Obama’s Post-Family America


The Republican Party went into the 2012 elections with a number of handicaps. One of the biggest of these handicaps was that it genuinely believed in a single country defined by the American Dream of family values, hard work and national greatness. The Democratic Party, which scored decisive victories across the country, never believed in any such thing, though its leading lights, like Obama, occasionally paid lip service to the idea as a sop to older white voters who would have been turned off by the 2012 version of Obama sounding like the 2002 version of Obama.

Where the Republican Party thought to bring out a national movement, the Democratic Party relied on a coalition of interest groups with little in common except for a dependency on the government and an outsider’s cultural antipathy to the Republican Party.

While the Republican Party still aspires to a vision of a single America, the Democratic Party pulls the strings of a broken America, a disassembled collection of hostile and suspicious groups protecting their own turf in post-American multicultural urban and suburban wastelands. This broken country of lost souls, fractured families and makeshift tribes is the Democratic Party’s base.

The Democratic Party is defined by the broken family in the same way that the Republican Party is defined by the family. It is a refuge for minority groups where fatherlessness leads to single mothers and government dependency and for white middle-class Julia types who use government dependency as a substitute for parental dependency.

Family defines continuity. Enough families taken together form a community. The common culture of the community is a multi-generational heritage that shapes the identities of their children. Take away the family and you have rootless individuals looking for tribes to affiliate with, clumping in artificial groups based on some common characteristic and economic interest. And that is the Democratic Party.

Take away the family and millions of seniors have no recourse for their needs and even their survival, but to turn to the government. Take away the family, and single mothers raising children on their own have to turn to the government. Take away the family and children no longer look to their parents to help them get a start in life; they look to the government. Take away the family and you take away identity. You take away everything that makes us a country and a people.

Take away the family and you have ghettoes where men prowl, leaving behind the children of different mothers, and the mothers of those children wait in line to cash their welfare checks. Take away the family and a generation of boys and girls wait in public housing to repeat the same cycle where the rite of passage is a prison sentence for boys and a prenatal exam for girls.

At the middle class level, parents no longer count on their children to take care of them when they grow old and children no longer count on their parents to pass on an inheritance to them. Marriage and children become an expense, not a net benefit. Abortion becomes logical when the economic interests of the middle class are no longer tied to having children, but to avoiding having children because the only people who benefit from having children are on public assistance. Parents and children become strangers thrown together by biology with no common future holding them together, all too grateful to a government that takes them off each other’s hands.

Under such conditions, dependency becomes a way of life. Without the family, individuals affiliate with identity groups that promise to help them get ahead in life. People who have little in common except race or gender affiliate with groups that shape them into artificial collectives based on race and gender, with the promise of economic benefits and outsider solidarity.

The descendants of Southern European immigrants from a dozen countries and multiple cultures begin calling themselves a persecuted racial minority. Women are encouraged to cluster into “sisterhoods.” Men attracted to other men join their own identity group. New identities are constantly discovered and formed. These identities provide no true mutual support and serve as an inferior and artificial substitute for the organic structure of the family.

Everyone in the Democratic Party is either a victim or a would-be savior of victims, but they aren’t a victim of some imaginary majority. They are victims of the fracturing of the social structures of a country. And the fracturers have done an excellent job of organizing their own victims into the post-American coalition that won them the election. While the fractured have ethnic, racial and gender studies offered in every college and university, all that the papers and courses do is paper over the tragic reality that they have no idea who they are. All that they have become and are is an aching need waiting to be filled from a government dispensary.

In a low turnout election, the dependent are the most reliable vote because they have few other options. They may not be enthusiastic about the candidate, but the dependent don’t need to believe because they aren’t voting on faith, but out of self-interest. They have become slaves to subsidies and those subsidies are the slave collar that drags them to the polls when they have reason to believe that their subsidies are threatened.

Government has become their father, a faceless paternal figure that dispenses food stamps and welfare checks, pays for their abortions and rocks the cradles of their abandoned children. Government is the father that teaches them to read — badly — pays for their tuition, while piling debt on their heads, and offers them limited medical care when they grow old. Government is everything to them and nothing.

The Post-Family Party is also the Post-American Party. The two invariably come together. Broken families make for broken communities and a broken nation. The end of marriage is also the end of responsibility. The end of fatherhood is also the end of adulthood. Cities full of overgrown children haunting the streets and the dorm rooms are never going to understand why we can’t just borrow more money to pay for the things that they want now. We are all their fathers and mothers, and the more we give them, the more they hate us for the one thing that we can’t give them; a sense of who they are. And they are never going to identify with a country when they have no healthy identity of their own.

Post-America is not just multicultural, it is post-family. Its multiculturalism is a sham disguising the broken nature of families in minority communities and the random nature of identities that pile all minorities under the category of “brown people” and demand economic benefits on their behalf.

The Democratic Party is the post-family party. Its base consists of groups of lost people trying to find some identity in an increasingly estranged country. The Democratic Party understands the state of fractured America and how it can be exploited, because it did much of the fracturing. Destroying the support structure of the family paved the way for destroying the support structure of America. Obama, with his complicated background and his third culture dislocation leading to a self-created identity, is the perfect figurehead for a broken family party that is as foreign to itself as it is to us.

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.  

  • Mary Sue

    This is exactly how the Communists gain power when they do it incrementally. Destroy the family, make everyone dependent on Government, all while causing some groups to curse the very government for "keeping them down" that they get their subsistence from.

    • devdeep

      very true mary sue

      • jckstry

        Actually, Communism fully supported families as the basis of Communist society, much the same as religions. The biggst threat to the family always has been and still is Capitalism, which puts profit interests before personal and family interests, leading to a situation like we now have in the USA where most wolking folks can hardly feed themselves, let alone a family with kids, while profits skyrocket.

        • Selmainboca

          when was the last time a poor person offered you a job?

        • Randy CA

          Nonsense! One of the first things the communists in Russia did once their power was secure, was to attack the family unit. Among many other things they forced people into communal apartments (which some still exist in St. Petersburg — I have been involved in trying to undo them for the tenants who hate living is such places) and built huge communal kitchens so people would not sit down family dinners.

        • erica

          Welfare pays females to reproduce without a spouse. The more they reproduce,the more freebies they receive .They make no financial contributions to cities ,states,the government or the world.

          Democrats made claims that absent fathers don’t affect a child’s development . This encouraged more reproduction .We are drowning in the result of liberal supported irresponsible behavior,selfishness,anchor babies,crime and greed.

          Capitalism didn’t make slums necessary , socialist /communist/ progressive practices did.

          Capitalism pays for the survival of the welfare system.

          Capitalism creates jobs so people don’t live in prisons of destitution .The more people earn,the more likey they are to be responsible parents,spouses and citizens . They have a vested interest in themselves ,their offspring and government .

          Poor single mothers aren’t going to create businesses or jobs ,they only create more dependents .

          And people that succeed in the Capitalistic system tend to get married ,have children and stay married longer. Government dependents can’t marry or they lose benefits.

          Yes capitalism encourages greed but so does welfare.

        • Toma

          Not only ask the question of “When was the last time a poor person offered you a job?” but also ask yourself, what, to most of America is “being poor”. The poorest of those in America are still better off than some”middle class” citizens in other countries. You are not poor if you are carrying a cell phone (and it’s not a free Obama phone), a carton of cigarettes, a six-pack of beer, and driving a leased Acura that costs about 35K+. But there are many who claim to be poor because their incomes are below that artificial line where the government dictates that “poor” begins. Poor in this country, with few exceptions, means “the envious” who are not satisfied that someone else has more “stuff” than they do whatever it might be. It is the mentality that says he should not have more than I have just because he was “luckier” than I was. Luck has little to do with it. I will use myself as an example: Born in 1948, mom divorced at the time I was two and brother was six, we lived on $200/month child support and $100 mom made working part-time at Sears (30 hours a week) while we were in school. He hours were limited not by Sears but by her desire to be home when we were out of school so as to be an influence or control in our lives before adulthood. Enlisted in the Air Force at 17, out at 21, worked through a variety of jobs, I was NEVER out of work from 1969 through 1981. If I changed jobs or lost a job I went looking for another. Nobody available to help. Two kids by 1970, another adopted in 1977. Married since I was 19. Divorced in seven years. Remarried in 1974. Never made over $15000 per year til 1981…Made it up to $60,000 through no help from anyone, simply worked hard and did my job. Lost that job during the 1990s downsizings. Took another one at 75% and kept going. Finally got fed up with government (employer) in 1997 and took very small retirement and started my own business doing something that I liked doing but was not all that good at. Took me the past 15 years to make it work to the point where I was good enough to maintain a consistent income level to pay my bills. Am I rich? Not at all, in fact, I was a conspicuous spender during the time I made good money and didn’t save much of anything. Regretted that a time or two, but my point in all this is that I did not rely on anyone else to do for me, I took it upon myself to better myself and keep pushing until I got the job I needed at the time and the one I was willing to accept at the pay offered, but once I took it, I worked it the best I could. That’s all I owe anyone and all I can expect is that I get paid for the work I agreed to do. If I didn’t want to take the job at the price offered, I didn’t but I cannot blame that person for being out of work. Once people in this country accepted the idea that nobody owed them anything. Unfortunately, those days are fading into the distant past and I pray they return in a renewal of faith in God and family rather than in government. The bottomless pit is full of government’s good intentions. Government is all about control and power and anyone pushing people into dependency on government only wants control of your lives and the power that goes with it. Sorry for the length, but you ticked me off with your anti-capitalist crap. You are so wrong and the sad part about it, it was probably some leftist teacher that planted those seeds in your imrpessionable head and it grew noxious weeds there….profusely. Good luck…you will need it without a faith in God. Won’t do you any good though!

  • Dabiel

    Destory the family and eduction system and you have ultimate power… each socilist greedy dictator's wet dream. Through acts like this, vulture like soros open the way to have their masters become feudal lords that canplunder and enslave what and whomever they want!

    • Lady_Dr

      FIRST Get rid of the public school system!

  • crackerjack

    The GOP is “Defined by the family”? Aha!! And what about the GOP candidates Cain and Gingrich? Wouldn’t ” dirty old men” be a more fitting definition for these two sugardaddys ? :-)

    • Mary Sue

      nobody's perfect. But at least they know they're wrong and aren't pretending it's a good thing. Though you never know what goes on behind closed doors. Gingrich's exes could have been total bees with an itch and we'd never, ever know.

      The birth control pill itself has been helping pull families apart, in ways that are stunning researchers. Turns out that when women are on the pill, (since the body thinks it is pregnant), they gravitate to the wrong kind of man in more ways than one. Pregnancy (or pseudo) causes a woman to be attracted to someone genetically similar. There's other wrong traits in this mix too but she doesn't find that out until she goes OFF the pill to have babby. Then suddenly her husband LITERALLY STINKS. I am not joking. Coming off the fake pregnancy, the woman realizes she's not actually compatible with the man at all. This might even culminate in genetic incompatibility (and inability to conceive), though that depends. You see, women who aren't pregnant are trying to find men via scent (though they don't know it) who are genetically dissimilar enough so that their immune systems fill in the gaps for the kids that the woman's doesn't have. Being on the pill WHILE DATING screws this entire dynamic up.

      This is well researched and documented. It's not the whole reason why relationships fail, but it is a significant factor.

      • amused

        Yea researched in your bathroom as you sit on the toilet. Stay there for a while Mary Sue , because you're so full of it , that it 's coming out of your ears . Noy to metion your mouth . It's rare to hear such jaw-dropping ignorance coming from someone who can operate a computer . Indicative of book knowledge , but a lack of intelligence and devoid of even an iota of wisdom . You are just attempting to tranfer your own actual character to others , you are truly pathetic . You've just described your own personal experience .

        • Ar'nun

          "but a lack of intelligence and devoid of even an iota of wisdom ."

          At least Mary Sue did more than just attack and insult. You offered no rebuttal, no ideas, and ultimately nothing of substance which is indictive of someone 2 I.Q. points above functionally retarded.

          • Mary Sue

            see below where I totally pwn his stupidity with an actual article from no less than Scientific American.

        • bkopicz

          Keep it up chump, show everyone here what liberals are really like.

        • visitor

          Hey Amused, learn how to spell first before you post.

        • Mary Sue

          http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=

          read it, weep, then choke on it.

          My character? My good sir you know nothing! I am but a poor simple virgin that hath not known man.

        • Mary Sue

          btw my poos have more substance and fact than anything you've just posted here.

      • Mike Elmore

        Mary Sue,
        Interesting point, now just figure out what men have been taking that's making them a bunch of pussies in this post American family/world. There lies the real problem..elmore

        • Lady_Dr

          "Give not thy strength to women." it says somewhere in the bible. I think that the women's movement has been bad because too many women went in pursuit of careers and thought they didn't need men. So males gave up being men and remained little boys. While it didn't always work out that way in the past a very high percentage of men took responsiblity for their wife and children, PLUS any unmarried female relative. It meant that nearly all women had some male protection. And believe me women do need male protection – men are naturally agressive and unprotected females are easy prey. So without protectors a lot of women have become like men with breast. I probably should write a book on this, but the fact is it actually started in the 19th century, very slowly, very gently – probably after the civil war when so many, many men died and so many women had to become self-reliant. It didn't help that men saw an advantage in this for themselves. The first world war made it far worse, and it has never really ended.

        • Susan

          Too much soy. It is a filler in just about everything. It mimics estrogen.

        • Mary Sue

          Birth control gets peed out, gets into the water, contaminates teh water, guess who drinks the water. When fish and frogs are getting gender confusion, you know it's bad.

        • Mary Sue

          I have never touched a birth control pill in my life.

        • Mike Elmore

          Amused,
          I know your no dummy and if you think I was specifically calling you a pussy I wasn't, it's a general observation I've made but I personally don't know you. As you can see I use my real name. I am a cattle rancher from Gillette Wyoming a easy place to find. Now if you want to post your real name, what you do, and where you live I'll certainly give deference to you for doing so, but for now, your hiding behind a rather silly moniker might put you in that group of people I've observed in my general observation. elmore

        • Max

          You are disgusting, madam Amused. Clean your filthy mouth and get professional psychiatric help.

    • wsk

      wouldn't mucking foron be a better moniker for you?

  • Perry

    The problem I have with this kind of analysis is that there is no self-critique involved. There is no mention of how the pursuit of the American economic dream is tearing families apart. How can one be intellectually honest and blame all of the current family problems on the Democratic party or the Obama administration? This thinking is characteristic of a fundamentalist ideology that is very reductionist and does not want to admit the complexities of the world we live in.
    We could also speak about the President's example of fatherhood and parenting and being a responsible husband as a black-American, and what impact this is having in that community. Why is this not mentioned in the article? Or are we that racist as conservatives? Would anyone care to do unbiased research on this? Or are we not supposed to let the facts get in the way of our ideology? The USA is changing ethnically and sociologically, and perhaps many do not want to leave Mayberry, but we must deal with the world that exists and not the one that existed 50 years ago if we want to continue to be leaders in the world.

    • amused

      " ANALYSIS " ????? WHAT ANALYSIS ? It's a not so cleverly concealed screed of hate . Get a grip Perry , you are asking rational questions of the irrational .

      • Max

        So, get out of this forum, if you think everyone here is a nut. Go suck on some latte with your fellow libs. Or get a J-O-B, as Judge Joe Brown says.

      • Western Canadian

        The only hate here, is that which you have brought with you.

    • Daniel Greenfield

      If the pursuit of the economic American dream is tearing families apart, why wasn't there a major decline in marriage in the 1950s?

    • Duke

      Oh please, we are the least racist country on the planet and in history.
      The USA has always changed ethnically and socially so that argument stinks.

      When you destroy the family, you destroy the most basic unit of society.

      I suggest you have a look at "society without the father" written about pre-nazi Germany and also "The Ominous Parallels".

      We have seen this act of humanity before…

    • Mary Sue

      Oh come on. Pursuit of the American dream doesn't destroy families. Any family which winds up with divorce because "the husband is never there" has bigger problems than following the American Dream.
      (Interestingly, Tom Leykis, no conservative he by ANY stretch of the imagination, made the claim that "women are dream-killers"–meaning, if a man is married to a woman, the woman will more than likely hold him back. She'll object to moving across-country. She'll object to him working long hours. But really this isn't a chasing the American Dream thing. This is a you picked the wrong woman who isn't supportive thing.)

      Nobody cares what the President does because not only is he not representative of how the typical black grew up in America, his wife had a stable two-parent family, which also appears to be in the minority as to how the majority grows up in that community. Perhaps it is a good example for the community, but perhaps they are not paying attention. Obama lived with money. His mother was lily white (and a freaking commie pinko). He doesn't know what it's like to live as a black person in America, really. He barely knows what it's like to live in continental America! No history of being enslaved in his father's background in America. His experiences are so divergent that it's not relatable.

      Race has got jack and s___ to do with this, Democrats are the ones that created the Klu Klux Klan, lest we forget.

    • Cat K

      We conservatives? You are conservative? I doubt that! Barack Hussein Obama's marriage and family is a role model? With his background and proclivities and his choice of faith institutions? So, then you claim to believe the image he presents through the media and to believe him when he speaks? Very conservative of you. (Sarcastic)

      The country is changing due to many factors related to Democrat/progressive policies and media dissemination of these "values." It is human nature to take the easy path if there is no incentive and reward or intrinsic satisfaction in to doing what is more difficult – like marriage, work, honor.
      But you know all this. You are here with your thesaurus open to disrupt. I expect angry condescending snark in response. Lets have it.

      Daniel, I am thinking you have niw received increased attention from some quarters.There is an increase in trolls here.

    • http://twitter.com/AEHarrod @AEHarrod

      Yes, Barack Obama has an admirable family, unlike the chaos of William Jefferson Clinton's personal life. Obama's personal life, though, has no bearing on his public policy, in which Obama rejects any claim for his family incorporating an objective standard of proper behavior. Many people say they admire Obama personally, but this manifests silly, superficial thinking, for Obama is doing everything publicly to encourage people not to be like him. Would, for example, Obama's daughters do just as well in a household of two homosexual men?

  • amused

    OIh , "nobody;s perfect " says Mary Sue -sycophant extraordinaire ….cept us republicans . What a steaming pile of DUNG expectorated by sanctimonious self righteous hypocrits !
    Give it a break Daniel , you insult your own intelligence with this one.
    Reading your prolific screeds [especially after the election ] one can only reasonably surmise , that you are driven by intense unmitigated hatred . You are transparent Daniel , and it shows . I recommend some serious spiritual counseling …from one jew to another .

    • rjr

      Mr Greenfield's so called "screed" makes a trenchant point while your screed is fatuous.

    • Mary Sue

      You are projecting again, amused-bouche. Who here is full of hatred? Not me. Not Daniel. More than likely, people like you, people like schlo-motion, people like deShawn, people like Truth-teller…

      Did you never read up on how Communists hate the family and that's how they gain control? Of course, politicians never follow the same 'rules' they set up for the rest of us.

  • amused

    Family ? Family ? Aint it funny , the Five States with the HIGHEST divoce rates [per 1000] are Ooooops Republican and VOTED Republican .
    And WHAT'S THIS ! The Five States with the LOWEST divorce rates [per 1000 residents ] are ….omigosh !! Democrat and voted Democrat . http://divorce.lovetoknow.com/Divorce_Statistics_

    So much for you "family and republican " BALONEY .

    • Ar'nun

      Because in those Republican states more people are getting married making a higher probability of divorse. While in the Blue States they are whoring around humping anything they can.

      • Amused

        Yea that 's must be it huh ? I'll bet that "anything they can " is lol…YOU .

        • Mary Sue

          it's called not bothering to get married. It's called "friends with benefits". Face facts, not as many people are even bothering with marriage, let alone in "enlightened" BLUE states.

        • Western Canadian

          State breakdowns can be very misleading, due to the variations between percentage of city vs country dwellers, and a single large city dominated by Democratic party hacks can skew any figures rather dramatically. The only valid comparisons would be by county. By which most republican counties have very low murder rates, while democratic counties can and do have murder rates that stop just short of outright slaughter…

          If you weren’t so easily amused, you might actually manage to educate yourself. NOT.

    • Daniel Greenfield

      See Charles Murray. The left's social impact has hit hardest on the working class. Both black and white.

    • rjr

      Who cares which 5 states has the highest or lowest divorce rates, there are 50 states and it is completely beside the point of the piece. The Democrats by their policies accelerated the breakdown of the family by the so called "Great Society" reforms. And now they pander to this burgeoning underclass for political power. Republicans, to their credit, recognize the importance of family in keeping people out of poverty despite the fact that we also have broken families in our ranks. We don't celebrate it or think it's a positive thing.

      • WilliamJamesWard

        I must have missed something, Obama says he campaigned in all 57 States……….William

    • Mary Sue

      who said this was only about divorce statistics? How about the rate of common-law marriage and SINGLE MOTHERS, smart a$$?

      The article you linked even cited that the probable reason for these divorce rates is the age in which people get married (the younger, the more likely it's NOT going to work out).

    • nightspore

      So are you implying that Massachusetts and Washington, D.C. are bastions of pro-family life? And did you read the entire article? (Or does the analysis therein matter to you?)

      When will you and your ilk learn to make sensible arguments instead of digging up non sequiturs that (evidently) allow you to pretend you've countered the posting? (This is just a rhetorical question.)

    • Horace

      Amused but not perceptive, You have to actually get married first to get divorced and the lost sheep of the USA in the clutches of the amoral democrat party generally dont marry (what does out of wedlock mean, Amused) Go see the "Lincoln" movie . The Democrats havent changed a bit. They hate black people still today, and have been destroying the black family structure steadily during and since slavery, accelerating it since the "Great Society" into the shambles it is today. The white family isn't far behind now.

  • al222

    This column is spot on. The bashers ignore a 40% out-of-wedlock birthrate at their peril, and offering a fallback argument about which politicians did what is a weak argument. those who think the nuclear family is more or less extraneous are kidding themselves.

    • Questions

      This less about policy than peer pressure among nonwhites, especially blacks. The welfare state is a reality for everyone. Only some races, however, readily respond to it. Blacks aren't some "slaves" on a metaphorical liberal plantation. They OWN the American plantation. White taxpayers are the slaves.

  • Ar'nun

    Who are we to judge these poor downtrodden single mothers? Now days it is alright to behave like an animal and hump anything that moves. After all, what good is a father anyways? Aren't all men dunces clumsily going through life causing mischief? Not to mention, as the Democrats have told us time and time again, the minorities are just not capable of providing for themselves. They have no capabilities and can't be expected to survive without the Government's helping hands.

    • Mary Sue

      We can and will blame them for chasing the 'bad boy' and getting knocked up by him while neglecting the attentions of the poor beleagured "nice guy".

  • Lady_Dr

    This paints things with a pretty broad brush. "Take away the family and you have rootless individuals looking for tribes to affiliate with, clumping in artificial groups based on some common characteristic and economic interest. And that is the Democratic Party." Yes, but there are plenty of otherwise rootless individuals who would like some tribal affiliation but who have found the courage to be individuals, and individuals who vote Republican and see through the danger that is the Obamanation. – I am one of them, what I don't understand is why there are not more like me.

    • JoJoJams

      It's because the individualist like you (and myself) are just that – individualists. I'd be willing to bet that you could also (for the most part) care less what people "think" and "say" about you – you do your own thing, no matter the crowd. And that is the difference. Most people can't do the "individual" thing. Not to mention there are always exceptions to any general rule about human "groups".

      • Questions

        That speaks of failures among those who dislike individualism, not practitioners of it.

  • pierce

    Having read most of the comments above, I am not particularly impress with the comments, nor the direction the Demonocratic Party is taking this country. Amused is not very amusing, as he/she has distinctly left leanings, must be extremely liberal, and quite sarcastic. Definitely would not be some one I would associate with, or want to interact with, but then I consider Obama just as radical.

    • wsk

      "amused" is an unamusing left wing pseudo-intellectual who trolls this website. Better to just ignore it. (or hunt it down).

      • JoJoJams

        He does have one redeeming quality — He truly does see the peril in the muslim mindset of jihad, and what that entails for the unbelievers the world over. That is a point he agrees with us on, though he may probably differ in thought as to how we can counter the rise of "radical" islam. Considering many of his posts are from the left, (though sometimes they aren't all that bad – just a different "perspective" – if he could just get off his own "holier than thou" high-horse and talk with people….) it's still a refreshing surprise that he agrees on the threat of "radical" islam.

      • Mary Sue

        They see him [amused] trollin/the Front Page
        But we all know he's just writin' dirty…

  • wsk

    What are you mouth breathing conservatives ranting about ? The family unit is fine. Mommy is working (maybe) and Daddy is the Government. It's as it should be comrades. Wecome to Amerika. Welcome to the new normal.

  • Western Spirit

    A post American post Christian nation is what America has become, because people like water choose the easy path to follow.

    A true Christian, like a true Jew, follow the laws of God. A true American follows the laws of man and God while using self reliance as a guide to living a full life.

    When the Left destroyed the family it won the battle for America but not the war because the war is between good and evil and that war continues.

    In the meanwhile America land of the free and home of the brave will decline, how could it do otherwise?

    • Duke

      We have lost the American Values…most cant tell you what they are:
      American values or the American Trinity are : In God We Trust, Liberty, E Plurbus Unum…
      These are printed on EVERY COIN..

      Leftist Values are Race, gender , class..

  • clarespark

    Although I agree that the family with both a father and a mother is a vital unit in society, I can't agree that our country is newly fragmented. Progessives played a major role in dividing us up by ethnicity and "race" and we never recovered from the Civil War. I wrote about some of that here: http://clarespark.com/2012/11/13/orwell-superpatr…. Greenfield's article is nostalgic for a polity that never existed. Not ever."Orwell, superpatriots, and the election."

  • John

    I think the funniest thing is how stupid we are to fall for the governments propoganda. Somehow women believe they are better off having to prostitute themselves out to businesses trading time for dollars – just like men have been doing for centuries to support their families and this makes them equal?

    I'd love to stay home and pursue the things that interest me rather than be coerced to pursue the things that are important to my "boss".

  • Walt

    Great article Daniel…….

  • Kevin Stroup

    Who am I to judge these people? I am the guy whose taxes pays their way in life. That gives me the right to judge them. Don’t want me judging you? Pay your own damn bills. But as long as you are supported by me, I have a say in how you live.
    Why should people who pay for their own kids have to pay for someone elses too? People who are disciplined, employed, and fiscally responsible are taxed out the wazhoo to pay for those who are not. What is just about this system?
    So conservatives should not talk about family values because so many of them fail to achieve the goals themselves? What is wrong with reaching for a goal that would help in establishing a prosperous (by many standards) civilization? In all of man’s history we have not eradicated rape or murder. Should we just go ahead and give up and legalize these then?

  • Fred Tyler

    What a horrible, fully appropriate piece.

  • John C. Davidson

    5 years ago I got an e-mail from my wife's sister claiming I had no right telling my step daughter what to do in the big house I provided for her mother and brother for 30 years. No, the socialists have been very busy behind the scenes for a very long time. Too many, including lawyers profitted off this trend.

    My wife of 33 years is now my ex and she got to keep that house that isn't worth anything now. That sure is PROGRESS isn't it?

  • tagalog

    Greenfield seems to have something here: it seems plausible that the Democrats have tapped into a winning strategy by catering to the various interest groups who center on government money as the solution to the ongoing existence of the splinter groups they belong to. The culture wars do indeed seem to have fractured our society into groups of people who lack private support structures.

    For me, the reason why Mr. Greenfield appears to be correct is that the administration and its supporters were able to press credibly the claim that the right wing believes in the idea that "You're on your own," a repugnant idea that a culture with significant private support structures still in place would instantly see to be a falsehood and a twisted exaggeration of the idea of self-reliance, a state of character once seen here as virtuous and now seen as silly, irrelevant to our survival, and obsolete.

    But now that the "little platoons" of civic groups that Edmund Burke and deToqueville once saw, along with Christianity, organized religion, churchgoing, shared American values, and the like have been abandoned in favor of non-judgmentalism, courts as cultural decision-makers, no-fault divorce, the dilution of the definition of marriage, birth control, and a host of other invasions of a single moral system in favor of something (sometimes called "diversity" or "tolerance" or "egalitarianism" or "progressivism" or whatever strikes the fancy at the moment), we righties are in a pretty untenable spot and can only hope that the new generations' maturity and experience will lead them our way.

    • rjr

      So true and so very sad.

    • Ronl

      Those little platoons are disapearing thanks to diversity. They are built on in-group trust. This is not my theory, but the work of the liberal academic, Robert Putnam. Putman spent years resaerching the data, and more years trying to disprove his politically icorrect findings.
      The study and book are called "Bowling Alone".

  • Anthony

    Greenfield is right. Post-family America may not have started out by design, but politicians have taken family declination trends and engineerd a way to increase control and build an ever greater base by doing everything possible to promote disorder.

    Amused should really shut his trap and who cares if he claims to be a “Jew”. If he is, he is a blathering drone who is the stereotypical “liberal Jew” type who despite repeated experiencial and logical thrashings, is so smart in his own mind, he is stupid.

  • Looking4Sanity

    The truth that this article presents can be summed up in one sentence…we have become, in majority, a Godless society. It is just that simple. Wait, watch, and witness the horrors visited upon this country for that fool's decision.

    • Cat K

      You are so correct. As a mental health professional, I have occasion to ask people if faith is a part of their life (to assess what supports or strengths they have going for them). In all age groups asked, I commonly hear the answer that they have none. Some attended church in the past but don't care to do so. Many never pray. Its still a free country (or maybe it is) so, sure, they are free to chose. But I think this is a great loss for these individuals and only increases their sense of being unmoored – whether that manifests in anxiety, depression unsatisfying relationships or not. I am judging from a sample of people with problems, of course, but I can't recall seeing many happy atheists.

    • Questions

      Nonsense. I've seen marital breakups among some of the most religious couples you can imagine. You can't reduce a social problem to a religion deficit.

      • Looking4Sanity

        Yeah, well you're obviously not getting it, which means that you're part of the problem. No explanation that doesn't come from government will ever satisfy you.

      • Mary Sue

        in those cases it depends. Maybe one or the other is abusive, which case is they're not really as religious as they like everybody to think they are.

  • Johnconrad

    "Government has shown it has the power to destroy families, it has yet to show it has the power to replace them."

    Ronald Wilson Reagan

  • pierce

    Funny no, but the 4 years Obama has been President, I have been trying to put my finger on why I can not stand him. I have finally figured it out. He is disingenuous, and patronizing. Enough said I believe. Take it, or leave it. Bye!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • JCS

    Wait until the gravy train collapses as it has in Greece. When the government collapses under the weight of it's mandates funded and unfunded, what will all the people do when their checks stop
    coming? Mass riots most likely as in Greece.
    As the old song says: "Tax the rich, feed the poor, 'till there are no rich no more." The deep blue large cities are becoming like 3rd World countries with only the rich living in luxury and the poor in public housing and slums. The middle class can't afford to live there anymore. See Manhattan, San Francisco etc.

    • moshe

      That may be, but then they will choose a leftist who will give them more checks by robbing the Jews, the "rich" and whoever else they can. Witness the rise of the National Socialist German Workers' Party in the 1930s. And now look at the rising tide of votes for Golden Dawn in Greece today.

  • riverboatbill

    Caesar,the roman dictator said it: divide and conquer.

  • BS77

    This is no longer the America of the 1940s or 50s….One sixth of our nation lives in poverty. Fifty million on food stamps. Millions on welfare, subsidized housing, millions unemployed., and a sixteen trillion dollar deficit…nah, it's not a serious situation.

    • WilliamJamesWard

      Sixteen trillion dollar deficit………..how long will it take the lenders to realise that Democrats
      will welch on the debt, stiffing them and laughing all the way to circus, there is no such
      amount of money anywhere, insanity has taken over and the loons are in charge.
      BS—-nothing really serious as you say, nah nothing……………….William

  • flowerknife_us

    Single parenthood is the fastest way to put Children under Federal regulatory control through the guise of the education department. Every Property owner is held hostage to a system that always costs more and produces less. It takes what,10 years of scrutiny to insure only Socialists make it to retirement?

  • Loyal Achates

    Pssst…even as the traditional two-parent family has become less common, crime is at historic lows. How could that be, unless you’re full of it? And isn’t most ‘welfare’ spending on SS and Medicare, which is only for old, disproportionately white people?

    But, as Lee Atwater said, ‘you can’t say the n-word, so you say welfare queen’.

    • Mary Sue

      because a lot of criminals are getting old and feeble. Not as many "kids" are around in basic cities to take up the slack.

      Gang crime pretty much stays the same wherever it is, except when it moves into new territory. I should tell you about the Bacon Brothers. Their whole family is screwed up.

      • Loyal Achates

        What a bizarre word salad.

        • Mary Sue

          Want some croutons with that?

    • Daniel Greenfield

      Medicare and SS isn't welfare to the extent that people have paid into it.

  • Dennis X

    You lead by example which the President has. A beautiful family!

  • popseal

    While we like bashing 'Bam, he's nothing more than the symptom of the disease that is afflicting America. The disease itself resides in college classrooms that specialize in screwing up the values and world view naive students. If parents were to overhear the crapola being slung, most of them would have to be restrained from assaulting the worthless scumbags behind the lecterns. From the simple things like 'saving for a rainy day' to the core values taught in churches and synagogues are savaged by them that couldn't make a living ouutside the campus confines. That's what I ran into in 1970 as an undergrad' and again in 1995-7 in a journalism refresher for 18 semister hours…..disgusting I tell you…disgusting! I called down a lesbian for promoting her debauchery to the students…..true! !

  • Tina

    What are 'white, middle-class Julia' types?

    thanx