So, Ryan opposes Obamacare because low-income people don't need subsidies to purchase health care. They just need a swift kick in the rear to get them off their lazy, teat-sucking behinds. Or—if they're already out there hopping—the threat of such a kick to keep them from backsliding into undignified idleness.

Remember the whole kerfuffle over Ann Romney, and her choice to be a stay-at-home mom? Do you remember any Republicans saying that Mitt Romney's wealth created a "disincentive" for his wife to go out and work, and that this was somehow a bad thing? Of course not. Conservatives love to praise "family values" and the importance to society of having a full-time mom (yes, they always want it to be mom) at home with the children. Well, except that regular people need that whole dignity of work thing. Dizzy yet?

In other words, it's good for Mrs. Romney to stay home with the kids, but not the many hundreds of thousands of mothers or fathers in two-income families who—thanks to Obamacare—will decide to cut back on their work and spend more time with their families. Never mind that the cost of child care made the second job a wash in terms of many families' income, but was necessary to preserve access to health insurance.

For conservatives like Ryan, there's only one right choice for the 99 percent: work more. Never mind that health care security offers regular people the freedom and the choice—although apparently not the kind of freedom Republicans value—to prioritize family over more money. The hypocrisy is rich. When Ann Romney stays home with her kids, she isn't depriving herself of Paul Ryan's "dignity of work." That's for the little people.