<?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: Will The Michelle Obama Tape Surface Tomorrow?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://strata-sphere.com/blog/index.php/archives/5501/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://strata-sphere.com/blog/index.php/archives/5501</link>
	<description>High Flying Political Debate</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 04:18:24 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: AJStrata</title>
		<link>http://strata-sphere.com/blog/index.php/archives/5501/comment-page-1#comment-336449</link>
		<dc:creator>AJStrata</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Jun 2008 12:43:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://strata-sphere.com/blog/?p=5501#comment-336449</guid>
		<description>Regarding the 60% who ignore Trinity it means nothing.  

40% say something different.   But no matter what your talking 60% of 33% of the general election electorate.

The Dems can&#039;t lose 40% of their vote and win.  Heck, they can&#039;t lose 6% and win.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Regarding the 60% who ignore Trinity it means nothing.  </p>
<p>40% say something different.   But no matter what your talking 60% of 33% of the general election electorate.</p>
<p>The Dems can&#8217;t lose 40% of their vote and win.  Heck, they can&#8217;t lose 6% and win.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: lurker9876</title>
		<link>http://strata-sphere.com/blog/index.php/archives/5501/comment-page-1#comment-336447</link>
		<dc:creator>lurker9876</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Jun 2008 12:30:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://strata-sphere.com/blog/?p=5501#comment-336447</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;Well if its any indication, 60% of the dems in exit polls tonight said Trinity Church was not an issue.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

The question is vague.  How many of these voters were Hillary supporters?  If they had already decided to vote for Hillary, then the Trinity Church would not be a factor in their vote.  Maybe it already was an issue until they made a decision?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>Well if its any indication, 60% of the dems in exit polls tonight said Trinity Church was not an issue.</p></blockquote>
<p>The question is vague.  How many of these voters were Hillary supporters?  If they had already decided to vote for Hillary, then the Trinity Church would not be a factor in their vote.  Maybe it already was an issue until they made a decision?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: dave m</title>
		<link>http://strata-sphere.com/blog/index.php/archives/5501/comment-page-1#comment-336263</link>
		<dc:creator>dave m</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Jun 2008 10:13:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://strata-sphere.com/blog/?p=5501#comment-336263</guid>
		<description>Hi AJ,

How do you interpret the Hillary statement that she would be open
to being Obama&#039;s VP? 
One reading is that the tape threat could be called off if Obama gives
her the nod, but Hillary probably realizes that the tape is &quot;out there&quot;
and would still surface in October despite anything she withheld.
A second reading would be she is only pretending to be interested
in the VP slot for plausible deniability when she does release the tape?

I wonder how much difference it would make? Democrats, in their
present mood, seem willing to accept anything about BHO and still
fall at his feet no matter what.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi AJ,</p>
<p>How do you interpret the Hillary statement that she would be open<br />
to being Obama&#8217;s VP?<br />
One reading is that the tape threat could be called off if Obama gives<br />
her the nod, but Hillary probably realizes that the tape is &#8220;out there&#8221;<br />
and would still surface in October despite anything she withheld.<br />
A second reading would be she is only pretending to be interested<br />
in the VP slot for plausible deniability when she does release the tape?</p>
<p>I wonder how much difference it would make? Democrats, in their<br />
present mood, seem willing to accept anything about BHO and still<br />
fall at his feet no matter what.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: MerlinOS2</title>
		<link>http://strata-sphere.com/blog/index.php/archives/5501/comment-page-1#comment-336238</link>
		<dc:creator>MerlinOS2</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Jun 2008 04:42:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://strata-sphere.com/blog/?p=5501#comment-336238</guid>
		<description>Well if its any indication, 60% of the dems in exit polls tonight said Trinity Church was not an issue.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well if its any indication, 60% of the dems in exit polls tonight said Trinity Church was not an issue.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Conservatism Today</title>
		<link>http://strata-sphere.com/blog/index.php/archives/5501/comment-page-1#comment-336237</link>
		<dc:creator>Conservatism Today</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Jun 2008 04:41:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://strata-sphere.com/blog/?p=5501#comment-336237</guid>
		<description>As I posted on my blog on the subject, I am most struck by the fact that the idea of Michelle Obama (who hopes to be first lady of the United States) uttering anti-white remarks seems so plausible to everyone. I have not heard anyone say &quot;no way, she would never do that.&quot; 

Instead, we all think she&#039;s probably said things like that many times bafore. It seems to fit with Trinity United&#039;s general message. 

This is my first time here - good posts.

www.conservatismtoday.com</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As I posted on my blog on the subject, I am most struck by the fact that the idea of Michelle Obama (who hopes to be first lady of the United States) uttering anti-white remarks seems so plausible to everyone. I have not heard anyone say &#8220;no way, she would never do that.&#8221; </p>
<p>Instead, we all think she&#8217;s probably said things like that many times bafore. It seems to fit with Trinity United&#8217;s general message. </p>
<p>This is my first time here &#8211; good posts.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.conservatismtoday.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.conservatismtoday.com</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

