He denounced the practice -- refined to an art form by President Obama -- of politicians employing class warfare to deride the wealthy with accusations that they don't contribute enough while treating the less fortunate as helpless and expecting no contribution from them at all. This, I think, is where he was dovetailing the scriptural texts warning against deriding one's neighbor. He was saying, in effect, that political demagogues who pit people against one another on the basis of income and wealth harm society, including the very people they pretend to help.
In a television interview, Carson expanded on some of these thoughts, explaining that the Founding Fathers were afraid of an out-of-control government that would "get to the point where it couldn't subsist without taking everything from the people." Next, he linked, though not expressly, the scriptural passage on generosity in challenging today's conventional wisdom that the wealthy are necessarily greedy. He pointed to the remarkable generosity of some of America's historically wealthiest individuals. America, he said, "has always been a very generous nation. Look at all the foundations that have been created for the purpose of taking care of people."
He also expounded on his comments on political correctness, apparently criticizing the president's selective assault on religious liberty. He said, "If the president would exercise anywhere near the sensitivity about religious freedom in this country as he does about Islam and offending them, we wouldn't even have these kinds of problems."
There is also no question in my mind that in citing the passage from 2 Chronicles, Carson was expressing his view that America has strayed from its godly roots and replaced God's absolute moral standards with those that seem right to a man but are wholly destructive of our moral fabric. We must turn back to God, reject this man-made ethic grounded in covetousness, envy and greed, and recommit ourselves to godly values and right living.
In his speech, Carson did not criticize President Obama by name, but he roundly condemned his philosophy of and approach to governance. He did so with abundant forcefulness but equally strong respectfulness.
It was an admirable display of forthrightness and courage and a virtual seminar in how President Obama's political opponents should boldly, directly and publicly dispute his wrongheaded message and block his destructive agenda.