But, like I said, I'm over it more than this winter weather so I'll let you guys do the talking today.

Let's start with the official response from the National Association of Health Underwriters, courtesy of CEO Janet Trautwein.

"While NAHU generally opposes the employer mandate, the leniency and flexibility the Treasury ruling offers for employers will help American businesses comply with the law causing less harm to their financial stability and employee job security," she said in a written statement. "We are very pleased with the ongoing dialogue the treasury department has maintained with both the employer community and the agent community and that the final rules reflect positive changes based on comments and discussions."

But it was the most upbeat reaction I would get this week.

"When I heard about the latest delay for employers between 50–99 employees," a carrier rep told me, "I personally didn't pay too much attention as unfortunately these delays are now becoming commonplace. With each one, doubt continues to seep into my mind regarding the planning around this law, and it leaves me thinking, 'OK, when is the next delay coming, and what is that going to look like.' I guess it confirms that this law, and the deadlines surrounding it, will continue to change so we all need to remain nimble."

Again, much like the humidity rather than the heat, it's not the law itself making life miserable, it's the questions swirling around it like flies on road kill.

Or, as someone else pointed out today, "The delays are the difference in removing a Band-Aid. Do you like it slow, one hair at a time? Or are you a ripper? Obviously the Obama administration is fond of the slow method."

Finally, one of my editorial board members offered up a good news, bad news assessment.

"Positive thought: They properly allowed for transition relief to plans that do not operate on a calendar year. This means agents and groups will not have to implement short plan years to get to renewal if their plan does not hit the Jan. 1, 2015 date," he said. "That's a good thing."

And on the other hand?

"Negative thought: We continue to kick the can down the street on a [crappy] law," he told me. "How many times can we change this 'law' during implementation? Proof positive that the government should not be involved in anything that should turn a profit."

Amen.