And it’s totally good news, guys! According to the lying liars who lie in the Obama administration, at least. More from Hot Air:

I’m done, guys. If we’ve reached the stage of welfare-state decadence where it’s a selling point for a new entitlement that it discourages able-bodied people from working, there’s no reason to keep going. We’ve lost, decisively.

As a great man once said, remember me as I am — filled with murderous rage.

Yep. The shake fisty is strong with this one.

As Twitchy reported, lapdogs over at HuffPo jumped in to wag their tails and further the absurd spin. Fox News’ Martha MacCallum is no lapdog. As always, she has cut right to the chase with a truth bomb.


It’s not funny, because it’s true!

And this Twitter user puts it in a nutshell:



‘Pelosi-level stupid’: HuffPo reporter says Obamacare will set millions of workers ‘free’

Heh: Is this how Obama and his lapdogs will explain CBO’s ugly Obamacare projections?

‘Are you really this stupid?’ Dizzy HuffPo editor spins CBO’s lousy Obamacare estimates

Cool it, America: Jay Carney says freedom ain’t nothin’ but a ‘buzzword’

  • Surry918

    This is the scariest thing I’ve ever heard.

    • DirkBelig

      In a world where, “Ladies and gentlemen, put your hands together for the greatest band in the world….NICKLEBACK!!!” can happen, no it isn’t.

  • therealguyfaux ✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ

    “Starnesville,” y’all: “We all thought it was a good idea. No– not exactly; we all thought we were supposed to think it was a good idea.”

    You’ve been warned. #GoGalt

    • bungopony

      President Ivy Starnes.

      • therealguyfaux ✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ

        Different novel, but, I think Barry’s more like “President Ellsworth Toohey”:

        “Don’t set out to raze all shrines — you’ll frighten men. Enshrine mediocrity— and the shrines are razed . . . Kill by laughter. Laughter is an instrument of human joy. Learn to use it as a weapon of destruction. Turn it into a sneer. It’s simple. Tell them to laugh at virtue. Don’t let anything remain sacred in a man’s soul — and his soul won’t be sacred to him. Kill reverence and you’ve killed the hero in man” (The Fountainhead, p. 637).

        • Markward

          No, He is Mooch from “Atlas Shrugs”

          All we need is directive 10-289.

          • bungopony

            Mouch.And every ACA is 10-289.

        • bungopony

          As a,er,prophet,Muhammad was a bust.Rand’s novels are full of passages like that.

  • rambler

    Pelosi said that the gov has a revenue problem and not a spending problem. Well, nothing fixes that problem better than having more on the dole and less paying for it. Those evil rich had better start ponying up the entire contents of their net worth. Time for Pelosi and her DC friends to start liquidating their wealth, there are a bunch of people waiting to live off that wealth! Walk the walk, honey.

    • StateofFranklin

      Pelosi has a breathing problem. The problem is, she is still doing it.

      • rambler

        With some luck, that may change.

        • WhoMeToo

          Don’t give me hope.

          • rambler

            She isn’t getting any younger or less senile.

          • WhoMeToo

            O.O ==> I fear the botox will preserve her forever. Like some kind of perverted, scary, living formaldehyde experiment gone horribly, horribly wrong.

          • rambler

            It’s more likely to freeze her diaphragm the way it freezes her face.

          • CoastalMaineBird

            Nancy wears a diaphragm?

          • Clete Torres

            Oh dear God. Don’t put that mental image in our heads.

          • rambler


          • Guest


          • Clete Torres

            Don’t do that.

          • WhoMeToo

            sorry…. but you know you were thinkin’ it too.

          • Guest

            LOLOLOL!!! LMFAO!!! ROTFL!!!

          • Greg Watkins

            There is no “hope” where there is “change”…

        • StateofFranklin

          Being optimistic.

          • rambler

            Everyone has an expiration date.

          • Greg Watkins

            Silence!!! I keel you!

      • colonialmarine

        Billion dollar babies Barry & Moochelle seem to be fine with the outcomes…

      • Guest


    • rick

      Pelosi’s a loon! If not for her “vibrating tickler,” a fist full of meds and wine she’d have gone postal by now! Our leadership at it’s finest!

      • Scorpion

        Either she just finished a large bowl of chili or evolved into a cow flatulence proponent.

  • NickGranite

    That press conference with the deputy…whoever, was one of the more comical, incoherent and downright sad explanations of bad news I think I’ve seen and that’s including Carney’s doozies. It’s like they are physically unable to tell the truth.

  • $84598387

    This is getting bizarre! The POTUS of the nation happy more people will have more time off. So much for hard work and being a productive American.

    The Fundamental transformation of America is almost complete.

  • StateofFranklin

    How many really understood BHO’s take on it? …all about expanding the middle class. Well, we all know why the Democratic Party wants to expand the middle class. THE MIDDLE CLASS PAYS FOR EVERYTHING IN THIS COUNTRY.

    Of course they want it larger, so it can pay for more benefits for the lazy…er…impoverished & keep pumping money into the business of the 1%’ers.

    • 4liberty

      They have turned the middle class into the dependent class and every thing they do expands it!!

  • John Thomas “Jack” Ward III

    Lemme get this straight: If I stay on Disability, etc. without being able to get a Full time/Part-time job, I can live like a King? BULL-$#!+!! Jawamax 8<{D}

  • Hotlanta Mike
  • Hotlanta Mike
  • Hotlanta Mike
    • Elizabeth

      Oh I love this one!!

    • rick


  • ConservativeTexan

    So what if Obamacare:
    Discourages working
    Costs more
    Has higher deductibles – which prevent the poor from using it
    Covers services you don’t need
    Adds to the already huge deficit
    Causes you to loose your existing coverage
    Causes you to loose your existing doctor and/or hospital
    Charges younger Americans three or four times as much as they paid previously
    Causes severe hardship and even death to those who have lost coverage

    What’s important here folks is the President’s legacy! None of that other stuff matters.

    • Discontentwliars

      And the question is, who is getting the money – AARP insurance companies, and the palms they greased to get it. If you’re not in on the deal, you lose.

  • Hotlanta Mike
  • Hotlanta Mike
  • Hotlanta Mike
    • Guest

      This one makes me shudder.. It reminds me of the song ‘Another Brick In The Wall’ by Pink Floyd. Total State control.

  • fishydude

    Just like LBJ’s great society, Bummercare is intended to increase dependency on government. The plan is to get over 51% hooked and thus secure a Democrat communist future.
    Bummer pushed that vision further claiming he will, without the consent of Congress, forgive 100% if outstanding college loan debt.

  • Hotlanta Mike
    • CLEmom

      How many were part time/hourly jobs, vs jobs capable of supporting a middle class lifestyle/family, say $50K plus bennies?

      That’s the money question.

      • StateofFranklin

        um, yeah…50k plus bennies capable of supporting family…?? hmmm…ya seen those Obamacare insurance rates yet? Family of 4 or 5 w/ only 50k ain’t doing too hot.

      • carmenta

        but in this new O’world, you dont NEED a full-time salaried job…you jsut need to choose to spend more time with your family and take up a hobby! Lets have government subsidies for hobbies, shall we?

        • StateofFranklin

          wait…choose to spend more time with my family? What if I want to spend more time my video games…or my guns at the range. Can I get a gov’t subsidy for that? Maybe a tax credit for electricity usage?…or ammunition purchases?

      • SupplyGuy

        I wonder how many are government jobs that don’t create wealth?

        • bungopony

          I wonder that every time I see an jobs increase.Obama(spit!)care bureuucrats,mebbe?Gov’t jobs shouldn’t even be included.

          2 typos in one post?Slick,Rick!

          • StateofFranklin

            But that’s the missing word…
            “Reports indicate the U.S. economy is in recovery after the 3rd quarter jobs report shows 172,000 newly created (government) jobs.”

            On that note…What do you think the monthly salary is of that guy who runs the WH twitter feed? Man, what a job…ZERO accountability, you can say what ya want…and you get paid!!!

            I’m in the wrong line of work.

          • bungopony

            You probably couldn’t do it.

          • StateofFranklin

            You’re more correct than you may know…

            you see, I have this constant desire to be honest with people.

          • bungopony

            ‘Swhat I meant!:)

        • Bathing Suit Area

          What’s the logic behind this generalization? If two people are doing the same work, one for the government and one in the private sector, is only one of them creating wealth?

          • mlittlemeyer

            The government has no wealth, it can only confiscate wealth from a and transfer it to b after being funneled and cut through bureaucracy after bureaucracy. That is not creating wealth.

          • Bathing Suit Area

            So for example a cook or chef, who takes raw ingredients and turns them into meals, is creating value if and only if they do so in the private sector? Should their paycheck come from the government, their work is for naught?

          • mlittlemeyer

            If he can create value for which there is demand he would be compensated by the market, not the taxpayer through forced confiscation and reallocation. The market would determine the value, not a bureaucrat. To your original question Look up the broken window fallacy and apply the same principles to any government job “creation”

          • SupplyGuy

            Yes. Go study some basic economics.

    • GulfPundit

      Cool. Almost enough to keep up with population growth, but low enough for continued stagnation and decay.

    • HARP2

      40% of which are part time.

  • SupplyGuy

    So w/ less people working, there will be less taxes paid to pay for this new entitlement.
    Say thank you to the nice Chinese man Johnny. He’s paying for your medical coverage.
    Now can we also talk about how people making less money are going to be able to afford the ridiculous deductibles? Anyone? Anyone?

    • nc ✓s & balances

      Most LIVs still don’t know what a deductible is yet. They won’t learn until they they get really sick or injured, and find out the hard way.

      • bungopony

        Well,then,a pox on California.And DC,and NY…

  • HARP2

    Hope the democrats enjoy all their “free time” after next November.

    • SupplyGuy

      Man I hope you’re right. We desperately need another wave like 2010, but this time aimed at the Senate.
      The tea leaves do seem to be portending that way w/ all of the rats jumping ship, but 2012 sure has made me skeptical of my fellow Americans.

  • NickGranite

    The Europeanization of America continues. We can all sit around in the cafes during what used to be our work day and bitch about whoever the current superpower is that takes our place…like they used to do about us.

  • TocksNedlog

    We truly are being ‘led’ by the scum of the earth.

  • Obey_Gravity

    “Excellent observation. If things don’t change our next generation is doomed to mediocrity & a welfare state country :-(”

    Well, you’re half right.
    Excellent observation. If things don’t change our next generation is doomed :-(

  • walterc

    I saw Stewart Varny on F&F this morning and his final comment was, “why did I come here?” Implying that he could have stayed in England if he wanted to live in a socialist welfare state.

    • World B. Free

      I saw that. He was livid.

      And he’s right. We are turning into Denmark.

  • Noonespecial

    Bottom line is that this IS good news for the left. They don’t care about any future that they aren’t in – so more people on the dole means more power for them right now, and more elections they can win with their vote slaves. As to the future, who cares, they’ll be dead in the future! Wheee, let’s have fun, more power! That is absolutely the left’s political mindset, no question. They are sociopathic scum.

  • Suzyqpie

    Democrats believe people are liberated from employment by 0bamaCare? What about the utility bills, the car payment & maintenance, paying/maintaining our dwellings? Are they so arrogant and removed from the hoi polloi, aka, middle class, that they are unaware that we aspire to nice vacations and nice retirements like we, the taxpayers provide to them? Ok the vacation is called a diplomatic or fact-finding mission, it’s a vacation that taxpayers provide…

    • Bathing Suit Area

      Hang on, you say that people having the option of working less is bad, but that nice retirements are a positive aim. You do know what retirement is, right?

      • Corey Dennison

        You don’t really understand the difference between someone reaching retirement age and an able-bodied member of the workforce not working…do you?

  • CobraJet428

    New Avis Car Rental slogan in the Age of Øbama–
    At Avis We’re #2, So…fock it.

  • Jennifer

    Democrats aren’t hiding it anymore. They are embracing the poverty their law creates. I’m sorry but I wont be pulling the wagon for a bunch of deadbeats.

  • World B. Free

    This guy approves of 0bama’s master plan….

  • Clete Torres

    Well, I suppose I can stop feeling guilty about being out of the workforce now. No more self-loathing, no more tears because I feel like I’m not contributing to my household, no more guilt about my Disability checks being less than half of what I used to bring in when I was able to work. All I need to do is sign up for 0bamacare, and everything will be forgiven.

    And then, I can feel crappy for a whole ‘nother reason.

    • Bathing Suit Area

      Guilt and self loathing? Why? Are you scamming the government by pretending to be disabled?

      Or are you legitimately unable to work and in need of assistance, but so wedded to the conservative mantra that anyone who makes use of the social safety net is scum that you hate yourself for it?

      • Clete Torres

        Not familiar with sarcasm, are you? Almost certain they have it in your neighborhood, just like everywhere else on the globe. Pity that you’re not intelligent enough to recognize it.

        Be gone, troll.

  • Pawtrax

    Hey, my wife just shifted to part time status at her job to stay home and spend more time with our newborn son. What a lazy parasite! Amirite!

    • keyboard jockey

      That’s called making a choice.

      What does it have to do with people who don’t want their hours cut down?

      • Pawtrax

        Classic twitcher. You have no idea what the CBO report actually said about the law’s impact on reduced hours and yet, you’re enraged over it.

        Why don’t you go find out what Martha MacCallum is referring to in her tweet and then try again.

        • Finrod Felagund

          Ignorant troll. Attacking others for supposed ignorance as a form of projection.

          • Pawtrax

            And here’s another person who presumably read this entire post, didn’t understand a word of it and is outraged nonetheless.

          • Finrod Felagund

            Have you ever considered hiring yourself out as a theater projector? You seem to have that skill set down, troll.

          • Pawtrax

            You really have no idea what you’re talking about and you can’t even be bothered to read the post you’re commenting on. It’s simply astonishing.

          • Finrod Felagund

            Wow, you couldn’t have described yourself better if you had tried. You’re up to IMAX levels of projection now.

          • Pawtrax

            Okay. Fine. Martha MacCullum tweeted the following: “Lemme get this right: companies used to incentivize hard work with benefits, now the govt discourages it with benefits?”

            This is apparently some kind of “truth bomb.”

            So Finrod, tell me what she means by it.

          • Finrod Felagund

            I would recommend that you enroll in an English As A Second Language class, since you seem unable to comprehend basic English.

          • Pawtrax

            Finrod, I know what she means.

            It’s pretty clear you don’t.

          • Finrod Felagund

            Given that you likely also believe that raising the minimum wage won’t result in less jobs for those working at that wage, I think what you don’t know about economics would fill the Pacific Ocean. Subsidizing not working means you get more people not working.

          • Pawtrax

            Now that you’ve finally admitted that this post is about Obamacare “subsidizing not working,” it would be great if you could go back through the thread and correct all the people who think it’s about Obamacare “forcing people into part-time work.”

            Thanks in advance!

          • Finrod Felagund

            Silly leftist troll, thinking that Obamacare only has one bad effect. The 30-hour requirement is in fact causing people to get their hours cut below 30. Other people, it’s keeping them from finding a job at all, since the cost of a 50th employee is now staggering.

            So when are you going to admit that if you tax/penalize something, you get less of it, and if you subsidize something, you get more of it? Few leftists comprehend Econ 101.

          • Pawtrax

            Finrod, the same CBO report that’s the subject of this thread also found the following:

            “In CBO’s judgment, there is no compelling evidence that part-time employment has increased as a result of the ACA.”


            It also found that its impact on demand for labor–that is, the number of jobs available, would be “mostly on the margins or are not measurable.”


            Over to you!

          • Finrod Felagund

            This is the same CBO that originally said that Obamacare was going to save us money, but now is saying it’s going to cost over $1 trillion over the next 10 years, right?

            Just wait, they’ll change their tune regarding labor too. Economic denial only lasts so long, unless of course you’re a leftist troll.

          • Pawtrax

            Now you’re attacking the reliability of the CBO?

            Could you please tell Martha MacCallum–and everyone else posting in this thread–that they shouldn’t be so freaked out by the latest CBO report because, gosh, those knuckle heads, what do they know?

            Sheesh. Talk about changing tunes, you’ve done some mighty fine dancing around the facts since you showed up.

          • Green Eggs And Ted

            You fail to understand WHY people are upset about being forced down to part-time because Obama’s failed healthcare law is damaging the company they work for. Your wife made a choice to go to part-time. You expect me to be happy that Obamacare cost me my job?

          • Pawtrax

            The findings of the CBO being tweeted about in this post are not related at all to people being forced to part-time work. Every tweet in this post is complaining about people VOLUNTARILY reducing their hours because of how the subsidies work on the exchanges.



            You people are complete morons.

          • Corey Dennison


          • Pawtrax

            Hopefully! (Because I think you’d all probably prefer not to make asses out of yourselves by completely misunderstanding the CBO report!)

          • Corey Dennison

            Maybe we’re not the ones misunderstanding what we’re reading. And if you keep claiming to be surrounded by idiots…maybe the idiot is you.

            (Note I’m being polite by using the word ‘maybe’ above)

        • keyboard jockey

          You understand that your reply makes no sense whatsoever.

          What part of my comment was “enraged” one of us can read the other is busy emoting.

          • Pawtrax

            I was presenting an example of someone choosing to reduce their work hours in favor of some other activity of value. This is the same choice given to some workers who decide that, now that health care is affordable to them, they can shift time to other activities of value in their lives–like caring for their family.

            It makes perfect sense if you know what CBO was actually reporting. Which you clearly don’t.

          • keyboard jockey

            You keep f’cking that chicken.

          • Pawtrax

            Sure. Whatever. That’s a pretty apt description of what it’s like explaining reality to you morons.

          • Corey Dennison

            So, you admit you find utility in fornicating farmyard animals.

            Well, I guess we know a little bit more about you now.

          • PNWShan

            As a full-time mom, let me put in my 2 cents. The difference is Who pays for it? I and our children are on my husband’s healthcare, which he earns as a benefit from his job. No one else subsidizes my choice to stay home. In fact, living on one income can be difficult.

            The CBO was talking about people staying home because of subsidized healthcare – aka, other people’s earnings are used to pay for people to stay home and not work, or not work as much. I do not want to pay higher taxes and premiums just so other people can choose not to work.

    • GulfPundit

      Your personal anecdote is meaningless to the issue and quite lame.

      • Pawtrax

        Given the track record so far there’s a pretty good chance you don’t actually know what the issue is but maybe I can explain it to you.

        The CBO report found that the “ACA will reduce the total number of hours worked, on net, by about 1.5 percent to 2.0 percent during the period from 2017 to 2024.” The question is why? It’s because Obamacare is a means tested program. Accordingly, a small percentage of people will do a rational cost-benefit analysis and will decide, VOLUNTARILY, that working 32 hours a week makes more sense than working 40 because of how the additional income impacts their subsidies. From the report:

        For some people, the availability of exchange subsidies under the ACA will reduce incentives to work both through a substitution effect and through an income effect. The former arises because subsidies decline with rising income (and increase as income falls), thus making work less attractive.

        Now you can argue that this is “discouraging” work but that’s a very narrow way of viewing it. You could also say that it “encourages” other activities, like, say, spending more time at home to raise a family.

        This is why my example is relevant. Let’s take the case of a family in which one spouse gets health insurance through their employer and the other spouse doesn’t. When they have a kid, the spouse without health insurance decides to reduce their work from 40 hours to 32 in order to spend more time at home. This reduces the family’s over all income but it’s worth it to raise the kid and it doesn’t jeopardize their insurance coverage since the other spouse gets it from their employer.

        But employer-based insurance is heavily subsidized by the government in that its pre-tax compensation to the employee and a deductible expense to the employer. Without that subsidy, the spouse with insurance would be paying more for their insurance or else be out on the individual market where premiums are much higher–even with Obamacare.

        It is, then, the government subsidy that makes the insurance affordable which, in turn, makes it possible for the other spouse to CHOOSE to spend more time at home. If the couple had to pay more for their insurance, the spouse would probably have to stay at full-time in order to pay for the extra cost of the insurance.

        By your reasoning, then, even the employer-based system of health care “discourages” work. But it’s far more accurate to say instead that it increases the options available to working families by making insurance more affordable.

        The same thing is true for the subsidies in Obamacare. They make insurance more affordable which, in turn, gives working families more options in terms of how to spend their time.

        This entire post assumes that everyone who VOLUNTARILY decides to work less to maintain their subsidies at a certain level is going to spend that time on “R&R” as one idiot puts it above.

        That is, again, a very slanted view of it. It is far more likely that people reducing their hours will turn their time to other activities of VALUE like raising their kids, volunteering at school, or what have you.

        If you want to argue that their is nothing more important in our lives than working, fine. But I hear a lot of conservatives screeching about how liberals undervalue the work of stay-at-home moms. Some moms will be able to stay at home more, as a result of the subsidies they get through Obamacare.

        If you want to trash them, be my guest.

    • Green Eggs And Ted

      If your wife shifted to part-time of her own free will, that’s her decision. But people who have been forced against their will to part-time status because the failures of the Obama administration are making things worse, you’re just going to have to forgive those people for not bowing at his feet and thanking Obama for making them have a harder time providing for their families.

      What if your wife had been forced against her will to part-time because of the failures of Obama? Would you be upset then?

      • Pawtrax

        You wrote:

        But people who have been forced against their will to part-time status because the failures of the Obama administration are making things worse

        I will say this again: That is not AT ALL what the CBO found in its report and it is NOT ALL what anyone is talking about in this post. It’s a completely separate issue!

        How is it possible that you people can read this post and not know AT ALL what it’s about?

    • Aimee

      What does that have to do with anything? CBO concluded that Obamacare disincentivizes work, which reduces tax receipts required to pay for govt programs and reduces money spent in the overall economy as well. The money has to come from somewhere, this isn’t rocket science.

      • Pawtrax

        It’s the same choice many people will make as a result of having subsidized affordable healthcare. You choose to characterize it as disincentivizing work, instead of what it is: allowing choices that are not entirely determined by economic need–like staying home to raise a family.

        Please also remember, someone reducing their hours does not reduce the employer’s need for workers. That remains. And so someone with no job, will find themselves with a part time job that didn’t exist before. This isn’t rocket science.

        • Aimee

          I can understand both sides of this argument. I’m not sure it is entirely clear how this scenario will unfold in reality. I have no reason to believe it will be better funded or more solvent than any of our other entitlement programs, none of which are currently sustainable or adequately funded. It’s the 600 pound gorilla no one wants to talk about.

  • carolina mama

    Maybe we all should voluntarily lower our standard of living now before the next wave of Obamacare “freedom-from-work incentives” kick in. That way, when our incomes take a hit, we’ll still be able to survive independent from government “help”

  • Junie3

    It’s time to deport G. Soros and Barry Obama. Enough of their stupid New World Order crap! So sick of this scum ruining our country because this evil Jew thinks he knows better. He’s an idiot, wouldn’t have a clue if he couldn’t copy someone from history.

    • Pawtrax

      So in two hours no one has down-voted this blatant anti-semitism.

      What a wonderful community you’ve all created here.

  • Kenneth Hutchings

    Look at the bright side. If they’re not working, then they’ll have more time to spend in the waiting or emergency room for treatment. /sarc (I shouldn’t have to do that, but one never knows who might take it serious).

  • Green Eggs And Ted

    So basically, the Obama administration has decided that killing jobs is a good thing, and if you lost your job and aren’t happy about it, you’re just a racist.

  • Green Eggs And Ted

    Every liberal should be forced to quit their jobs (assuming any actually work for a living) since they are dumb enough to believe this crap the Dems are spewing about losing jobs and wages being a good thing. Someone who is out of work would love to take the job you are “Slave” to.

    • Discontentwliars

      And give freely to the poor children out of their own pocket.

  • Evie1949

    I nearly blew my coffee across the room when I heard the clip from Jan Carney yesterday. This is completely unbelievably stupid.

    So what they are telling me is that I worked like a fool from age 18 to my retirement at age 62 (forced out of the workforce when they shutdown our space program) when I could have just worked a whole lot less and lived off those still silly enough to work for a living.

    Yes, from the folks who believe that welfare and unemployment are good for the economy, and that we can give FREE HEALTH care to everyone without anyone adding into the glorious pot of money. Goodness, how did those fools get elected?

    • Bathing Suit Area

      “my retirement”
      But people choosing to work less is always bad! How dare you retire?

      • Corey Dennison

        Bless your heart…you’re just not very bright, are you?

    • keyboard jockey

      Yes just like they do in Greece. You remember how well it worked out in Greece right?

  • Socialism is Evil. Organized.

    Why does Obama feel the need to lie so much about Obamacare?

  • frozeninbemidji

    It’s time to starve the monster.
    Before it breaks us.

  • Abbie Mills

    Hussein Obama’s personal jihad against the Constitution of the United States is destined to fail.