Worshipping Uncle Sam: All you need to know about the Obama administration’s “#Julia”

Posted by: ST on May 3, 2012 at 6:53 pm

This breathtakingly stupid slide show from Team Obama about how a fictitious woman named “Julia” will fare in life under “Obama’s policies” versus “Romney’s policies”  represents the absolute rot of this administration”s “belief system”: govt over individual, with government being the “savior” and the individual being the “helpless victim” who needs rescuing from Democrats. Here’s a sample slide:

Julia

Julia can't make it through life without President Obama.

Ed Morrissey has a good take down of the “Julia” tactic here, and provides a more realistic life possibility for Julia under Democrat policies:

  • 3 years old – Julia gets a new-and-improved Head Start, which a new HHS study shows won’t do anything for her anyway.
  • 17 years old – Race to the Top improves Julia’s SAT scores.  Is there any evidence at all to support that argument?  Even so, she’s down the list from all of the home-schooled children and the charter- and private-school students who actually got an education rather than an NEA indoctrination.  However, thanks to the NEA indoctrination, Julia is now better prepared for a life on the government dole.
  • 18 years old – Julia’s family qualifies for a $10,000 tuition tax credit spread out over four years, while Obama’s student-loan subsidies drive tuition costs up even faster.
  • 22 years old – Julia undergoes surgery, which has to be funded by her parents’ employers despite Julia being an adult, and which will be most likely delayed as providers decline in number thanks to the economics of ObamaCare.
  • 23 years old — Thanks to the Lily Ledbetter Act, trial attorneys get rich by filing lawsuits against employers that otherwise wouldn’t have been brought, leaving fewer resources to hire Julia.  No college job for our intrepid Julia!
  • 25 years old – Julia finally gets her 4-year degree in seven years, thanks to the inability to handle the tuition bubble and the lack of work.  However, the good news is that the $200,000 in student loans will only hang over her head for 20 years, while taxpayers like Julia end up paying for the costs of default.
  • 27 years old – Julia wants to have sex for the first time in her life, apparently, and is looking for contraception.  Her employer would provide it for free thanks to the ObamaCare HHS mandate … if she could only find a job.

Make sure to read the whole thing. Ed also links to a must-read by David Harsanyi, who pegs the Obama administration’s statist mentality to a “T”:

In the new Barack Obama campaign piece The Life of Julia, voters can “Take a look at how President Obama’s policies help one woman over her lifetime — and how Mitt Romney would change her story.” It is one of the most brazenly statist pieces of campaign literature I can ever remember seeing.

Let’s, for the purposes of this post, set aside the misleading generalizations regarding policy in the ad (no one is innocent on that account, obviously). 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. It is, I’d say, implicitly un-American, in the sense that it celebrates a mindset we have — outwardly, at least — shunned.

It is also a mindset that women should find offensively patronizing. When they’re old enough, I hope my two daughters will find the notion that their success hinges on the president’s views on college-loan interest rates preposterous. Yet, according to the “Life of Julia,” women are helpless without the guiding hand of Barack Obama.

“Feminists” should be outraged over this, but they’re not. And won’t be. It’s funny. They’ll tell you they “don’t need a man” but that’s not true at all. They’ll always turn to Uncle Sam … their leader/hero/savior/sugar daddy. Over and over and over again. They’ve also been known to urge women to get on their knees to show our “appreciation” for Uncle Sam.

But I digress.

If this utterly offensive “Julia” tactic, not to mention the disturbing stalling games by this administration on Fast and Furious accountability, don’t get you highly motivated to defeat this President in November, I don’t know what will.

Game ON.

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Trackbacks

13 Responses to “Worshipping Uncle Sam: All you need to know about the Obama administration’s “#Julia””

Comments

  1. Bob says:

    The sad part is that two of my 4 kids will swallow this hook, line and sinker.

  2. Phineas says:

    Interesting to note: We were told for over a year that it was offensive and denigrating to refer to the new health care “reforms” as “Obamacare.” Yet, per the slide above, it’s apparently now something they’re proud of.

    Okay, Team Obama. You’re on.

  3. mrt says:

    Julia is the name of Winston Smith’s love in ‘1984’.
    Go figure.

  4. Tex says:

    Man I’m still amazed that Liberals actually think that making insurance companies, and companies in general, give stuff to people for “free” is actually “free”.

  5. Great White Rat says:

    I think there’s one the Obama campaign missed:

    At birth –

    Under President Obama, not only is Julia already $60,000 in debt due to uncontrolled spending, but her prospects for finding a job during her lifetime are vanishing rapidly.

    Under Mitt Romney – Julia’s debt is far less, and the economic forecasts are promising.

    That’s assuming, of course, that under Obama Julia isn’t the victim of a partial birth abortion….

  6. Drew the Infidel says:

    In keeping with Obhammud’s unbroken string of failures this ad should be enough to scare the hell out of any voter, not to his advantage.

  7. Drew the Infidel says:

    This charade was artfully ridiculed by Jonah Goldberg of “National Review” this morning on “Fox & Friends”.

  8. PE says:

    Julia is a lucky child to have access to all of these fine government programs. She will be well prepared for a successful career as an inflatable doll.

  9. Chris in N.Va. says:

    2012: Julia — a single WHITE(!?) woman who, without continual cradle-to-grave government handouts, will never survive in the cruel real world. True she’s eventually an “entrepreneur” but still needs gummint to survive in the business world.

    1968-71: Julia — a widowed (husband killed in Vietnam) BLACK(!) nurse (career requiring education, not just a professional/generational welfare-mom), raising a child and living a normal everyday life. I don’t EVER remember seeing her whining about her lot and wishing Nanny Gummint would take care of her every need. No, she did it with grit and grace and rose above her circumstances.

    Then, anyone remember the Mary Tyler Moore Show? Ah, yes, all about that feminist icon/role model who whimpered her way from one government office to another with her little tin cup, meekly begging for yet another drop of milk from the government teat to survive to the next day…

    No, that’s not quite how it went, did it?

    Cue “You’re going to make it after all” theme song.

    Hmm….

  10. Carlos says:

    What a sad story, that this poor unreal person will never find it within herself to take some initiative and accomplish something besides sucking off the teat of the government.

    I know I went through my liberal days, but one of the things that always bothered me and was a driver to my reform was, where the heck do they all think all the money for all the goodies is going to come from? Even if it was growing out in the unicorn fields, someone would have to go pick it and process it and get it distributed!

  11. Drew the Infidel says:

    Why was it “Julia”? Why not “Sandra” or some other “dumb Fluke”?

  12. david foster says:

    Julia is a “web designer,” which could mean any of several things…but to the extent that the segment she works in is majority-male, the “Lily Ledbetter equal pay act” would result in DOWNWARD pressure on her salary.