<?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: A Tale Of Two Howards (But Only One Billmon)</title>
	<atom:link href="http://informedspeculation.com/2006/07/27/a-tale-of-two-howards-but-only-one-billmon/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://informedspeculation.com/2006/07/27/a-tale-of-two-howards-but-only-one-billmon/</link>
	<description>Refunds Cheerfully Given To All Who Disagree</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 06:53:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sean P</title>
		<link>http://informedspeculation.com/2006/07/27/a-tale-of-two-howards-but-only-one-billmon/comment-page-1/#comment-70705</link>
		<dc:creator>Sean P</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 Jul 2006 17:21:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://decision08.net/2006/07/27/a-tale-of-two-howards-but-only-one-billmon/#comment-70705</guid>
		<description>Sorry, I&#039;m not buying it. In 2003, Dean said the US needed to be &quot;neutral&quot; in its approach to Isreal and its neighbors. Now Dean is unequivicably demanding that Iraq take Isreal&#039;s side in a dispute with Hezbollah. Where&#039;s the neutrality? And your &quot;right to exist&quot; distinction is silly. The Palestinian Authority never recongized Isreal&#039;s right to exist in deed or in (Arabic) word, but Dean still preached for &quot;neutrality&quot;. Now that he smells an opportunity to pander, he won&#039;t.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sorry, I&#8217;m not buying it. In 2003, Dean said the US needed to be &#8220;neutral&#8221; in its approach to Isreal and its neighbors. Now Dean is unequivicably demanding that Iraq take Isreal&#8217;s side in a dispute with Hezbollah. Where&#8217;s the neutrality? And your &#8220;right to exist&#8221; distinction is silly. The Palestinian Authority never recongized Isreal&#8217;s right to exist in deed or in (Arabic) word, but Dean still preached for &#8220;neutrality&#8221;. Now that he smells an opportunity to pander, he won&#8217;t.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: The Mahablog &#187; In Contempt</title>
		<link>http://informedspeculation.com/2006/07/27/a-tale-of-two-howards-but-only-one-billmon/comment-page-1/#comment-70640</link>
		<dc:creator>The Mahablog &#187; In Contempt</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 Jul 2006 14:42:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://decision08.net/2006/07/27/a-tale-of-two-howards-but-only-one-billmon/#comment-70640</guid>
		<description>[...] In RightieWorld, one either supports Israel&#8217;s every cough or one hopes for Israel&#8217;s destruction. It&#8217;s beyond their comprehension that a person could support Israel&#8217;s right to exist in peace and yet condemn its current actions. This rightie thinks Howard Dean is inconsistent because he said, in 2003, that the United States should not take sides in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict &#8212; “Israel has always been a longtime ally with a special relationship with the United States, but if we are going to bargain by being in the middle of the negotiations then we are going to have to take an evenhanded role.&#8221; But in 2006 he said of the government of Iraq &#8212; &#8220;We don’t need to spend $200 and $300 and $500 billion bringing democracy to Iraq to turn it over to people who believe that Israel doesn’t have a right to defend itself and who refuse to condemn Hezbollah.&#8221; [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] In RightieWorld, one either supports Israel&#8217;s every cough or one hopes for Israel&#8217;s destruction. It&#8217;s beyond their comprehension that a person could support Israel&#8217;s right to exist in peace and yet condemn its current actions. This rightie thinks Howard Dean is inconsistent because he said, in 2003, that the United States should not take sides in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict &#8212; “Israel has always been a longtime ally with a special relationship with the United States, but if we are going to bargain by being in the middle of the negotiations then we are going to have to take an evenhanded role.&#8221; But in 2006 he said of the government of Iraq &#8212; &#8220;We don’t need to spend $200 and $300 and $500 billion bringing democracy to Iraq to turn it over to people who believe that Israel doesn’t have a right to defend itself and who refuse to condemn Hezbollah.&#8221; [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

