Google News really needs to work on its results counter. The first page of its 10:15 p.m. search listings on [Obama "widespread evidence"] (typed exactly as indicated between brackets) tells us that there are "about 90 results," but moving to the second page of listed results shows there are only 11 (technically 13, because the first listing on the first page has three items).
Those sparse results, none of which except for Fox News would be considered an establishment press outlet, show that the press, including Darlene Superville at the Associated Press in an onsite report, has ignored the following howler delivered by President Barack Obama in Largo, Maryland on Thursday: "There's no widespread evidence that the Affordable Care Act is hurting jobs."
Given the definition of "widespread" ("distributed over a wide region, or occurring in many places or among many persons or individuals"), it's more than safe to say that the list of 313 companies either laying people off or cutting workers' hours due to Obamacare renders Obama's claim completely false.
Graham's list is about as good as one can hope for in the circumstances, but I'll have a few points to add after the excerpt (bolds are mine throughout this post):
ObamaCare Employer Mandate: A List Of Cuts To Work Hours, Jobs
ObamaCare's impact on jobs is hotly debated by politicians and economists. Critics say the Affordable Care Act, with its employer mandate to provide health insurance, gives businesses an incentive to cut workers' hours. This year, report after report has rolled in about employers restricting work hours to fewer than 30 per week — the point where the mandate kicks in. Data also point to a record low workweek in low-wage industries.
In the interest of an informed debate, we've compiled a list of job actions with strong proof that ObamaCare's employer mandate is behind cuts to work hours or staffing levels. As of Sept. 25, our ObamaCare scorecard included 313 employers. Here's our latest analysis, focusing on cuts to adjunct hours at nearly 200 college campuses.
Unfortunately, most of the listings don't identify specific numbers of jobs, and those which do usually have pretty small numbers. I copied the entire listing into an Excel spreadsheet and got a total of 18,808 affected employees at 93 entities.
That number would grow exponentially based on other companies listed and other extrapolations made from those which are listed.
First there's Wal-Mart, which has, according to the IBD and other news reports, "Increased temp share of workforce to 'fewer than 10%' from 1-2% before this year." 8-9% of Wal-Mart's 1.4 million-person U.S. workforce would be about 120,000 workers.
Second, many of the entities listed are retail franchises and school systems. There are easily tens of thousands of each nationwide, most of which clearly face the same employment issues as the listed entities, and many of which will make the same decisions as the ones on IBD's list did.
Finally, there's the intimidation factor. Many companies and others are surely making the same moves as those described on IBD's list, but are doing so quietly because they'd rather not get the attention of far-leftists who have no respect for property or show up on the Obama administration's radar.
The most obvious media failure to cover President Obama's obviously newsworthy "no widespread evidence" remark was, as would be expected, at the Associated Press, aka the Administration's Press. AP's onsite writeup of over 700 words by insufferable Obama cheerleader Darlene Superville ignored the quote, and played up the President's characterization of his Republican and other opponents as "crazy" (numbered tags are mine):
Obama mocks GOP for 'crazy' Obamacare predictions
With just five days to go before Americans can begin signing up for health care under his signature law, President Barack Obama on Thursday ridiculed Republican opponents for "crazy" doomsday predictions of the impact and forecast that even those who didn't vote for him are going to enroll. 
With polls showing many Americans still skeptical of the law known as "Obamacare," the president went back to the basics of explaining how nearly 50 million uninsured Americans will be able to buy coverage in new government-run exchanges while mocking Republicans for trying to block its implementation. "The closer we get, the more desperate they get," Obama argued. 
"The Republican party has just spun itself up around this issue," Obama said. "And the fact is the Republicans' biggest fear at this point is not that Affordable Care Act will fail. What they're worried about is it's going to succeed." 
... Obama won loud applause from a friendly audience at Prince George's Community College in the Washington suburbs when he vowed that he wouldn't let Republicans block the law. "We are going to see it through. The Affordable Care Act is here," Obama said. 
The six-month enrollment period for the exchanges starts Tuesday, with consumers in most of the country able to comparison shop between plans online. The Obama administration needs millions of Americans -- especially young, healthy people -- to sign up in order to keep costs low for everyone. 
... "All this would be funny if it wasn't so crazy," Obama said. 
 — The law says they have to enroll or else face fines. And we're supposed to be impressed?
 — Most Americans don't even know that open enrollment starts on Tuesday. The administration has had 3-1/2 years to explain Obamacare. Who's despereate here?
 — No, what Amercians deeply concerned about this country's future are worried about is that when Obamacare fails, as it almost certainly will, its failure will be spun as a success no matter how horrific the result is, and that we'll be stuck with a final bankrupting entitlement program which will end any hope of salvaging the country's financial future.
 — Obamacare is not "here." What's "here" is a shadow of what the American people were promised 3-1/2 years ago. Exchanges aren't ready. No one is going to screen information provided by applicants for accuracy. The administration itself has waived or deferred several of the law's requirements and missed countless implementation deadlines.
 — The success of the enterprise depends on young people mostly acting against their own best interests. What other legitimate business depends on systematically ripping its customers off to claim success?
 — I would submit that the last person to question someone's sanity would be a guy who says there is "no widespread evidence" of something everyone can see with their own eyes.
Cross-posted at BizzyBlog.com.