By the Left Coast Rebel
We recently wrote about Obama's lower and upper intestinal-turning "Julia" internet Flash cartoon socialist prop characterizing women as nothing more than harried, helpless, hapless, hopeless wards of the Leviathan state.
King Socialist Obama and Chicago Co. thought that Julia's life story of government at her perennial side (from birth through sans-husband motherhood) would somehow be a hit with the key female government-program demographic, but as we have fortunately witnessed with various Obama campaign initiatives recently, it ended up backfiring in a rather spectacular manner.
Julia's Dystopic Obama America is not inevitable.
America, there is hope, meet Emily:
How can we create an Emily America of self-reliance and properity; one where individuals are left alone to pursue their own vision of happiness; an America where dreamers and makers are just simply left alone by government nanny-staters, war mongers, deficit-spending bankrupters, taxpayer-raping robber-barrons, collectivist bean counters, do-gooders and Republicrat-statist grabbing hands?
Writes individual liberty stud Dan Mitchell:
(We) also need a serious discussion of why dependency is a bad thing, which is why I’m glad the Center for Freedom and Prosperity has produced this new “Economics 101″ video.
It’s narrated by Emily O’Neill, who contrasts the moocher mentality of Julia with how she wants her life to develop. To give away the message, she wants the kind of fulfillment that only exists when you earn things.
Emily’s view could be considered Randian libertarianism, conventional conservatism, or both. That’s because there’s a common moral belief in both philosophies that government-imposed coercion and redistribution erode the social capital of a people.
Note that Dan Mitchell correctly describes Emily's ethos of self-reliance as one correlated to Randian libertarianism, of which her brilliant, life-changing (for me and countless millions) fictional novels Atlas Shrugged and the Fountainhead epitomize.
Dan Mitchell is most certainly not referring to the anti-individualist "neo-conservative" statism of today's Republican party.
Which America do you want to live in, Emily's or Julia's?