and then countered by a senator using wikepedia. you can go into wikepedia and you can do your own editing on that. i'm not sure that is a good source. i'd prefer to rely on the "wall street journal." there isn't any article or opinion that can't be quibbled with. that's just like the amendments we have here. but what i prefer to think is when an amendment or an article or a speech is given that we ought to be looking for the idea, the grain of truth, the juice of it that should be used, and we're not doing that right now. we're just doing amendments there and amendments here, and we're defeating the amendments here and it kind of bothers me that we have all these amendments from this side, because, first of all, our amendments were voted down, all except two, when we went through the health, education, labor, and pensions committee process to get the bill out of committee. and when we went to the finance committee, the same thing happened. i think we had two amendments there that were taken as well over a whole week of amendments.