<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: State of the Union &#8212; Preliminary Thoughts</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.gaypatriot.net/2007/01/24/state-of-the-union-preliminary-thoughts/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.gaypatriot.net/2007/01/24/state-of-the-union-preliminary-thoughts/</link>
	<description>The Internet home for American gay conservatives.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 19:19:15 -0700</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: World and Global Politics Blog &#187; Blog Archive &#187; President on Iraq Critics â€” Back on his Game</title>
		<link>http://www.gaypatriot.net/2007/01/24/state-of-the-union-preliminary-thoughts/comment-page-1/#comment-26385</link>
		<dc:creator>World and Global Politics Blog &#187; Blog Archive &#187; President on Iraq Critics â€” Back on his Game</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 Jan 2007 08:53:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.gaypatriot.net/?p=936#comment-26385</guid>
		<description>[...] Today, while beginning my day, I had FoxNews on and was delighted to hear the President challenge the critics of his new Iraq policy, saying that it was their &#8220;obligation&#8221;* to put forward their own plan. It seems he&#8217;s following up on his strong State of the Union address where, as I noted earlier this week, quoting Powerline&#8217;s John Hinderaker, that the president was &#8220;back on his game.&#8221; [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Today, while beginning my day, I had FoxNews on and was delighted to hear the President challenge the critics of his new Iraq policy, saying that it was their &#8220;obligation&#8221;* to put forward their own plan. It seems he&#8217;s following up on his strong State of the Union address where, as I noted earlier this week, quoting Powerline&#8217;s John Hinderaker, that the president was &#8220;back on his game.&#8221; [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Peter Hughes</title>
		<link>http://www.gaypatriot.net/2007/01/24/state-of-the-union-preliminary-thoughts/comment-page-1/#comment-26384</link>
		<dc:creator>Peter Hughes</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Jan 2007 16:59:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.gaypatriot.net/?p=936#comment-26384</guid>
		<description>#11 - Welcome back, Vera dahlin!  I have REALLY missed you on this board!  You are definitely a breath of fresh air.

My cup runneth over.  Which is why I switched to a pint.  Cheers!

;-)

Regards,
Peter H.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>#11 &#8211; Welcome back, Vera dahlin!  I have REALLY missed you on this board!  You are definitely a breath of fresh air.</p>
<p>My cup runneth over.  Which is why I switched to a pint.  Cheers!<br />
 <img src='http://www.gaypatriot.net/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';-)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p>Regards,<br />
Peter H.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ThatGayConservative</title>
		<link>http://www.gaypatriot.net/2007/01/24/state-of-the-union-preliminary-thoughts/comment-page-1/#comment-26383</link>
		<dc:creator>ThatGayConservative</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Jan 2007 06:43:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.gaypatriot.net/?p=936#comment-26383</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt;#4
Can someone define for me what the democrat definition of &#039;bipartisanship&#039; is?&lt;/i&gt;

Easy:

Bend over, lube up, and take it like a good b*tch should.

Bipartisanship, unity, comity etc. all mean the same thing. Republicans should shut up, get rid of their ridiculous beliefs and do what liberals say. Which is why it irritates the sh*t out of me when Republicans roll over so the liberals will like them or shiv their president because they think it&#039;s popular.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>#4<br />
Can someone define for me what the democrat definition of &#8216;bipartisanship&#8217; is?</i></p>
<p>Easy:</p>
<p>Bend over, lube up, and take it like a good b*tch should.</p>
<p>Bipartisanship, unity, comity etc. all mean the same thing. Republicans should shut up, get rid of their ridiculous beliefs and do what liberals say. Which is why it irritates the sh*t out of me when Republicans roll over so the liberals will like them or shiv their president because they think it&#8217;s popular.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ThatGayConservative</title>
		<link>http://www.gaypatriot.net/2007/01/24/state-of-the-union-preliminary-thoughts/comment-page-1/#comment-26382</link>
		<dc:creator>ThatGayConservative</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Jan 2007 06:32:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.gaypatriot.net/?p=936#comment-26382</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt; It would be nice if this type of respect were to define their relationship for the next two years, much as,&lt;/i&gt;

Problem is, Pelosi likes her job and will do whatever it takes to keep it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i> It would be nice if this type of respect were to define their relationship for the next two years, much as,</i></p>
<p>Problem is, Pelosi likes her job and will do whatever it takes to keep it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: North Dallas Thirty</title>
		<link>http://www.gaypatriot.net/2007/01/24/state-of-the-union-preliminary-thoughts/comment-page-1/#comment-26370</link>
		<dc:creator>North Dallas Thirty</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Jan 2007 05:28:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.gaypatriot.net/?p=936#comment-26370</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt;If the CEO of a company was making bad decisions that the majority of stock holders felt were the wrong course of action and as a result the board of directors called on that CEO to make a change in his policy, should we then expect the board to suggest the correct course of action? What&#039;s the CEO&#039;s role then except as a figurehead?&lt;/i&gt;

Just A Question, you regularly demonstrate the fact that, in order to be a Democrat, you can never have actually worked for a living or understand corporate America.

Boards of directors are made up of experienced people with years of service in an industry and a proven track record of success. Many are former CEOs themselves. The point of having these people is to use their combined knowledge and experience to set strategy and direction. The CEO, as part of the Board, is the individual who carries it out.

In contrast, Pelosi, Reid, Webb, and the other Democrats have demonstrated that their only criteria for whether or not something is a good decision is whether or not it&#039;s anti-Bush. Hence their support of Cindy Sheehan, who sends hundreds of thousands of dollars in cash and supplies to the terrorists daily attempting to kill our soldiers, Webb&#039;s son included -- all because she&#039;s anti-Bush.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>If the CEO of a company was making bad decisions that the majority of stock holders felt were the wrong course of action and as a result the board of directors called on that CEO to make a change in his policy, should we then expect the board to suggest the correct course of action? What&#8217;s the CEO&#8217;s role then except as a figurehead?</i></p>
<p>Just A Question, you regularly demonstrate the fact that, in order to be a Democrat, you can never have actually worked for a living or understand corporate America.</p>
<p>Boards of directors are made up of experienced people with years of service in an industry and a proven track record of success. Many are former CEOs themselves. The point of having these people is to use their combined knowledge and experience to set strategy and direction. The CEO, as part of the Board, is the individual who carries it out.</p>
<p>In contrast, Pelosi, Reid, Webb, and the other Democrats have demonstrated that their only criteria for whether or not something is a good decision is whether or not it&#8217;s anti-Bush. Hence their support of Cindy Sheehan, who sends hundreds of thousands of dollars in cash and supplies to the terrorists daily attempting to kill our soldiers, Webb&#8217;s son included &#8212; all because she&#8217;s anti-Bush.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Vera Charles</title>
		<link>http://www.gaypatriot.net/2007/01/24/state-of-the-union-preliminary-thoughts/comment-page-1/#comment-26381</link>
		<dc:creator>Vera Charles</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Jan 2007 02:34:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.gaypatriot.net/?p=936#comment-26381</guid>
		<description>Vera was slightly drunk during the speech, but she remembers this:

On HDTV - with her never-ending blinking - Nancy Pelosi looked like a drag queen that was tweaking.

John Kerry is to politics what Kevin Federline is to music: tone deaf and irrelevant.

Hillary Clinton should have moved her seat before the speech;
Sitting next to Obama only heightened the major differences between them; A good looking black male trumps a tired looking female.

Condi: get your Zoloft prescription refilled.  Today.

Jim Webb needs a better colorist.  And a better color.

Dick Cheney looked like Mr. Potter from ‘It’s a Wonderful Life’.
He used to look like ‘Clarence’ the aspiring angel.

GWB gave a good speech - and Madam Speaker Pelosi was kind enough to return his testicles to him when he was done.  They were in her clutch bag.

Rummy should have shown up drunk and ranting, ala James Mason (as Norman Maine) in the Oscar sequence from “A Star is Born”.  It would have been priceless.

Cheers darlings, if you can manage it…</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Vera was slightly drunk during the speech, but she remembers this:</p>
<p>On HDTV &#8211; with her never-ending blinking &#8211; Nancy Pelosi looked like a drag queen that was tweaking.</p>
<p>John Kerry is to politics what Kevin Federline is to music: tone deaf and irrelevant.</p>
<p>Hillary Clinton should have moved her seat before the speech;<br />
Sitting next to Obama only heightened the major differences between them; A good looking black male trumps a tired looking female.</p>
<p>Condi: get your Zoloft prescription refilled.  Today.</p>
<p>Jim Webb needs a better colorist.  And a better color.</p>
<p>Dick Cheney looked like Mr. Potter from ‘It’s a Wonderful Life’.<br />
He used to look like ‘Clarence’ the aspiring angel.</p>
<p>GWB gave a good speech &#8211; and Madam Speaker Pelosi was kind enough to return his testicles to him when he was done.  They were in her clutch bag.</p>
<p>Rummy should have shown up drunk and ranting, ala James Mason (as Norman Maine) in the Oscar sequence from “A Star is Born”.  It would have been priceless.</p>
<p>Cheers darlings, if you can manage it…</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Calarato</title>
		<link>http://www.gaypatriot.net/2007/01/24/state-of-the-union-preliminary-thoughts/comment-page-1/#comment-26380</link>
		<dc:creator>Calarato</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Jan 2007 22:36:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.gaypatriot.net/?p=936#comment-26380</guid>
		<description>Well, let&#039;s put it this way.  Someone brought up the example of Harry Reid.  As recently as December 2006, he called strongly for a troop surge.  Now that Bush wants it, he&#039;s agin it.  Same with Andrew Sullivan.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well, let&#8217;s put it this way.  Someone brought up the example of Harry Reid.  As recently as December 2006, he called strongly for a troop surge.  Now that Bush wants it, he&#8217;s agin it.  Same with Andrew Sullivan.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: EssEm</title>
		<link>http://www.gaypatriot.net/2007/01/24/state-of-the-union-preliminary-thoughts/comment-page-1/#comment-26379</link>
		<dc:creator>EssEm</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Jan 2007 22:24:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.gaypatriot.net/?p=936#comment-26379</guid>
		<description>Is it just me and my curmudgeonly state of mind, or does W lose no matter what he does? If he&#039;s clear and resolute, then he&#039;s arrogant, partisan and imperial. But if he&#039;s gentlemanly, conciliatory...then....nothing. He gets nothing, and only winds up looking dickless.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Is it just me and my curmudgeonly state of mind, or does W lose no matter what he does? If he&#8217;s clear and resolute, then he&#8217;s arrogant, partisan and imperial. But if he&#8217;s gentlemanly, conciliatory&#8230;then&#8230;.nothing. He gets nothing, and only winds up looking dickless.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Peter Hughes</title>
		<link>http://www.gaypatriot.net/2007/01/24/state-of-the-union-preliminary-thoughts/comment-page-1/#comment-26378</link>
		<dc:creator>Peter Hughes</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Jan 2007 21:48:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.gaypatriot.net/?p=936#comment-26378</guid>
		<description>#5 - Isn&#039;t it ironic that someone who was part of the caterwauling in 2000 about an &quot;unelected&quot; president and &quot;disenfranchised voters&quot; would favor having an unelected House Speaker as president, with no say from the American voters whatsoever?

Hypocrisy, thy name is liberalism.

Regards,
Peter H.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>#5 &#8211; Isn&#8217;t it ironic that someone who was part of the caterwauling in 2000 about an &#8220;unelected&#8221; president and &#8220;disenfranchised voters&#8221; would favor having an unelected House Speaker as president, with no say from the American voters whatsoever?</p>
<p>Hypocrisy, thy name is liberalism.</p>
<p>Regards,<br />
Peter H.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Michigan-Matt</title>
		<link>http://www.gaypatriot.net/2007/01/24/state-of-the-union-preliminary-thoughts/comment-page-1/#comment-26377</link>
		<dc:creator>Michigan-Matt</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Jan 2007 21:36:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.gaypatriot.net/?p=936#comment-26377</guid>
		<description>Dan, I think GWB hit it exactly right... he was a gentleman to NancyP and clearly won her over with his gracious comments --she repsonded perfectly.  He moved through a litany of work to be done in a bipartisan fashion and his &quot;people call outs&quot; in the gallery reminded us of what America can be and is.

It&#039;s now up to the Administration to keep hammering away... and the SenGOP not to cave in on any menaingless grandstanding proposals from the House.

Of the top issues that voters want GWB and Congress to address this year, GWB made substantive proposals on every single major issue.  I think the social conservatives here probably liked his comment about no amensty for illegals in the US.  I liked his resolve on Iraq and the WOT.

Top issues outlined here --http://www.pollingreport.com</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dan, I think GWB hit it exactly right&#8230; he was a gentleman to NancyP and clearly won her over with his gracious comments &#8211;she repsonded perfectly.  He moved through a litany of work to be done in a bipartisan fashion and his &#8220;people call outs&#8221; in the gallery reminded us of what America can be and is.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s now up to the Administration to keep hammering away&#8230; and the SenGOP not to cave in on any menaingless grandstanding proposals from the House.</p>
<p>Of the top issues that voters want GWB and Congress to address this year, GWB made substantive proposals on every single major issue.  I think the social conservatives here probably liked his comment about no amensty for illegals in the US.  I liked his resolve on Iraq and the WOT.</p>
<p>Top issues outlined here &#8211;http://www.pollingreport.com</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Peter Hughes</title>
		<link>http://www.gaypatriot.net/2007/01/24/state-of-the-union-preliminary-thoughts/comment-page-1/#comment-26376</link>
		<dc:creator>Peter Hughes</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Jan 2007 21:07:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.gaypatriot.net/?p=936#comment-26376</guid>
		<description>His comments about Pelosi and her father were great.  And didn&#039;t anyone notice how many ardent anti-Bush Dhimmicrats - including Pelosi, Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX) and Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) - lined up for handshakes and autographs afterwards?

Kucinich even got TWO handshakes - once when the Prez walked into the House, and one on the way out.  Bet the Kossacks are gonna give him hell to pay for that faux pas...

Gee, he worked the room better than Slick Willie ever did.  Now THAT is the GWB we know and love in Texas.

Regards,
Peter H.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>His comments about Pelosi and her father were great.  And didn&#8217;t anyone notice how many ardent anti-Bush Dhimmicrats &#8211; including Pelosi, Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX) and Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) &#8211; lined up for handshakes and autographs afterwards?</p>
<p>Kucinich even got TWO handshakes &#8211; once when the Prez walked into the House, and one on the way out.  Bet the Kossacks are gonna give him hell to pay for that faux pas&#8230;</p>
<p>Gee, he worked the room better than Slick Willie ever did.  Now THAT is the GWB we know and love in Texas.</p>
<p>Regards,<br />
Peter H.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Just A Question</title>
		<link>http://www.gaypatriot.net/2007/01/24/state-of-the-union-preliminary-thoughts/comment-page-1/#comment-26375</link>
		<dc:creator>Just A Question</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Jan 2007 21:06:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.gaypatriot.net/?p=936#comment-26375</guid>
		<description>Riddle me this...

If the CEO of a company was making bad decisions that the majority of stock holders felt were the wrong course of action and as a result the board of directors called on that CEO to make a change in his policy, should we then expect the board to suggest the correct course of action? What&#039;s the CEO&#039;s role then except as a figurehead? Why should the stockholders expect to pay a salary to said CEO? Why shouldn&#039;t said CEO simply resign?

I hear all this GOP blather about Democrats not having any ideas or alternatives. Well guess what fellows, that&#039;s not their job. That&#039;s the job of the big fellow in the white house. And frankly if you feel that it IS somehow their job to take both the responsibility AND the privilege of acting as commander-in chief, you should recommend the dunderhead and vice dunderhead in charge step down and let Nancy Pelosi move her stuff into the oval office already.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Riddle me this&#8230;</p>
<p>If the CEO of a company was making bad decisions that the majority of stock holders felt were the wrong course of action and as a result the board of directors called on that CEO to make a change in his policy, should we then expect the board to suggest the correct course of action? What&#8217;s the CEO&#8217;s role then except as a figurehead? Why should the stockholders expect to pay a salary to said CEO? Why shouldn&#8217;t said CEO simply resign?</p>
<p>I hear all this GOP blather about Democrats not having any ideas or alternatives. Well guess what fellows, that&#8217;s not their job. That&#8217;s the job of the big fellow in the white house. And frankly if you feel that it IS somehow their job to take both the responsibility AND the privilege of acting as commander-in chief, you should recommend the dunderhead and vice dunderhead in charge step down and let Nancy Pelosi move her stuff into the oval office already.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: benj</title>
		<link>http://www.gaypatriot.net/2007/01/24/state-of-the-union-preliminary-thoughts/comment-page-1/#comment-26374</link>
		<dc:creator>benj</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Jan 2007 20:45:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.gaypatriot.net/?p=936#comment-26374</guid>
		<description>Can someone define for me what the democrat definition of &#039;bipartisanship&#039; is?

Overall Bush was resolute,  somewhat contrite and delivered a good State of the Union with a lot of new proposals....Nice job!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Can someone define for me what the democrat definition of &#8216;bipartisanship&#8217; is?</p>
<p>Overall Bush was resolute,  somewhat contrite and delivered a good State of the Union with a lot of new proposals&#8230;.Nice job!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Infidels Are Cool &#187; Blog Archive &#187; SOTU: The Good, The Bad and The Boring *UPDATED*</title>
		<link>http://www.gaypatriot.net/2007/01/24/state-of-the-union-preliminary-thoughts/comment-page-1/#comment-26373</link>
		<dc:creator>Infidels Are Cool &#187; Blog Archive &#187; SOTU: The Good, The Bad and The Boring *UPDATED*</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Jan 2007 20:21:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.gaypatriot.net/?p=936#comment-26373</guid>
		<description>[...] Gay PatriotÂ  [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Gay PatriotÂ  [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: keogh</title>
		<link>http://www.gaypatriot.net/2007/01/24/state-of-the-union-preliminary-thoughts/comment-page-1/#comment-26372</link>
		<dc:creator>keogh</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Jan 2007 19:44:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.gaypatriot.net/?p=936#comment-26372</guid>
		<description>If by “Back on his Game” you mean proposing major governmental programs with no way to fund them except through deficit spending, you are right, Bush is “Back to the His old Games”
Same old Bush…INSPIRING!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If by “Back on his Game” you mean proposing major governmental programs with no way to fund them except through deficit spending, you are right, Bush is “Back to the His old Games”<br />
Same old Bush…INSPIRING!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ted B. (Charging Rhino)</title>
		<link>http://www.gaypatriot.net/2007/01/24/state-of-the-union-preliminary-thoughts/comment-page-1/#comment-26371</link>
		<dc:creator>Ted B. (Charging Rhino)</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Jan 2007 19:42:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.gaypatriot.net/?p=936#comment-26371</guid>
		<description>The Gods alone know why the Democrats chose Webb.  Maybe they thought he&#039;s use his personal moral throw-weight as a parent with a son on combat-duty in Iraq to attack either the President or his policies in Iraq....and he starts with the hestitant &quot;plug&quot; for the 400th anniversary celebration of Jametown!?!  He lost me right there.  Personally, I expected him to start with&quot;...as a Senator, and a father with a son in the line of fire, I have the grave resposibility to respectfullty....&quot;  Instead he pulls-out a framed picture of his father in WW2 and plays the &quot;greatest generation&quot;-card??

He served only to demonstrate...again...that the Opposition to the Administration&#039;s policies lack intelligently thought-out alterantive plans to accompany their &quot;opposition&quot;-position.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Gods alone know why the Democrats chose Webb.  Maybe they thought he&#8217;s use his personal moral throw-weight as a parent with a son on combat-duty in Iraq to attack either the President or his policies in Iraq&#8230;.and he starts with the hestitant &#8220;plug&#8221; for the 400th anniversary celebration of Jametown!?!  He lost me right there.  Personally, I expected him to start with&#8221;&#8230;as a Senator, and a father with a son in the line of fire, I have the grave resposibility to respectfullty&#8230;.&#8221;  Instead he pulls-out a framed picture of his father in WW2 and plays the &#8220;greatest generation&#8221;-card??</p>
<p>He served only to demonstrate&#8230;again&#8230;that the Opposition to the Administration&#8217;s policies lack intelligently thought-out alterantive plans to accompany their &#8220;opposition&#8221;-position.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

