Mark Steyn: So Obama wants to be his “brother’s keeper”? I have an idea for him!

posted at 2:30 pm on February 3, 2012 by Tina Korbe

In the midst of espousing Biblical principles at the National Prayer Breakfast yesterday, Barack Obama made a point to say, “We are our brother’s keeper.” Interesting that he used the collective “we” — and made no mention of his actual brother or of his responsibilities to him.

Yesterday evening, author Mark Steyn filled in the gaps in the president’s speech:

“Oh give me a break,” Steyn said on Hugh Hewitt’s radio show on Thursday night. “For a start, when he says, ‘I am my brother’s keeper,’ his brother is back in Kenya living on $12 a year. That’s what he was living on at the time of the 2008 election. So all the president has to do in terms of shared responsibility is put a $10 bill in an envelope and mail it to Nairobi or Mombasa or wherever and he will double his brother’s salary.”

At issue is the Obama administration’s effort to require Catholic institutions to provide contraception. Steyn explained this is part of “big government” trying to supplant the church as a source of “moral authority.”

“This version of shared responsibility means the state should be your ‘brother’s keeper,’” he said. “And this is the point for the Catholic Church. Separation of church and state is one thing, but big government means the state as church, the sole legitimate source of moral authority whether it’s on contraception or gay marriage or abortion or any of the rest. And that’s what you see in Europe. Big government drives out other sources of moral authority.”

Steyn’s comments are thought-provoking, as they usually are. His last statement, though, could easily be reversed: The decline of other sources of moral authority enables big government. It’s a chicken-egg dilemma: Did we first abandon a belief in the authority of church and family, leaving a hole for government to fill? Or did the government gradually usurp the authority of church and family, leading church and family to abdicate responsibility?


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Yeah, I noticed. Color me unimpressed with Kenny. Facts don’t matter to people like that.

ghostwriter on February 3, 2012 at 3:31 PM

Yeah, but watch..two hours from now he’ll slink back in and post something just as stupid just so he can sleep tonight.

BigWyo on February 3, 2012 at 3:40 PM

Here it is:
http://voices.yahoo.com/america-most-charitable-nation-world-327986.html

Of course, the libs want to put an end to that.

ghostwriter on February 3, 2012 at 3:43 PM

Doesn’t the one also have an aunt on the public dole? Can’t he help her, or is it the government’s responsibility to take care of his whole family?

ghostwriter on February 3, 2012 at 3:17 PM

Obama’s father’s sister, Auntie Z, came to the U.S. on a visa (IIRC, a tourist visa) sometime in the 1970′s or 1980′s and stayed on after her visa expired. Around the time of the 2008 election, it was reported that she was living in a public housing apartment in Massachusetts, with no visible means of support (other than U.S. taxpayers). Once reporters started sniffing around her, Obama supporters hired an immigration lawyer for her (since she was an illegal alien), and she had multiple hearings before finally securing a ruling from a federal judge that she could stay on here indefinitely as some sort of political refugee (because of her relationship to Obama).

Obama has many poor relatives, both here in the U.S. and elsewhere, but the multi-millionaire philanthropist doesn’t seem to be particularly troubled by that fact.

AZCoyote on February 3, 2012 at 3:45 PM

Speaking of the President’s extended ‘family’.

Why is there such a detachment?

It would seem to me that it would be a wonderful Muli-Culti moment for the President’s kids to visit with the Kenyan side.

When Michelle visited Kenya she made no contact that was made public with any of them.

No contact with Uncle in Mass. No contact with Aunty Amnesty.

Are they kin? Or was Obama Sr. a patsy - with no blood shared, and we know it. The President is Obama II, not junior – Jr. would be named in succession, II, would be named in honor of.

Wander on February 3, 2012 at 3:46 PM

I aslo percieved liberals wether they attend church or not, always take the lazy path, easy cheap morality where nothing is immoral much, so it’s easy for a lazy Christain to proclaim his righteousness,… since they never have to actually do anything hard, like live up to high standards of behavior…

They forgive all, condemn nothing, and walk on, oblivious to the ever cruder, always more vulgar coarseness of society. They’ll condemn people being uncivil, but only in the context that you’re a jerk cretin and fool because you won’t agree 100% percent with them and argue back.. that’s mean, but they of course, are never mean, even when they scream liar or threaten to break your nose, like that idiot Congressman Moran, as noted by Michell Malkin on her post about him.

They’ll shrug about forcing a person to violate their faith at the point of a government weapon,…. but go apesh*t insane if you just disagree..

a liberal.. the definition of an insane hypocrit.

mark81150 on February 3, 2012 at 3:48 PM

Too bad his brother actually lives in England, and this is all a big fat lie by Steyn.

RanchTooth on February 3, 2012 at 2:35 PM

You were one of those unfortunate statisitics of Gardasil huh?

ToddPA on February 3, 2012 at 2:56 PM

LOL. You owe me a new keyboard.

talkingpoints on February 3, 2012 at 3:49 PM

What about the “biblical principle” wherein the worker is worthy of his wage. Or, where one shouldn’t muzzle the ox that plows? What “bibical principle” is behind the embracing of homosexual marriage? What “biblical principle” is behind the embracing of abortion? What “biblical principle” is behind Caesar attempting to use the words of Jesus Christ, so that more can be rendered unto Caesar, through State confiscation? What “biblical principle” is behind the warping of the New Testament story, wherein the old woman “gave” all that she had – which was almost nothing – and garnered the praise of Jesus Christ – as opposed to the rich men, who simply gave of the same surplus that Caesar now wants to tax even more?

I have many questions of Caesar and the Socialists?

OhEssYouCowboys on February 3, 2012 at 2:45 PM

Beautiful.

Mommynator on February 3, 2012 at 3:49 PM

This is how I see it, in a nutshell:

The guiding principle of Jesus Christ is – give of your heart.

The guiding principle of Obama is – take, by the power of the State.

OhEssYouCowboys on February 3, 2012 at 3:51 PM

I think a better way to ask the last question of the post is whether, by design or through opportunism, statism going back to the sixties eroded the influence of church and family, and now the big government types see their chance to make the final push.

bville 13027 on February 3, 2012 at 3:57 PM

Did we first abandon a belief in the authority of church and family, leaving a hole for government to fill? Or did the government gradually usurp the authority of church and family, leading church and family to abdicate responsibility?

I’d say church and family were eroded by the liberal counterculture, and government stepped into the vacuum.

hawksruleva on February 3, 2012 at 4:00 PM

Did we first abandon a belief in the authority of church and family, leaving a hole for government to fill? Or did the government gradually usurp the authority of church and family, leading church and family to abdicate responsibility?

The latter, Tina. I’d always bet on the expansion of government first over people abandoning personal principles. History has shown this in the way that churches abdicated responsibility to help the poor once the government told them that it was government’s job to do so through higher taxes and redistribution of wealth.

mintycrys on February 3, 2012 at 4:02 PM

Why do Americans give so much more than Europeans? Recently, François Heisbourg, director of the Foundation for Strategic Research (a Parisian think tank), summarized the differences between Europeans and Americans: “The biblical references in politics, the division of the world between good and evil, these are things that [Europeans] simply don’t get. In a number of areas, it seems to me that we are no longer part of the same civilization.” According to a similar analysis in the New York Times by a former advisor to the late French President François Mitterand, “Europe defends a secular vision of the world,” whereas the United States has “an altogether biblical self-assurance in its transcendent destiny.”

It is simply undeniable that Europe and America are drifting apart culturally, and the drift is nowhere more evident than in the area of religious faith. The percentage of the population that has no religion (or never attends a house of worship) is higher in almost every European country than it is in America, and the percentage that goes to church every week is lower in most as well. In many cases, the differences are dramatic. For example, according to the ISSP data from 2002, a British citizen is three times as likely to be completely secular as an American (63 to 19 percent).

This divergence in religiosity may be one explanation for the huge trans-Atlantic charity gap, given what research has found about the way religious behavior affects American giving. For example, according to the Social Capital Community Benchmark Survey (a survey of about 30,000 Americans in 41 communities nationwide in the year 2000), Americans who attended their house of worship every week or more were 25 percentage points more likely to donate money to charity than secularists (people who never attended, or had no religion), and 23 points more likely to volunteer. Nor is this simply a matter of religious citizens giving to religious causes. Religious people were ten points more likely than secularists to give money to explicitly nonreligious charities and 21 points more likely to volunteer for secular causes. The value of the average religious household’s gifts to charity was more than three times higher than the average secular household’s.

This clear correlation between secularism and low rates of charity occurs across countries as well. The ISSP data tell us, for example, that 32 percent of Americans attended church regularly in 1998. The same year, 38 percent volunteered for nonreligious charities. Compare this with Germany, where 8 percent attended church and 10 percent volunteered for secular causes. Or Denmark, where 2 percent regularly attended church and 11 percent volunteered.
http://www.philanthropyroundtable.org/topic/excellence_in_philanthropy/are_americans_generous

ghostwriter on February 3, 2012 at 4:03 PM

And now, they are forcing the Church to go along with subsidizing contraception and abortion.

ghostwriter on February 3, 2012 at 3:26 PM

My mother worked at a Catholic hospital for 30 years.

None of my 3 children were born there even though we lived in the same town.

My mother called the taxi and took me across town to another hospital for the birth of my 1st child.

The Catholic Hospital quit delivering children because they would be forced to perform abortions if they did.

My first child is now 40 years old.

Joy

DarrelsJoy on February 3, 2012 at 4:03 PM

I’ve never seen one Crappie hook another; I should notify ‘Field and Stream’.

Bishop on February 3, 2012 at 2:49 PM

Field and Stream? I’d call the EPA. There must be sumthin in da wahteh.

platypus on February 3, 2012 at 4:04 PM

Legal immigration by Europeans has restricted since the 1960s.Hows the new immigrant policy working out. Look at the old european immigrant neighborhoods in our big cities. I dont think the Finns or Germans were out slinging dope or robbing and murdering people wholesale.There was very little in the way of govt support so they just put there backs into the living on got on with being Americans. They just wanted a chance not a handout. Where are the Swedish ghettos these days ST Paul?

Thicklugdonkey on February 3, 2012 at 4:05 PM

the term “brother’s keeper” is taken out of context. While, on its face, it may appear to mean a person who tends/keeps/cares for his brother, it is not. It was a smart ass answer that Cain gave the Lord after he killed his brother. “Am I my brother’s keeper?” is akin to answering God with “How the hell do I know where he is?”

ted c on February 3, 2012 at 2:44 PM

Now, it actually makes more sense for Obama to have said it. lol

Fallon on February 3, 2012 at 4:08 PM

Obama has many poor relatives, both here in the U.S. and elsewhere, but the multi-millionaire philanthropist doesn’t seem to be particularly troubled by that fact.

AZCoyote on February 3, 2012 at 3:45 PM

The thing that I find galling is that folks will approach some of these DEM politicians (like Obama or Hillary), looking for help, and recounting the tale of the hardships and adversitity that they face. And the response that these politicians almost invariably offer is some perfunctory expression of sympathy and a request for the person’s vote. They can’t (really, won’t) open their checkbook, and actually help the person in front of them. No, only the government can help that person, and only if the politician gains the office that they seek.

There is something very unseemly about that entire transaction–not that somebody might go to a polician for help, but that the lib politician seems to feed off the person’s misery…

ghostwriter on February 3, 2012 at 4:13 PM

Auntie Zeituni was living free in public housing for five years and living off the State of Massachusetts, he needs to send Duval a check. He has more money than he needs. Although I have not heard Michelle lately rejecting what money can actually buy.

Michelle has a lean and hungry look.

Fleuries on February 3, 2012 at 4:15 PM

It’s worth noting that the Bible never says we are our brothers’ keepers. There is a strong case to be made that God wouldn’t put the matter that way.

Cain asked a snarky question — “Am I my brother’s keeper?” — when confronted by God after he had murdered his brother. The Bible never validates an affirmative answer to that question as moral truth. Cain wasn’t accountable in the generic for his brother’s life; he was accountable for his own actions. His question stands as an indictment of his attitude — which is a perfect example for the ages of the spiritual condition of sin.

God tells us how we should treat each other, and Jesus is the example for us to follow. Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his brothers.

But in the Bible, “brother’s keeper” is a formulation of the sinful mind. It is a flawed, exaggerated premise, intended to get Cain off the hook. God never said Cain was his brother’s keeper. We humans are not accountable for outcomes in the manner implied by that formulation. The Bible, in toto, makes it very clear that we are responsible for our behavior, but outcomes belong to God.

J.E. Dyer on February 3, 2012 at 4:15 PM

I always took “my brother’s keeper” to be along the lines of Cain liking Abel to a pet to be kept in that sense…not in the sense of looking out after someone or giving them a helping hand.

But, with the Socialist enslavement attitude, I was not surprised The One said this.

Dr. ZhivBlago on February 3, 2012 at 4:22 PM

“Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s.”

Since Obama is both Ceasar and God

PortlandJon on February 3, 2012 at 4:24 PM

sean hannity has the 2 most annoying people on now addressing this..they do not have a clue as to what this really means. I can’t stand it! Why is everyone so dumb!!!!!!

congma on February 3, 2012 at 4:24 PM

I always took “my brother’s keeper” to be along the lines of Cain liking Abel to a pet to be kept in that sense…not in the sense of looking out after someone or giving them a helping hand.

But, with the Socialist enslavement attitude, I was not surprised The One said this.

Dr. ZhivBlago on February 3, 2012 at 4:22 PM

I would be willing to bet a significant sum of money that Obama did not know the source of the quote. He may have known that it came fromt he Bible, but he probably didn’t know which story, and certainly not the context.

ghostwriter on February 3, 2012 at 4:28 PM

The decline of other sources of moral authority enables big government.

When mans’ choice for morality is between a set of edicts by an ethereal entity and “to each according to his need from each according to his ability”, I think we are beyond “decline” of other sources of moral authority- morality has ceased to be part of the conversation.

The words of Thomas Jefferson, in my view, still ring true and strong (though incongruently) with enough americans that I’m optimistic this fool will be voted out and better times will follow. But we will soon be here again if our society refuses to discover and accept the morality required to support the great political ideas of our founding fathers.

beselfish on February 3, 2012 at 4:29 PM

The only government that can take care of each of us is self-government.

When we marry we create Law of Nations.

It is through self-government that we create society via interacting with other individuals. It is via society that we tend to the needy, the poor, the sick and the elederly via our moral responsibility as individuals and through the organs of charity we create to tend to those individuals that are beyond our scope to care for as individuals.

Government is an organ of society, it is not made to be the keeper of each of us, but to tend to the functions of society that are handed to it and to protect a society as a whole. Government is not a charitable organization but an organ that we grant negative liberty powers to that would be too horrific for individuals to wield.

Sovereign Nations do have brothers: other Sovereign Nations. They are equals in all respects for power, though magnitude of power varies. Government is to ATTEND to other governments as equals via diplomacy and to keep each other in check via sanctions which are a form of warfare which is a negative power of the liberty of warfare.

When we hand the power of positive liberties of individuals to government to wield, the individual becomes a slave to government.

Government is not our brother’s keeper because, in so doing, we become a slave of government.

That is why government via a negative liberty power grant is essential to restrict… we do so via the Constitution…. which BHO sees as deeply flawed.

Note that to get what he wants, you become a slave to government.

ajacksonian on February 3, 2012 at 4:30 PM

J.E. Dyer on February 3, 2012 at 4:15 PM

Obama isn’t really the great speaker he’s hyped up to be.

I hate to refer to Coulter after her blatant sell out of conservatives but this falls under what she noted in her book Demonic. Democrats are great at sloganeering but closer inspection their rhetoric and sloganeering don’t hold up.

Dr Evil on February 3, 2012 at 4:30 PM

The words of Thomas Jefferson, in my view, still ring true and strong (though incongruently) with enough americans that I’m optimistic this fool will be voted out and better times will follow. But we will soon be here again if our society refuses to discover and accept the morality required to support the great political ideas of our founding fathers.

beselfish on February 3, 2012 at 4:29 PM

All that we can really hope for is to win the fight for our generation, and to put off the day of reckoning for 20 years, or so. Our children will have to fight the battle their own generation.

ghostwriter on February 3, 2012 at 4:33 PM

Got a better idea (no, I’m not Henry Ford). Barack, how about going back to Kenya and keep your brother? Maybe God will spare us the judgment you have accrued for us.

Incidentally, Barack, the guy who questioned his responsibility toward his brother had already murdered his brother. Better you should leave God’s Word alone, Barack! You and Tom Daschle, John Edwards, and John Kerry. God is not mocked, O man of darkness!

Gordy on February 3, 2012 at 4:34 PM

Another point about European “charity” is that the funds come primarily through government taxation; the amount given by individuals is negligible. On the other hand, Americans are most generous personally in charitable giving and even more so in times of disasters internationally. This money is given well beyond whatever our government agencies via our tax dollars expend.

The more that government decides how charitable giving is to be determined, the less that an individual is able to donate for causes of personal importance. The government has no inherent right to decide how a person is to support charities.

Somebody had better give a wake-up call to the Moocher-in-Chief, informing him that he is not the arbiter of our moral lives. Not only is he a hypocrite in blaspheming the intent of sacred texts through selective misinterpretation, but he does a disservice to the nation’s people in encouraging handouts instead of promoting self responsibility.

onlineanalyst on February 3, 2012 at 4:36 PM

If Obooba is our keeper, then we are sheep.

Akzed on February 3, 2012 at 4:39 PM

A people cannot ascend beyond the limits of their morality.

Citizens who police their own behavior have little need for any other kind of police.

If we do not choose to have good manners, we have chosen to have good tyrants.

Mr. Obama should learn the Commandments before he learns the commentary, that is, Thou Shall Not Steal and Thou Shall Not Covet.

As for criticizing those to whom much is given — Mr. Obama, much is expected, and you have been weighed in the balance and found wanting.

Can’t wait to vote in ’12.

Rosey on February 3, 2012 at 4:41 PM

Too bad his brother actually lives in England, and this is all a big fat lie by Steyn.

RanchTooth on February 3, 2012 at 2:35 PM

Ssshh. Don’t tell that to REAL America. They liked the Kenya angle better. Has anyone seen his transcripts, btw?

KeninCT on February 3, 2012 at 2:44 PM

Well, we taxpayers are just a tad miffed at taking care of Obama’s aunt and uncle, two illegal aliens sucking on the public dole for years.

onlineanalyst on February 3, 2012 at 4:42 PM

Did we first abandon a belief in the authority of church and family, leaving a hole for government to fill? Or did the government gradually usurp the authority of church and family, leading church and family to abdicate responsibility?

Do you really have to ask? It was the abandonment of God and family values (in favor of selfish pursuit of physical sensation) that opened the door for big government.

disa on February 3, 2012 at 4:47 PM

I have many questions of Caesar and the Socialists?

OhEssYouCowboys on February 3, 2012 at 2:45 PM

You gave plenty of fine examples just as a start of the hypocrisy of this ignorant president, who knows only what his speechwriters crank out and his former “pastor” spewed.

Maybe Obama and Michelle can give a party at the WH for the homeless and destitute on their own dime and have the new hip-hop music group, Caesar and the Socialists, provide the dance tunes.

onlineanalyst on February 3, 2012 at 4:47 PM

At the same breakfast, Eric Metaxas, the author of “Bonhoeffer: Pastor, Martyr, Prophet, Spy” gave the keynote address. The speech was excellent, and one of the topics he hit upon was phony religiosity. President Obama was sitting just a couple feet away. It was funny, too, because Metaxas gave President Obama a copy of both of his books, but when he gave him the Bonhoeffer book, he said in a very deadpan manner something to the effect of “Well, no pressure here, but George W. Bush has read this book, and we all know how ‘intellectually uncurious’ he’s supposed to be”.

Katja on February 3, 2012 at 3:10 PM

I just finished reading the Bonhoeffer book. It’s outstanding. Good for Metaxas!

Mr. D on February 3, 2012 at 4:48 PM

Too bad his brother actually lives in England, and this is all a big fat lie by Steyn.

RanchTooth on February 3, 2012 at 2:35 PM

So when did he move to England, the land of the evil colonialists who tortured his grandfather?

disa on February 3, 2012 at 4:48 PM

Too bad his brother actually lives in England, and this is all a big fat lie by Steyn. RanchTooth on February 3, 2012 at 2:35 PM

From the Wikipedia article this dope linked to [since he keeps getting quoted I beg Tina's forgiveness for re-posting]:

Youngest half-brother of Barack Obama, born c.1982, son of Barack Obama Sr. and Jael Otieno (now a resident of Atlanta, Georgia). George was six months old when his father died in an automobile accident, after which he was raised in Nairobi by his mother and a French step-father. He later lived in South Korea for two years while his mother resided there for business reasons. Returning to Kenya, George Obama “slept rough for several years,” until his aunt gave him a six-by-eight foot corrugated metal shack in the Nairobi, Kenya, slum of Huruma Flats. [end]

So RanchTooth is a liar or a moron.

The 6 x 8 tin shack was a step up.

Akzed on February 3, 2012 at 4:49 PM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jtztrMoIUDc

ghostwriter on February 3, 2012 at 4:54 PM

Did we first abandon a belief in the authority of church and family, leaving a hole for government to fill? Or did the government gradually usurp the authority of church and family, leading church and family to abdicate responsibility?

It accelerated by being a bit of both. That vacuum in between the ears of liberals is filled with all sorts of flying pink unicorn ideas.

kirkill on February 3, 2012 at 4:58 PM

Liberals love humanity. They couldn’t care less about individuals. I guess it hits too close to home for them, actual people you know who you can see and touch. Better to send money to Guatemala, Darfur, or to the Palestinians. Or especially to some government agency. But your own brother? Nah. No way! Wait. Does a love for humanity mean you actually have to deal with, you know, your relatives and stuff? That just sucks.

Paul-Cincy on February 3, 2012 at 3:00 PM

Emerson and Thoreau made the same points.

onlineanalyst on February 3, 2012 at 5:09 PM

Akzed on February 3, 2012 at 4:49 PM

I saw this from 2008:

…Barack Obama, Sr. was married to at least three women, always 2 at a time, and fathered eight children with four different women.

…The youngest Obama son, George, was born to the fourth woman, Jael, in Nairobi. It is reported that Barack Sr. was planning to marry her at the time of his death. (Apparently polygamy was common in Africa.) George, only six months old when his father died, lives today in a corrugated tin shack in the slums of Nairobi and reportedly gets by on $1 a day.

Barack Obama is promising to solve your economic problems, but has done nothing to help his half-brother escape the dangers of life in the slums. Yet his own family lives in a $1.65 million dollar home they bought with the help of convicted felon Tony Rezko’s wife.

Fallon on February 3, 2012 at 5:15 PM

Has anyone seen his transcripts, btw?

KeninCT on February 3, 2012 at 2:44 PM

Have you seen them?

Thanks for reminding us that no one knows what sort of grades 0bama got, or what classes he took, while an undergrad.

BTW, the link you helpfully provided shows us that Soetoro does indeed have a half-brother, named George, who lives in Kenya.

Thanks for proving Steyn’s point.

MidniteRambler on February 3, 2012 at 5:16 PM

Do you really have to ask? It was the abandonment of God and family values (in favor of selfish pursuit of physical sensation) that opened the door for big government.

disa on February 3, 2012 at 4:47 PM

The lawless heathens will burn in hell?

Self-righteousness is unbecoming.

gravityman on February 3, 2012 at 5:54 PM

I’ve never seen one Crappie hook another; I should notify ‘Field and Stream’.

Bishop on February 3, 2012 at 2:49 PM

Yesterday it was Madison Conservative on fire. Today you are.

chemman on February 3, 2012 at 6:09 PM

Did we first abandon a belief in the authority of church and family, leaving a hole for government to fill? Or did the government gradually usurp the authority of church and family, leading church and family to abdicate responsibility?

I think we believe this is new, but we forget that the concept of government care of the poor has been around for some time. Viilages would get paid families to take care of orphans and the poor. Towns would provide shelter in exchange for free labor. And then in the 1800s, because of a population spurt and the development of more urban areas, government run poor houses were begun here and in Europe.
Most of this came about through no particular fault, churches and families simply couldn’t keep up with the burden. The idea behind welfare originally was to replace these and engourage people to live on their own and find work, and we all know how that turned out.

Deanna on February 3, 2012 at 6:12 PM

So is Obama a cafeteria Separation of Church and Stater??

CW on February 3, 2012 at 6:21 PM

The American form of government.

http://www.wimp.com/thegovernment

If libs would just watch the video, they’d learn more than they learned at public screwel. It’s short, sweet and accurate.

Califemme on February 3, 2012 at 6:31 PM

Ssshh. Don’t tell that to REAL America. They liked the Kenya angle better. Has anyone seen his transcripts, btw?

KeninCT on February 3, 2012 at 2:44 PM

Such a smart fellow you are. HAVE you seen his transcripts…. BTW?

fiatboomer on February 3, 2012 at 2:47 PM

When little Kenny (who I’m pretty sure is “special”) isn’t parroting laughable and easily disproven inaccuracies he read on the twitter feed of known anti-semite Eric Boehlert, he’s railing against community college alums. Apparently at the schools Ken and his messiah went to, they learn about the 57 states, the Austrian language, how FDR was President in 1929 and utilized broadcast television (which existed in 1929) to calm the nation’s economic angst, the country of Europe, and the countless contributions “corpse-men” have made to our Navy. They even have a medical school where aspiring physicians are trained to treat asthma with a device called a “breathalyzer”. Those are all things your average community college don’t teach, hence Kenny’s disdain for community colleges.

Walter Sobchak on February 3, 2012 at 6:39 PM

Liberals love humanity. They couldn’t care less about individuals [...] Does a love for humanity mean you actually have to deal with, you know, your relatives and stuff? That just sucks.

Paul-Cincy on February 3, 2012 at 3:00 PM

Pretty bright flashlight. :)

Axe on February 3, 2012 at 6:44 PM

Good question, Tina. In my opinion, the government initially increases its authority. The reason it does this is that liberal utopians have an unconstrained vision of man (this is Sowell’s thought) and believe they can eliminate all imperfections and even discomfort.

But the building of character requires some discomfort. So in developing their utopia, an unintended consequence is that character in individuals, families and neighborhoods atrophy.

As the smaller institutions die and as character and personal morality disappear, government, I think, seizes an opportunity to be still more assertiveness.

Burke on February 3, 2012 at 6:46 PM

Shouldn’t the original context be considered? Steyn is accepting Obama’s bastardization of the meaning. Wouldn’t President Obama, if confronted about his brother have the same reply as Cain did when God asked him about Abel (who Cain had just killed): “Am I my brother’s keeper?”

Honest Debate on February 3, 2012 at 6:48 PM

Sleazy Eric Holder could claim the reason he keeps perjuring about Fast and Furious is because he’s been too busy “fixing” Uncle Omar’s DUI.

viking01 on February 3, 2012 at 6:49 PM

Walter Sobchak on February 3, 2012 at 6:39 PM

Zinger.

Nutstuyu on February 3, 2012 at 7:02 PM

Michelle has a lean and hungry look.

Fleuries on February 3, 2012 at 4:15 PM

Hungry yes; lean no way!

bw222 on February 3, 2012 at 7:08 PM

I aslo percieved liberals wether they attend church or not, always take the lazy path, easy cheap morality where nothing is immoral much, so it’s easy for a lazy Christain to proclaim his righteousness,… since they never have to actually do anything hard, like live up to high standards of behavior…

They forgive all forgive nothing, condemn nothing condemn all, and walk on, oblivious to the ever cruder, always more vulgar coarseness of society.

mark81150 on February 3, 2012 at 3:48 PM

And don’t forget,ALWAYS do this at the expense of others which, they themselves intensely dislike, particularly, when visited upon them.

Pity the poor self-righteous liberal…..lol

DevilsPrinciple on February 3, 2012 at 7:19 PM

Liberals love humanity. They couldn’t care less about individuals [...] Does a love for humanity mean you actually have to deal with, you know, your relatives and stuff? That just sucks.

Paul-Cincy on February 3, 2012 at 3:00 PM

Precisely Paul and it is because of their belief in “democracy ” which is “mob rule” as opposed to our framers notion of the protection of the individuals rights in the framework of a constitutional republic.The chief characteristic and distinguishing feature of a Democracy is: Rule by Omnipotent Majority. In a Democracy, The Individual, and any group of Individuals composing any Minority, have no protection against the unlimited power of The Majority. It is a case of Majority-over-Man.

A Republic, on the other hand, has a very different purpose and an entirely different form, or system, of government. Its purpose is to control The Majority strictly, as well as all others among the people, primarily to protect The Individual’s God-given or the secular description~ by birthright~, unalienable rights and therefore for the protection of the rights of The Minority, of all minorities, and the liberties of people in general.

They are two entirely different and antithetical political philosophies.

DevilsPrinciple on February 3, 2012 at 7:29 PM

Progressive Dream come true……..

From their seats of power in the government they set all the rules (for they are the enlightened class) for all of the witless animals out there (since they are Darwinists at heart we’re all just flotsam and apes that have evolved).

as Uncle Andrew (from the “Magicians Nephew” said)

“But of course you must understand that rules of that sort, however excellent they may be for little boys—and servants—and women—and even people in general, can’t possibly be expected to apply to profound students and great thinkers and sages. No, Digory. Men like me, who possess hidden wisdom, are freed from common rules

THAT is what Progressives want and are.

PappyD61 on February 3, 2012 at 7:30 PM

It was the abandonment of God and family values (in favor of selfish pursuit of physical sensation) that opened the door for big government.

disa on February 3, 2012 at 4:47 PM

I would say moral relativism has been more the problem than hedonism.

As for “selfish pursuit”, don’t knock it. After all, is there any other kind?

beselfish on February 3, 2012 at 7:31 PM

The following is totally unrelated to anyone’s mancrush on anyone:

Romney/Steyn ’12!

itsnotaboutme on February 3, 2012 at 7:33 PM

so, Barry is channeling his inner Christian :-)…aww…

jimver on February 3, 2012 at 7:43 PM

nment. It’s a chicken-egg dilemma: Did we first abandon a belief in the authority of church and family, leaving a hole for government to fill?

Perhaps… but what about those who say “I own my life, not the church and not the government!” isn’t that the very essense of liberty and self-determination?

weew on February 3, 2012 at 7:59 PM

J.E. Dyer on February 3, 2012 at 4:15 PM

Dr. ZhivBlago on February 3, 2012 at 4:22 PM

Agree

From the 2010 article from American Thinker The Real Meaning of ‘My Brother’s Keeper’ By Matthew Eckel

But what was Cain actually saying when he uttered those words to God? The Hebrew word used here for “keeper” means more than “protector” or “defender”; it is more akin to “overseer” or “master,” as in “keeping” sheep (1 Samuel 17:20, 22); royal wardrobes (2 Kings 22:14); the king’s forest (Nehemiah 2:3, 3:29); gates (1 Chronicles 9:19); vineyards (Song of Solomon 1:6); and the temple threshold (Jeremiah 52:24) [ii]. Although these jobs are foreign to most of us, we can get the sense of them by thinking “zookeeper” or “doorkeeper.”

Note this article refers to Obama speak in 2010. Although Obama uses the phrase to misrepresent the Bible, he is not misrepresenting himself, because to him, we are livestock who must be managed

entagor on February 3, 2012 at 8:02 PM

Brits always seem better than Americans at communication, it’s a little embarassing. Thank God they have shown up through the years.

John Kettlewell on February 3, 2012 at 8:15 PM

Brits always seem better than Americans at communication, it’s a little embarassing. Thank God they have shown up through the years.

John Kettlewell on February 3, 2012 at 8:15 PM

Steyn is Canadian, not British.

Walter Sobchak on February 3, 2012 at 9:01 PM

It still surprises when a pol uses “Brother’s Keeper” as a way to sound religious while acting as if it is the worlds responsibility to take of everyone. As most people know, the “Brother’s Keeper” reference in the bible was from Cane deflecting God’s questions about where Able was, after Cane had killed him.

Brother’s Keeper

CLaFarge on February 3, 2012 at 9:12 PM

If our Christian ethic dictates that the government should take care of the poor, then we should outlaw (and put some teeth behind enforcing ending) divorce, abortion, drug use, prostitution, pagan religions, contraception, businesses being open on Sundays and all pornography.

cptacek on February 4, 2012 at 1:10 AM

Ms. Korbe is nearly right — it’s not “chicken-and-egg” but rather a vicious cycle.

I’d phrase the last paragraph as follows:

“Steyn’s comments are thought-provoking, as usual. The decline of other sources of moral authority creates a vacuum which big government greedily fills. As we abandon belief in church and family, we invite a false substitute. And the nature of the lust for power means that government continues to usurp the place of church and family, leading to further breakdown of church and family responsibility.”

RobertJon on February 4, 2012 at 5:21 PM

Obama has a brother in Kenya living in a shack and has been up on drug charges.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/2590614/Barack-Obamas-lost-brother-found-in-Kenya.html

He also has a brother from Kenya who is currently working in China who recently wrote a book about Barracks father that conflicts with the one’s book “Dreams of my father”.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/11/04/mark-ndesandjo-obamas-hal_0_n_344824.html

Yet another brother in Kenya appears to have setup a questionable charity and running a scam.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1384925/Barack-Obamas-brother-accused-fraud-charity-set-family-name.html

And there is Samson, also a Kenyan who was denied entry into the UK after attacking a brit girl on a prior visit.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7995544.stm

OH Yeah… looks like he does have a brother, Bernard living in the UK. http://yeyeolade.wordpress.com/2009/11/04/obamas-brother-bernard/

Lot of Muslims in his family… Funny that.

So he has alot of brothers to be keeping. Good luck with that Barry.

NTxOkie on February 5, 2012 at 12:43 AM

In all fairness though, Mark. That’s just one brother. Given Obama’s father’s…lifestyle?…how many brothers and sisters does Barack have? If he did as you suggest, it could very well turn out to be a sizeable sum!

Still, I get your point.

PorchDawg on February 6, 2012 at 3:26 PM

Comment pages: 1 2