You Get What You Vote For

It’s fair. It’s just. People should get what they voted for.

It feels right that most of those who are suffering from the Obama administration’s policies should be those who voted for their Savior.

Minority Americans turned out in very large numbers to elect one of their own to the White House. Symbolism is fine; self-esteem can be fine. But, members of these groups have been lining up in very large numbers to collect unemployment compensation and food stamps.

You get what you vote for.

Remember the Community Reinvestment Act, the Clintonian horror designed to make home ownership more affordable for members of minority communities? When the proverbial excrement hit the fan in 2008 and the property market cratered, guess which groups were the most likely to lose their homes to foreclosure?

You guessed it: members of the same minority groups that voted so enthusiastically for Bill Clinton and Barack Obama.

How can we forget the millennial women who also came out in large numbers to vote for their hero, Barack Obama. Spurred on by agitprop about the Republican war on women, fearful of losing their free birth control, they voted for Julia’s favorite candidate: Barack Obama.

(In case you forgot the Obama campaign’s Life of Julia, here’s a link to my post.)

How are they doing now?

Glad you asked?

This generation of college-education women is, for the most part waiting on tables. You see, the Obamafied economy can’t do better than to create part-time jobs, jobs that pay immiseration wages and do not offer health insurance or any other benefits. Thanks to Obamacare more and more companies will be hiring more and more part time workers.

Some would counter that women have been doing pretty well under the Obama recovery.

In this and in many other cases appearances are deceiving.

Bloomberg reports the truth behind the statistics:

Unemployment data appear to reflect big advances for women. The jobless rate in August for females 20 years and older was 6.3 percent, the lowest since December 2008, compared with 7.1 percent for men. As recently as January, the rate was 7.3 percent for both genders, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

The downside is that the gains have been largely in lower-paying industries such as waitresses, in-home health care, food preparation and housekeeping. About 60 percent of the increase in employment for women from 2009 to 2012 was in jobs that pay less than $10.10 an hour, compared with 20 percent for men, according to a study by the National Women’s Law Center using data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Women have monopolized low-wage jobs. College educated millennial women voted for the pro-women’s lib candidate and proudly proclaim their independence. Funnily enough, Obamanomics has relegated them to jobs that closely resemble a role that they have been taught to dread: housewife.

Except, they aren’t housewives. They get to do what traditional housewives got to do, without the home, without the husband, without the family.

You’ve come a long way, baby!

They may not have known that that was what they were voting for, but, hey, you get what you vote for!

Of course, we want to be fair and balanced here. We do not want to traffic in caricatures.

So, we will recognize that one group of Obama supporters has been doing very well, indeed. That would be the people Obama used to call fat-cat Wall Street bankers.

People fail to recognize that most fat-cat Wall Street bankers, accompanied by other wanna-be or actual billionaires, are liberal Democrats. Some of them went over to the dark side during the last election and supported Mitt Romney, but most of them, in 2008 and even in 2012 lined up behind Barack Obama.

Trust me, Wall Street bankers are not Tea Party Republicans.

You will be happy to note that they are doing very well, indeed. 

Another great success for Occupy Wall Street.