Who are you? Where am I? When is Matlock on?

Doug Kmiec endorses Barack Obama and Paul at Power Line (he's the goofy looking one...no, the other goofy looking one. Yeah, him) is bamboozled, bewildered, and bereft (my emphasis):

In one of the most vacuous statements I've ever read, Douglas Kmiec has endorsed Barack Obama for president. Kmiec is a Republican who served in the Justice Department under President Reagan and the first President Bush. Until recently, Kmiec was co-chair of the Romney for President Advisory Committee on the Constitution and the Courts. In that capacity, he wrote a piece on Power Line explaining why he supported Romney.

[...]

In his endorsement of Obama, though, Kmiec is entirely silent on all of the specific issues that mattered to him less than half a year ago. And for good reason. There is no indication that Obama agrees with him on the rights of terrorist detainees, the sentencing of crack cocaine users and distributors, the hand-gun ban issue, and preventing voting fraud (not to mention the social issues -- e.g., the rights of the unborn -- Kmiec cites in his endorsement of Obama).

On the more general, and crucial, questions of the rule of law and the proper role of judges, the best Kmiec can offer is: "I am convinced based upon [Obama's] 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." But why conservatives should vote for a candidate who probably respects conservative views, instead of a candidate who more often than not agrees with them, Kmiec never explains.

Kmiec assures us that Obama "will cast his net widely in search of men and women of diverse, open-minded views and of superior intellectual qualities to assist him in the wide range of responsibilities that he must superintend." That's nice. But why has Kmiec abandoned the standard he applied last October -- "mak[ing] nominations in the tradition of Roberts, Alito, Scalia and Thomas, and before all else, insist[ing] that the women and men to be appointed have a demonstrated record of valuing the rule of law." Kmiec doesn't say.

On the non-legal front, Kmiec is at least as incoherent. He is clearly unhappy that President Bush, in his judgment, "has involved our nation in a military engagement without sufficient justification or clear objective." He also believes that "the office of the presidency. . .has been distorted beyond its constitutional assignment."

[...]

Having ducked every relevant question, and having ignored his prior analysis, Kmiec simply cannot be taken seriously.

I guess this is a bit more than a "We'll just agree to disagree" moment.

Personally I thought Kmiec was being delicate in not mentioning that John McCain is a crazy old fuck who knows nothing about world affairs, economics, or even whether he remembered to take his Aricpet this morning and Kmiec is therefore unwilling to toss him the keys to the car so he can take it out for a spin.

But that's just me. I guess the Power Line guys know Doug better.