mr. Kmiec during the recent election. To be clear, the problem with Kmiec was not that he supported Obama, it was that he consistently advanced disingenuous or highly questionable arguments, arguably distorting Catholic teaching, to make the case. Apparently, rumors have surfaced that many in the Vatican are similarly displeased with Mr. Kmiec, and that the Vatican might take the unusual step of vetoing Mr. Kmiec’s nomination should he be appointed.

John Allen, one of the best reporters on Church matters, argues here both that vetoing the appointment of Mr. Kmiec would be unwise, and that President-elect Obama would be unwise to appoint Kmiec:

Continue reading...

3 Responses to To The "Traitor," Go The Spoils? Kmiec & The Ambassadorship