Explaining Features and Bugs to Walter Russell Mead

Each day (and I read him each day), I get slightly more confused by Walter Russell Mead.  Here is one of the most perspicacious critics of Obama and an unrelenting point-outer that the "Blue Model" is careening rapidly towards a fiery crash.  And the guy is a lifelong Democrat and Obama voter.  The guy can analyze the tar out of current events/policy and do so with an engaging prose style, but seems to be oblivious to the hierarchy of big ideas/truths.

Once again, a curious look at his offerings.  This on income inequality.

Actually, there’s plenty of evidence that unwed childbearing, father absence and fraying kinship and community networks exacerbate the problems of low-income people and make it incredibly hard for them to gain a foothold in the middle class. These are thorny problems that aren’t easily solved by the kinds of government measures Obama champions. So his speech says very little about the ways that strong marriages, family stability, or a robust role for churches in helping struggling Americans improve their lives can all improve economic mobility in this country. These social and cultural factors are arguably root causes of inequality, and it’s a pretty conspicuous omission to ignore that in a presidential speech on the subject.

How can a guy this educated and ostensibly clear thinking not know that socialists of all stripes (whether they be modern, light-touch socialists going by the name "progressives" or unapologetic Marxists) want three core things.  They are:
1)  The elimination of private wealth
2)  The banishment of religion
3)  The destruction of the nuclear family

In one way or another and to varying degrees, these are what the broad spectrum of the collectivist left ultimately wants.  Full stop.  Always has been, always will be, despite the constantly shifting and evolving branding of such.

So I ask.  Why would Obama, who is the standard bearer of the collectivist left in America, decry familial instability and waning religiosity for its ill effects?  Of course, he wouldn't, these are the features, not bugs, to all that Obama represents.  So, next question is why would any educated person expect him to?  Hmm, WRM?

(H/T Instapundit)