<?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: Oh, this LA Times Editorial Isn&#8217;t Going to be Received Well.</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.sundriesshack.com/2008/06/16/oh-this-la-times-editorial-isnt-going-to-be-received-well/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.sundriesshack.com/2008/06/16/oh-this-la-times-editorial-isnt-going-to-be-received-well/</link>
	<description>Delivering the Best of the New Media Since 2004.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 28 Jan 2012 20:08:42 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: spoots</title>
		<link>http://www.sundriesshack.com/2008/06/16/oh-this-la-times-editorial-isnt-going-to-be-received-well/comment-page-1/#comment-654387</link>
		<dc:creator>spoots</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Jun 2008 21:03:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sundriesshack.com/?p=4672#comment-654387</guid>
		<description>Neocon alert!  &lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Kirchick&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Kirchick&lt;/a&gt; </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Neocon alert!<br />
  <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Kirchick" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Kirchick</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: James Kirchick Didn&#8217;t Get the Memo, Apparently &#171; ChenZhen&#8217;s Chamber</title>
		<link>http://www.sundriesshack.com/2008/06/16/oh-this-la-times-editorial-isnt-going-to-be-received-well/comment-page-1/#comment-654231</link>
		<dc:creator>James Kirchick Didn&#8217;t Get the Memo, Apparently &#171; ChenZhen&#8217;s Chamber</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Jun 2008 02:40:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sundriesshack.com/?p=4672#comment-654231</guid>
		<description>[...]    James Kirchick Didn&#8217;t Get the Memo,&#160;Apparently June 16, 2008   I came across a post by fellow blogger Jimmie over at Sundrie&#8217;s Shack, in which he reported on an editorial in the [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...]    James Kirchick Didn&#8217;t Get the Memo,&nbsp;Apparently June 16, 2008   I came across a post by fellow blogger Jimmie over at Sundrie&#8217;s Shack, in which he reported on an editorial in the [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ChenZhen</title>
		<link>http://www.sundriesshack.com/2008/06/16/oh-this-la-times-editorial-isnt-going-to-be-received-well/comment-page-1/#comment-654226</link>
		<dc:creator>ChenZhen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Jun 2008 20:15:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sundriesshack.com/?p=4672#comment-654226</guid>
		<description>BTW-  Jimmie, it&#039;s John &lt;em&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_McClane&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;McClane&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/em&gt;. </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>BTW-  Jimmie, it&#039;s John <em><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_McClane" rel="nofollow">McClane</a></em>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ChenZhen</title>
		<link>http://www.sundriesshack.com/2008/06/16/oh-this-la-times-editorial-isnt-going-to-be-received-well/comment-page-1/#comment-654220</link>
		<dc:creator>ChenZhen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Jun 2008 19:21:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sundriesshack.com/?p=4672#comment-654220</guid>
		<description>Wow! &lt;em&gt;Another&lt;/em&gt; post on this?  Do I revisit? 
 
Nah. </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wow! <em>Another</em> post on this?  Do I revisit?</p>
<p>Nah.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jimmie</title>
		<link>http://www.sundriesshack.com/2008/06/16/oh-this-la-times-editorial-isnt-going-to-be-received-well/comment-page-1/#comment-654208</link>
		<dc:creator>Jimmie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Jun 2008 16:09:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sundriesshack.com/?p=4672#comment-654208</guid>
		<description>Come on, Fred. You have got to do better than that. Not only is part of what you said factually incorrect, but your memory seems to begin somewhere in 2003. </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Come on, Fred. You have got to do better than that. Not only is part of what you said factually incorrect, but your memory seems to begin somewhere in 2003.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Buzz</title>
		<link>http://www.sundriesshack.com/2008/06/16/oh-this-la-times-editorial-isnt-going-to-be-received-well/comment-page-1/#comment-654204</link>
		<dc:creator>Buzz</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Jun 2008 15:04:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sundriesshack.com/?p=4672#comment-654204</guid>
		<description>Fred you dumb a$$. Clinton was impeached because he lied to a court of law and denied a woman due process, he was not, I repeat because you may be deaf, he was not impeached because he was cheating on his wife in the Oval Office of the White House with an employee half his age. </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Fred you dumb a$$. Clinton was impeached because he lied to a court of law and denied a woman due process, he was not, I repeat because you may be deaf, he was not impeached because he was cheating on his wife in the Oval Office of the White House with an employee half his age.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Fred</title>
		<link>http://www.sundriesshack.com/2008/06/16/oh-this-la-times-editorial-isnt-going-to-be-received-well/comment-page-1/#comment-654201</link>
		<dc:creator>Fred</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Jun 2008 14:47:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sundriesshack.com/?p=4672#comment-654201</guid>
		<description>Bush is responsible for everything: EVERTHING. If he got bad intel, it was his intel agencies giving him bad data. He was warned about bin Laden in the PDB, he did nothing. Richard Clarke tried to talk to the shoe shopper (Rice) and was ignored. If it happend on Bush&#039;s watch, it is his problem to solve. 
 
Your president either lied to you or he was too stoopid to know they were lies. Either one you choose to believe makes Bush responsible. You idiots impeached Clinton over a private act. Why must you turn yuor head away from Bush&#039;s catastophic failures? It is your money and treasure too. </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Bush is responsible for everything: EVERTHING. If he got bad intel, it was his intel agencies giving him bad data. He was warned about bin Laden in the PDB, he did nothing. Richard Clarke tried to talk to the shoe shopper (Rice) and was ignored. If it happend on Bush&#039;s watch, it is his problem to solve.</p>
<p>Your president either lied to you or he was too stoopid to know they were lies. Either one you choose to believe makes Bush responsible. You idiots impeached Clinton over a private act. Why must you turn yuor head away from Bush&#039;s catastophic failures? It is your money and treasure too.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: SAM</title>
		<link>http://www.sundriesshack.com/2008/06/16/oh-this-la-times-editorial-isnt-going-to-be-received-well/comment-page-1/#comment-654186</link>
		<dc:creator>SAM</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Jun 2008 14:08:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sundriesshack.com/?p=4672#comment-654186</guid>
		<description>I try to keep informed, but I don&#039;t have time to read SenIntellComm reports numbering 172 pages long. I noticed that a National Review piece by Andrew McCarthy sharply criticized the report last week. Then, I saw the LA Times piece by an editor for a left-of-center publication, so I chimed in on a Townhall.com post referring to the same article. But I got roundly criticized for intellectualy laziness by two toads. One of them purported to read the 20 pages of conclusions provided on an MSNBC link.   
 
Maybe they were a little sensitive because of the defection. Mistaken intelligence is a far cry from the hysteria about lying. </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I try to keep informed, but I don&#039;t have time to read SenIntellComm reports numbering 172 pages long. I noticed that a National Review piece by Andrew McCarthy sharply criticized the report last week. Then, I saw the LA Times piece by an editor for a left-of-center publication, so I chimed in on a Townhall.com post referring to the same article. But I got roundly criticized for intellectualy laziness by two toads. One of them purported to read the 20 pages of conclusions provided on an MSNBC link.  </p>
<p>Maybe they were a little sensitive because of the defection. Mistaken intelligence is a far cry from the hysteria about lying.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Served from: www.sundriesshack.com @ 2012-02-10 05:17:25 by W3 Total Cache -->
