Will Ferrell Nixes Plans for Reagan Comedy
Decency prevails.Read More »
Barack Obama’s political ad team introduced us to Julia. What a poor, misunderstood and insulted woman. If she exists, she is a pariah. If she is a composite, nobody with pride would admit to being one of the models. Julia appeals to no one of an independent mind for two reasons. She is totally dependent and seemingly isolated. This combination of factors weakens Julia to an appalling degree which no truly intelligent or independent woman would ever respect.
David Harsanyi voiced the outrage of the taxpayer over the entire “Julia” Project. He unburdens himself of this disquietude in a column entitled Who the hell is “Julia,” and why am I paying for her whole life? His characterization of the advertisement is as follows.
It is one of the most brazenly statist pieces of campaign literature I can ever remember seeing…..What we are left with is a celebration of a how a woman can live her entire life by leaning on government intervention, dependency and other people’s money rather than her own initiative or hard work.
Julia, we are told can enroll in a BARACK OBAMA-Fortified Head Start Program. Or Julia’s parents could read to her at night and start her working on math problems right after dinner and a bath. Julia can take the SAT’s after she’s gone through BARACK OBAMA’S Race to The Top Program. Or she could take a stack of index cards, write the definitions of all the polysyllabic words on them and then study her inquisitive, little butt off during her lunch and her bus ride home. She can also get low interest student loans.
Mitt Romney would force her to haul rip-rap out of a coal mine to pay off her tuition debt. Save us, Barry!
According to the advertisement, Julia works as a web designer. She can’t be distracted by noisy children. Not to worry. BARACK OBAMA made her insurance company cover her birth control. Insurers are business people, and BARACK OBAMA made them an offer they couldn’t refuse. Life is carefree and easy under Mein Obama. And who needs another child around when you perpetually remain one yourself?
The total absence of any help or provision in Julia’s life outside that provided by the Dear Leadership ensconced in Versailles Upon The Potomac also strikes a chord with James Taranto of The Wall Street Journal. He suggests that In Obama’s ideal world, men are replaced by bureaucrats. As a bureaucrat of the most dashing and manly sort, I suppose I should take great umbrage. But I don’t. Mr. Taranto makes a valid and telling critique.
At 31, the story tells us, “Julia decides to have a child. Throughout her pregnancy, she benefits from maternal checkups, prenatal care, and free screenings under health care reform.” In due course she bears a son named Zachary, the only other character in the tale.
Who fathered young Zachary? The ad seems to imply this is not relevant to the story. It would get between Julia and the love of her life; the ubiquitous and ever-abundant welfare state*. Husbands are like the drone-bees after the queen has laid her eggs for the season. Julia’s baby gets taken care by the coerced generosity of others. Again, people get made an offer that they cannot refuse.
Then nothing happens to Julia between ages 42 to 65. But actually, something does. She gets tax-mined to support Julia II. But BARACK OBAMA never acknowledges the price you will pay. That first hit of the welfare state meth is advertised as being nearly free.
This may well re-elect Barack Obama. I remember a woman in Florida crying and cheering that Barack Obama would pay her mortgage and her car**. If “Julia” now represents the true American Woman, thank God I married a Korean. Julia has come a long way from what our people used to be like.
In Obama’s mind it has been ever “Forward.” Forward towards what? If “Julia” represents what we truly are as a people, I can only imagine it is forward to a condign and ineffable damnation as a civilization.
* – My wife once accused me of marrying the Deluxe Edition of Civilization IV. (I never quite made it Beyond The Sword. I’m the monogamous sort.) I’d argue that’s somewhat more redeeming than marrying AFDC or SNAP.
** – He actually nationalized the car company and signed legislation that allowed the bank to ignore her non-payment on the note. I guess you can’t blame poor Barack I for at least trying.