Spin, spin, spin, spin. It’s enough to keep your head spinning! Let’s try and make some sense of the issue of Obamacare and a possible government shutdown.

First, there is a growing chorus from a wide range of political viewpoints that Obamacare is too costly and, at the very least, just not working. Max Baucus, D-Mont., the Senate Finance chair and original Obama-care sponsor, has said it is going to be a “train wreck.”

Labor unions are opposing it and now we learn that unless the administration helps pick up more of the tab, congressional staff members will take early retirement and desert the ship rather than go under the Obamacare program.

The polls are showing a vast majority of Americans would prefer to see Obamacare repealed or modified.

Each year the Congress is supposed to fund the various governmental agencies. For years the Congress has been unable to get this work done and so members pass continuing resolutions — CRs — to make funds available and to keep the government’s doors open. 

Early this year, Bill suggested a way to stop the implementation of Obamacare while also fully funding the federal government. His idea was to add an amendment to the CR that, while fully funding the federal government, would prohibit the use of the money to “implement, administer, promote, or enforce” the provisions of Obamacare.

Back then nobody was listening and Congress passed a CR and fully funded Obamacare. But now some in Congress are listening!

Sixty House members and a small group of senators are pushing to do what Bill suggested back in February. But there is opposition. The Republican leadership is concerned that, just like in the mid-1990s, the GOP will get blamed for shutting down the federal government. They are living in fear rather than focusing on what is the right thing to do!

It would seem they are more interested in getting re-elected (being politicians) than they are in representing us.

If the Congress were to pass a CR that fully funds the federal government but prohibits the use of funds for the Obamacare program the President, and the press, will try to blame the GOP for shutting down the government. However, that would not be the truth.

The only thing such a CR would shut down is funding of Obamacare. Everything else would be fully funded. So, if the government were shut down (e.g., National Parks closed, the Patent and Trademark Office shut down, air controllers sent home, border patrol agents not paid) who would really be responsible? The Congress would have fully funded all of these agencies and programs. 

Would it not be the President who should take the blame?

Obamacare was ill-conceived, and the president admits it cannot be fully implemented. 

It has major flaws and is opposed by a wide-range of Americans. Meanwhile the House continues to take symbolic votes to repeal it, knowing full well that doing so has no real effect.

The question is when and who will stand up and take an action that will count? Which congressmen have the character to make the right choice? Only time will tell. 

Next week we will focus on why Obama-care is so damaging … stay tuned!

Bill Sargent, Mark Mansius and John Gay are writing a series of columns on timely issues for today. All three ran in the 14th Congressional District primary.


(38) comments

Raymond Lewis

You know guys, it would have been helpfull had you demonstrated at least a cursory understanding of "Obamacare" (as you call it) and suggest what should be done with the state's vast uninsured. By the way, what will you or your insurer do with the reimbursement coming in October as a result of "Obamacare"?

Island Bred

That is it - this is finally proof that these 3 loser contenders for a political seat - acutally pay GDN to print thier diatribes................... ***yawn****

George Croix

Started out with a claim of 30 million uninsured (it would be nice if they'd only count U.S. citizens, but, we get what we vote for), so we spend two years passing the ACA as Priority One. Got it. Don't know much about what's in it, but got it. Increase unemployment checks by nearly 300 percent and food stamps by millions, but, by golly, got the ACA.
Now, 3 years after the fact, and 50 days before full implementation (for individuals, the corporations already being given a pass, illegally by Presidential fiat, to get off the train tracks for a year), the claim is 48 million uninsured. That's largely due to the increase in the jobless (the REAL increase, the real number exceeding 10%, still, not the phony numbers politicians use), and the fallout of the ACA's punitive measures to business that has seen not just a dearth of hiring, but a dramatic and growing increase in former full time workers now made into part time workers.
What a great deal the ACA already is. Lose a chance to get a job with good medical benefits in the first place, or get your pay cut by 25% as you get reduced to part timer. That's what a real winner looks like.
Add in the Doctors dropping out rather than take it up the financial wazoo, those choosing specialization over family practice for the same reason, and that you really cannot count on keeping your insurance if you are happy with what you have, and the increase already seen in our premiums versus the claimed cutting of everybody's costs, and it's no reason only the usual suspects support something that even the President himself knows sucks so bad that he has to give waivers from it.
To cronies, to fellow politicians (including the ones telling YOU what a great deal it is, which includes POTUS and his family), to unions who once supported it, and by delaying the business part lest it all implode immediately. He STILL is counting on masses of folks, especially younger folks signing up for the exchanges under the still-to-be-enforced individual mandate's umbrella, because if he lets we-the-people off the hook for a year like he did business, then the ACA WILL implode, worse than already, because it CANNOT WORK unless large numbers of long term to be taxpayers get into it. The pyramid will crumble right away, rather than a few years down the road, in conjunction with national bankruptcy.
That was evident to anyone with eyes when 10 years taxes were said to be needed to pay 6 years of benefits under this 'plan'. So, far, before it's even fully going, it's over way over budget.
Wait, I forgot that there's no way to even verify whether applicants for subsidies to buy Obamacare insurance are really eligible, so we'll give it to ANYONE CLAIMING TO BE. Honest people paying for this might as well bend over and spread 'em right now. Add in the administrators of the whole thing, the IRS, think it's perfectly fine to reward the Administration's friends and punish their enemies, and there's sure a lot to like about it all.
IF you are on the taking side, and not the providing the money for it side.
Those are the 'winners', obverall. The rest of us the 'losers', overall.
Fortunately, there is at least supposed to be better access to mental health care. It will be needed as people agonize over and get despondent about how they are fgoing to pay their bills with a lot less less money or no job.
Maybe we need a National Utilities and Groceries Bills Payment Act...
Wait, we alreqdy have that, too.
The Government is our Friend.

Gary Miller

Progressives believe there are more "takers" who will vote than "payers" who will vote.

George Croix

"OBAMA ADMINISTRATION DELAYS another provision of the federal health law, pushing off until 2015 a mandatory cap on out-of-pocket costs for individuals"
Aside from the fact that this is yet another example of Administration disdain for law
and it's Oath of Office taken swearing to uphold them, it's another prime example of the ACA's need, all of it, not just the POTUS' cherrypicked parts, for at least a year or two delay.
Or 5.
Or 10.
Or, even better, put this choice in the trash with other bad choices, and start over in the light of day, in full public view, rather than a Senate backroom with locked doors.

Gary Miller

ACA or Obamacare?
Never mentioned it was 140 laws passed with one corrupt "phantom" vote.
"Deemed to have been passed" without actually being voted on?
The 140 laws created 140 bureaucracies and gave each of them the job of writing regulations controling it's application.
Some of the new bureaucracies were put under the umbrella of existing agencies. Individual mandate under the IRA. Access to state exchanges under HHS. Without de funding the umbrella agencies ACA can't be touched.
BHO doesn't have the legal authority to delay or amend any part of the 140 ACA laws. His 1,400 waivers for campaign donners is illegal.
Only congress has that authority.
Congress should repeal all waivers and require all parts of ACA start in full ,on time.
AARP, CIO, congress and NAACP would join in trying to repeal all 140 of the ACA laws.

Lars Faltskog

I vote to cease the CRs that allow this triumverate to keep scribing these "scare" letters.

"Next week - a story to describe how 'damaging' Obamacare is". I can't wait for more chuckles.

HILLARY/MICHELLE 2016 "Stay the Course"

George Croix

Yes, IHOG, the same level of thought process that allows anyone to be a fan of this debacle would be aghast if the IRS decided to 'deem' them to be agreeing to voluntarily pay more in than they really owe.
It's the same level that cannot rebutt, only rebuke.

Chris Gimenez

Obama(s)care is collapsing under its own prodigious weight. Like a beached whale taken from the support of its aqua environment, obamacare no longer can breathe on its own. This was meant to be the stepping stone to a single-payer system where the federal government would once again pull as many as possible to its welcoming, taxtating bosom. Instead, Obama has now lost the support of the unions who want to be excluded along with the IRS, Obama has stolen our tax dollars to supplement Congress' massive health insurance premiums, daily he is having to postpone bits and pieces of this debacle because it's not ready for prime time and its been revealed that his vaunted exchanges will not be ready and personal information will be completely unsecured and subsidy reimbursements will be based on the "honor" system with regard to reporting income. Fraud will run rampant in this system the likes of which we've never seen in any other government boondoggle.

The majority of the public is against obamacare, employers are turning full-time jobs into part-time jobs because of the onerous costs associated with compliance, and yet The One refuses to admit his idealistic failure and retreat to save our country from this abomination. It appears that all that's necessary at this point is to sit back and let it die a slow, excruciating death.


Really people? Some of these lengthy, rambling responses to an article that is just as asinine will never persuade those of us who actually educate ourselves and care to see others receive health insurance. I really believe too many things are written and responded to in such a way to draw uninformed folks out of their tiny little corners, to rile them up and make them feel intelligent and informed...not working.

Lars Faltskog

Response to ClassyTeacher posted at 9:46 pm on Tue, Aug 13, 2013:

You are right on the money on that. In reality, the diatribes that are written against the plan are predominately written by folks who simply get green at the gills that someone in need might get something of which they are not "deserving". Examples: the populace who are of color, and/or or in jobs that currently don't have the upperhand in regard to health care.

The ramblers cling to that "pull yourself up by the bootstrap" mindset. The same type of mentality that the failed presidential contender (Rob-me) had. Remember when he said that college kids should "borrow from their parents"?

Chris Gimenez

And just what did the Great Promiser-In-Chief end up giving to his young voters? No employment opportunities and being forced to live with their parents. And let's not look at the destruction he's wreaked on the black community with unemployment nearly 14%. You two believers in hand-outs as the key to prosperity keep on believing that along with the rest of the Democrat Party. Don't believe what Dem. Max Baucus (an original author of obamascare) said when he recently stated that Obamacare was a train wreck coming down the tracks and distanced himself from what he hath wrought.

“Look, as the chair of the [Congressional] Black Caucus I’ve got to tell you, we are always hesitant to criticize the president. With 14 percent [black] unemployment if we had a white president we’d be marching around the White House. [...] The president [Obama] knows we are going to act in deference to him in a way we wouldn’t to someone white.” [A]nd as much as I love Sen. Clinton, [were she president instead of Obama], I would have been all over her on 14 percent unemployment for African Americans. I would have said, ‘My sister, I love you, but this has got to go.’”

- Congressman Emanuel Cleaver (D-MO), interview in The Root, September 17, 2012


Chris Gimenez

Thank you ClassyTeacher for providing such an insightful one-line rebuttal of the facts about obamascare-"those of us who actually educate ourselves and care to see others receive health insurance". It's dripping with the liberal self-portraying mindset that's sending this country into ruin quicker than illegals are crossing our borders.

Here's another one-liner for you-"Well, of course we have to pass this bill so we can find out what's in it". Nancy Pelosi on obamascare.

Lars Faltskog

Response to bvresident posted at 7:08 am on Wed, Aug 14, 2013:

"sending this country into ruin quicker than illegals are crossing our borders"??

Have you heard the term "Todos somos mojados?" Interestingly, (and I've mentioned this before) - I know lots of priviledged and "adinerado" white folks who have the upperhand - in that they don't have to worry about health insurance/care.

And the vast majority of these white folks I mentioned above would merely look at your name and place you in the category of "illegal" - just from your name. I am surprised that you defend those "haters". Not too late to join the other side and embrace our nation's diversity, and invest in our immigrants' well-being.

Chris Gimenez

The "other side" as you generously offer up, is a dead-ender. The "other side" has stripped their followers of the need to be productive and self-reliant not only for their well-being but for that of the country. Rather, the "other side" increasingly believes in an endless supply of government aid to virtually anyone in an effort to secure their support in future elections. While I'm far from being wealthy or even having the financial security I'd like to have, I know that I have all the opportunity in the world to get wherever I want to work hard enough to be.

Meanwhile, because of your president's policies food stamp rolls have increased from 30 million to an eye-popping 47 million during his term in office, unemployment is stuck at just under 8% for whitey and almost 14% for blacks, our national debt is utterly out of control, illegal aliens are streaming across our borders with impunity, and personal responsibility and self-respect has become a thing of the past for more than half of this country while your president has done more to set back racial tolerance than any public figure in my lifetime. The "other side"? No thanks. I don't make personal and life decisions because someone, anyone, might call me some name not knowing anything about me. Life's not supposed to be fair but it is supposed to be satisfying and satisfaction comes from within, not from being a ward of the federal government.

Lars Faltskog

Response to bvresident posted at 7:34 am on Wed, Aug 14, 2013:

Regarding the African-American unemployment rate of 14%, and not to mention the "underemployed" and underinsured....that's all the more reason that our country needs the Obamacare plan. People simply can't survive without it.

There's so much lacking in our country in terms of taking care of our social issues. I just heard last night on the news that we're the only industrialized country that has a virtually non-existent plan for maternity leave. How can folks live at least an inkling the American dream without organized systems of assistance?
You actually made a good point in regard to the young people having to live "at home". Lots of folks need help. "Trashing" a national healthcare plan would be counterproductive at best, and extremely harmful in the long run.

Kevin Lang

At best, Obamacare is really only going to help people spread their medical payments out over time. Most of us pay thousands of dollars per year in medical insurance premiums and maybe get hundreds of dollars in benefits per year. We hope that we never break even on it, because that means that we'll have to deal with some nasty diseases at some point. If people get better wellness care, there may be some savings in less major medical care. However, if people get more wellness care, they may also spend more money over time on expensive maintenance medications, too. Certainly, we need to make it less likely that people will get really sick. However, we need to make it cheaper for people to stay well, and also to get well. For the most part, that kind of stuff has been generally ignored because it's really sensitive politically. Things like pushing insurance companies to have less overhead (for example C-suite salaries), reducing the administrative cost reimbursements to doctors, hospitals, and insurers, etc. Right now, there's a lot of dollars being eaten by the healthcare industry that have almost nothing to do with patient care, and until we fix that, Obamacare is just going to be a short-term bandaid.

Kevin Lang

Just out of curiosity, if Democrats, by nature, are so opposed to job creation, why are some of the biggest job creators such staunch supporters of Democrats? Some of the companies doing the best at job destruction contribute heavily to Republicans. Of course, many of the top corporations hedge their bets and play both sides.

I just don't see any valid generalizations about either party with respect to job creation. When you get right down to it, the only jobs that John Boehner, Eric Cantor, Mitch McConnell, and Harry Reid are really worried about is are their own. Well, those, and the ones of their top contributors. They really couldn't care less about mine, yours, or anyone else's on this forum.

And, while we're on the subject of illegal immigrants, the only ones that either side really want to do anything about are the ones that commit violent crimes while in this country. The couldn't give a flying rat's behind about the ones that are building houses, picking fruit, and cleaning houses. Those illegals are helping keep money in the pockets of the political contributors. That money does far more for candidates than if it were in the hands of working stiffs that are in this country legally.

Chris Gimenez

As usual Kevin, you don't provide anything to back up your statements. A quick search provides a list of the corporate backers of your president and it's easy to see that the bulk of them are technology related (I would believe because they want to be part of the great technology give-a-way by the federal government) and entertainment bigwigs who are mostly in la la land anyway. You can also add Warren "I misled the public about my tax rates" Buffet and George "I'm a Socialist" Soros. Big deal.

Where are the Republican job destroyers that you can't provide any proof of? The facts are stubborn. Both Democrats, unions, the IRS, and Congress all want exclusions from obamascare. It was reported today that approximately 1/3 of obamascare won't be ready on time. The IRS has already been caught deadbang with their hands in the harassment-of-conversatives cookie jar and yet we're supposed to be comfortable with them overseeing the implementation of obamascare.

It's time for people like you and your buddies on here to stop the mindless support of something that will destroy 1/6 of our economy and will in no way accomplish the stated goal of ensuring that everyone has health insurance. The "Something is better than nothing" philosophy of the left is bankrupting our country. Your president needs to take his medicine and admit that his social engineering experiment called obamascare is a massive failure and needs to go away. Then, and only then might he actually try to work with Congress and those in this country who he is depending on to fund his grand plans.

Kevin Lang

Ever hear of Hewlett Packard? Meg Whitman has done nothing to stem the tide of HP's growing lack of relevance in the computer business. The company is mostly surviving due to printers and consulting. HP's manufacturing business has been declining for years, and that was a big thing that Whitman was supposed to turn around.

I guess Salesforce.com, Google, and others don't qualify as job creators? Since entertainment companies don't count in your book, then I guess Republicans should give Sands their money back?

My whole point is that neither party has a great record over the last decade with "job creation". In fact, politics, at best, may adjust the playing field to make certain job creators a bit more comfortable, but in the end, politcking in DC doesn't create many jobs whatsoever outside of lobbying. The real job creation? Well, I guess that's left to the real job creators--most of whom (Republican AND Democratic) have been on vacation a good part of the past decade.

The political parties in control have far less to do with job creation (or destruction) than you care to admit. If the job creators were out creating jobs, what would those jobs be producing? Most likely, nothing. People aren't itching to buy stuff that isn't on the shelves. Rather, stuff is sitting on shelves with no buyers. Since at about 85% of the country is working, I would say the reason stuff is sitting is because people don't want to buy it. I would say that for most of them the reason is because they just don't want or need it, not becasue they couldn't afford it if they wanted it. After all, they're finding $200-400 to buy cell phones and tablets. So, it's not like they don't have $400 to spend on washing machines or loveseats.

Where do you get "mindless support" out of what I wrote? You didn't. You made that up, because anyone else would see that I criticized the fact that it does virtually nothing to reduce the total costs of healthcare. Anyone with a lick of sense knows that in the long run, insurance doesn't reduce the total cost of something, it just flattens out the payments.

Chris Gimenez

Hey Kevin, I know this is going to be uncomfortable for you but one of your president's most ardent supporters just put a lot of people on the streets. Say it ain't so Warren Buffet. What a cruel, heartless, cold-blooded businessman.


George Croix

There's another one telling everybody how smart they are.
No specific rebuttal, no information, just 'your dumb and I'm smart'.
Do tell?

Anyway, the answer to your question, kevjlang, about those staunch supporters, is one word. Power. That is obtainable with another single word. Money. Which is needed to get another single word. Influence. Which leads to another single word. Connection. Which takes us to yet another. Access. And on to the next. Quid pro quo (well, a single term, anyway). Then the next. Payback. And finally to. Power.
Repeat often.
There is great power to be had by being king-like, and thus by association with the majestic figures. The way to keep that power, is to keep as many others as possible powerless. And dependent. And thinking they are lucky to have someone to give them things. And, as we see so grandly displayed here, thinking they are very smart for doing so.
A good education is not a repair for a problem that can't be fixed.

George Croix

I should have added, in our own lives, what would anyone think of being told by their boss that they must do something, but then watch the boss do the opposite?
How about at an emergency scene if a crew was told to to go over there and attack that problem, but their Captain beat feet in the other, safer and cooler, direction?
How about if you won a share of the Power Ball lottery with one other person, and it was decided by the Lottery Commission that your cut would be 10%, and the other guy 90%?
Even a really, really bright and well educated person should be able to figure that out in a few days. Or 4 1/2 years.
The rest of us took about 20 seconds to get it.

Kevin Lang

gecroix, and bvresident, you both want to place me in the "defender" camp. Don't know why, when it's obvious that I'm attacking both sides.

The reason we're having this discussion is because there's not much job creation going on. It's not because the government is doing anything specific to create or destroy them. There's plenty of money in the private sector right now to create more than enough jobs to cut unemployment by more than 50%. The problem is once we hire those people, what are they going to do? I'm not going to hire someone just because I'm a nice guy and want to see someone collect a salary. I'm going to hire someone because I have work to do, and I can't do it with the staff I have.

Lars Faltskog

Well, I've alluded to this before, but I shall reiterate. Much of the problem with jobs is the concept of "underemployement". That casts a wide net. It can mean merely working when there's work available in your field, i.e. - migrant fruit pickers.

Then, there's the type of work where you're on the job up to 30-35 hours per week, but you are not available for the company's health care b/c you're "part-time". Then, you have a big sector of hard-working folks here who are the jornaleros. They work long days/sometimes Saturdays, sweat much more than we do, yet are in no way part of a group company health insurance program.

That's why we need national healthcare. Yes, it all ties together - work availablity, job creation, responsibility for this industrialized country to do something about the wide gaps in availability.

Chris Gimenez

Kevin, I think your perception of what you're saying is starkly different from what you actually say. Reread your comments. With regard to job creation you skirt around the edges of the reality because what is the basis behind the lack of confidence in expansion by the business sector is uncertainty. Uncertainty about taxes, about obamascare costs, about constant government attempts to intervene in the private sector. The only sector that is seeing increases hiring, increased salaries, and increased benefits is the government sector. Your president and your party seem to believe they know what it takes to encourage the private sector to grow and they've failed miserably. Add to that the constant vilification of the small business owner ("if you have a successful business you didn't build that by yourself,...) and you have what we have now-stagnation. Business owners are more than willing to take calculated risks to grow their businesses but what they won't do is throw caution to the wind in the kind of hostile-to-business environment that's been created by your president. He continues to criticize those who have the ability to create jobs, quality employment opportunities, an ability to get off the taxpayer dole, and achieve a quality of life they will never experience depending on the federal teat.

Kevin Lang

Ponder this:

For 5 years we've been hearing about our debt crisis, right? Has congress been able to do anything to alleviate this crisis? We've heard both conservatives and liberals give us spins on how we should deal with it, but has anything actually been done? It is still a crisis, isn't it? Evidently some crises are more critical than others....

Switch to Obamacare:

We've heard ad infinitem how it's going to be a disaster. We know it's not going to be repealed. It's going to take effect. If it's going to be a disaster, shouldn't someone at least be working closely with the folks trying to implement it to at least reduce the level of impact? If it's going to destroy the economy, do conservatives really want to be viewed as the ones that knew it was going to a disaster yet were completely unwilling to try and do something, even if just to try to help limit the damage?

When the crisis is realized, what makes you think that anything more will be done than has been done with the national debt and the annual deficits?

I have to ask, are conservatives happy just pointing out disasters? Or do they point at just about everything and want people to believe that they're pointing at disasters?

Liberals are just as bad. Even if the debt, the deficit, and Obamacare fail to attain the true definition of crisis, no one can look at either and say that they don't need some fixes.

Right now, I look at both parties as being parties that offer little in the way of solutions. They both offer lots of rhetoric, but I don't have much use right now for a dog that can only bark. Imagine Chuck Norris in a late-night infomercial. Only there is no such thing as a Total Gym. All he's doing is selling talk, but not product. That's what I see with all of our political leaders now. I don't think you can point to anything tangible that any of them are selling.

Sorry to disappoint you, but there is no single lever available for me to use on election day.

Chris Gimenez


We have a WH administration living in the state of Denial.

Chris Gimenez

And then if obamascare and the IRS scandal and the Benghazi scandal, and the NSA scandal aren't bad enough, this keeps coming back around to remind the country just how low this administration and its attorney general have sunk.



Lars Faltskog

Response to kevjlang posted at 3:47 pm on Wed, Aug 14, 2013:

My cat keeps scratching on my Total Gym mat! OMG

Kevin Lang

From what I understand, just being in the same room as a Total Gym is enough to transform a couch potato into a weekend warrior. If you even use it once, you're guaranteed to be more buff than 90% of America. Bottom line, I ain't messing with your cat!

George Croix

No, I don't, personally. I don't give a darn what camp you are in. It doesn't effect at all what I want to say.
Right and wrong are not determined by what camp one is in. At least, it wasn't back before polarization became the goal of choice of our various elected 'leaders'.
I'm old enough to remember when our elected honchos called for unity and commonality of purpose, and immediately after doing so did not give another speach dam_ing the hel_ out of half the country. That's pretty old fashioned of me, but I miss that.
You want to reduce that level of bad effect?
How about delay the WHOLE thing until it's ready for reasonably non-disastrous implementation WITHOUT special exemptions and waivers and delays for some but not others. Congress has only to vote to do so, and the President has only to sign it.
No illegal cherrypicking allowed.
It will never happen, because this whole law is a Trojan Horse. It's ONLY purpose is to start down the path to single payer. That is evident because the INDIVIDUAL mandate part, the get=em-hooked-and-reel-em-in part, is NOT being delayed. Despite no way to verify legitimate claims for program subsidies. And an anticipated doubling of individual out of pocket expenses for many, many people because the part of the ACA that is supposed to limit such ioncreases is also being delayed.
The mechanism for deliverance is right there in front of our eyes.
There is ONE, and only one reason it will not be used.
That reason can be found currently on Martha's Vineyard.

Kevin Lang

gecroix, that sounds somewhat pragmatic. Delaying provisions should certainly be options for the things that are problematic to implement. However, those delays compound the uncertainty that businesses are facing. As bvresident said, uncertainty is a big factor in business decisions. If we can't give business the certainty of Obamacare going away, then we need to give them the certainty of having to work with it.

I have faith that our business community is clever enough that they can work through the issues either way. Conservatives have helped fuel this uncertainty. They promised to take back the Senate in 2010 so they could repeal it. They promised to take the Senate and White House in 2012 so they could repeal it. Now, they're banking on stall tactics to reach 2014 when they'll take the Senate back and repeal it. Barring that, they'll try to stall until 2016 when they'll retake the Senate and White House and repeal it.

If that fails, then what? At some point, there needs to be a plan B that gives businesses certainty. How about starting to work with the business community and work out a plan for navigating Obamacare and making it a problem they can work with until the stars realign? Maybe the lemons that make up Obamacare won't make the best lemondate, I would think that we have one or two thinkers and innovators in Congress that could at least make it drinkable.

Gary Miller

Conservatives are suggesting they should fund all the government except ACA in the CR. If the government was shut down it would be Obama that shut it down.
He has illegally delayed several important parts until after the mid term elections because Democrats believe it would hurt their chances of getting elected.

They forced it onto America with corrupt use of Senate rules but now say America hates it so much it could cost them re election.
They are afraid of the law they passed.
Need anymore be said?

Kevin Lang

The business of CRs does nothing to provide the stability that the business community is looking for out of DC. At some point, we need members of both parties to just hold their noses and take a small dose of the other party's poison, and put together a budget and budget plan to lays out a roadmap of where we're heading for the next 3-5 years. If it includes some or all of Obamacare, at least we know what to expect and can plan accordingly.

Sara Cox

OK. which part of Obamacare are you disputing. The part the allows kids to remain on their parents insurance until age 26? The part that prohibits denial of insurance based on pre existing conditions? The part that prohibits canceling insurance policies if the insured becomes sick? I bet its the part that includes preventative care or is it the "free" birth control for sluts? (Birth control is the single most effective deterrent to abortion) Private insurers will still have the ball. Small businesses have several options for providing insurance for employees. Now with that said, I'm not completely happy with he ACA either. But I clearly remember the "debates" prior to the bill passing. Not one idea for an alternative was offered by the RNC. Is it true that being in good health is not a right? Right to life is only for the unborn? The reason for delays in implementation are a good part in insufficient funding. Believe it or not, this president actually is taking costs into account unlike the previous one.

Lars Faltskog

Response to saraishelafs posted at 4:05 pm on Tue, Aug 27, 2013:

I have illustrated on a few occasions the mentality of the teapartiers/repubs/reactionaries - but it bears to reiterate: These folks simply want the poor or the marginal middle class to simply phase out. That way, more of the teapartiers "kind" will dominate. it's no wonder these folks don't want to sit at the table and come to compromise. Giving their perceived opponents the upper hand is surely not something the reactionaries will embark upon. It's a "survival of the fittest" type of mentality and the eventual cleansing of the poor peoples' "defective genes that drive the reactionary camp's agenda(s).

Kevin Lang

There is no desire to get rid of the poor. Someone needs to work the menial jobs. However, between minimum wage laws, unemployment, and welfare, the only people left to fill those jobs are the illegals, and with it being preferable to slam the illegals, government is making it too expensive for companies to fill menial positions. They don't want to even pay $7.25/hr, but most welfare recipients, I guess, can't be bought for less than ten.

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.