Funny how you can be so wrapped up in your own life that you forget not everyone is in the same world as you. After the keynote last night I picked up my phone to call my mom and see if she'd watched. And realized I'd missed a call from my mom. Her message: "I'm just calling to see if you watched the speech by, um, Barack Obama. I guess he's running for Senate in Illinois. I just heard something about him this morning on NPR and I watched the speech just now. I think he's going to be president someday. I hope you were watching."

I was dumbfounded that yesterday was the first she'd heard of Obama. I have no idea why I thought my mom in Ohio should have heard of a state senator in Illinois, but since I hear his name every 5 seconds I just assumed everyone else did too.

Obviously I loved the speech. I did take exception to one thing, and it was the thing a lot of people seemed to love. I am NOT "my brother's keeper," and I dislike that phraseology. Let's forget for a moment that it limits us to an exclusively Judeo-Christian worldview. In my opinion it's also a misreading of Genesis to think that even in the BIble being someone's keeper is a good thing. Remember it was Cain, who'd just murdered his brother, who asked God if he was supposed to be his brother's keeper-- a word usually meant in the Bible to mean jailer or animal herder. God didn't say, "Yes, you should be."

I think when Democrats adopt the rhetoric of borther's keeper, they are living up to the worst stereotypes of Democrats as painted by Republicans. For me, it does not follow that because I care about fellow humans I should be a jailer, guard, or even babysitter of those same humans. It should not even mean that I have a responsibility for every person in the world or the country.

I do care about other people; I do care about the environment. I would like to think I am not overly selfish. But to me the true difference between Democrats and Republicans (and mind you, I am only a Democrat because it's the lesser of two very big evils for me) is not that Democrats are compassionate and unseflish and Republicans are not. The difference is how to best serve one's own personal interests.

Le's be honest. Am I an environmentalist because I think it's the right thing to do or because I believe the natural world is sacred? Well, maybe in part. But, really, I'm an environmentalist because I get cough when I breathe in smog, because I like my air to be clear enough to see beautiful mountaintops and my water clean enough to keep me healthy. I recycle because we're running out of anywhere to put the trash.

Do I care about education because I believe it's an inalienable right? Sure. But I also believe that a more educated society is likely a less dangerous society and one I'd rather live in.

Do I like welfare? No. I'd prefer everyone could earn their own money or had families to help them get back on their feet. But I'd prefer welfare to robbery when people can't afford to eat.

Ok, I'm exaggerating a bit here. But I honestly think the best rhetoric for the Democrats is not to rely on the slippery slope of brother's keeper but instead to focus on the interconnectedness of all people in a way that demonstrates how wanting to help others is actually a selfish concern (not in those words). Let's show people how it helps them to focus on things like education and hurts them to focus on war and big business.

Just a thought.