Kmeic and Obama Tom Smith

Having read Dean Kmeic's endorsement of Obama more carefully, I can see my reaction in my comment below was too flippant.  I can say now that on reflection I find his statement of endorsement baffling and completely unpersuasive.  Kmeic allows that he is a Catholic (has he always been one, or did he convert?) and that marriage and presumably abortion are priority issues to him.  If this is the case, I have no idea why he should support Obama.  Certainly these are reasons not to support Hillary.  Is this what Kmeic is implying, very indirectly?  Possibly.  I do think it is true that Hillary would be sympathetic to the lesbian view of things and all that entails, even more than most people realize.  So maybe that's it. 

But beyond that, I see no reason whatever to expect that Obama would do anything but support strongly the social agenda of the Democratic Party, which is strongly pro-abortion, pro-gay marriage and so on.  So what on earth is he thinking?  Has Obama made some traditional values comments that have escaped my notice?  With all due respect, which my flippant comment below did not convey, if you can't give good reasons for your actions, the observer's views tend naturally to the not so good reasons.  I suppose charity requires one extend the benefit of the doubt, but I confess I find it hard to do so in the case of this endorsement.  I would take less umbrage at it if I did not think that if Obama is not a threat to the Republic, he will certainly do until one comes along.

Comments

[dearieme]

I suppose it's rather naive to observe that St Obama's marriage seems to be more, um, conventional than La Clinton's?

[krome]

"Has Obama made some traditional values comments that have escaped my notice?"

It doesn't matter whether Obama has made any "traditional values" comments when his entire history in public life shows him to be enthusiastic in his opposition to them. Actions should speak louder than words.