>so I don't think you can claim that no one is worried. No that isn't what I claimed, I claimed no one was worried. Using an article written almost two years a

>so I don't think you can claim that no one is worried. No that isn't what I claimed, I claimed no one was worried. Using an article written almost two years after fact as proof against my claim doesn't make a whole a lot of sense. Now obviously my no one claim is hyperbole but the fact the bill's passing was near-unanimous is my point. Using one of the very few no votes in congress as proof against my claim would make a lot more sense.