[bsder]

Thank you for proving the point of the original post.

You fell for a propaganda talking point:

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/the-context-behind-nancy-pelosis-...

People knew quite well what was in the bill and it was on record. The issue was whether there might be unintended consequences and what they would be after the bill was enacted.

Now, will you admit you are wrong and change your stance? Or will you double down to a different talking point?

If someone on HN can fall for this kind of disinformation campaign, what chance does someone with far less access have?

[AnimalMuppet]

And thank you for completely ignoring my point, and continuing to trumpet your own. Now, will you admit that you are a propagandist who's here just to argue? Or will you actually start to have a real conversation with us?

That is: Do you see how your style closes off conversation? Do you see how it results in closed-minded people just yelling at each other? And, seeing that, will you drop that style and have a reasonable conversation with us? Or will you continue to dismiss what others say as "talking points" whenever we disagree with you?

As to your actual criticism of my post: I was in fact unaware of the larger context of Pelosi's quote. That fact does not make ACA any better.