Democrats: 2.5 Million fewer jobs due to ObamaCare is actually increasing FREEDOM! So how can GOP object?

A few days ago the Congressional Budget Office--the office that's supposed to analyze the cost of laws and government programs--issued a report stating that ObamaCare was going to result in 2.5 *million* fewer U.S. jobs over the next decade.

Republicans responded by saying "We told you so."  The law is horribly ill-conceived and written, and will have horrible consequences as long as it's in force.  And in the current economy, 2.5 million fewer jobs over a decade absolutely, unequivocally qualifies as a complete disaster.

To make matters worse, the CBO is historically pro-Democrat and very friendly to their programs, so it always errs on the "not so bad / not so costly" side.  So if the CBO forecasts X fewer jobs, the real impact is likely to be higher.

So...faced with a damning report from a normally-friendly source, what do you think Democrat strategists did?  Of course:  circle the wagons and deny, deny, lie, lie.

One well-known liberal tactic is for Democratic organs to quickly reverse their historic position and claim that what was bad when Bush did it is actually good now.  As I posted a few days ago, the NY Slimes editorial board--not just some crazy-ass guest columnist, but the consensus of the whole board--took this route, claiming 2.5 million fewer jobs was a good thing.  Because it freed Americans from having to stay with jobs they only kept for the health insurance.

To refresh your memory--and unless you follow the liberal-conservative wars you don't remember it at all--back when George W. Bush was president the Times claimed a monthly *gain* of 100,000 jobs was just *terrible*, awful, anemic--a "jobless recovery."  But suddenly, with Duh King in the oval office, a policy that will shit-can 2.5 MILLION jobs is a GOOD thing???

Everyone on the Times is willing to tie themselves in logical knots to try to support crappy Obama/Dem/liberal/"progressive" policies.  And it's so ludicrously obvious when they praise a result that they lambasted when it happened under Bush--like this one.

So what's happening now that the Times has set the message is that other liberal/Dem/"progressive" standard-bearers are picking it up.  For example, a guy who has the title of "senior congressional reporter" for the Huffington Post--again, not a guest wacko--has slyly implied that because the lost jobs actually amount to giving Americans more *freedom*, then for conservatives to criticize ObamaCare is really criticizing...freedom!

There’s an irony in the GOP complaining that ACA lets people quit jobs. I mean, what’s wrong with freedom?

Hey, give this guy the Joe Goebbels medal for creative writing!  What's next from the Democrats, eh?  How about "New Democrat proposal to ban gun sales to anyone who's ever had a traffic ticket is actually giving Americans MORE FREEDOM, since they won't have to fill out any paperwork!  Thanks, Democrats!"

"Shortage of heating oil and natural gas to heat homes is actually giving Americans MORE FREEDOM since they'll get the chance to walk through the countryside and pick up brush to burn for heat!!"

"Scarcity of meat due to EPA emission regulations will actually give Americans MORE FREEDOM to experiment with new recipes!  Thanks, Obama!"

"Six-month wait-list for MRI scan will actually give sick Americans MORE FREEDOM to research alternative diagnostic and treatment methods!  Thanks, Obama!"

In his famous novel "1984" George Orwell had the Party pushing three famous lines :  "Freedom is slavery," and "War is peace."  And "If you like your health insurance you can keep it.  Period."

I may not be remembering that last one right but it was something like that.

Coming soon to liberal publications nationwide.