<?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: The Way They See the World</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.fair.org/blog/2009/08/17/the-way-they-see-the-world/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.fair.org/blog/2009/08/17/the-way-they-see-the-world/</link>
	<description>The national media watch group</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 06:38:11 -0600</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: jhm</title>
		<link>http://www.fair.org/blog/2009/08/17/the-way-they-see-the-world/comment-page-1/#comment-8649</link>
		<dc:creator>jhm</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 18 Aug 2009 15:00:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fair.org/blog/?p=12217#comment-8649</guid>
		<description>Your point is well taken, and while it doesn&#039;t help the case of those exhibiting regrettably commonplace poor reportage, President Obama could be more clear as to what he favors.  Here, I don&#039;t take the side of those reporters who have an almost pathological attachment to the verbiage: &quot;public option, deal breaker?&quot; but the President, instead of the ambiguous statement of principles, could challenge the opponents of the public option to come up with something else that would satisfy the principles.  Doing otherwise lends credibility to those who falsely decry government takeovers, and spout other nonsense designed to obscure the fact that they oppose any and all reform.  It is permissible to oppose reform, but one should expect those who do to have the integrity to do so openly.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Your point is well taken, and while it doesn&#039;t help the case of those exhibiting regrettably commonplace poor reportage, President Obama could be more clear as to what he favors.  Here, I don&#039;t take the side of those reporters who have an almost pathological attachment to the verbiage: &#034;public option, deal breaker?&#034; but the President, instead of the ambiguous statement of principles, could challenge the opponents of the public option to come up with something else that would satisfy the principles.  Doing otherwise lends credibility to those who falsely decry government takeovers, and spout other nonsense designed to obscure the fact that they oppose any and all reform.  It is permissible to oppose reform, but one should expect those who do to have the integrity to do so openly.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Joel Sax</title>
		<link>http://www.fair.org/blog/2009/08/17/the-way-they-see-the-world/comment-page-1/#comment-8638</link>
		<dc:creator>Joel Sax</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 18 Aug 2009 01:06:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fair.org/blog/?p=12217#comment-8638</guid>
		<description>This story lasted less than a day.  Word is now that the White House has no intention of abandoning the public option.

We got taken in by a trial balloon.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This story lasted less than a day.  Word is now that the White House has no intention of abandoning the public option.</p>
<p>We got taken in by a trial balloon.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

