Registered to point this out:
May I kindly note that the user that started the thread has zero posting history outside of this thread. Yellow flag.
He or she posts FUD-filled (Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt) and information-poor or easily-falsifiable replies to reasonable replies. Red flag.
Once challenged, he or she posts a comprehensive list full of bad information, attempting to sour general perception of the PPACA ("Obamacare"). Yellow flag.
When called out on any of this, he or she falls back on the standard "Well I'm allowed my opinion, AREN'T I???", apparently not understanding the difference between opinions ("I don't much care for Alternative Rock music") and facts ("Alternative Rock is a subgenre of Rock and Roll"). You can't state bad facts that you draw conclusions from, have all your facts debunked, then still defend your conclusion as "Just my opinion stop being un-American by disagreeing with me!!!!". That's bloody ridiculous and "Amanda" is arguing in very bad faith using standard PR techniques. MASSIVE red flag.
Based on his or her posting style, falling back on multiple "trenches" of argument ("I'm just asking questions", then "Here's bad facts to support my conclusions", then "Well it's an opinion, you can't argue with an opinion", and then just dragging out the argument until less than 1 percent of readers will stick to the thread long enough to see him or her made to look foolish...) and general lack of ability to commit to a single viewpoint but instead taking a "throw a bunch of stuff at the wall to see what sticks", I strongly suspect that the parent poster is a politically motivated sockpuppet; a paid-PR poster, or similar.
I make a habit of uncovering these people (and have busted a few on other sites just for laughs or because they annoyed the hell out of everyone and were poisoning any attempt at polite discourse), and after a while you get to recognize a "type" that most shills and sockpuppets fit into, and I'm afraid that my alarm bells were going off after reading the first few posts by this bozo.
Sorry guys, but in all probability you're arguing with someone that can't be convinced simply because they're not even arguing about their own beliefs. He or she is just trying to muddy the waters and increase the overall negative perception of the PPACA. I personally suspect funding by various insurers (who are furious about the bill's limitation of how much "administrative cost" can be extracted by them) or some large hospital organizations (who are furious that they're going to have to start being responsible for their quality of care, not just how much they can get away with billing for). They're willing to spend millions to get public sentiment back on their side, as the long-term difference for them is in the billions of dollars (of pure profit, extracted from consumers and patients).
I'm also sorry to say that it's only going to get worse... Normally this kind of garbage used to only be directed at the "politically interested" few percent of people on large news aggregator websites or special-interest ones such as global warming-related discussion sites. Unfortunately, the tools ("persona management systems", etc) available to people like our friend here have gotten exponentially better in the last 5-10 years, and you're going to have to start dealing with them on much more general-interest sites or less-political specialty sites such as this one.
Sorry about the long rant, but it needed to be said. Happy holidays, friends!