Decent points overwhelmed by instigative phrasing instead. The source material doesn't exactly set things up for a reasonable conversation about the bill itself either of course but at least it's points aren't straight flames.

FWIW the bill also contains things like rules on electric charging regulation and it's likely most people don't really want a law about restricting which type of meat can be sold as much as that portion was thrown in and the rest of the law was more important. Things like focusing just on how stupid those who do/don't think the bill should have been vetoed really sidestep the actual discussion on that kind of nuance.