Sorry, my pronouns were unclear. In the first sentence, "it" refers to the document. In the second sentence, "it" referred to the comment to which you replied.

Sorry, my pronouns were unclear. In the first sentence, "it" refers to the document. In the second sentence, "it" referred to the comment to which you replied. Very little that's in the document is relevant to this conversation, and the comment itself was attempting to discredit a particular thesis (HSR is a good idea for the US) by discrediting other theses held or allegedly held by the same people (providing for people unwilling to work is good, bovicide is good, etc.). (I don't think it's unusual for politicians to, in the course of their legitimate work, produce internal documents that when brought to a technical discussion forum can be used to produce political flamebait. It's certainly not unusual for technical people to do the same - a Google internal strategy memo on some recent W3C discussion, with no context, can easily turn into flamebait if posted to HN.) Edit: to clarify my pronouns further, in my first sentence I meant "I did not downvote the comment (I don't find the document embarrassing)", and in (a) I meant that the comment is not factually correct in identifying the document with the Green New Deal. In (b), (c), and (d) I mean the document. ... Also, I think it's incorrect that the DNC produced it. AOC's staff produced it, did they not? And it starts off with a sentence about how they want to make sure other Democrats don't claim credit for it. (Remember, again, that we are talking about the document entitled "Green New Deal FAQ" that was briefly posted to AOC's website, not about the Green New Deal legislation.)