How Obama’s “Life of Julia” prevailed
During the 2012 campaign, we conservatives had great sport at the expense of the Obama administration’s “Life of Julia”—a cartoon explaining the cradle-to-grave government programs that provided for Julia’s happy and successful life.
The president, alas, had the last laugh. For the voting blocs that went so disproportionately for the president’s re-election—notably, Latinos and single women—the Julia view of government clearly resonates. To put it another way, maybe Americans who have reason to feel insecure about their futures don’t find a government that promises to be there for them when they need it all that menacing. …
The conservative is rightly concerned with incentives and the long-term effects of any government program for relief, which are vital concerns for workable policy. The liberal is far less abstract: Here are some food stamps so your children don’t go hungry tonight.
Never mind the long-term costs and consequences of these solutions. Yes, the education loans that supposedly make college “affordable” actually drive its costs up faster than normal inflation. Yes, housing subsidies have saddled people with homes they cannot afford. And, yes, minimum-wage laws price the people who can least afford it out of the job market. The dilemma for those of us who oppose big-government solutions is that the true costs of these “solutions” are seldom clear until it’s too late.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Problem is, thats not what Julia was about. It was about Government running your life.
Zaggs on November 27, 2012 at 9:19 AM
And then the Julias expect to be bailed out of the mortgages, the college loans, etc., because the debt is held by eeevil big banks. Since the big banks got bailed out, everyone else should be, too.
Wethal on November 27, 2012 at 9:23 AM
Republicans are going to have to drop the opposition to abortion in instances of rape and incest in the party platform when even their candidates at the top of the ticket won’t support it because it’s a death knell for their candidacy. But alas it’s back to Iowa and Bob VanDerPoop, the “Republican Kingmaker” there with the ready and waiting pledge to sign even though her couldn’t be elected dogcatcher. And Bachmann and Santorum can back track again and explain they “never really read it” when questioned whether black families really were “happiest” under slavery.
Marcus on November 27, 2012 at 9:25 AM
And the problem with the Pravda article about the American
electorate was what exactly??
ToddPA on November 27, 2012 at 9:27 AM
So what? It FEELS good to be trying, right?
Washington Nearsider on November 27, 2012 at 9:28 AM
So we’re doomed then.
Your benefits are over there, by the trench, Julia.
forest on November 27, 2012 at 9:29 AM
Well that’s the problem right there. We conservatives are zeroed in on the long-term costs and consequences. And the reason is because we’re starting to feel them now. Why do you think our federal government is running trillion-plus dollar deficits every year? Because of all those bridges and roads we’re building? It’s in order to keep these goodies flowing to the likes of “Julia”, we’re now forced to borrow 40 cents of every dollar we spend.
And it’s not like when this entire house of cards collapses, these parasites are gonna suddenly see the light and understand why we were so adamant about fiscal responsibility all these years. They’re gonna be out in the street protesting and rioting like the Greek. Then we’re really up the creek.
Doughboy on November 27, 2012 at 9:29 AM
Republicans with the limited exception of Gingrich never seriously opposed the welfare state, merely occasionally obstructed tax hikes. So it’s not as if the conservative arguments are even familiar to the wider public.
Seth Halpern on November 27, 2012 at 9:29 AM
There are always going to be less than ideal situations (even in my own family). Guys will run off. But how about, if you are going to have kids, make a commitment to each other first, and, dare I say it, get married. Understand the seriousness off what you are about to embark on.
rbj on November 27, 2012 at 9:30 AM
I’m stunned that Putin is to the right of Obama. But not really stunned, stunned.
Washington Nearsider on November 27, 2012 at 9:30 AM
Yes. Which is why S&W is doing so well these days.
Washington Nearsider on November 27, 2012 at 9:32 AM
“To put it another way, maybe Americans who have reason to feel insecure about their futures don’t find a government that promises to be there for them when they need it all that menacing” Yet the underlying assumption is that they will always “need it” in every single aspect of their lives, cradle to grave. The other side of the coin is that government will always “be there” and it won’t always be “for” you.
tommyboy on November 27, 2012 at 9:33 AM
Lesson learned the hard way. The only thing that will turn this around now is acute pain.
forest on November 27, 2012 at 9:37 AM
And that is what all these young people — who have been brought up on slogans like “If you dream it, you can become it,” — will find out. That when the government is supporting you, it can tell you what you are going to do and be. They are enslaving themselves to soul-killing mediocrity and uniformity. The 35 to 40 year olds who adore Obama have no idea what they’re setting their kids up for.
DaydreamBeliever on November 27, 2012 at 9:40 AM
For someone who prides herself on her independence, Julia still seems like she’s always looking for someone to take care of her.
CurtZHP on November 27, 2012 at 9:40 AM
One of my nephews sent a link to the family for a petition on a law excusing or forgiving college loans. He is employed, in a decent job (as far as I can tell), with benefits. He has loans $25,000 in excess of his annual salary.
I just got another email of the house he is buying with his girlfriend.
Sorry, kid. I was sure your mom and dad taught you deferred gratification.
Wethal on November 27, 2012 at 9:40 AM
I disagree. I think the acute pain – which is inevitable – will only make it worse. The banks and the Wall Street types will be blamed, along with the rich white folks.
Everyone else will demand they give up more, and it’ll get really ugly really quickly.
Washington Nearsider on November 27, 2012 at 9:41 AM
A big problem with the narrative of “our children and grandchildren are going to be paying the bill”, is that it is long term and too abstract for many people.
I think at this stage the narrative should be “If you are between the ages of 18 and 60 (or 70,80,take your pick), YOU are going to be paying the bill. By the time the young kids are older, it will have all collapsed by then anyway.
moo on November 27, 2012 at 9:44 AM
I would add that at 50 years old I’d rather it be now than when I’m 70 and less able to bounce back.
moo on November 27, 2012 at 9:45 AM
Libs don’t realize that when the gravy train stops, and the House of Cards collapses, then the checks stop coming to their constituent groups.
Now I know why the preppers were always so self-sufficient.
victor82 on November 27, 2012 at 9:46 AM
That’s when it gets really bad. See: Greece, riots in.
Washington Nearsider on November 27, 2012 at 9:50 AM
I think we agree, but have different definitions of “acute pain”.
forest on November 27, 2012 at 9:55 AM
Perhaps. I’m talking about a complete seizure and collapse of the US economy, similar to the Soviets.
Washington Nearsider on November 27, 2012 at 9:59 AM
Exactly! Republicans, capitalists, business owners, conservatives, etc. will always be the scapegoats. The 47% (and growing) will never accept that their heroes (or themselves) are to blame for anything.
KS Rex on November 27, 2012 at 10:10 AM
Liberals attacked and then largely destroyed in culture the role of the man as protector and provider.
Then they filled the natural vacuum with big government. They didn’t “free” women, they just transferred ownership to themselves.
29Victor on November 27, 2012 at 11:00 AM
Count me in on that. America is not suddenly going to come to reality when the money runs out. The 50% will still want ‘theirs’ and will throw an adult-sized temper tantrum when they aren’t given it.
Reality, for them, will only hit when they’re starving in their unlit cold apartments and there’s no more supermarkets to loot. Or when they’ve been marched off in chains to perform hard labor for the rest of their natural lives and their illegitimate children raised by someone else.
MelonCollie on November 27, 2012 at 11:00 AM
Might be interesting when things really go to crap, and someone goes out and snips the power lines running to a bankrupt blue state. Then “acute pain” will take on a whole new meaning.
GWB on November 27, 2012 at 11:23 AM
If red states are serious about splitting, the movers and shakers in them should start some (very quiet) talks with the companies that run infrastructure in and to blue states, minus of course the Demoncrat union-shop ones.
Imagine if everything in a blue state but police/fire stations, hospitals, and military bases suddenly lost all external power and utilities. Could give the red states a hell of an advantage.
MelonCollie on November 27, 2012 at 11:49 AM
Any reason, ANY REASON at all that does not lay one iota of blame on Romney for his failure. ANY REASON except Romney was doomed for no other reason than he was too progressive to win the Republican vote in the general.
astonerii on November 27, 2012 at 11:51 AM
Cows rule
Schadenfreude on November 27, 2012 at 12:00 PM