<?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/"
		xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd"
	xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: When You&#8217;re That High Up&#8230;</title>
	<atom:link href="http://commentsfromleftfield.com/2007/10/when-youre-that-high-up/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://commentsfromleftfield.com/2007/10/when-youre-that-high-up</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 09 May 2012 10:28:37 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Liberal Journal</title>
		<link>http://commentsfromleftfield.com/2007/10/when-youre-that-high-up/comment-page-1#comment-8055</link>
		<dc:creator>Liberal Journal</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Oct 2007 22:56:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://commentsfromleftfield.com/2007/10/when-youre-that-high-up#comment-8055</guid>
		<description>Kyle, this was a very good post. Too many of my fellow Democrats are taking this electability approach. They are ignoring her hawkish positions and her association with Rupert Murdoch. They are crossing their fingers, hoping she won&#039;t be like Bush. But she&#039;s about winning. And she learned from her husband AND from Bush that &quot;It&#039;s better to be wrong and strong than weak and right&quot;

So I only take exception to what you said about begrudgingly supporting her if she wins the nomination. 

I will not vote for her is she wins the nomination and for two reasons: 1) my conscience, and 2) to send the message NOW, to all of my fellow Democrats blindly supporting her that she will lose votes on the Left. If you think she&#039;s the most electable, you&#039;re probably assuming people like me will go along on the bandwagon. Sorry, you&#039;re sorely mistaken!

What if Giuliani wins? Then maybe in 2012 we&#039;ll nominate someone who will REALLY take us in a different direction.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Kyle, this was a very good post. Too many of my fellow Democrats are taking this electability approach. They are ignoring her hawkish positions and her association with Rupert Murdoch. They are crossing their fingers, hoping she won&#8217;t be like Bush. But she&#8217;s about winning. And she learned from her husband AND from Bush that &#8220;It&#8217;s better to be wrong and strong than weak and right&#8221;</p>
<p>So I only take exception to what you said about begrudgingly supporting her if she wins the nomination. </p>
<p>I will not vote for her is she wins the nomination and for two reasons: 1) my conscience, and 2) to send the message NOW, to all of my fellow Democrats blindly supporting her that she will lose votes on the Left. If you think she&#8217;s the most electable, you&#8217;re probably assuming people like me will go along on the bandwagon. Sorry, you&#8217;re sorely mistaken!</p>
<p>What if Giuliani wins? Then maybe in 2012 we&#8217;ll nominate someone who will REALLY take us in a different direction.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kyle E. Moore</title>
		<link>http://commentsfromleftfield.com/2007/10/when-youre-that-high-up/comment-page-1#comment-8012</link>
		<dc:creator>Kyle E. Moore</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Oct 2007 16:56:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://commentsfromleftfield.com/2007/10/when-youre-that-high-up#comment-8012</guid>
		<description>Thank you Donna.  You know, I hadn&#039;t quite thought about it that way, but I suppose you are right.  We&#039;re seeing something of the same thing we saw with Bush in that with Bush, any criticism is pushed aside by his most ardent supporters by accusing his critics of just being &quot;Bush haters&quot; and I can see the same thing happening for Hillary.

Interestingly enough, the people doing this are not a new and strong group of leftist Hillary supporters, but instead the same people who stood by Bush.  Michael O&#039;Hanlon, Charles Krauthammer, these arethe folks that are backing Hillary, and that should say something to those getting ready to vote for her hoping that she&#039;ll be a solid Democratic president who will put an end to the war and reverse Bush&#039;s policies that have done much to tear this country apart.

thank you for the comment!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thank you Donna.  You know, I hadn&#8217;t quite thought about it that way, but I suppose you are right.  We&#8217;re seeing something of the same thing we saw with Bush in that with Bush, any criticism is pushed aside by his most ardent supporters by accusing his critics of just being &#8220;Bush haters&#8221; and I can see the same thing happening for Hillary.</p>
<p>Interestingly enough, the people doing this are not a new and strong group of leftist Hillary supporters, but instead the same people who stood by Bush.  Michael O&#8217;Hanlon, Charles Krauthammer, these arethe folks that are backing Hillary, and that should say something to those getting ready to vote for her hoping that she&#8217;ll be a solid Democratic president who will put an end to the war and reverse Bush&#8217;s policies that have done much to tear this country apart.</p>
<p>thank you for the comment!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Donna</title>
		<link>http://commentsfromleftfield.com/2007/10/when-youre-that-high-up/comment-page-1#comment-8004</link>
		<dc:creator>Donna</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Oct 2007 16:10:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://commentsfromleftfield.com/2007/10/when-youre-that-high-up#comment-8004</guid>
		<description>Thank you for articulating so well.  I have noticed, these past few years, that any statement contrary to 
GWB&#039;s position had better be well couched in terms to preemptively head off the retort of &#039;unpatriotic&#039;.   Now, I 
find that any statement contrary to Hillary&#039;s candidancy had better be well couched in terms that preemptively 
head off the retort of &#039;Hillary basher&#039;.   I am a little tired of emotional blackmail that works to stifles dissent, let
alone that stifles full exploration of issues.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thank you for articulating so well.  I have noticed, these past few years, that any statement contrary to<br />
GWB&#8217;s position had better be well couched in terms to preemptively head off the retort of &#8216;unpatriotic&#8217;.   Now, I<br />
find that any statement contrary to Hillary&#8217;s candidancy had better be well couched in terms that preemptively<br />
head off the retort of &#8216;Hillary basher&#8217;.   I am a little tired of emotional blackmail that works to stifles dissent, let<br />
alone that stifles full exploration of issues.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

