« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Julia’s Come A Long, Long Way

And Has Nothing Left That Is Truly Her Own?.

By: Repair_Man_Jack (Diary)  |  May 4th, 2012 at 01:00 PM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

Julia Has Been Mislead To Believe She Has Come A Long Way

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.

Tags: , , , , ,

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • renl57

    …as was pointed out on another blog,

    Julia is reminiscent of the characters in the game “The Sims.”

    The player (Obama in this case) supplies all her needs throughout life.

    In “The Sims,” the player has the option to give the Sims a certain amount of free will and autonomy. I guess those are the years of Julia’s life that aren’t specifically mentioned in the video.

  • http://barnettlaw.org Frozen_Man

    A must read to understand what these statists are really doing.

  • proudmarinemom

    that, in between the lines of Obama’s fairy tale of “Princess Julia’s Happily-Ever-After Life” lie the ruins of the real Hope that this traitor’s young women supporters thought would protect and guide them. I wish for their sakes that Obama had turned out to be something else, an inspiring, real leader who would demand of them excellence and achievement and success. His failure is as much a tragedy as it is a travesty.

    My own “Julia” is still young and has the world on a string. Bright, beautiful, talented, industrious, wise, and innocently unaware that anyone would expect her to live her life as an insipid, codependent cartoon character. She scoffs at Julia.

    She is my own Hope in the future of this great nation. I have to believe that there are other young women with similar grace who will emerge as leaders in the coming (my golden) years.

  • nyislander

    If I were a woman (I’m not) and if it were not 1952 (it’s not) and if I had a sense of post-suffrage independence and self-worth (I would), I’d find everything about this dreck, well, dreck. And patronizingly disqualifying of the man insulting me.

  • dave72

    Julia is a parasite. Julia is a Democrat.

    OWS – parasites, all. OWS – Democrats, all.

    The Democratic Party appears to be the party of parasites.

    • jaykali

      Pure gold. The democrats accidentally put out an ad that explains what the REALLY think. Amazing. And I love that it has completely backfired.

      • http://travismonitor.blogspot.com Freedoms Truth

        Bad unemployment and yet Obama may win. He’s creating a socialist state and yet polls near 50%.

        We need to laugh.
        So let’s laugh at these silly liberals imploding with their statist phony baloney.

        Pure comedy gold.

  • bass_man

    Basically, the President has just said women can’t get ahead on their own. They need “The One” to take care of her needs.

    Sounds kind of misogynist to me.

  • jaykali

    You are a faceless woman, dependent on the government with no family to lean on except for your fatherless child you bear alone thanks to Uncle Sam.

    YOU’RE WELCOME1 -The Government

  • jaykali

    It’s too perfect. We need to hold onto this gold.

  • http://travismonitor.blogspot.com Freedoms Truth

    You know if they were more honest, the Obama team would add:

    Julia, unemployed because her web design job was offshored during the Obama years, now draws unemployment thanks to Obama being a brave big spender that extended unemployment benefits to the millions of long-term unemployed.

  • septembergurl

    The strange thing is that Julia is presented as a positive, as the kind of life women (and, I guess, men) will have under Obama. But what a strange, bleak picture. Avoiding responsibility and focusing on one’s own health and well being at all costs is not the recipe for a good life.

    Whoever made this believes it is what women want. The focus here has been on Julia as a parasite, consuming social services throughout her life. And I get that. What I find so striking is the picture it paints of a desirable life.

    The Julia here does not seem like an American. There’s nothing to indicate an attachment to a place, to a community, to a family. The absence of religion in her life is striking though perhaps not surprising. Most Americans undergo a religious conversion or awakening in their lives, there is nothing of this here or of the profound influence of religion in daily life and the great events of our lives.

    Equally she seems to have no connections to her community or to the nation. Americans are great joiners, as Tocqueville noted, yet she seems to belong to no professional, community, charitable or civic organizations. Nor does she seem to have any connection to her nation, especially to its military. Are there no wars in this Utopia? Are there no great social movements like the Civil Rights movement or the Tea Party?

    Julia could be living in England or Denmark. There’s nothing American about her life, in fact, the kind of timid, self-serving existence created here seems profoundly unamerican to me.

    But that’s not my real problem here. It’s that Julia doesn’t seem like a woman to me. She’s profoundly un feminine and unwomanly (I say this as a woman). There is nothing in her personal life, health, childhood, education, professional career, etc, that indicates she is a woman. She could just as easily be Jules.

    And this of course is the point. In Obama’s utopia, all gender differences that carry with them the slightest onus of societal responsibility are erased. we are told that Julia has a child, but not how or with whom, if anyone. adoption, a sperm donor, in vitro, a surrogate? We aren’t told. The child appears (a dim sense here by these social engineers that women have a very strong procreative instinct) but has no effect on Julia’s life thanks to the nanny state (or actual nannies if Julia is rich).

    in real life, many women are wrapped up in their careers and social life till they have children and it all changes. What then? What if little Zachary is born with special needs like Bella santorum or Trig palin? That’s when a partner comes in handy, but we’re never told if she has one or what gender s/he is. what if Julia gets sick (and she will, even under Obamascare)? what if her partner gets Alzheimer’s or Parkinsons disease in their idyllic senior center? What if Zachary shows up on the doorstep with a goth girlfriend, stds, no job and thousands of dollars in student loans?

    And what about Julia’s parents? What happens when they get old. Oh, I forgot, under Obamascare they will be shunted off to the hospice where they will be denied treatment and drugs under Obamascare rationing, and soon be on the way to the crematorium..

    What I say is, this is insulting to women not so much because it implies we are helpless without the nanny state, but because it removes everything that makes our lives worth living — that is, the sacrifices, the risks, the mistakes and the successes of creating our families. We nurture children, we tolerate men (I kid!) we take care of our parents as they took care of us. Where is this in Julia?

  • fotophun

    I don not think Julia is the reason women wanted the vote

    from wikipedia
    look who tried to stop the women vote
    The key vote came on June 4, 1919, when the Senate approved the amendment by 56 to 25 after four hours of debate, during which Democratic Senators opposed to the amendment filibustered to prevent a roll call until their absent Senators could be protected by pairs. The Ayes included 36 (82%) Republicans and 20 (54%) Democrats. The Nays comprised 8 (18%) Republicans and 17 (46%) Democrats. It was ratified by sufficient states in 1920, the Nineteenth Amendment, which prohibited state or federal sex-based restrictions on voting.

  • checkmate2012

    This composite Julia is the quintessential definition of cradle-to-the- grave nanny statism. It is denigrating to all women who use their minds and talents to prosper but apparently Julia is clueless and can’t function without government telling her how to act.

    I hope the RNC has a good comeback ad that demonstrates that the Dems think women are stupid and hopeless without Big Gov’t!

    • garfieldjl

      Calling them out on their “War on Woman” BS.

      Meanwhile Senator McConnell was AWOL.

      • checkmate2012

        Glad to hear Boehner blasted on this one…if only the message got heard :(

        • garfieldjl

          We should give Boehner the benefit of the doubt, our priority should be getting McConnell voted out of being Leader for the Republicans in the Senate.