More subversion and criminality.
Apparently part of the secret back room rule changes McCarthy agreed to was a “select committee “ made of Jan 6 defendants/planners whose purpose is to find bias in the DOJ in order to taint the cases against them and pardon themselves (a power congress does not have, btw).
I certainly hope they try, because accepting these self pardons would be a legal admission of guilt, and the pardons worthless, so they’re really going to accidentally plead guilty to treason. They are just that dumb, and that criminal.

These are you guy. These you pick.

Right now we are in that position, but it's the minority that benefits unequally. Under Republican rule, how many bills were killed by democrats threatening a filibuster? Certainly less than under Democratic rule, republicans love to kill bills so much McConnell is known as the grim reaper for killing legislation as both the majority and minority leader.
When one party, a party that has millions fewer votes for their representatives btw, has the power to stop all legislation as the majority or minority and abuses that power in a partisan way to the detriment of the nation, it makes sense to rewrite the rule changes that put us in that position.
McConnell has threatened exactly that, scorched earth, destroying the legislative process if he can't call all the shots as the minority leader.
As you mentioned, there are ways around it if the leaders are underhanded and purely partisan....democrats have not shown the spine to do that in recent memory, I hope they do now if they don't regulate filibustering.
Time for the nuclear option, whatever that is so long as it stops obstructionist republicans from controlling as the minority. Republicans use it whenever it's convenient, Democrats don't seem to do that, but it's fine to stop them from starting...but requires a rule change to make it unnecessary. Obstructionism has harmed the nation badly, and is the mantra of Republicans....has been all century.

I also have a thin hope that at least two of Trump's appointees to the supreme court can be removed for perjuring themselves at their confirmation hearings, fbi reports declassified since Trump left prove Kavanaugh and Comey did.

Wait, you said clearly that if the truth doesn’t help your case, it’s the right thing to do to lie, even under oath, only stupid people would tell the truth if it hurts their case. Now you think you have a leg to stand on calling someone a liar? Get a grip.

This points out in great clarity how biased and untrustworthy Rand Paul and most republicans are.

Investigations galore, multiple recounts, signatures were compared, over 60 cases tossed for lack of evidence, a few for lack of standing, only about what, +-70 votes actually in question for fraud now that the dominion lie has been quashed, far fewer prosecuted, and they were Trumpsters voting twice or more, the rest are cases of minor technicalities that Republicans thought meant since two people in one Republican county weren’t afforded the same help some people in other counties got like ballot curing or a chance to fix a signature that was missing or considered different from the one on file before election day (because the republicans in that county specifically disallowed it) they think those other counties must be discarded completely, a few million votes should be discarded to make up for two republicans that Republicans screwed over.

How many times did Paul lie about what Stephanopilous had just said? I lost count.

We had the debate, repeatedly. Paul is lying again.

We had thorough examinations in every state, full recounts in some, multiple in Georgia. Republicans are all liars who want to rehash the election in different ways and venues until they win, then stop the process. Too bad you lost so badly, in such a massive landslide with such a clear mandate across the board that no amount of rehashing, not an ocean of their tears could change the outcome.

The conservative Supreme Court heard umpteen challenges to election rule changes and found NONE to be illegal, Paul is just lying again.
If every single claim thrown out of court for lack of evidence was won by the right, Trump still would have lost bigly.

You are such a willing tool for the lying right. If lying were a crime, republicans would all be in prison for felony level dishonesty. Where you go one, you go all....into the mouth of madness.

I do like that you tagged this ridiculous lie fest from Paul as “lies”, and the reporting by Stephanopolis “news”. That’s a step back towards sanity.

What's up your ass? Nazi facebook got shunned and grandpa hitler wannabe got kicked off social media?

Hey, look,




I'm sorry you got duped.
But that doesn't give anyone the right to do what they did.
LETS BE CLEAR
People forced their way into the capitol building through violence. They hung up a noose https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/noose-hung-outside-capitol/ and when inside the building they were chanting 'FIGHT FOR TRUMP FIGHT FOR TRUMP FIGHT FOR TRUMP' until the president tweeted about Mike Pence's disloyalty, then they started with "WHERE IS PENCE, WHERE IS PENCE?

If you know anyone who was at the rally and stormed the capitol, please contact the FBI
https://www.fbi.gov/contact-us/field-offices/washingtondc/news/press-releases/fbi-seeking-information-related-to-violent-activity-at-the-us-capitol-bu
ilding
https://preview.tinyurl.com/yyq8xcba (link is too long)

They are wanted as person's of interest, suspected of terrorism.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/capitol-rioters-prison-trump-executive-order-federal (link is too long) copy+paste

$50k for anyone associated with the pipe bombs https://www.npr.org/sections/congress-electoral-college-tally-live-updates/2021/01/08/954845870/u-s-capitol-flag-will-fly-at-half-staff-fbi-issues-rew
ard-over-pipe-bombs


------------##########------------
------------##########------------
Look, I believe that you believe what you're saying, okay?

Let me make one last red rover talk with you, maybe you'll come on back to reality.
------------##########------------
------------##########------------


Here's the argument for Georgia, laid out in point by point sections


1.--------------------------------
Do you know any Trump supporters who don't trust the election?

From 2018 so before the current bullshit; though it's worth pointing out that Trump also claims that the 2016 election that he fucking won was a fraud.

"Results from a new Grinnell College National Poll give insights into which citizens lack confidence in the November 2018 election. As it turns out, white conservatives, despite accusations of election fraud from President Trump and several outspoken conservative leaders, are neither the only groups concerned about the accuracy of the 2018 vote count nor the groups most concerned. The poll’s results also uncover how a lack of confidence in the vote count is linked with voter turnout "
https://bit.ly/2VooAMS

I would argue that's contributed to a suppression of turnout. See also # 10 on my list here.


2.--------------------------------

https://apps.npr.org/elections20-interactive/#/house

The democrats lost a chunk of seats in the house of reps.
Flip flip flip flip flip flip
All that, all the Democrat plot to steal the election? That's some 7d chess right there. Secret dem plot = elect republicans. (it's the same ticket as the presidential vote) Can't trust people who voted Republican? Is that it? Throw those votes out?


3.-------------------------------
Arguing a that a technicality should disqualify votes doesn't mean that Americans' vote count is inaccurate. And if those votes' certification is invalid, why did Republican senators and Congress people from those states take their offices on Jan 2nd?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>They are voted in on the same ballot that the vote for president is cast on. <<<<<<<<<<<<<<< <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
If they genuinely think and believe it was a scam, why did they show up to Washington and take office on the basis of so-called fraudulent ballots? If those ballots are frauds, what are those Republicans doing seated in those congressional seats?

Also, if that rule change is so bad, and absentee ballots are so fraudulent and can't be trusted, why did the Republican party in that state send a absentee ballot to every Republican who voted in the last election? You'd have to throw out ~700,000 republican votes as well. Don't their votes count?


4.-------------------------------

Mitt Romney is an absolute asshole and he supports policy i strongly disagree with, but at least he's honest and seems to speak with an appeal to integrity. I think I saw his outrage at his own party spilling out of his head during the objection hearing.

But he's been an R his whole life? Cant be trusted?

Mitch McConnel is like a RPG character that someone dumped all the skill points into "fuck these rules, I'm getting my way" He will do anything, cast off nearly any rule to advance republican politics. He is against this. No one, only one man can be trusted ???

Mike pence is the most republican motherfucker around, and he does not endorse this, which party are you with?



5.------------------------------

The senators objecting were right the cases didn't progress to a hearing, and were all "without standing" or were unable to even make a claim, with Rudy going into court and when the judge flatly asks him if he's suing for fraud,
'is this a fraud case ? '

>>>>>>>>>>>>>RUDY - "NO"
"No we do not"
( O_O) ?

The judge explains that maybe he did allege fraud at some point, but not in the paper work he filed currently in front of the judge. (EVEN JUDGE JUDY DON'T ALLOW THAT SHIT)

WOULD YOU LIKE THE AUDIO OF THAT?
https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4925496/user-clip-alleging-fraud

Finally, after some linguistic dancing, the judge revisits the topic, bookending that clip. ”Does the Amended complaint include fraud with particularity ?"

>>>>>>>>>>>>RUDY - "NO YOUR HONOR"



6.-------------------------------------------

So all of my
X Y Z cant be trusted?
Add McConnel and Pence



7.------------------------------------------

Maybe you are taking trump literally, not seriously? You're supposed to do "seriously, not literally" i've heard. Maybe he seriously won the election...
...but not literally, actually, or in-fact.



8.------------------------------------------

So only one man can be trusted? Only one man with the power? He used to hint at not conceding, now he's hinting at no more elections.

is that the way of a democracy or a republic? NO MORE ELECTIONS, THEY CANT BE TRUSTED UNLESS I WIN
???What good are elections? Why would we need those? They're all stolen anyway right ?



9.------------------------------------------

The states that made a difference and flipped from red to blue. Red, they were already red. Red as in Republicans won previous elections there and we're in charge of the local government and election boards in each case.
REPUBLICANS CERTIFIED EACH OF THOSE STATES.
HENCE THE FLIPPING,
THEY CERTIFIED IN DECEMBER,
BEFORE THEIR REPLACEMENTS ARRIVED.


10.-----------------------------------------

Democrats have been doing the work of flipping Georgia for 30 years, for democrats, that's how they flipped the state.

[The Daily] The Georgia Runoffs, Part 1: ‘We Are Black Diamonds.’ #theDaily
https://podcastaddict.com/episode/117319937 via @PodcastAddict

They interview Stacy Abraham's here^ and she speaks at length about the decades long process to flip Georgia, and all the fundraising they did during that time

There is also a sister episode where republican campaign officials are interviewed and they discuss how they are not prepared in Georgia because they thought that state was a lock, still they could have pulled it off, but voter turnout was being suppressed because people were being told it was a fraud. There is a telling moment where the two R senators up for election in Georgia are on stage but the crowd just keeps chanting TRUMP TRUMP TRUMP to the point that they are unable to speak to the crowd
[The Daily] The Georgia Runoffs, Part 2: ‘I Have Zero Confidence in My Vote’ #theDaily
https://podcastaddict.com/episode/117362059 via @PodcastAddict

>>>>>>>>>>>Notable,
the interviewer tries and tries but can't find a republican who will say they have confidence in their vote at the Georgia rally.


>>>>>>>>>Finally<<<<<<<<< >>>>>>>>>Finally<<<<<<<<< >>>>>>>>>Finally<<<<<<<<< >>>>>>>>>Finally<<<<<<<<< >>>>>>>>>Finally<<<<<<<<<
"To all of those who have asked, I will not be going to the Inauguration on January 20th."

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 8, 2021

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Come on.

Stop.

It's over.

You're defending people who planted pipe bombs in the capitol building of the United States of America.

It doesn't matter how you cut it, that!

THAT!

Is NOT right.








Edit: And we're actually a mixture of both a republic and a democracy. There are regular instances on the people voting on laws directly.

Whatever happens, I hope Republicans keep doing what they're doing, because they are losing every election since trump and then some ...shithead.

That's why I didn't say "cheated him out of a win".
While I think he could have won the primary given a fair shot, there's no way to be sure...what we are sure of is the DNC broke it's own rules to ensure he didn't get that fair shot.
He was absolutely cheated out of his fair shot.

And actually, I think you're wrong about the numbers too. Even with all the underhandedness (after the fact rule changes, targeted voter purging, etc) Sanders still came really close, and there's little question that he would have done better against Trump. He wouldn't have energized Trump's base 1/4 as much as her nomination did.
Clinton may have had more ardent supporters where it mattered for the primary, in the DNC and primary voting booths, but she also had FAR more ardent detractors in the general public that translated into votes for Trump, and a criminal investigation it was certain would reemerge at the last minute....things they completely ignored, which is why she (and we all) lost.

Trump as president will be the same as Trump as presidential candidate. There won't be policies and solutions, he wants to be a demagogue, giving speeches and basking in the adulation. He will delegate the hard work of running the country to other people and stoke his ego presiding over ridiculous meetings where he gives directions and derides his cabinet for failing. "You're fired!"

President Trump will get nothing done and when he pushes the wrong buttons he'll be impeached. The Trump presidency will not be 4 years.

But this guy's video is full of shit. He blissfully ignores the fact that a president must compromise and sometimes even make the best choice from a list of undesireable options. No President can, or should be able to, get everything they want. You can never judge a politician based on every naive expectation you have, because you have the luxury of idealism while they're dealing with reality. The best you can do is support someone who's agenda best matches your own and applaud them when they succeed.

It's like pinball. You can use what control you have to push the ball where you want it but you cannot ultimately control where it goes.

This video starts out be denigrating the idea that game theory should influence our choices in politics. Well that's one of the stupidest things he could say. You cannot refuse to throw the dice in monopoly, claim all the properties and believe you're winning. You have to develop the best strategy you can for the best outcome you can manage with the rules that are in place. If you don't like the rules...change them before the next game begins. Of course, that would require you to make an effort in between games. You don't get YouTube views for that.

As much as I am a Sander's supporter. I can't support the idea of him running as an independent. That would split the Democratic vote too much, and the idea of a Trump Presidency is far too dangerous. I think the fact that the polls show again and again that Sanders would do much better against Trump should show the DNC that Hillary needs Sanders and his supporters far more than Sanders needs her and her supporters.

If I were Hillary I'd offer Sanders the VP spot. Even if he doesn't accept, he gets the prime time keynote spot. Then you also promise the Congressional Progressive Caucus get's at least 60% of the rest of the prime time spots, with moderates getting 40% of the prime time spot. Off prime time the CPC still gets 40% (no less than 33%). Between Sanders and the CPC having the bulk of the prime time spots, it helps move the progressive message forward.

She then needs to have a known progressive on her ticket. If she can't secure Sanders, she'd probably consider Warren, but unfortunately, two women might make too many independent voters nervous. So I'd push for Dennis Kucinich. The advantage with Kucinich is that he's a known progressive, and he'd help give Clinton Ohio. If you can't get him, then find a rising member of the CPC. Again, the idea is to push the progressive agenda. Warren and Sanders have to have spots in the cabinet though if they want in.

There's enough hate of Trump in the Republican ranks that I think this year is the year to push for 3rd parties, especially the Libertarian party since that is the one most likely to pull votes from Republicans looking for an alternative to Trump... it won't pull the religious right who'll stick with Trump, but the more sane minded Republicans will probably consider it over absentee voting. The anti-Trump Republicans need to push the idea of the Libertarian party, and then push for Republicans for the Senate and House to avoid loosing the Senate, which is possible...

The Democrats meanwhile need to do something to get people out and vote. Democratic turnout keeps going down, beyond what one would expect purely from the Voter ID laws Republicans put in to lower Democratic votes. They need to rally the base into actually getting out and voting. To secure not only the Presidency from Trump, but to overtake the Senate and start making a push for the House. Of course one of the main way they do this is start appealing to Sanders supporters, and the party seems so intent on dissing his supporters.

The DNC is way too dismissive of the actions in Nevada. The Nevada people went out of their way to make sure Sanders didn't win, they knew people were still trying to get in when they made rule changes... people they were holding back on purpose so they could push those changes through, then when those people got in, they of course were upset. The DNC, a party that publicly tries to support those who have been disenfranchised from voting, is going out of their way to disenfranchise a large percentage of its base... all just because it's Clinton's turn or something. Fine, let it be her turn, but don't shut out the movement. She needs to step to the left, and add a large number of progressive voices to her team. She and the DNC needs to reach out to Sanders supporters and other progressives and unite the party... Trump seems to be pulling in the moderates to his side. As split as the Republicans were at the start, they are starting to pull together far better than the Democrats are... and it isn't up to Sanders to drop out and push his support to her, she needs to be the one to offer an olive branch and start wooing him and his supporters. Right now they seem to think it's Sander's job... no, it's the leader's job... It isn't the Republican moderates reaching out to Trump, it is Trump meeting with them and wooing them. Some to less success than others, true enough, but he's doing far better at starting an appeal to the moderates than Clinton is to Sanders, his supporters and the progressives.

Wall of text incoming. Again.

Sorry. Again.

tl;dr:

Debt relief right away was proposed, was neccessary, and was skipped to protect the European financial system.



You are 100% correct, we both are as convinced as one can be that a disorderly collapse would have been much worse for Greece. Might have turned it into a failed state, if things went really bad.

But the situation in Greece at the time the Troika got involved suggested a textbook approach would work just fine. Greece was insolvent, no two ways about it. A debt restructuring, including a haircut, was required to stabilise the system. Yet it was decided against it, thereby creating an enormous debt bubble that keeps growing to this day, destabilising everything.

Why?

People in Brussels, Frankfurt and Berlin knew in May of 2010 that Greece cannot service its current debt, nevermind pay it back. I remember rather vividly how it was presented to us, as it stirred up a lot of dust in Germany. They pretended as if the problem was a shortage of liquidity, even though they knew it was in fact an insolvency. And to provide an insolvent nation with the largest credit in history (€110-130b) is... well, we can all pick our favorite in accordance to our own bias: madness, idiocy, incompetence, a mistake, intent. They threw Greece into permanent indebtedness(?), and also played one people against another. People in Germany were pissed, still are. Not at the decision makers, but the Greek people.

Again, why?

Every European government, pre-crisis, drank the Cool Aid of deregulation, particularly with regards to the financial sector. When the crisis hit, they had to bail out the banks, a very unpopular decision in Germany, given the scandalous way it was done (different story). Like I pointed out before, when Greece was done for, German banks were on the hook for €17b+, and the French for €20b+. So no haircut for Greek debt.

It gets even better. The entity most experienced in these matters is, of course, the IMF. But IMF couldn't get involved. Its own regulations demand debt to be sustainable for it to become involved in any debt restructuring. Strauss-Kahn had the rules changed in a very hush-hush manner (hidden in a 146 page document) to allow the IMF to lend vast sums to Greece, even though they knew it would not be payed back. Former EC members are on record saying the Strauss-Kahn decided to protect French banks this way as a part of his race for President in France. So they changed IMF rules and ignored European law to bail out German and French banks, using the insolvent Greek government as a proxy.

Several members of the IMF's board were in open opposition. The representatives of India, Russia, Brazil and Switzerland are on record, saying this would merely replace private with public financing, that it would be a rescue package for the private creditors rather than the Greek state. They spoke out in favor of negotiations of a debt relief.

And if that wasn't bad enough, there's an IMF email, dated March 25th, 2010, that was published by Roumeliotis, formerly IMF. They put it very bluntly:

"Greece is a relatively closed economy, and the fiscal contraction implied by this adjustment path, will cause a sharp contraction in domestic demand and an attendant deep recession, severely stretching the social fabric."

Even the IMF, who chose parameters according to their own ideology, thought the European program to be too severe. That's saying something.

All that is just about the initial decision. The implementation is another story entirely, with unelected and unaccountable bureaucrats telling a democratically elected government what to do. There are former Greek ministers on record, telling how Troika officials basically wrote legislation for them. Blackmail was common, bailout money held as leverage. The Memorandum of Understanding was to be followed to the letter, and the Troika program was as detailed as a government program, so they really had their hand in just about everything.

The specifics of the program are a discussion of their own, with all the corruption going on. The Lagarde list (2000+ Greek tax dodgers) was held in secret by order of an IMF official – that alone should trigger major investigations. The nationalisation and sell-off of the four largest Greek banks, or the no-bid sale of the Hellenikon area to a Greek oligarch – all enforced by Troika officials.

The haircut of 2012, ~€110b wiped out, came two years late. As a result, it didn't hit any German or French institutions in a serious way. Most of the debt was in the hands of these four largest Greek banks -- NBG, Piraeus, Euro, Alpha – who subsequently had to be recapitalised by Greece to the tune of €50b. Cut by 110, up by 50 right away. Banks were nationalised and shares later sold again, at 2/3 the price. Lost another €15b, because the Troika demanded the sale to appease the markets.

The legal aspects of all this are nightmare-inducing as well. They violated numerous European laws, side-tracked parliaments, used governmental decrees, etc.

Let me just say this: when they forced Cyprus to give away two banks' branches in Greece for a fraction of their worth, Cyprus lost €3.5b, at a GDP of €17b, and those two banks went belly-up. It was pure blackmail, do it or you're out. Piraeus Bank received those €3.5b, and its head honcho had €150m of personal bad credit wiped clean right then and there, all at the command of the Troika. Those €3.5b had to be taken from ordinary folks by "suspending" the deposit insurance, perhaps the most stupid decision they had made so far.

Why did they do it? Because Greece was more important than Cyprus, and Cypriot banks were involved in shady deals with Russian oligarchs. Still illegal, and massively so.

Edit: I cut my post in half and it's still too long.

Then I point you to somewhere which requires reading:

http://motherboard.vice.com/blog/now-just-001-percent-of-climate-scientists-reject-global-warming

http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/the-curious-wavefunction/2014/01/10/about-that-consensus-on-global-warming-9136-agree-one-disagrees/

http://www.independentaustralia.net/environment/environment-display/only-1-of-9136-recent-peer-reviewed-authors-rejects-global-warming,6094

I could go all day. But, of course, this study isn't without it's detractors, who honestly do have a claim, if substantiated. (I've read the math on it, and the 97% is indeed an accurate sum, however, it is misleading in the sense that it only accounts for papers that state a stance and don't outright deny climate change is solely anthropogenic.)

Perhaps you found your info on Forbes.com, a decidedly unbiased site whose solely interested in getting to the bottom of the facts, regardless of political ideology. (sarcasm)

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor/2013/05/22/after-oklahoma-city-tragedy-shameless-politicians-unsheath-global-warming-card/

Or we could try a different route and try a group dedicated to statistics:

http://stats.org/stories/2008/global_warming_survey_apr23_08.html

"Eighty-four percent say they personally believe human-induced warming is occurring, and 74% agree that “currently available scientific evidence” substantiates its occurrence. Only 5% believe that that human activity does not contribute to greenhouse warming; the rest are unsure."

Now, we should work on your use of the word "some".

"some
səm/Submit
determiner
1.
an unspecified amount or number of.
"I made some money running errands"
2.
used to refer to someone or something that is unknown or unspecified.
"she married some newspaper magnate twice her age"
pronoun
1.
an unspecified number or amount of people or things.
"here are some of our suggestions"
2.
at least a small amount or number of people or things.
"surely some have noticed"
adverbNORTH AMERICANinformal
1.
to some extent; somewhat.
"when you get to the majors, the rules change some""

Don't worry, none of those came from a .gov link.

from http://www.formula1.com/news/features/2014/1/15408.html:
Rule change: Introduction of new power unit consisting of a 1.6-litre V6 turbo engine and two Energy Recovery Systems (ERS)
Implications: The 2.4-litre normally-aspirated V8 engines of 2013 produced around 750bhp, with an additional 80bhp available for around six seconds per lap from KERS. The 2014 V6s put out around 600bhp. However, the two ERS systems (ERS-K and ERS-H) will give drivers an additional 160bhp or so for approximately 33 seconds per lap.

The description from one of the other slingshot rocket launcher vids is:

Launching rockets in Germany requires all kinds of permits and licenses nobody ever gets. But for just 48 hours each year, the rules change. During these two days, every adult person is allowed to blast away with rockets and fire crackers!

The Slingshot Channel MUST take advantage of this once-in-a-year time slot. This time, we built a 2,5 meters high rubber based launch tower, capable of launching an unlit rocket about 50 meters up in the air! Add these 50 meters to the 60-80 meters that the rockets achieve by means of their powder charge, and you get some serious total height.

Of course many things can go wrong. The flimsy wooden shafts are not made to endure the stress of 50 kilogramms (110 lb) of a draw force applied by the rubber bands, and can break right in the barrel of the launcher. Also, if the timing of the fuse is bad and the charge ignites when the nose of the rocket is already pointed downwards, then the rocket will be propelled downwards and explose at ground level - effectively a surface to surface missile.

The Slingshot Channel tests all this... come and see the results!

Congratulations! Your comment on GOP's Little Rule Change They Hoped You Wouldn't Notice has just received enough votes from the community to earn you 1 Power Point. Thank you for your quality contribution to VideoSift.

Congratulations! Your comment on GOP's Little Rule Change They Hoped You Wouldn't Notice has just received enough votes from the community to earn you 1 Power Point. Thank you for your quality contribution to VideoSift.

Congratulations! Your video, GOP's Little Rule Change They Hoped You Wouldn't Notice, has reached the #1 spot in the current Top 15 New Videos listing. This is a very difficult thing to accomplish but you managed to pull it off. For your contribution you have been awarded 2 Power Points.

This achievement has earned you your "Golden One" Level 31 Badge!