Quote :

"If they have the votes, THEN WHY NOT FUCKING VOTE ON IT ALREADY."

Republican filibusters. You really have no idea what is going on do you?

Quote :

"but said rules are always trumped by the Constitution"

They can change the constitution.

3/16/2010 10:24:21 PM

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/03/slaughter-house-rules-the-truth-about-democrats-plan-to-pass-health-care.php?ref=fpa

Quote :

"So what is a "self-executing rule", and why are Democrats invoking it? Taking the second question first, House Democrats are, basically, reacting to GOP threats that, on the campaign trail, they'll treat a vote for the Senate health care bill as a vote for controversial provisions like the Nebraska Medicaid deal, even though those provisions will be immediately stripped from the legislation. So instead of holding a direct vote on the Senate bill, Democrats may adopt a rule that allows them to vote on the reconciliation fix on its own. But the rule will stipulate that if the House passes the fix, it is, in effect, also passing the Senate health care bill. It makes the latter contingent on the former. Now, whether this will actually insulate Democrats on the campaign trail is an open question. The hope is that they'll be able to respond to charges that they voted for the Nebraska deal by saying "if it wasn't for me, the Nebraska deal would've been sustained," or "I voted to improve the Senate bill." "

The house doesn't want to be blamed by the GOP for parts of the senate bill they are fixing. If they don't do it this way the GOP has already threatened to mislead the public about their support for the bad parts of the senate bill that they are actually removing.

I think this is an even more important point:

Quote :

"Republicans have dubbed this the "Slaughter Solution," and described it as an unprecedented maneuver that will allow Democrats to enact reform without casting a vote on it. The reality is that this maneuver (known more technically as a "self executing rule") has a long history, and has been used more frequently by Republicans than by Democrats."

[Edited on March 16, 2010 at 10:28 PM. Reason : .]

3/16/2010 10:28:02 PM

Earthdogg is like a walking talking Fox News/GOP talking point machine. He even coined the "slaughter" phrase before I heard it on the news.

3/16/2010 10:30:46 PM

Quote :

"Republican filibusters."

This is a Senate rule. You really have no idea what is going on do you?

3/16/2010 10:33:43 PM

^^He also is the man quoter of Rasmussen "Strongly" Polls which he has repeatedly used to swear by a coming bloodbath for democrats.

Rasmussen polls vs all other pollster.com listed polls:

3/16/2010 10:37:45 PM

shoot the messenger is usually the most strategic way to handle bad news

3/17/2010 12:10:00 AM

Quote :

"Republican filibusters. You really have no idea what is going on do you?"

The pubs are filibustering in the House? Really?

Quote :

"They can change the constitution."

The rules themselves cannot.

3/17/2010 12:12:47 AM

(and that doesn't even have this current session.

[Edited on March 17, 2010 at 1:31 AM. Reason : .]

3/17/2010 1:29:37 AM

Quote :

"except that they didn't make it up and the constitution allows each body of congress to set their own rules"

Quote :

"If "determining the rules of its proceedings" means you can bypass the rule stating that "in all such Cases the Votes of both Houses shall be determined by Yeas and Nays", then why have that rule in the first place? Clearly, "determining the rules of its proceedings" does not mean they can just re-write or ignore the rest of the Constitution."

It's Unconstitutional.
End of Debate.
Like someone else suggested, it's never been challenged because it's never been used for such a large and controversial bill.

But seriously. How can you all not clearly see that one rule in the Constitution saying that each house can make-up rules for their proceedings, obviously wasn't intended to mean that they could ignore the other rules in the Constitution, namely that both houses must actually vote. If this one rule, stating that "Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings" actually meant that they could ignore other rules, then what's the point of even having those other rules? Don't you get it? It's obvious. The "Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings" rule does not trump the "in all such Cases the Votes of both Houses shall be determined by Yeas and Nays" rule or any other rule.

Unconstitutional.

3/17/2010 7:43:14 AM

because it's politically convenient not to. duh

3/17/2010 7:53:28 AM

Quote :

"The reality is that this maneuver (known more technically as a "self executing rule") has a long history, and has been used more frequently by Republicans than by Democrats."

the GOP has never used this rule on something so controversial and serious as this tho.

3/17/2010 8:21:24 AM

^exactly. I've never heard of this until now and I don't agree with anyone, in any party using it. It's complete shit.

3/17/2010 8:24:33 AM

You've never heard of it because it wasn't politically convenient for Republicans.

And the fact is you wouldn't care if the GOP used it, because it would be spun as necessary and you'd eat it up because you're just as partisan as anyone else.

And the Republicans used it numerous times the last time they controlled Congress:

Quote :

"But despite Republican claims that such parliamentary gymnastics as reconciliation and self-executing rules are somehow in violation of House rules or rare, neither is the case, says congressional scholar Thomas Mann of the Brookings Institution. "On the self-executing rule, Republicans in their last Congress that they controlled, the 109th, used it 36 times; the Democrats, in the next Congress they controlled, used it 49 times," Mann said. And in many cases, Mann says, they were on some pretty major bills. "The reauthorization of the Patriot Act, the Tax Relief Reconciliation Act, the Deficit Control Conference Report; all kinds of major measures have been approved through self-executing rules, which means the House votes indirectly rather than separately on these measures.""

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=124742346

3/17/2010 8:30:43 AM

Why would either side need to use this strategy if the bill weren't controversial or serious?

3/17/2010 8:31:38 AM

^
Right. Legislation is serious business and that's why there are checks and balances.
This is an unconstitutional loophole that allows controversial bills to be passed.

Quote :

"You've never heard of it because it wasn't politically convenient for Republicans"

How about those of us that aren't dems or repubs? (I hate how this partisan crap makes us invisible... )
We don't want either the dems or repubs having this bullshit procedure.

Quote :

"The reauthorization of the Patriot Act"

So that's how republicans got that shit through? See? Does anyone really want either party having this shit?
No.

It is unconstitutional.

[Edited on March 17, 2010 at 8:51 AM. Reason : ]

3/17/2010 8:42:32 AM

It's not unconstitutional.

3/17/2010 8:56:00 AM

Quote :

"I've never heard of this until now and I don't agree with anyone"

that about sums it all up right there. "I don't know what I'm talking about but this is outrageous!!!"

3/17/2010 8:58:30 AM

They may have used this procedure while passing the patriot act, but to act as though that was the only way by which they were able to pass it is a blatant distortion.

There was broad support for the patriot act among the dems. They may have used this procedure to expedite things, but it was NOT necessary as the only tactic to pass the bill.

Are you completely retarded or just trolling?

3/17/2010 9:26:54 AM

Quote :

"David Dreier (R-San Dimas, CA) 3/15/10: The Slaughter Solution comes in three flavors: in the first, the rule simply self-enacts the Senate bill and sends it along to the President for his signature; the second deems the Senate healthcare bill adopted only upon House passage of the reconciliation package; and the third, most egregious option, conditions adoption of the Senate healthcare package on the Senate passage of the reconciliation sidecar. Only then would the Senate-passed healthcare bill be approved by the House. In all three of these scenarios, the Senate-passed healthcare bill wouldn’t be given an up or down vote on its own. While it appears that the Democratic majority has not definitively settled on a strategy, the third Slaughter Solution may not be viable. Recent reports indicated that the Senate parliamentarian has thrown cold water on that scenario by asserting that the House must approve and the President must sign the Senate-passed healthcare bill before the Senate can even begin the reconciliation process. The reasoning was that the reconciliation instructions contained in the Budget Resolution require changes in law, and changes to a yet-to-be-enacted bill don’t count. Even Speaker Pelosi and Majority Leader Hoyer seem to have accepted this detail as a reality that must be confronted. Reconciliation is no silver bullet. It requires a leap of faith that the Senate won’t change anything and — with all due respect to the Senate — that faith is misplaced. Institutionally, they simply can’t guarantee that outcome. Any House Democrat who votes for a rule that moves this process forward is really voting for one thing — to make the Senate-passed healthcare bill the law of the land. The actual language of the rule will be unequivocal on that point. Just because you use a bat to hit a ball instead of throwing it, your neighbor’s window is still just as broken. A vote for the rule is a vote for the Senate bill. There is no getting around that fact. They can break any arm, bend any rule. But the Democratic Majority cannot deny that they are turning the process of our democracy on its head in an effort to achieve a highly unpopular, partisan objective."

3/17/2010 10:00:41 AM

Quote :

"If "determining the rules of its proceedings" means you can bypass the rule stating that "in all such Cases the Votes of both Houses shall be determined by Yeas and Nays", then why have that rule in the first place? Clearly, "determining the rules of its proceedings" does not mean they can just re-write or ignore the rest of the Constitution."

Quote :

"How can you all not clearly see that one rule in the Constitution saying that each house can make-up rules for their proceedings, obviously wasn't intended to mean that they could ignore the other rules in the Constitution, namely that both houses must actually vote. If this one rule, stating that "Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings" actually meant that they could ignore other rules, then what's the point of even having those other rules? Don't you get it? It's obvious. The "Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings" rule does not trump the "in all such Cases the Votes of both Houses shall be determined by Yeas and Nays" rule or any other rule."

No one has addressed the fact that you simply don't write a rule that allows you to ignore other rules. That's clearly not how it's supposed to work. A rule that allows each house to determine their rules of proceedings clearly isn't meant to allow them to circumvent other rules in the Constitution that direct and limit their actions. It doesn't matter what party you're in, or whether or not you support this or that bill, this procedure is unconstitutional.

Quote :

"In all three of these scenarios, the Senate-passed healthcare bill wouldn’t be given an up or down vote on its own."

Quote :

"U.S Constitution, Article I, Section VII, Clause II. ...But in all such Cases the Votes of both Houses shall be determined by Yeas and Nays, and the Names of the Persons voting for and against the Bill shall be entered on the Journal of each House respectively"

[Edited on March 17, 2010 at 10:03 AM. Reason : ]

3/17/2010 10:02:02 AM

Quote :

"The pubs are filibustering in the House? Really?"

What's the point in passing it in the house if it's going to get shot down in the senate?

Quote :

"The rules themselves cannot."

They can if they want, the normal process would be for the supreme court to find change unconsitutional.

3/17/2010 12:41:58 PM

Quote :

"What's the point in passing it in the house if it's going to get shot down in the senate?"

hahaha. that's not what you were trying to imply initially, and you know it. you spoke out your ass.

3/17/2010 8:36:58 PM

aaronburro ftw

3/17/2010 8:39:00 PM

indy, thank you.

Sorry, didn't know filibustering wasn't Constitutional. Fine by me, I think it's stupid. If our Legislative branch can't work together to pass laws to HELP our country because individuals or parties are upset, then they either need to sit down and work it out, or get booted out of office. They are there to represent us, not stand up and read dictionaries to prevent arbitrary deadlines from passing.

3/17/2010 11:21:31 PM

Quote :

"Sorry, didn't know filibustering wasn't Constitutional. "

WTF? Who are these dumb motherfuckers and why are they in our soapbox??

3/17/2010 11:22:58 PM

I'm tired of these motherfucking n00bs in this motherfucking soapbox

3/18/2010 12:15:37 AM

Quote :

"that's not what you were trying to imply initially, and you know it."

Sure it was, whether it's in the house or the senate doesn't really matter, they're part of the same legislative branch, and it was filibusters that have forced democrats to use this kind of stuff rather than just voting.

3/18/2010 8:10:12 AM

Quote :

"whether it's in the house or the senate doesn't really matter"

I'm just gonna post this whenever you need reminding what a dumbass you are

3/18/2010 8:28:09 AM

From Politico...

Quote :

"The so-called “Slaughter solution” for enacting health care reform without a conventional House vote on an identically worded Senate bill would be vulnerable to credible constitutional challenge, experts say. No lawyer interviewed by POLITICO thought the constitutionality of the “deem and pass” approach being considered by House Democrats was an open-and-shut case either way. But most agreed that it could raise constitutional issues sufficiently credible that the Supreme Court might get interested, as it has in the past. The Senate bill and its text would not come before the House in the ordinary way for an up-or-down vote but would be passed indirectly. While this procedure has been used before, the Supreme Court has said in past cases that repetition of an unconstitutional process does not make it constitutional."

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0310/34508.html#ixzz0iXMLdk48

[Edited on March 18, 2010 at 10:09 AM. Reason : .]

3/18/2010 10:09:05 AM

Quote :

"I'm just gonna post this whenever you need reminding what a dumbass you are"

I'll just keep ignoring you like everyone else because you never post anything worth reading.

3/18/2010 5:24:43 PM

^^ Great, does that mean we can go ahead and sue to have the entire remaining portions of the Patriot Act revoked?

It seems odd that the ACLU hasn't jumped all over that.

[Edited on March 18, 2010 at 5:48 PM. Reason : .]

3/18/2010 5:46:04 PM

Because it's a huge stretch. As I said the courts are very likely to show deference to the congress' authority to make it's own rules

3/18/2010 6:32:58 PM

Quote :

"Sure it was, whether it's in the house or the senate doesn't really matter, they're part of the same legislative branch, and it was filibusters that have forced democrats to use this kind of stuff rather than just voting."

back-pedaling. I LIKE IT.

if they have the votes IN THE HOUSE, WHERE THE ACTION IS OCCURRING, DURRRRRRR. just shut the fuck up, dude. you talked out your ass.

there is NO FILIBUSTER IN THE FUCKING HOUSE. THEY DON'T HAVE TO RESORT TO THIS BULLSHIT TO GET IT PASSED IN THE HOUSE. You know, where I said they allegedly had the votes.

3/18/2010 11:17:34 PM

If you say it louder it makes it truer!

3/18/2010 11:31:40 PM

Quote :

"does that mean we can go ahead and sue to have the entire remaining portions of the Patriot Act revoked?"

Why? Obama loves the Patriot Act. He wanted to extend roving wiretaps and accessing private business records.

3/18/2010 11:32:50 PM

so you admit you talked out your ass. not that this is anything new to anyone here

3/18/2010 11:37:24 PM

Well since we're just ignoring arguments and typing in loud fonts then I ADMIT UR A BITCH

3/19/2010 12:04:33 AM

Quote :

"THEY DON'T HAVE TO RESORT TO THIS BULLSHIT TO GET IT PASSED IN THE HOUSE."

I was under the impression that the Senate had secured enough votes and that the House had not.

3/19/2010 12:33:58 AM

^yes.

but it seems like they probably have them. just some holdouts waiting to be the deciding vote i'm guessing.

3/19/2010 1:08:15 AM

Quote :

"Why? Obama loves the Patriot Act. He wanted to extend roving wiretaps and accessing private business records."

Oh my, I see we're going to have to clear something up here. Just because the vast majority of Republicans supported every little thing Bush did for 7 years doesn't mean that the majority of Democrats support everything Obama's done in the last year.

It's a common misconception, and I can understand why y'all so desperately cling to it. Holding onto that belief justifies all the support of Bush's policies as "just going along with the leaders".

3/19/2010 9:01:47 AM

Quote :

"Just because the vast majority of Republicans supported every little thing Bush did for 7 years"

ROFL




perspective... its a bitch, aint it

3/19/2010 10:12:02 AM

Quote :

"Republicans supported every little thing Bush did for 7 years"

I'm pretty conservative..and I didn't support much of any part of the Patriot Act. And I think Bush was a berry berry bad president. Of course Obama takes the cake. (..and spreads around the frosting)

3/19/2010 10:43:08 AM

Quote :

"Well since we're just ignoring arguments and typing in loud fonts then I ADMIT UR A BITCH"

What argument? That the house has the filibuster? hahahah

3/19/2010 2:48:14 PM

No, the argument is that the republicans would inevitably filibuster, so they have to fight fire with fire.

3/19/2010 9:13:14 PM

THEY CAN'T FILIBUSTER IN THE GOD-DAMNED HOUSE, YOU FUCKTARD. WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT THE FUCKING HOUSE THE WHOLE FUCKING TIME, YOU FUCKING FUCKING FUCKTARD.

say it with me.
HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE HOUSE

[Edited on March 19, 2010 at 9:42 PM. Reason : ]

3/19/2010 9:41:41 PM

Quote :

"Well since we're just ignoring arguments and typing in loud fonts then I ADMIT UR A BITCH"

3/19/2010 9:47:46 PM

so, you admit that the house doesn't have the filibuster. what argument is there to make? or are we just gonna go in circles because you can't stand to admit that you talked out your ass

3/19/2010 9:48:32 PM

I didn't talk out of my ass. Filibuster is the reason why democrats are having to go through all of these other things, if it just came to a vote, we would have been done a long time ago.

3/19/2010 9:54:10 PM

it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass
it already passed the fucking senate, dumbass

but yes, nancy pelosi, speaker of the HOUSE is pulling these shenanigans in the HOUSE because she can't get past the filibuster in the senate where it already passed.

3/19/2010 9:55:28 PM

So we're doing repetion now instead of caps and bold?
So we're doing repetion now instead of caps and bold?
So we're doing repetion now instead of caps and bold?
So we're doing repetion now instead of caps and bold?
So we're doing repetion now instead of caps and bold?
So we're doing repetion now instead of caps and bold?
So we're doing repetion now instead of caps and bold?
So we're doing repetion now instead of caps and bold?
So we're doing repetion now instead of caps and bold?
So we're doing repetion now instead of caps and bold?
So we're doing repetion now instead of caps and bold?
So we're doing repetion now instead of caps and bold?
So we're doing repetion now instead of caps and bold?
So we're doing repetion now instead of caps and bold?
So we're doing repetion now instead of caps and bold?
So we're doing repetion now instead of caps and bold?
So we're doing repetion now instead of caps and bold?
So we're doing repetion now instead of caps and bold?
So we're doing repetion now instead of caps and bold?
So we're doing repetion now instead of caps and bold?
So we're doing repetion now instead of caps and bold?
So we're doing repetion now instead of caps and bold?
So we're doing repetion now instead of caps and bold?
So we're doing repetion now instead of caps and bold?
So we're doing repetion now instead of caps and bold?
So we're doing repetion now instead of caps and bold?
So we're doing repetion now instead of caps and bold?
So we're doing repetion now instead of caps and bold?
So we're doing repetion now instead of caps and bold?
So we're doing repetion now instead of caps and bold?
So we're doing repetion now instead of caps and bold?
So we're doing repetion now instead of caps and bold?
So we're doing repetion now instead of caps and bold?

[Edited on March 19, 2010 at 9:57 PM. Reason : aww sweet we're doing both!]

3/19/2010 9:57:00 PM