<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1"?>

<rss version="2.0" xmlns:blogChannel="http://backend.userland.com/blogChannelModule">

<channel>
<title>Er, Presidential Debate Anyone? (Trees And Things)</title>
<link>http://www.treesandthings.com/story/2007/4/28/213016/143</link>
<description>So apparently these guys known as The Democrats held their first little debate thingy this past week. It was so well publicised that I personally didn't hear about it until the next day on NPR. The major candidates--Obama, Hillary, John Edwards and Bill Richardson competed--as well as &lt;a href="http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2007/04/28/after_debate_little_known_democrat_draws_a_crowd/">a few minor ones&lt;/a>.</description>
<language>en-us</language>
<pubDate>Mon, 30 Apr 2007 03:11:42 EST</pubDate>
<lastBuildDate>Thu, 3 May 2007 08:56:57 EST</lastBuildDate>

<item>
<title>tomc: Race</title>
<link>http://www.treesandthings.com/story/2007/4/28/213016/143#28</link>
<description>A while ago there was this kerfuffle in Canada about Indian immigrants taking over local chapters of federal parties to make sure that only people of Indian descent could be nominated as candidates for federal elections. For some reason, the fact that immi</description>
<pubDate>Thu, 3 May 2007 08:56:57 EST</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>nmiguy: Re: Er, Presidential Debate Anyone?</title>
<link>http://www.treesandthings.com/story/2007/4/28/213016/143#27</link>
<description>I didn't watch because I figured the first debate would be pretty civil, lame and tell me very little about the candidates at this point. &#160;Later on, when the herd is culled a bit, and the real competition begins, the debates will be more meaningful. &amp;</description>
<pubDate>Thu, 3 May 2007 08:56:34 EST</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>thefadd: Re: Really?</title>
<link>http://www.treesandthings.com/story/2007/4/28/213016/143#26</link>
<description>yeah, it's one of my pet peeves, too, actually. don't know why I did it.</description>
<pubDate>Wed, 2 May 2007 20:39:37 EST</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>zyxwvutsr: Re: Really?</title>
<link>http://www.treesandthings.com/story/2007/4/28/213016/143#25</link>
<description>&lt;blockquote>&lt;i>She literally took the Senate by storm...&lt;/i>&lt;/blockquote>Literally?&lt;p>&#10;Sorry, but that's one of my pet peeves, when someone uses the word "literally" figuratively. (Or was there an actual meteorological storm of some sort?) </description>
<pubDate>Wed, 2 May 2007 19:20:26 EST</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>thefadd: Re: Really?</title>
<link>http://www.treesandthings.com/story/2007/4/28/213016/143#24</link>
<description>When I do look strictly at policy, I think Clinton is the more appealing choice for me. She's got vastly more experience than Obama, particularly in previously being a part of the executive branch and in her effectiveness in the Senate. She literally took </description>
<pubDate>Wed, 2 May 2007 18:20:47 EST</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>uncarved block: Really?</title>
<link>http://www.treesandthings.com/story/2007/4/28/213016/143#23</link>
<description>&#160; &#160;&lt;i>I've come toward the conservative side of late&lt;/i>&lt;p>&#10;&#160; &#160;Geez, would have never guessed that, from the blog links in your Saudi terror bust sub :)&lt;p>&#10;&#160; &#160;I've also started to listen to conservative arguments a little more</description>
<pubDate>Wed, 2 May 2007 14:36:22 EST</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>rEvolution inAction: Re: Er, Presidential Debate Anyone?</title>
<link>http://www.treesandthings.com/story/2007/4/28/213016/143#22</link>
<description>If you want to win, you can't play by someone else's rules, you have to make your own.</description>
<pubDate>Wed, 2 May 2007 14:28:25 EST</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>permazorch: People would take him seriously in a hurry.</title>
<link>http://www.treesandthings.com/story/2007/4/28/213016/143#21</link>
<description>&lt;i>Holy crap, they need to permanently solder her to his arm.&lt;/i>&lt;br>&#10;Word. The. Fuck. Up.&lt;p>&#10;Gordon Urkel is so much better over here. For reasons like that link he's &lt;a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six_Million_Dollar_Man">The Six Million Dollar Man</description>
<pubDate>Wed, 2 May 2007 13:48:27 EST</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>thefadd: Re: Pointless castigation of the electorate</title>
<link>http://www.treesandthings.com/story/2007/4/28/213016/143#20</link>
<description>And this I think tends to be a basic difference between a lot of American liberals and conservatives. I've come toward the conservative side of late in a lot of ways and look a lot more for vague notions of "leadership qualities" as opposed to rock solid p</description>
<pubDate>Tue, 1 May 2007 23:05:07 EST</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>jwb: Re: Pointless castigation of the electorate</title>
<link>http://www.treesandthings.com/story/2007/4/28/213016/143#19</link>
<description>Kucinich is the only one with an explicit, detailed platform. &#160;But his platform is a laugher, so it doesn't really help. &#160;He's also the only candidate who has a theme song that isn't chosen by a marketing committee: God Bless America. &#160;You g</description>
<pubDate>Tue, 1 May 2007 20:08:02 EST</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>thefadd: Re: Er, Presidential Debate Anyone?</title>
<link>http://www.treesandthings.com/story/2007/4/28/213016/143#18</link>
<description>Chris Rock I saw. He was standing in line at the gumbo pot wearing sunglasses, facial hair, and a tweed english driver style hat. It was pretty funny because he was obviously trying to slip in and slip out but his voice when he ordered was unmistakable and</description>
<pubDate>Tue, 1 May 2007 19:51:43 EST</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>pO157: Re: Er, Presidential Debate Anyone?</title>
<link>http://www.treesandthings.com/story/2007/4/28/213016/143#17</link>
<description>Are we talking about Chris Rock or Dennis Kucinich?</description>
<pubDate>Tue, 1 May 2007 19:25:45 EST</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>thefadd: Re: Burn Hillary, Burn.</title>
<link>http://www.treesandthings.com/story/2007/4/28/213016/143#16</link>
<description>Did you see the pic of Kucinich and his wife in gordon's link above? Holy crap, they need to permanently sodder her to his arm. People would take him seriously in a hurry.</description>
<pubDate>Tue, 1 May 2007 19:21:17 EST</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>thefadd: Re: Er, Presidential Debate Anyone?</title>
<link>http://www.treesandthings.com/story/2007/4/28/213016/143#15</link>
<description>I don't think you can put a woman or a black man in as vice president first. It's the Chris Rock rule. I saw him the other day at the 3rd &amp; fairfax farmers market. he was lookin good but man is he short.</description>
<pubDate>Tue, 1 May 2007 19:19:29 EST</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>thefadd: Re: Er, Presidential Debate Anyone?</title>
<link>http://www.treesandthings.com/story/2007/4/28/213016/143#14</link>
<description>I think it's process and that part of racial progress includes these biases up to a point. Until Kennedy was elected President, irish catholic was as much a subset of the population as a lot of other minorities, probably most akin to Mexicans today. There </description>
<pubDate>Tue, 1 May 2007 19:17:22 EST</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>dzetetes: Re: Pointless castigation of the electorate</title>
<link>http://www.treesandthings.com/story/2007/4/28/213016/143#13</link>
<description>&lt;a href="http://www.harpers.org/archive/2006/11/0081275">Obama is a politician&lt;/a>, a politician Obama - that is all&lt;br>&#10;&#160; &#160; Ye know on Nov. 4th, and all ye need know.</description>
<pubDate>Tue, 1 May 2007 18:54:20 EST</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>rEvolution inAction: Re: Er, Presidential Debate Anyone?</title>
<link>http://www.treesandthings.com/story/2007/4/28/213016/143#12</link>
<description>I agree, white people shouldn't be allowed to vote. They're sketchy.</description>
<pubDate>Tue, 1 May 2007 15:20:12 EST</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>rEvolution inAction: Re: Er, Presidential Debate Anyone?</title>
<link>http://www.treesandthings.com/story/2007/4/28/213016/143#11</link>
<description>To answer the question in your first sentence, yes. To answer the affirmation in your second sentence, it's because you are a white male.</description>
<pubDate>Tue, 1 May 2007 15:19:35 EST</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>rombuu: Re: Er, Presidential Debate Anyone?</title>
<link>http://www.treesandthings.com/story/2007/4/28/213016/143#10</link>
<description>I keep saying letting everyone vote is a bad idea and no one listens to me....</description>
<pubDate>Tue, 1 May 2007 13:43:20 EST</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>uncarved block: Didn't Watch, Won't Watch</title>
<link>http://www.treesandthings.com/story/2007/4/28/213016/143#9</link>
<description>&#160; &#160;The only political debates I've watched over the last couple years were the first two Kerry/Bush conflic . . er, shared press appearances, and only because I was on vacation and away from a Civ game. A shocking lack of civic duty? Hardly, at l</description>
<pubDate>Tue, 1 May 2007 13:34:13 EST</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>pO157: Re: Er, Presidential Debate Anyone?</title>
<link>http://www.treesandthings.com/story/2007/4/28/213016/143#8</link>
<description>&lt;blockquote> Do you really think people are so shallow they'd vote for someone just because they were the same sex or race? &#160;Hell, I don't fell compelled to vote for someone because they are white or male. &lt;/blockquote>&lt;p>&#10;Unfortunately, there are ton</description>
<pubDate>Tue, 1 May 2007 13:10:36 EST</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>rombuu: Re: Er, Presidential Debate Anyone?</title>
<link>http://www.treesandthings.com/story/2007/4/28/213016/143#7</link>
<description>Do you really think people are so shallow they'd vote for someone just because they were the same sex or race? &#160;Hell, I don't fell compelled to vote for someone because they are white or male.</description>
<pubDate>Tue, 1 May 2007 12:50:08 EST</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>pO157: Pointless castigation of the electorate</title>
<link>http://www.treesandthings.com/story/2007/4/28/213016/143#6</link>
<description>I will reiterate my position: At this point I think a fair portion of the folks who are going "&lt;CANDIDATE X&gt; RAH RAH RAH!" need to rethink their support. I mean, do we even know what they stand for? I have gone to a few campaign websites and all I re</description>
<pubDate>Tue, 1 May 2007 10:08:09 EST</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>rEvolution inAction: Re: Er, Presidential Debate Anyone?</title>
<link>http://www.treesandthings.com/story/2007/4/28/213016/143#5</link>
<description>Yeah, but what about the 100% certain victory on the Obama/Clinton or Clinton/Obama ticket? I mean just look at the demographics. No matter how many white men there are out there, they are outnumbered by the women and minorities.</description>
<pubDate>Tue, 1 May 2007 03:18:28 EST</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>permazorch: Burn Hillary, Burn.</title>
<link>http://www.treesandthings.com/story/2007/4/28/213016/143#4</link>
<description>A Dennis Kucinich and Barack Obama ticket makes this shallow liberal wet, with knees quivering. I don't care which one for Prez.&lt;p>&#10;None of the rest turn me on. Turn offs? Hillary Clinton.</description>
<pubDate>Tue, 1 May 2007 01:32:41 EST</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>thefadd: Re: Er, Presidential Debate Anyone?</title>
<link>http://www.treesandthings.com/story/2007/4/28/213016/143#3</link>
<description>It was interesting to me that Hillary came of so poorly and Obama so well. She certainly didn't show any of her hubby's charisma, whereas Obama did. She came off stilted and snobbish, almost Gore-like. This scares me a bit because it seems to be a trait th</description>
<pubDate>Mon, 30 Apr 2007 16:52:31 EST</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>rEvolution inAction: Re: Er, Presidential Debate Anyone?</title>
<link>http://www.treesandthings.com/story/2007/4/28/213016/143#2</link>
<description>Or how about they move the NH primary to the day after the election... California can get the same day, year 2... I dunno who wants year three, but it's up for bid.</description>
<pubDate>Mon, 30 Apr 2007 14:22:31 EST</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>pO157: Re: Er, Presidential Debate Anyone?</title>
<link>http://www.treesandthings.com/story/2007/4/28/213016/143#1</link>
<description>Why not just move all the primaries to one single day preferably closer to the big day in November so we don't have to listen to these inane TV ads all the time -- this state by state garbage is ridiculous.</description>
<pubDate>Mon, 30 Apr 2007 07:53:14 EST</pubDate>
</item>

<textInput>
<title>Search Trees And Things</title>
<description></description>
<name>string</name>
<link>http://www.treesandthings.com/search/</link>
</textInput>

</channel>
</rss>