>>>>As a wise dude once said: "Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time." What you're expecting now, is one of those other forms of goverment that clearly deviates from the way it was designed. Apparently the expectation is that if you pile up invective you can trump the legislative process.
>>>>
>>>>The fact is that the act has been passed. It was challenged in the Supreme Court. The challenge did not succeed in delaying or overturning the bill.
>>>>
>>>>The rest is smokescreen, since it doesn't matter how much invective or allegation can be stacked up. What matters who is voted into power and is able to pass or repeal bills. The others are entitled to holler and decry, but demanding re litigation of a passed act as the price of government? Nope.
>>>
>>>I'm not rabid on the subject of Obamacare one way or the other since unlike apparently everyone who is, I am neither an expert on the economics of the health care industry nor am I familiar with every single detail of the thousands of pages defining it.
>>>
>>>But I am kind of interested in the ideas of separating partisan passion from constitutional argument. I suggest this article and if there are real constitutional arguments against the point Sowell makes I'm interested.
>>>
>>>http://jewishworldreview.com/cols/sowell100413.php3#.UlLl51MQMvP
>>
>>"....If Senator Reid and President Obama refuse to accept the money required to run the government, because it leaves out the money they want to run ObamaCare, that is their right. But that is also their responsibility....."
>>
>>That is a pretty lame-brained way to look at it - take a looong close look at that sentence & tell me otherwise..haha -
>
>Is it wrong, though?
>
>If not, the cry-baby ad should have been for Obama & Reid instead of Boehner.

It's not wrong, but it's incomplete.
The house has never voted on the continuing resolution that would include funding for ACA.
Boehner won't let the vote occur because he knows that he'll lose and it will be funded, so it's a bit of a stretch to say that the house wants to fund everything but ACA.
Boehner can end this tomorrow by allowing the vote and he won't.
Obama can end it by accepting Boehner's terms without a vote and he won't.
Who's right?
This tussle is like most political tussles.. childish.. and anyone who has raised children knows that trying to find a right or wrong party in a childish dispute is futile.
All this is foreplay for the real showdown, the debt ceiling.
Stay tuned.

In the meantime, the repubs had better get down on their knees every night and pray that the ACA fails.

If it succeeds somehow, they will be forever known as the party that wanted to deny health care to 37 million people and risked bankrupting the government in the process.