<?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"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Texas goes to . . . Obama?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/04/texas-goes-to-obama/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/04/texas-goes-to-obama/</link>
	<description>The Wichita Eagle Editorial Department Blog</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 03 Dec 2008 01:52:21 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.5</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: American Way</title>
		<link>http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/04/texas-goes-to-obama/#comment-323942</link>
		<dc:creator>American Way</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Apr 2008 15:54:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/04/texas-goes-to-obama/#comment-323942</guid>
		<description>Anyone want some popcorn? It's great to watch the libs eat each other up. I've always enjoyed watching the pigs roll in the mud.

Chaos. I tell you. Chaos pure and simple.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Anyone want some popcorn? It&#8217;s great to watch the libs eat each other up. I&#8217;ve always enjoyed watching the pigs roll in the mud.</p>
<p>Chaos. I tell you. Chaos pure and simple.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: J R</title>
		<link>http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/04/texas-goes-to-obama/#comment-323893</link>
		<dc:creator>J R</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Apr 2008 13:58:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/04/texas-goes-to-obama/#comment-323893</guid>
		<description>I suspect that "The Outfit" is a well known con poster in yet another nic trying to interfere in the Democratic nomination.

    For kelley...

    You are not even aware or honest as to the media bias toward Obama. Given that, how studied as to Obama or for that matter anything else can you be?

     Here is a hint.

     If you are truly for Obama? Pretend for a day that he is your worst nightmare. Do your research accordingly. Find his weaknesses that way and get out in front of them now.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I suspect that &#8220;The Outfit&#8221; is a well known con poster in yet another nic trying to interfere in the Democratic nomination.</p>
<p>    For kelley&#8230;</p>
<p>    You are not even aware or honest as to the media bias toward Obama. Given that, how studied as to Obama or for that matter anything else can you be?</p>
<p>     Here is a hint.</p>
<p>     If you are truly for Obama? Pretend for a day that he is your worst nightmare. Do your research accordingly. Find his weaknesses that way and get out in front of them now.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: The Outfit</title>
		<link>http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/04/texas-goes-to-obama/#comment-323841</link>
		<dc:creator>The Outfit</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Apr 2008 12:19:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/04/texas-goes-to-obama/#comment-323841</guid>
		<description>What's required in a situation like this, Songbird, is for the losing candidate to read the tea leaves and be honorable enough to step forward, concede, and unite the party.  

Won't happen with the Clintons.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What&#8217;s required in a situation like this, Songbird, is for the losing candidate to read the tea leaves and be honorable enough to step forward, concede, and unite the party.  </p>
<p>Won&#8217;t happen with the Clintons.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Songbird</title>
		<link>http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/04/texas-goes-to-obama/#comment-323838</link>
		<dc:creator>Songbird</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Apr 2008 12:01:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/04/texas-goes-to-obama/#comment-323838</guid>
		<description>The Clintons are royal?  

Horses--t.

This ain't Tudor England, Outfit.  And thank goodness for that.  

I just saw "The Other Boleyn Girl" - and I'm thanking my luckiest and luckier stars that we won our independence from the British.  

If we worshipped the Clintons and Bill were regarded as Henry VIII, can you just imagine what................

Oh, wait...........................</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Clintons are royal?  </p>
<p>Horses&#8211;t.</p>
<p>This ain&#8217;t Tudor England, Outfit.  And thank goodness for that.  </p>
<p>I just saw &#8220;The Other Boleyn Girl&#8221; - and I&#8217;m thanking my luckiest and luckier stars that we won our independence from the British.  </p>
<p>If we worshipped the Clintons and Bill were regarded as Henry VIII, can you just imagine what&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;.</p>
<p>Oh, wait&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: The Outfit</title>
		<link>http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/04/texas-goes-to-obama/#comment-323837</link>
		<dc:creator>The Outfit</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Apr 2008 12:01:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/04/texas-goes-to-obama/#comment-323837</guid>
		<description>Clinton recently went on TV in future primary states with an ad saying that Obama wants to prevent people from having a voice.  

When she loses, anyway, the seed will have been planted in the mind of the voting public that Obama is undemocratic.  

Clinton keeps proving her ability to destroy.  If that's what you want in a president, go ahead and nominate her.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Clinton recently went on TV in future primary states with an ad saying that Obama wants to prevent people from having a voice.  </p>
<p>When she loses, anyway, the seed will have been planted in the mind of the voting public that Obama is undemocratic.  </p>
<p>Clinton keeps proving her ability to destroy.  If that&#8217;s what you want in a president, go ahead and nominate her.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: The Outfit</title>
		<link>http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/04/texas-goes-to-obama/#comment-323834</link>
		<dc:creator>The Outfit</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Apr 2008 11:41:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/04/texas-goes-to-obama/#comment-323834</guid>
		<description>If the numbers were reversed and Clinton held the lead in delegates, Obama would have been told to get out of the way.  

But the Clintons are royal, and you don't tell royalty what to do.  You give a few hints instead, and hope that they finally get the message.  

So far, it hasn't worked.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If the numbers were reversed and Clinton held the lead in delegates, Obama would have been told to get out of the way.  </p>
<p>But the Clintons are royal, and you don&#8217;t tell royalty what to do.  You give a few hints instead, and hope that they finally get the message.  </p>
<p>So far, it hasn&#8217;t worked.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: The Outfit</title>
		<link>http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/04/texas-goes-to-obama/#comment-323832</link>
		<dc:creator>The Outfit</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Apr 2008 11:21:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/04/texas-goes-to-obama/#comment-323832</guid>
		<description>JR speaks of Obama's "negatives," but the one constant throughout the campaign has been Senator Clinton's negatives.  In reality, the intent of the Clinton campaign has been to drag Obama down with them.  The Senator ran on "inevitability," and when that fell through, this is what she resorted to.  Anyone else would have been shown the door a long time ago.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>JR speaks of Obama&#8217;s &#8220;negatives,&#8221; but the one constant throughout the campaign has been Senator Clinton&#8217;s negatives.  In reality, the intent of the Clinton campaign has been to drag Obama down with them.  The Senator ran on &#8220;inevitability,&#8221; and when that fell through, this is what she resorted to.  Anyone else would have been shown the door a long time ago.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: kelly</title>
		<link>http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/04/texas-goes-to-obama/#comment-323828</link>
		<dc:creator>kelly</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Apr 2008 10:11:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/04/texas-goes-to-obama/#comment-323828</guid>
		<description>Surely, JR, you must understand that you're argument that, "You don't know the whole truth, and you need to be afraid of what you don't know" isn't very persuasive.  To really be convinced to take your admonition to heart, your audience must be predisposed to give you credit for being clairvoyant, or for having possession of critical information that has not already been revealed in blogs and by pundits around the country.  

While I agree that it is difficult to rebut your ghostly, secret claims of superior knowledge, you must understand that this audience doesn't know you either, and hasn't seen any evidence that would warrant you receiving our blind faith that you know all, and see all that the rest of us cannot and have not, even though we have been searching.

And while many of us don't want to attack Clinton, some of us feel compelled nevertheless to defend the candidate of our choice.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Surely, JR, you must understand that you&#8217;re argument that, &#8220;You don&#8217;t know the whole truth, and you need to be afraid of what you don&#8217;t know&#8221; isn&#8217;t very persuasive.  To really be convinced to take your admonition to heart, your audience must be predisposed to give you credit for being clairvoyant, or for having possession of critical information that has not already been revealed in blogs and by pundits around the country.  </p>
<p>While I agree that it is difficult to rebut your ghostly, secret claims of superior knowledge, you must understand that this audience doesn&#8217;t know you either, and hasn&#8217;t seen any evidence that would warrant you receiving our blind faith that you know all, and see all that the rest of us cannot and have not, even though we have been searching.</p>
<p>And while many of us don&#8217;t want to attack Clinton, some of us feel compelled nevertheless to defend the candidate of our choice.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: cosmos</title>
		<link>http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/04/texas-goes-to-obama/#comment-323821</link>
		<dc:creator>cosmos</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Apr 2008 06:06:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/04/texas-goes-to-obama/#comment-323821</guid>
		<description>J R,

You do not defend your own posts.

That is your problem... not mine.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>J R,</p>
<p>You do not defend your own posts.</p>
<p>That is your problem&#8230; not mine.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: J R</title>
		<link>http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/04/texas-goes-to-obama/#comment-323820</link>
		<dc:creator>J R</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Apr 2008 05:50:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/04/texas-goes-to-obama/#comment-323820</guid>
		<description>I'd rather not make an enemy of you "cosmos".

   Quit chewing on my ankles.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;d rather not make an enemy of you &#8220;cosmos&#8221;.</p>
<p>   Quit chewing on my ankles.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: J R</title>
		<link>http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/04/texas-goes-to-obama/#comment-323819</link>
		<dc:creator>J R</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Apr 2008 05:43:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/04/texas-goes-to-obama/#comment-323819</guid>
		<description>WS

    Obama is not vetted.

    I can't say more.

    I am NO great fan of the Clinton's and the record here will show that.

     My support for Hillary Clinton is not so much for her as worried as to Obama.

    If you truly support your candidate, get out in front of his difficulties.

     Before the right does. 

     Because when I have to it may be too late.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>WS</p>
<p>    Obama is not vetted.</p>
<p>    I can&#8217;t say more.</p>
<p>    I am NO great fan of the Clinton&#8217;s and the record here will show that.</p>
<p>     My support for Hillary Clinton is not so much for her as worried as to Obama.</p>
<p>    If you truly support your candidate, get out in front of his difficulties.</p>
<p>     Before the right does. </p>
<p>     Because when I have to it may be too late.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: cosmos</title>
		<link>http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/04/texas-goes-to-obama/#comment-323818</link>
		<dc:creator>cosmos</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Apr 2008 05:37:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/04/texas-goes-to-obama/#comment-323818</guid>
		<description>So basically, J R is unable to defend his attacks on Obama, and unable to provide the secret "research" that he has done.

And J R happily calls "Senator" Obama a "candydate", while he respects Clinton by calling her "Senator" Clinton.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So basically, J R is unable to defend his attacks on Obama, and unable to provide the secret &#8220;research&#8221; that he has done.</p>
<p>And J R happily calls &#8220;Senator&#8221; Obama a &#8220;candydate&#8221;, while he respects Clinton by calling her &#8220;Senator&#8221; Clinton.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: WSClark</title>
		<link>http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/04/texas-goes-to-obama/#comment-323817</link>
		<dc:creator>WSClark</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Apr 2008 05:32:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/04/texas-goes-to-obama/#comment-323817</guid>
		<description>"You have to do your own research WS."

Already did - he is the real deal.

I also researched Hillary.

She's okay, but Barack wins.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;You have to do your own research WS.&#8221;</p>
<p>Already did - he is the real deal.</p>
<p>I also researched Hillary.</p>
<p>She&#8217;s okay, but Barack wins.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: J R</title>
		<link>http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/04/texas-goes-to-obama/#comment-323816</link>
		<dc:creator>J R</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Apr 2008 05:26:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/04/texas-goes-to-obama/#comment-323816</guid>
		<description>You have to do your own research WS.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You have to do your own research WS.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: J R</title>
		<link>http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/04/texas-goes-to-obama/#comment-323815</link>
		<dc:creator>J R</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Apr 2008 05:24:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/04/texas-goes-to-obama/#comment-323815</guid>
		<description>I don't like arguing with an unknown.

  And despite my earlier and lingering respect for "cosmos" he or she is still an unknown.


    Why did Senator Clinton not go after Obama's radical affiliations? I don't know.

    Was she kind or negligent?

    I don't know.


    Why does she not go after more of Obama's radical affiliations?

    Maybe the same reason I don't.

    Though Obama wants to pander to the enemy, I am not ready yet to call him and his supporters enemies.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t like arguing with an unknown.</p>
<p>  And despite my earlier and lingering respect for &#8220;cosmos&#8221; he or she is still an unknown.</p>
<p>    Why did Senator Clinton not go after Obama&#8217;s radical affiliations? I don&#8217;t know.</p>
<p>    Was she kind or negligent?</p>
<p>    I don&#8217;t know.</p>
<p>    Why does she not go after more of Obama&#8217;s radical affiliations?</p>
<p>    Maybe the same reason I don&#8217;t.</p>
<p>    Though Obama wants to pander to the enemy, I am not ready yet to call him and his supporters enemies.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: WSClark</title>
		<link>http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/04/texas-goes-to-obama/#comment-323814</link>
		<dc:creator>WSClark</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Apr 2008 05:16:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/04/texas-goes-to-obama/#comment-323814</guid>
		<description>"I will hold my fire."

If you have something, fire away........... you keep threatening but never shoot. 

If you have something, I would like to hear it because I have yet to hear anything that would convince me that Barack Obama is not our best choice for president.

So, fire away.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;I will hold my fire.&#8221;</p>
<p>If you have something, fire away&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;.. you keep threatening but never shoot. </p>
<p>If you have something, I would like to hear it because I have yet to hear anything that would convince me that Barack Obama is not our best choice for president.</p>
<p>So, fire away.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: cosmos</title>
		<link>http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/04/texas-goes-to-obama/#comment-323813</link>
		<dc:creator>cosmos</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Apr 2008 05:11:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/04/texas-goes-to-obama/#comment-323813</guid>
		<description>If Obama has such horrible "radical affiliations", why don't Clinton's surrogates make them public?

Instead, the Clintons, and J R, go after Obama with out-of-context spin.  Like J R's false claim re paying for children's health insurance &lt;i&gt;today&lt;/i&gt;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If Obama has such horrible &#8220;radical affiliations&#8221;, why don&#8217;t Clinton&#8217;s surrogates make them public?</p>
<p>Instead, the Clintons, and J R, go after Obama with out-of-context spin.  Like J R&#8217;s false claim re paying for children&#8217;s health insurance <i>today</i>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: J R</title>
		<link>http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/04/texas-goes-to-obama/#comment-323812</link>
		<dc:creator>J R</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Apr 2008 05:01:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/04/texas-goes-to-obama/#comment-323812</guid>
		<description>The process continues.

     I will hold my fire.

     Obama supporters must do their own research and come to their own conclusions.

      But as a supporter of Senator Clinton, I will not continue to endure further abuse from people who I may have mistakenly considered friends.

     As this blog knows from its beginning, I'd much rather fight my enemies than those that pretend to be my friend.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The process continues.</p>
<p>     I will hold my fire.</p>
<p>     Obama supporters must do their own research and come to their own conclusions.</p>
<p>      But as a supporter of Senator Clinton, I will not continue to endure further abuse from people who I may have mistakenly considered friends.</p>
<p>     As this blog knows from its beginning, I&#8217;d much rather fight my enemies than those that pretend to be my friend.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: WSClark</title>
		<link>http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/04/texas-goes-to-obama/#comment-323809</link>
		<dc:creator>WSClark</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Apr 2008 04:50:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/04/texas-goes-to-obama/#comment-323809</guid>
		<description>"Not yet."

As Muhammad Ali said to George Foreman during the early rounds of the Rumble in the Jungle: "Is that all you have - you ain't got nothing."

Knockout - eighth round - the fight was over.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Not yet.&#8221;</p>
<p>As Muhammad Ali said to George Foreman during the early rounds of the Rumble in the Jungle: &#8220;Is that all you have - you ain&#8217;t got nothing.&#8221;</p>
<p>Knockout - eighth round - the fight was over.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: cosmos</title>
		<link>http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/04/texas-goes-to-obama/#comment-323808</link>
		<dc:creator>cosmos</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Apr 2008 04:46:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/04/texas-goes-to-obama/#comment-323808</guid>
		<description>J R,

I don't know you either -- so I guess I shouldn't waste my time "reacting" to you.

J R believes that Clinton has more "political savvy" than Obama.  But MSM is an important part of U.S. politics.

See part 5, starts about 1/2 way down the page,

'AND YOU DON’T MESS AROUND WITH TIM! Clinton tugged on Superman’s cape -— and the Raccoons swung into action:'
http://www.dailyhowler.com/dh100407.shtml</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>J R,</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t know you either &#8212; so I guess I shouldn&#8217;t waste my time &#8220;reacting&#8221; to you.</p>
<p>J R believes that Clinton has more &#8220;political savvy&#8221; than Obama.  But MSM is an important part of U.S. politics.</p>
<p>See part 5, starts about 1/2 way down the page,</p>
<p>&#8216;AND YOU DON’T MESS AROUND WITH TIM! Clinton tugged on Superman’s cape -— and the Raccoons swung into action:&#8217;<br />
<a href="http://www.dailyhowler.com/dh100407.shtml" rel="nofollow">http://www.dailyhowler.com/dh100407.shtml</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: J R</title>
		<link>http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/04/texas-goes-to-obama/#comment-323806</link>
		<dc:creator>J R</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Apr 2008 04:42:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/04/texas-goes-to-obama/#comment-323806</guid>
		<description>I am not here to attack your candydate WS.

   Not yet.

   Senator Clinton has taken the right wing fire for many years. 

    I am not entirely happy with her. But I prefer her to an unknown.

    And Obama IS an unknown. How ELSE does he get this far without exposition of his radical affiliations?

     Please do your research on where the right will hit him before you attack a friend so that you may work with your enemies.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I am not here to attack your candydate WS.</p>
<p>   Not yet.</p>
<p>   Senator Clinton has taken the right wing fire for many years. </p>
<p>    I am not entirely happy with her. But I prefer her to an unknown.</p>
<p>    And Obama IS an unknown. How ELSE does he get this far without exposition of his radical affiliations?</p>
<p>     Please do your research on where the right will hit him before you attack a friend so that you may work with your enemies.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: WSClark</title>
		<link>http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/04/texas-goes-to-obama/#comment-323804</link>
		<dc:creator>WSClark</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Apr 2008 04:37:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/04/texas-goes-to-obama/#comment-323804</guid>
		<description>"I am not prepared to react to posters who I do not know."

In other words, you can't delineate the "Obama issues."</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;I am not prepared to react to posters who I do not know.&#8221;</p>
<p>In other words, you can&#8217;t delineate the &#8220;Obama issues.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: WSClark</title>
		<link>http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/04/texas-goes-to-obama/#comment-323803</link>
		<dc:creator>WSClark</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Apr 2008 04:36:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/04/texas-goes-to-obama/#comment-323803</guid>
		<description>"And you yourself WS told me less a Clinton supporter and more an Obama doubter,"

Huh?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;And you yourself WS told me less a Clinton supporter and more an Obama doubter,&#8221;</p>
<p>Huh?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: J R</title>
		<link>http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/04/texas-goes-to-obama/#comment-323802</link>
		<dc:creator>J R</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Apr 2008 04:35:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/04/texas-goes-to-obama/#comment-323802</guid>
		<description>I have said that I am content to let the process play out.

   I am not prepared to react to posters who I do not know.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have said that I am content to let the process play out.</p>
<p>   I am not prepared to react to posters who I do not know.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: J R</title>
		<link>http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/04/texas-goes-to-obama/#comment-323801</link>
		<dc:creator>J R</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Apr 2008 04:32:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/04/texas-goes-to-obama/#comment-323801</guid>
		<description>And you yourself WS told me less a Clinton supporter and more an Obama doubter,

   that I did not matter.

    Obama has the media on his side. (for now)

    Obama gets a pass. (for now)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>And you yourself WS told me less a Clinton supporter and more an Obama doubter,</p>
<p>   that I did not matter.</p>
<p>    Obama has the media on his side. (for now)</p>
<p>    Obama gets a pass. (for now)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
