<?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: Today&#8217;s Must Read for Anyone Still Mired in the Democratic Primary Race</title>
	<atom:link href="http://commentsfromleftfield.com/2008/04/must-read-4-democratic-primary/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://commentsfromleftfield.com/2008/04/must-read-4-democratic-primary</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: DrGail</title>
		<link>http://commentsfromleftfield.com/2008/04/must-read-4-democratic-primary/comment-page-1#comment-33040</link>
		<dc:creator>DrGail</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Apr 2008 12:50:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://commentsfromleftfield.com/?p=3990#comment-33040</guid>
		<description>You just put your finger on (or near to, at least) something that&#039;s been bothering me for a while.  I see Hillary in front of audiences of potential voters and I see her talking about how she understands them, relates to them, wants to be president so she can help them, etc. etc.

Yet there&#039;s a cynical undertone to the whole thing, because those very voters to whom she is speaking are really little more than pawns.  Their votes are not the payoff for her, they are merely a means to an end.  The end being, of course, convincing the superdelegates that she is the horse to back.

I guess this is true of both candidates, and maybe her actions only bother me because she&#039;s behind (and falling further behind with each primary) and therefore has to be more brazen in her approach.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You just put your finger on (or near to, at least) something that&#8217;s been bothering me for a while.  I see Hillary in front of audiences of potential voters and I see her talking about how she understands them, relates to them, wants to be president so she can help them, etc. etc.</p>
<p>Yet there&#8217;s a cynical undertone to the whole thing, because those very voters to whom she is speaking are really little more than pawns.  Their votes are not the payoff for her, they are merely a means to an end.  The end being, of course, convincing the superdelegates that she is the horse to back.</p>
<p>I guess this is true of both candidates, and maybe her actions only bother me because she&#8217;s behind (and falling further behind with each primary) and therefore has to be more brazen in her approach.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

