<?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: Courting Trouble</title>
	<atom:link href="http://malcolmpollack.com/2009/11/20/courting-trouble-2/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://malcolmpollack.com/2009/11/20/courting-trouble-2/</link>
	<description>I go many places</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 24 May 2012 02:48:20 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Malcolm</title>
		<link>http://malcolmpollack.com/2009/11/20/courting-trouble-2/comment-page-1/#comment-155513</link>
		<dc:creator>Malcolm</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 22 Nov 2009 03:28:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://malcolmpollack.com/2009/11/20/courting-trouble-2/#comment-155513</guid>
		<description>No, JK, it&#039;s &#039;pantywaist&#039;. Sorry.

Peter, the party whose remarks are being quoted here are those of Eric Holder, the Obama administration&#039;s Attorney General. That IS the opposing view. Taranto expressed exactly what I would have said, and it was simpler just to quote him, as he had already done the heavy lifting.

You may recall that I quoted Jonah Goldberg in a very recent post precisely because I disagreed with him sharply, and wanted to rebut his position.

When I repost items from other writers, it is either because I disagree and want to explain why, or because I agree and feel that the author has already done a good job of making an important point.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>No, JK, it&#8217;s &#8216;pantywaist&#8217;. Sorry.</p>
<p>Peter, the party whose remarks are being quoted here are those of Eric Holder, the Obama administration&#8217;s Attorney General. That IS the opposing view. Taranto expressed exactly what I would have said, and it was simpler just to quote him, as he had already done the heavy lifting.</p>
<p>You may recall that I quoted Jonah Goldberg in a very recent post precisely because I disagreed with him sharply, and wanted to rebut his position.</p>
<p>When I repost items from other writers, it is either because I disagree and want to explain why, or because I agree and feel that the author has already done a good job of making an important point.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: JK</title>
		<link>http://malcolmpollack.com/2009/11/20/courting-trouble-2/comment-page-1/#comment-155512</link>
		<dc:creator>JK</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 22 Nov 2009 03:05:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://malcolmpollack.com/2009/11/20/courting-trouble-2/#comment-155512</guid>
		<description>I &quot;think&quot; it&#039;s spelled, panty &lt;em&gt;waste.&lt;/em&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I &#8220;think&#8221; it&#8217;s spelled, panty <em>waste.</em></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Peter, the one eyed man</title>
		<link>http://malcolmpollack.com/2009/11/20/courting-trouble-2/comment-page-1/#comment-155507</link>
		<dc:creator>Peter, the one eyed man</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 21 Nov 2009 22:55:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://malcolmpollack.com/2009/11/20/courting-trouble-2/#comment-155507</guid>
		<description>I came not to argue, but to make a suggestion.

Political threads here invariably quote from the same group of like-minded individuals:  Jonah Goldberg, the Wall Street Journal, Norman Podhoretz, and so forth.

My suggestion would be to take the opposite approach, and find an opposing view and deconstruct it.  Not a pantywaist liberal like Alan Colmes, but something from a well-reasoned and thoughtful source, whether it is liberal (e.g., Glenn Greenwald or Rachel Maddow) or centrist (e.g., the New York Times or the Economist). 

I mean, if you&#039;re going to rigorously analyse these issues, it makes sense to leave the echo chamber and point out the putative weaknesses in the arguments of the other side ...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I came not to argue, but to make a suggestion.</p>
<p>Political threads here invariably quote from the same group of like-minded individuals:  Jonah Goldberg, the Wall Street Journal, Norman Podhoretz, and so forth.</p>
<p>My suggestion would be to take the opposite approach, and find an opposing view and deconstruct it.  Not a pantywaist liberal like Alan Colmes, but something from a well-reasoned and thoughtful source, whether it is liberal (e.g., Glenn Greenwald or Rachel Maddow) or centrist (e.g., the New York Times or the Economist). </p>
<p>I mean, if you&#8217;re going to rigorously analyse these issues, it makes sense to leave the echo chamber and point out the putative weaknesses in the arguments of the other side &#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

