<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	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/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Liberal Whoppers</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com</link>
	<description>The truth without the spin</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 18:59:20 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Feel Good with Rick</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/feel-good-with-rick/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/feel-good-with-rick/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 18:59:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Congress]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/feel-good-with-rick/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ If you think Rick Santorum can get independents, go for it, folks. Senator Santorum, who enjoyed a magnificent triumph in three states last night, deserves a lot of credit, as he would no doubt be the first to tell you, for hanging in there. He has been impressive in recent debates. And a grateful nation thanks Mr. Santorum for seemingly having dispatched Newt Gingrich back under his bridge, at least for the time being.  But last night was not good for the Republican party. ...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> If you think Rick Santorum can get independents, go for it, folks. Senator Santorum, who enjoyed a magnificent triumph in three states last night, deserves a lot of credit, as he would no doubt be the first to tell you, for hanging in there. He has been impressive in recent debates. And a grateful nation thanks Mr. Santorum for seemingly having dispatched Newt Gingrich back under his bridge, at least for the time being.  But last night was not good for the Republican party. &#8230;</p>
<p>Read the original post:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/290505/feel-good-rick-charlotte-hays" title="Feel Good with Rick">Feel Good with Rick</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/feel-good-with-rick/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Does the Right to Choose a Roommate Include a Right to Advertise Discriminatory Preferences?</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/does-the-right-to-choose-a-roommate-include-a-right-to-advertise-discriminatory-preferences/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/does-the-right-to-choose-a-roommate-include-a-right-to-advertise-discriminatory-preferences/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 18:46:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/does-the-right-to-choose-a-roommate-include-a-right-to-advertise-discriminatory-preferences/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ Last week, Eugene blogged about the Ninth Circuit’s opinion in Fair Housing Council v. Roommate.com .  As Eugene noted, the court, in an opinion by Judge Alex Kozinski, holds that federal and state housing discrimination law do not extend to discrimination in choice of roommates (or in advertising for roommates). Part of the court’s rationale is its judgment that reading the law as applying to roommate selection would raise serious constitutional concerns, given the right to “intimate association” that the Supreme Court has recognized in cases such as Bd. of Dirs. of Rotary Int’l v. Rotary Club of Duarte (1987); the Ninth Circuit therefore interprets the federal and state laws, which it sees as not definitive on the subject, to avoid the constitutional problem. I...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> Last week, Eugene blogged about the Ninth Circuit’s opinion in Fair Housing Council v. Roommate.com .  As Eugene noted, the court, in an opinion by Judge Alex Kozinski, holds that federal and state housing discrimination law do not extend to discrimination in choice of roommates (or in advertising for roommates). Part of the court’s rationale is its judgment that reading the law as applying to roommate selection would raise serious constitutional concerns, given the right to “intimate association” that the Supreme Court has recognized in cases such as Bd. of Dirs. of Rotary Int’l v. Rotary Club of Duarte (1987); the Ninth Circuit therefore interprets the federal and state laws, which it sees as not definitive on the subject, to avoid the constitutional problem. I&#8230;</p>
<p>Excerpt from:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://volokh.com/2012/02/08/does-the-right-to-choose-a-roommate-include-a-right-to-advertise-discriminatory-preferences/" title="Does the Right to Choose a Roommate Include a Right to Advertise Discriminatory Preferences?">Does the Right to Choose a Roommate Include a Right to Advertise Discriminatory Preferences?</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/does-the-right-to-choose-a-roommate-include-a-right-to-advertise-discriminatory-preferences/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Civil Unions Are Important</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/civil-unions-are-important/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/civil-unions-are-important/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 18:39:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/civil-unions-are-important/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I don't have anything to add to Drew's Prop 8 post. Just the note that civil unions (or more properly, as California terms them "registered domestic partnerships") were important. I mean that in the value-neutral sense. Not that they're necessarily...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t have anything to add to Drew&#8217;s Prop 8 post. Just the note that civil unions (or more properly, as California terms them &#8220;registered domestic partnerships&#8221;) were important. I mean that in the value-neutral sense. Not that they&#8217;re necessarily&#8230;</p>
<p>Originally posted here:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://minx.cc/?post=326537" title="Civil Unions Are Important">Civil Unions Are Important</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/civil-unions-are-important/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Just Another Morning in American Politics</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/just-another-morning-in-american-politics/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/just-another-morning-in-american-politics/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 18:34:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/just-another-morning-in-american-politics/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ There was a day, not long ago, when the Fox News Channel (other than Greta Van Susteren) didn’t bother to cover the Rick Santorum presidential campaign. Now, he’s a man with a booked schedule, with hosts all wanting their window with him ( see here ).  ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> There was a day, not long ago, when the Fox News Channel (other than Greta Van Susteren) didn’t bother to cover the Rick Santorum presidential campaign. Now, he’s a man with a booked schedule, with hosts all wanting their window with him ( see here ).  </p>
<p>Read more from the original source:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/290504/just-another-morning-american-politics-kathryn-jean-lopez" title="Just Another Morning in American Politics">Just Another Morning in American Politics</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/just-another-morning-in-american-politics/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>On the Progressivity of the U.S. Federal Tax System</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/on-the-progressivity-of-the-u-s-federal-tax-system/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/on-the-progressivity-of-the-u-s-federal-tax-system/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 18:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/on-the-progressivity-of-the-u-s-federal-tax-system/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[   Over at the  Washington Examiner , I  responded  to Jonathan Chait’s most recent  feedback  on  my observation  that the United States’ federal tax system is more progressive than those of other Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) nations. The  original article  in the  Examiner noted that, looking at the OECD data, it’s hard to claim that rising inequality in the U.S. is the product of a lack of progressivity in the federal tax code — a claim we often hear. The data shows that countries with supposedly less inequality than the U.S. have more-regressive tax codes. I also noted that raising taxes  only  on the rich won’t address our debt ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>   Over at the  Washington Examiner , I  responded  to Jonathan Chait’s most recent  feedback  on  my observation  that the United States’ federal tax system is more progressive than those of other Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) nations. The  original article  in the  Examiner noted that, looking at the OECD data, it’s hard to claim that rising inequality in the U.S. is the product of a lack of progressivity in the federal tax code — a claim we often hear. The data shows that countries with supposedly less inequality than the U.S. have more-regressive tax codes. I also noted that raising taxes  only  on the rich won’t address our debt </p>
<p>Read more here:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/290309/progressivity-us-federal-tax-system-veronique-de-rugy" title="On the Progressivity of the U.S. Federal Tax System">On the Progressivity of the U.S. Federal Tax System</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/on-the-progressivity-of-the-u-s-federal-tax-system/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>#InevitabilityFail</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/inevitabilityfail/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/inevitabilityfail/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 17:53:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/inevitabilityfail/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ The coup de grace to Mitt Romney's very bad night: He finished third in Minnesota . ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> The coup de grace to Mitt Romney&#8217;s very bad night: He finished third in Minnesota . </p>
<p>See the original post:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Talking-Points-Memo/~3/pymlvpW9Mkw/inevitabilityfail.php" title="#InevitabilityFail">#InevitabilityFail</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/inevitabilityfail/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Top Headline Comments 2-8-12</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/top-headline-comments-2-8-12/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/top-headline-comments-2-8-12/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 17:51:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/top-headline-comments-2-8-12/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Happy Wednesday. The State Department is cutting and running from its Iraq mega-embassy. It seems the salad bar ran out and there's no Splenda for coffee. Really. Those are their actual, ISYN, complaints. Oh, and they're limited to only six...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Happy Wednesday. The State Department is cutting and running from its Iraq mega-embassy. It seems the salad bar ran out and there&#8217;s no Splenda for coffee. Really. Those are their actual, ISYN, complaints. Oh, and they&#8217;re limited to only six&#8230;</p>
<p>See more here:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://minx.cc/?post=326535" title="Top Headline Comments 2-8-12">Top Headline Comments 2-8-12</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/top-headline-comments-2-8-12/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Tee Pawed</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/tee-pawed/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/tee-pawed/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 17:46:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/tee-pawed/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ Last night’s big loser was Mitt Romney. The runner-up: Tim Pawlenty, the former GOP governor of Minnesota. He just lost the veepstakes. I like Pawlenty. Last year, when it became clear that Mitch Daniels and a few others weren’t going to run for president, and before Pawlenty himself dropped out, it might have been fair to call me a “Pawlenty leaner.” So I say this with no pleasure: His endorsement delivered nothing. Romney finished third in Minnesota–a distant third, no less. So if Romney wins the nomination, will anybody say that choosing Pawlenty for veep will ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> Last night’s big loser was Mitt Romney. The runner-up: Tim Pawlenty, the former GOP governor of Minnesota. He just lost the veepstakes. I like Pawlenty. Last year, when it became clear that Mitch Daniels and a few others weren’t going to run for president, and before Pawlenty himself dropped out, it might have been fair to call me a “Pawlenty leaner.” So I say this with no pleasure: His endorsement delivered nothing. Romney finished third in Minnesota–a distant third, no less. So if Romney wins the nomination, will anybody say that choosing Pawlenty for veep will </p>
<p>Follow this link:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/290501/tee-pawed-john-j-miller" title="Tee Pawed">Tee Pawed</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/tee-pawed/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Sheriff Joe Arpaio Hasn&#8217;t Delivered On Cash He Promised Fellow Border Hawks</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/sheriff-joe-arpaio-hasnt-delivered-on-cash-he-promised-fellow-border-hawks/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/sheriff-joe-arpaio-hasnt-delivered-on-cash-he-promised-fellow-border-hawks/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 17:21:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Congress]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/sheriff-joe-arpaio-hasnt-delivered-on-cash-he-promised-fellow-border-hawks/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ When Sheriff Joe Arpaio launched his own federal political action committee last year, he vowed to move beyond his role as just a national leader for immigration hardliners. He wanted to become one of their more serious sources of campaign cash. But months after announcing the creation of Joe PAC, the Arizona sheriff's desire to become a major financial backer for the movement is far from reality. Instead, it has been consumed by his own bid for reelection. As of Dec. 31, Joe PAC had managed to scrape together only about $20,000, according to financial disclosures filed last week with the Federal Election Commission. None of it had been spent on other candidates or groups. The tally is nowhere near the $6 million Arpaio hauled in as part of his bid ...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> When Sheriff Joe Arpaio launched his own federal political action committee last year, he vowed to move beyond his role as just a national leader for immigration hardliners. He wanted to become one of their more serious sources of campaign cash. But months after announcing the creation of Joe PAC, the Arizona sheriff&#8217;s desire to become a major financial backer for the movement is far from reality. Instead, it has been consumed by his own bid for reelection. As of Dec. 31, Joe PAC had managed to scrape together only about $20,000, according to financial disclosures filed last week with the Federal Election Commission. None of it had been spent on other candidates or groups. The tally is nowhere near the $6 million Arpaio hauled in as part of his bid &#8230;</p>
<p>More:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/TPMmuckraker/~3/P3kvEwr9pos/sheriff_joe_arpaio_lags_on_financial_promise_to_he.php" title="Sheriff Joe Arpaio Hasn't Delivered On Cash He Promised Fellow Border Hawks">Sheriff Joe Arpaio Hasn&#8217;t Delivered On Cash He Promised Fellow Border Hawks</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/sheriff-joe-arpaio-hasnt-delivered-on-cash-he-promised-fellow-border-hawks/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Proposition 8: What Happens Next?</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/proposition-8-what-happens-next/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/proposition-8-what-happens-next/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 17:18:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/proposition-8-what-happens-next/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ Now that a Ninth Circuit panel has ruled that California's ban on gay marriage is unconstitutional, it seems inevitable that the ruling on Proposition 8 will eventually be appealed to the Supreme Court. But whether the Supreme Court agrees to hear it is another story. At this point, proponents of Prop 8 have fourteen days to decide whether to petition for a rehearing. If granted, an eleven-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit will hear the case, which could take another six months to a year. If the initiative's supporters choose to go straight to the Supreme Court, four of the nine justices would have to vote in favor of hearing the case for it to be taken up. Judge Stephen Reinhardt, who wrote the majority opinion for the 2-1 ruling, determined that...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> Now that a Ninth Circuit panel has ruled that California&#8217;s ban on gay marriage is unconstitutional, it seems inevitable that the ruling on Proposition 8 will eventually be appealed to the Supreme Court. But whether the Supreme Court agrees to hear it is another story. At this point, proponents of Prop 8 have fourteen days to decide whether to petition for a rehearing. If granted, an eleven-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit will hear the case, which could take another six months to a year. If the initiative&#8217;s supporters choose to go straight to the Supreme Court, four of the nine justices would have to vote in favor of hearing the case for it to be taken up. Judge Stephen Reinhardt, who wrote the majority opinion for the 2-1 ruling, determined that&#8230;</p>
<p>See the original post:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/TPMmuckraker/~3/VrDZAvqQzQ8/proposition_8_what_happens_next.php" title="Proposition 8: What Happens Next?">Proposition 8: What Happens Next?</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/proposition-8-what-happens-next/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Why South Carolina&#8217;s Voter ID Suit Could Be Bound For The Supreme Court</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/why-south-carolinas-voter-id-suit-could-be-bound-for-the-supreme-court/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/why-south-carolinas-voter-id-suit-could-be-bound-for-the-supreme-court/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 17:05:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Congress]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/why-south-carolinas-voter-id-suit-could-be-bound-for-the-supreme-court/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ Paul Clement is the former Solicitor General of the United States and the guy conservatives go to when there's a Supreme Court case on the line. So it's not surprising that it was Clement's signature that ended up on the complaint filed on behalf of the state of South Carolina this week, in a suit against Attorney General Eric Holder over DOJ's decision to block the state's voter ID law because of the disparate impact the state's numbers show it will have on minority voters. It's a suit that supporters hope will not only enshrine South Carolina's voter ID requirement as the unquestioned law of the state, but that will also do away with federal restrictions placed on states like South Carolina because of their clear history of...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> Paul Clement is the former Solicitor General of the United States and the guy conservatives go to when there&#8217;s a Supreme Court case on the line. So it&#8217;s not surprising that it was Clement&#8217;s signature that ended up on the complaint filed on behalf of the state of South Carolina this week, in a suit against Attorney General Eric Holder over DOJ&#8217;s decision to block the state&#8217;s voter ID law because of the disparate impact the state&#8217;s numbers show it will have on minority voters. It&#8217;s a suit that supporters hope will not only enshrine South Carolina&#8217;s voter ID requirement as the unquestioned law of the state, but that will also do away with federal restrictions placed on states like South Carolina because of their clear history of&#8230;</p>
<p>Read this article:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/TPMmuckraker/~3/WvP6WYt_U2U/why_south_carolinas_voter_id_suit_could_be_bound_for_the_supreme_court.php" title="Why South Carolina's Voter ID Suit Could Be Bound For The Supreme Court">Why South Carolina&#8217;s Voter ID Suit Could Be Bound For The Supreme Court</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/why-south-carolinas-voter-id-suit-could-be-bound-for-the-supreme-court/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>A Big, Big Win for Santorum . . . Errr . . . CPAC</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/a-big-big-win-for-santorum-errr-cpac/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/a-big-big-win-for-santorum-errr-cpac/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 15:46:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/a-big-big-win-for-santorum-errr-cpac/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ Mitt Romney had a horrible, horrible night. Early yesterday, Mitt Romney’s campaign called Missouri a “beauty contest” and said to focus on Colorado. We did. Wow. I’ve said since Sunday that yesterday would be the first day of voting that Mitt Romney’s “poor” comment to Soledad O’Brien would have an impact. It typically takes a week for comments like that to be digested by voters. Six days after Romney opened his mouth, Rick Santorum swept the night. From Missouri to Minnesota to Colorado the Republican electorate sent a very clear signal — they want conviction...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> Mitt Romney had a horrible, horrible night. Early yesterday, Mitt Romney’s campaign called Missouri a “beauty contest” and said to focus on Colorado. We did. Wow. I’ve said since Sunday that yesterday would be the first day of voting that Mitt Romney’s “poor” comment to Soledad O’Brien would have an impact. It typically takes a week for comments like that to be digested by voters. Six days after Romney opened his mouth, Rick Santorum swept the night. From Missouri to Minnesota to Colorado the Republican electorate sent a very clear signal — they want conviction&#8230;</p>
<p>Read this article:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.redstate.com/erick/2012/02/08/a-big-big-win-for-santorum-errr-cpac/" title="A Big, Big Win for Santorum . . . Errr . . . CPAC">A Big, Big Win for Santorum . . . Errr . . . CPAC</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/a-big-big-win-for-santorum-errr-cpac/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Morning Briefing for February 8, 2012</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/morning-briefing-for-february-8-2012/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/morning-briefing-for-february-8-2012/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 15:45:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Congress]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/morning-briefing-for-february-8-2012/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ RedState Morning Briefing For February 1, 2012 Go to www.RedStateMB.com to get the Morning Briefing every morning at no charge. 1. A Big, Big Win for Santorum . . . Errr . . . CPAC 2. Justice Ginsburg and the Need to Oppose Radical Judicial Nominees 3. Ron Paul, Constitutional Scholar ———————————————————————- 1. A Big, Big Win for Santorum . . . Errr . . . CPAC Mitt Romney had a horrible, horrible night. Early yesterday, Mitt Romney’s campaign called Missouri a “beauty contest” and said to focus on Colorado. We did. Wow. I’ve said since Sunday that yesterday would be the first day of voting that Mitt Romney’s “poor” comment to Soledad O’Brien would have an impact. It typically takes a week for comments like that...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> RedState Morning Briefing For February 1, 2012 Go to www.RedStateMB.com to get the Morning Briefing every morning at no charge. 1. A Big, Big Win for Santorum . . . Errr . . . CPAC 2. Justice Ginsburg and the Need to Oppose Radical Judicial Nominees 3. Ron Paul, Constitutional Scholar ———————————————————————- 1. A Big, Big Win for Santorum . . . Errr . . . CPAC Mitt Romney had a horrible, horrible night. Early yesterday, Mitt Romney’s campaign called Missouri a “beauty contest” and said to focus on Colorado. We did. Wow. I’ve said since Sunday that yesterday would be the first day of voting that Mitt Romney’s “poor” comment to Soledad O’Brien would have an impact. It typically takes a week for comments like that&#8230;</p>
<p>Original post:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.redstate.com/erick/2012/02/08/morning-briefing-for-february-8-2012/" title="Morning Briefing for February 8, 2012">Morning Briefing for February 8, 2012</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/morning-briefing-for-february-8-2012/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>I endorse . . .</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/i-endorse/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/i-endorse/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 14:29:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/i-endorse/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Move over Donald Trump (your hair, too).  I have my own endorsement to make. Now that the GOP field of contenders has been narrowed to just three people – Romney, Gingrich and Santorum – I feel comfortable enough to present the hightly-coveted Melmacian endorsement to . . . Yeah, yeah. luaP noR is still technically ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Move over Donald Trump (your hair, too).  I have my own endorsement to make. Now that the GOP field of contenders has been narrowed to just three people – Romney, Gingrich and Santorum – I feel comfortable enough to present the hightly-coveted Melmacian endorsement to . . . Yeah, yeah. luaP noR is still technically </p>
<p>Go here to see the original:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://feeds.wizbangblog.com/~r/Wizbang/~3/sW74YFpZpKs/" title="I endorse . . .">I endorse . . .</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/i-endorse/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Santorum Sweeps CO, MO, and MN</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/santorum-sweeps-co-mo-and-mn/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/santorum-sweeps-co-mo-and-mn/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 13:39:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/santorum-sweeps-co-mo-and-mn/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The hat-trick. He won 40%-35% in Colorados caucuses and that was his least convincing win. He was 45% to Ron Pauls 27% in Minnesota and 55% to Romneys anemic 25% in Missouri. Romney has to realize that his strategy of...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The hat-trick. He won 40%-35% in Colorados caucuses and that was his least convincing win. He was 45% to Ron Pauls 27% in Minnesota and 55% to Romneys anemic 25% in Missouri. Romney has to realize that his strategy of&#8230;</p>
<p>View post:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://minx.cc/?post=326532" title="Santorum Sweeps CO, MO, and MN">Santorum Sweeps CO, MO, and MN</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/santorum-sweeps-co-mo-and-mn/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Curious George</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/curious-george/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/curious-george/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 12:45:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[White House]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/curious-george/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ To run against a storyteller, such as the writer in the White House, you need a story to tell. Mitt Romney has one. But he’s hesitant to tell it. The most compelling part of his past — his family’s dogged journey — is rarely discussed. Instead, playing it safe, Romney highlights Bain and the Olympics. His father’s humble beginnings as a Mormon outcast in Mexico, and his own tumultuous experience as a missionary in France, have, for the most part, been kept out of the political playbook. Until tonight. Keep reading this post . . . ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> To run against a storyteller, such as the writer in the White House, you need a story to tell. Mitt Romney has one. But he’s hesitant to tell it. The most compelling part of his past — his family’s dogged journey — is rarely discussed. Instead, playing it safe, Romney highlights Bain and the Olympics. His father’s humble beginnings as a Mormon outcast in Mexico, and his own tumultuous experience as a missionary in France, have, for the most part, been kept out of the political playbook. Until tonight. Keep reading this post . . . </p>
<p>Link:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/290500/curious-george-robert-costa" title="Curious George">Curious George</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/curious-george/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Insert &#8216;Rickroll&#8217; Joke Here</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/insert-rickroll-joke-here/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/insert-rickroll-joke-here/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 12:18:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/insert-rickroll-joke-here/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ Santorum takes all three of Tuesday night's contests. ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> Santorum takes all three of Tuesday night&#8217;s contests. </p>
<p>More:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Talking-Points-Memo/~3/dXzCcx7rzhQ/insert_rickroll_joke_here.php" title="Insert 'Rickroll' Joke Here">Insert &#8216;Rickroll&#8217; Joke Here</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/insert-rickroll-joke-here/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Santorum Sweeps</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/santorum-sweeps/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/santorum-sweeps/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 12:14:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/santorum-sweeps/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ As of today, Rick Santorum officially has no more delegates than he had yesterday. That said, as CNN is just now this moment calling Colorado for Santorum in a stunning upset, his clean sweep of the states who voted/caucused today is a stunning rebuke to both Romney’s purported march through February and Newt Gingrich’s position as the favored not-Romney candidate. Santorum’s performance was impressive in each state, vastly outperforming his position in the polls, which had him losing by 9 points in Colorado (he won by 5) and winning by only 9 in Minnesota (he won by 18). It is hard to tell who got clobbered worse – Romney, who fell...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> As of today, Rick Santorum officially has no more delegates than he had yesterday. That said, as CNN is just now this moment calling Colorado for Santorum in a stunning upset, his clean sweep of the states who voted/caucused today is a stunning rebuke to both Romney’s purported march through February and Newt Gingrich’s position as the favored not-Romney candidate. Santorum’s performance was impressive in each state, vastly outperforming his position in the polls, which had him losing by 9 points in Colorado (he won by 5) and winning by only 9 in Minnesota (he won by 18). It is hard to tell who got clobbered worse – Romney, who fell&#8230;</p>
<p>More here:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.redstate.com/leon_h_wolf/2012/02/08/santorum-sweeps/" title="Santorum Sweeps">Santorum Sweeps</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/santorum-sweeps/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Rick Wins</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/rick-wins/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/rick-wins/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 12:10:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/rick-wins/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ The GOP chairman in Colorado just declared the caucus there tonight a win for Rick Santorum. Hard work pays off. Focusing on issues, substance pays off. And this race is not over yet. (See here , scroll down for more.) Santorum is a leader. And people do happen to be looking for one.  ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> The GOP chairman in Colorado just declared the caucus there tonight a win for Rick Santorum. Hard work pays off. Focusing on issues, substance pays off. And this race is not over yet. (See here , scroll down for more.) Santorum is a leader. And people do happen to be looking for one.  </p>
<p>See the original post:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/290499/rick-wins-kathryn-jean-lopez" title="Rick Wins">Rick Wins</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/rick-wins/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>How Dangerous Is Obama?</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/how-dangerous-is-obama/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/how-dangerous-is-obama/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 12:04:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[james lewis]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/how-dangerous-is-obama/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This nuclear brinkmanship with Iran is simply characteristic of Barack Obama and left-of-leftist maniacs like him.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This nuclear brinkmanship with Iran is simply characteristic of Barack Obama and left-of-leftist maniacs like him.</p>
<p>Read the rest here:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/02/how_dangerous_is_obama.html" title="How Dangerous Is Obama?">How Dangerous Is Obama?</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/how-dangerous-is-obama/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Let&#8217;s Stop Obama-ing Apart</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/lets-stop-obama-ing-apart/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/lets-stop-obama-ing-apart/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 12:04:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[christopher chantrill]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/lets-stop-obama-ing-apart/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[There are four pillars to ensure a successful society...and the Obama administration is chipping away at all of them.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There are four pillars to ensure a successful society&#8230;and the Obama administration is chipping away at all of them.</p>
<p>Visit link:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/02/lets_stop_obama-ing_apart.html" title="Let's Stop Obama-ing Apart">Let&#8217;s Stop Obama-ing Apart</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/lets-stop-obama-ing-apart/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>CPAC for Sissies: Self-Censoring for Sharia</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/cpac-for-sissies-self-censoring-for-sharia/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/cpac-for-sissies-self-censoring-for-sharia/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 12:03:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pamela geller]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/cpac-for-sissies-self-censoring-for-sharia/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[CPAC starts tomorrow, but one particular subject of incredible import to conservatives is absent from the roster...or at least, it's almost absent.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>CPAC starts tomorrow, but one particular subject of incredible import to conservatives is absent from the roster&#8230;or at least, it&#8217;s almost absent.</p>
<p>Read more from the original source:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/02/cpac_for_sissies_self-censoring_for_sharia.html" title="CPAC for Sissies: Self-Censoring for Sharia">CPAC for Sissies: Self-Censoring for Sharia</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/cpac-for-sissies-self-censoring-for-sharia/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Obama&#8217;s War against Catholics</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/obamas-war-against-catholics/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/obamas-war-against-catholics/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 12:03:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[keith riler]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/obamas-war-against-catholics/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Between the Army's squelching military chaplains and Obama's recent contraception edict against the church, there is no doubt that a state-sponsored war on Catholicism is actively underway.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Between the Army&#8217;s squelching military chaplains and Obama&#8217;s recent contraception edict against the church, there is no doubt that a state-sponsored war on Catholicism is actively underway.</p>
<p>Here is the original post:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/02/obamas_war_against_catholics.html" title="Obama's War against Catholics">Obama&#8217;s War against Catholics</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/obamas-war-against-catholics/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Voter Integrity Laws Gathering Momentum across the U.S.</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/voter-integrity-laws-gathering-momentum-across-the-u-s/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/voter-integrity-laws-gathering-momentum-across-the-u-s/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 12:02:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[elise cooper]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/voter-integrity-laws-gathering-momentum-across-the-u-s/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Contra the Holder DOJ, states across the Union are ramping up protections against fraudulent voting.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Contra the Holder DOJ, states across the Union are ramping up protections against fraudulent voting.</p>
<p>Read more from the original source:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/02/voter_integrity_laws_gathering_momentum_across_the_us.html" title="Voter Integrity Laws Gathering Momentum across the U.S.">Voter Integrity Laws Gathering Momentum across the U.S.</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/voter-integrity-laws-gathering-momentum-across-the-u-s/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>I Will Pay My &quot;Fair Share&quot; of Taxes When&#8230;</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/i-will-pay-my-fair-share-of-taxes-when/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/i-will-pay-my-fair-share-of-taxes-when/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 12:02:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[robert j. mack]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/i-will-pay-my-fair-share-of-taxes-when/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[President Obama is being totally unfair to the people he wants to tax in order to pay for his dream of an evenhanded America. So here's when I'll pay my fair share.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>President Obama is being totally unfair to the people he wants to tax in order to pay for his dream of an evenhanded America. So here&#8217;s when I&#8217;ll pay my fair share.</p>
<p>The rest is here:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/02/i_will_pay_my_fair_share_of_taxes_when.html" title="I Will Pay My &quot;Fair Share&quot; of Taxes When...">I Will Pay My &quot;Fair Share&quot; of Taxes When&#8230;</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/i-will-pay-my-fair-share-of-taxes-when/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Understanding Unemployment Statistics</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/understanding-unemployment-statistics/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/understanding-unemployment-statistics/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 12:01:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[chris w. bell]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/understanding-unemployment-statistics/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It may come as a surprise that according to the federal government, an out-of-work person who who scours every available newspaper's want ads every morning and visits every job search website on the web with no luck may not be counted as unemployed.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It may come as a surprise that according to the federal government, an out-of-work person who who scours every available newspaper&#8217;s want ads every morning and visits every job search website on the web with no luck may not be counted as unemployed.</p>
<p>Read the original post:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/02/understanding_unemployment_statistics.html" title="Understanding Unemployment Statistics">Understanding Unemployment Statistics</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/understanding-unemployment-statistics/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Pop Quiz On The Constitution</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/pop-quiz-on-the-constitution/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/pop-quiz-on-the-constitution/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 11:28:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/pop-quiz-on-the-constitution/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ Background Information on Ruth’s comments to Egyptians looking for guidance on writing a new constitution: Justice Ginsburg And The Need To Oppose Radical Judicial Nominees Ruth Bader Ginsburg Trashes Constitution Ginsburg to Egyptians… Cross-Posted: TobyToons.com (Conservative Political Cartoons) ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> Background Information on Ruth’s comments to Egyptians looking for guidance on writing a new constitution: Justice Ginsburg And The Need To Oppose Radical Judicial Nominees Ruth Bader Ginsburg Trashes Constitution Ginsburg to Egyptians… Cross-Posted: TobyToons.com (Conservative Political Cartoons) </p>
<p>Go here to see the original:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.redstate.com/dia0420/2012/02/08/pop-quiz-on-the-constitution/" title="Pop Quiz On The Constitution">Pop Quiz On The Constitution</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/pop-quiz-on-the-constitution/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Some Random Tuesday Thoughts</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/some-random-tuesday-thoughts/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/some-random-tuesday-thoughts/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 11:26:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/some-random-tuesday-thoughts/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ A few years ago, there was a great deal of commentary that the GOP was becoming the exclusive province of Southern evangelicals. And yet all the primary and caucus victories so far this year have gone to a Mormon from Massachusetts, a Catholic from Pennsylvania, and a Catholic who nominally hails from Georgia but grew up in a variety of places including Pennsylvania and … (gulp)  France . Gingrich seems to be fading as the alternative to Romney: that’s what happens when your major policy idea comes from an  old Andy Griffith TV movie  and it turns into the cold open for  Saturday Night Live . Santorum is...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> A few years ago, there was a great deal of commentary that the GOP was becoming the exclusive province of Southern evangelicals. And yet all the primary and caucus victories so far this year have gone to a Mormon from Massachusetts, a Catholic from Pennsylvania, and a Catholic who nominally hails from Georgia but grew up in a variety of places including Pennsylvania and … (gulp)  France . Gingrich seems to be fading as the alternative to Romney: that’s what happens when your major policy idea comes from an  old Andy Griffith TV movie  and it turns into the cold open for  Saturday Night Live . Santorum is&#8230;</p>
<p>Go here to see the original:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/290494/some-random-tuesday-thoughts-john-j-pitney-jr" title="Some Random Tuesday Thoughts">Some Random Tuesday Thoughts</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/some-random-tuesday-thoughts/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>&#8216;ObamaCare&#8217;s Great Awakening&#8217;</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/obamacares-great-awakening/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/obamacares-great-awakening/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 11:20:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/obamacares-great-awakening/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ A Wall Street Journal editorial sums it up: “HHS tells religious believers to go to hell. The public notices.”   It concludes: Keep reading this post . . . ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> A Wall Street Journal editorial sums it up: “HHS tells religious believers to go to hell. The public notices.”   It concludes: Keep reading this post . . . </p>
<p>See original here:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/290493/obamacares-great-awakening-kathryn-jean-lopez" title="'ObamaCare's Great Awakening'">&#8216;ObamaCare&#8217;s Great Awakening&#8217;</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/obamacares-great-awakening/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>All That Glitters</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/all-that-glitters/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/all-that-glitters/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 11:14:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/all-that-glitters/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ Romney's night of humiliation is capped as someone moves to glitter-bomb him following his Denver speech. ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> Romney&#8217;s night of humiliation is capped as someone moves to glitter-bomb him following his Denver speech. </p>
<p>View original post here:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Talking-Points-Memo/~3/TRZVYdxEJqc/all_that_glitters.php" title="All That Glitters">All That Glitters</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/all-that-glitters/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Operation F&amp;F&#8230;Three Critical Questions</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/operation-ff-three-critical-questions/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/operation-ff-three-critical-questions/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 11:10:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[russ vaughn]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/operation-ff-three-critical-questions/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Closing in on the truth.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Closing in on the truth.</p>
<p>Read the original here:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2012/02/operation_ffthree_critical_questions.html" title="Operation F&#038;F...Three Critical Questions">Operation F&#038;F&#8230;Three Critical Questions</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/operation-ff-three-critical-questions/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>California court overturns Prop 8</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/california-court-overturns-prop-8/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/california-court-overturns-prop-8/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 11:05:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[matt c. abbott]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/california-court-overturns-prop-8/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A federal constitutional right to same-sex marriage?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A federal constitutional right to same-sex marriage?</p>
<p>Original post:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2012/02/california_court_overturns_prop_8.html" title="California court overturns Prop 8">California court overturns Prop 8</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/california-court-overturns-prop-8/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Mitt&#8217;s Path</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/mitts-path/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/mitts-path/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 10:49:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/mitts-path/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ The big picture view is simple. Much like McCain in ‘08, Romney will continue to struggle to consolidate his position, even after it has become obvious that he is the only candidate with the national organization to grind out the 1,144 delegates needed to win the nomination and face President Obama in the fall. The resistance to Romney within the GOP base is stronger than he imagined; even big victories in some states can’t erase his weakness elsewhere. But the message isn’t that Santorum would be a winner in the fall — he very likely wouldn’t be — or that Santorum can take the nomination from Romney, though anything’s possible in politics. Rather, it’s that Romney won’t be able to take his foot off the gas pedal for a long time. Romney and his ...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> The big picture view is simple. Much like McCain in ‘08, Romney will continue to struggle to consolidate his position, even after it has become obvious that he is the only candidate with the national organization to grind out the 1,144 delegates needed to win the nomination and face President Obama in the fall. The resistance to Romney within the GOP base is stronger than he imagined; even big victories in some states can’t erase his weakness elsewhere. But the message isn’t that Santorum would be a winner in the fall — he very likely wouldn’t be — or that Santorum can take the nomination from Romney, though anything’s possible in politics. Rather, it’s that Romney won’t be able to take his foot off the gas pedal for a long time. Romney and his &#8230;</p>
<p>Go here to read the rest:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/290489/mitts-path-larry-sabato" title="Mitt's Path">Mitt&#8217;s Path</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/mitts-path/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Santorum Path</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/the-santorum-path/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/the-santorum-path/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 10:44:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/the-santorum-path/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ In Missouri, Santorum 55 percent, Romney 25 percent. With Gingrich off the ballot, Romney is in big trouble.   In Minnesota, Santorum 45 percent, Romney — a very distant third. Keep reading this post . . . ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> In Missouri, Santorum 55 percent, Romney 25 percent. With Gingrich off the ballot, Romney is in big trouble.   In Minnesota, Santorum 45 percent, Romney — a very distant third. Keep reading this post . . . </p>
<p>See original here:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/290495/santorum-path-maggie-gallagher" title="The Santorum Path">The Santorum Path</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/the-santorum-path/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Ron Paul, Constitutional Scholar</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/ron-paul-constitutional-scholar/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/ron-paul-constitutional-scholar/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 10:42:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Congress]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/ron-paul-constitutional-scholar/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ People like to say, “Ron Paul’s got a great domestic program, it’s just his foreign policy I don’t like.” Really, people only say that because they don’t take the time to understand what Ron Paul’s domestic program is all about , or at least the more insane details thereof. One particular example of this is Ron Paul’s view on monetary policy. Paul, who likes to present himself as some sort of Constitutional scholar, has said in his last several concession speeches that “the Constitution still says that only gold and silver can be legal...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> People like to say, “Ron Paul’s got a great domestic program, it’s just his foreign policy I don’t like.” Really, people only say that because they don’t take the time to understand what Ron Paul’s domestic program is all about , or at least the more insane details thereof. One particular example of this is Ron Paul’s view on monetary policy. Paul, who likes to present himself as some sort of Constitutional scholar, has said in his last several concession speeches that “the Constitution still says that only gold and silver can be legal&#8230;</p>
<p>Read this article:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.redstate.com/leon_h_wolf/2012/02/07/ron-paul-constitutional-scholar/" title="Ron Paul, Constitutional Scholar">Ron Paul, Constitutional Scholar</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/ron-paul-constitutional-scholar/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Meanwhile in Hades…</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/meanwhile-in-hades/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/meanwhile-in-hades/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 10:33:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/meanwhile-in-hades/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ As the Greek economy shrinks, tax revenues fall, and the hole gets deeper.   Ekathimerini report s: Budget revenues were found to be lagging by a considerable 1 billion euros in the year’s first month, provisional January data compiled by the Finance Ministry showed on Tuesday. Revenues posted a 7 percent decline compared with January 2011, while the target that had been set in the budget provided for an 8.9 percent annual increase. Worse still, value-added tax receipts posted an 18.7 percent decrease last month from January 2011 as the economy continues to tread ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> As the Greek economy shrinks, tax revenues fall, and the hole gets deeper.   Ekathimerini report s: Budget revenues were found to be lagging by a considerable 1 billion euros in the year’s first month, provisional January data compiled by the Finance Ministry showed on Tuesday. Revenues posted a 7 percent decline compared with January 2011, while the target that had been set in the budget provided for an 8.9 percent annual increase. Worse still, value-added tax receipts posted an 18.7 percent decrease last month from January 2011 as the economy continues to tread </p>
<p>See the original post here:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/290486/meanwhile-hades-andrew-stuttaford" title="Meanwhile in Hades…">Meanwhile in Hades…</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/meanwhile-in-hades/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Mitt&#8217;s Bad Night</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/mitts-bad-night/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/mitts-bad-night/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 10:28:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/mitts-bad-night/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ Romney’s shellacking as of 11pm EST is so great he is not leading in a single county in any state. That’s right — no county anywhere is giving him even a plurality of the vote. That’s a political equivalent of having a perfect game thrown against you. Keep reading this post . . . ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> Romney’s shellacking as of 11pm EST is so great he is not leading in a single county in any state. That’s right — no county anywhere is giving him even a plurality of the vote. That’s a political equivalent of having a perfect game thrown against you. Keep reading this post . . . </p>
<p>Read this article:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/290485/mitts-bad-night-henry-olsen" title="Mitt's Bad Night">Mitt&#8217;s Bad Night</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/mitts-bad-night/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>What Santorum&#8217;s Wins Mean</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/what-santorums-wins-mean/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/what-santorums-wins-mean/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 10:21:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/what-santorums-wins-mean/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ I was just chatting with our friend Larry Kudlow, who shared his read of Santorum’s victories (Minnesota and Missouri, as I blog): It’s a referendum on Obamacare and the Department of Health and Human Services mandate. What’s Santorum known for? His “steadfast pro-life defense.” Larry surmises: “ A vote for Rick Santorum tonight was the easiest and most immediate voter path to protest Obamacare and Obama’s pro-abortion view.” I tweeted ( @kathrynlopez ) something similar. While I’m not a fan of some of the attacks of this week, this win tonight seems like a pretty clear and strong message: Don’t make me pay a fee to follow my conscience. Don’t erode our freedom. Nix the HHS mandate … and Obamacare. Keep reading this post . . . ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> I was just chatting with our friend Larry Kudlow, who shared his read of Santorum’s victories (Minnesota and Missouri, as I blog): It’s a referendum on Obamacare and the Department of Health and Human Services mandate. What’s Santorum known for? His “steadfast pro-life defense.” Larry surmises: “ A vote for Rick Santorum tonight was the easiest and most immediate voter path to protest Obamacare and Obama’s pro-abortion view.” I tweeted ( @kathrynlopez ) something similar. While I’m not a fan of some of the attacks of this week, this win tonight seems like a pretty clear and strong message: Don’t make me pay a fee to follow my conscience. Don’t erode our freedom. Nix the HHS mandate … and Obamacare. Keep reading this post . . . </p>
<p>Go here to see the original:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/290478/what-santorums-wins-mean-kathryn-jean-lopez" title="What Santorum's Wins Mean">What Santorum&#8217;s Wins Mean</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/what-santorums-wins-mean/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Santorum Triuphant</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/santorum-triuphant/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/santorum-triuphant/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 10:21:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/santorum-triuphant/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ Rick Santorum’s hugely strong performances in Tuesday’s contests in Missouri, Minnesota, and Colorado amount to perhaps the most remarkable showing in a presidential-nomination battle since the eminently forgettable Henry Cabot Lodge won New Hampshire in 1964 as a decidedly unenthusiastic write-in candidate. Unlike Lodge, Santorum is a champion of conservatism, and his campaign will not prove at all forgettable. Santorum has run a campaign on a budgetary shoestring. He has been written off repeatedly by the pundit class and by the entire political establishment. He was supposed to appeal only to social conservatives. But he has triumphed tonight, after winning in Iowa, after winning...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> Rick Santorum’s hugely strong performances in Tuesday’s contests in Missouri, Minnesota, and Colorado amount to perhaps the most remarkable showing in a presidential-nomination battle since the eminently forgettable Henry Cabot Lodge won New Hampshire in 1964 as a decidedly unenthusiastic write-in candidate. Unlike Lodge, Santorum is a champion of conservatism, and his campaign will not prove at all forgettable. Santorum has run a campaign on a budgetary shoestring. He has been written off repeatedly by the pundit class and by the entire political establishment. He was supposed to appeal only to social conservatives. But he has triumphed tonight, after winning in Iowa, after winning&#8230;</p>
<p>Read the rest here:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/290481/santorum-triuphant-quin-hillyer" title="Santorum Triuphant">Santorum Triuphant</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/santorum-triuphant/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Liberals and the Constitution: A Postscript</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/liberals-and-the-constitution-a-postscript/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/liberals-and-the-constitution-a-postscript/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 10:15:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[liberals]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/liberals-and-the-constitution-a-postscript/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[(John Hinderaker) This morning, Steve did a great post titled Liberals and the Constitution. If you haven’t read it, you should. Steve wrote: [T]he prize for this week’s liberal obtuseness about the Constitution goes to Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who told an Egyptian television audience that “I would not look to the U.S. Constitution if I were drafting a constitution in the year 2012.” Instead, “I might look at the constitution of South Africa. That was a deliberate attempt to have a fundamental instrument of government that embraced basic human rights, had an independent judiciary.” She added that “you should certainly be aided by all the constitution-writing that has gone one since the end of World War II.” So, great minds think alike. Tonight Michael Ramirez made Steve’s point in graphic ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>(John Hinderaker) This morning, Steve did a great post titled Liberals and the Constitution. If you haven’t read it, you should. Steve wrote: [T]he prize for this week’s liberal obtuseness about the Constitution goes to Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who told an Egyptian television audience that “I would not look to the U.S. Constitution if I were drafting a constitution in the year 2012.” Instead, “I might look at the constitution of South Africa. That was a deliberate attempt to have a fundamental instrument of government that embraced basic human rights, had an independent judiciary.” She added that “you should certainly be aided by all the constitution-writing that has gone one since the end of World War II.” So, great minds think alike. Tonight Michael Ramirez made Steve’s point in graphic </p>
<p>See the rest here:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://feeds.powerlineblog.com/~r/powerlineblog/livefeed/~3/gOPdX8nTGGQ/liberals-and-the-constitution-a-postscript.php" title="Liberals and the Constitution: A Postscript">Liberals and the Constitution: A Postscript</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/liberals-and-the-constitution-a-postscript/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Santorum: I&#8217;m &#8216;the Conservative Alternative to Barack Obama&#8217;</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/santorum-im-the-conservative-alternative-to-barack-obama/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/santorum-im-the-conservative-alternative-to-barack-obama/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 10:15:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/santorum-im-the-conservative-alternative-to-barack-obama/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[   “Conservatism is alive and well in Missouri and Minnesota!” Keep reading this post . . . ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>   “Conservatism is alive and well in Missouri and Minnesota!” Keep reading this post . . . </p>
<p>Follow this link:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/290480/santorum-im-conservative-alternative-barack-obama-katrina-trinko" title="Santorum: I'm 'the Conservative Alternative to Barack Obama'">Santorum: I&#8217;m &#8216;the Conservative Alternative to Barack Obama&#8217;</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/santorum-im-the-conservative-alternative-to-barack-obama/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Mitt Romney Has Reason to Be Concerned</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/mitt-romney-has-reason-to-be-concerned/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/mitt-romney-has-reason-to-be-concerned/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 10:14:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/mitt-romney-has-reason-to-be-concerned/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ Mitt Romney’s campaign will have lots of explanations for their man’s poor showing tonight. Yes, Colorado and Minnesota were caucus states — the turnout is skewed in such contests toward a more conservative electorate. Yes, Missouri’s primary was a “beauty contest” and didn’t award any delegates. But what Romney won’t be able to explain away is just how much more poorly he did tonight in those three states than in his 2008 showing — when he lost the GOP nomination for president. Keep reading this post . . . ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> Mitt Romney’s campaign will have lots of explanations for their man’s poor showing tonight. Yes, Colorado and Minnesota were caucus states — the turnout is skewed in such contests toward a more conservative electorate. Yes, Missouri’s primary was a “beauty contest” and didn’t award any delegates. But what Romney won’t be able to explain away is just how much more poorly he did tonight in those three states than in his 2008 showing — when he lost the GOP nomination for president. Keep reading this post . . . </p>
<p>See the original post here:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/290479/mitt-romney-has-reason-be-concerned-john-fund" title="Mitt Romney Has Reason to Be Concerned">Mitt Romney Has Reason to Be Concerned</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/mitt-romney-has-reason-to-be-concerned/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Sheila Jackson Lee: Privatizing TSA Screeners Would Be Asking for Another 9/11</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/sheila-jackson-lee-privatizing-tsa-screeners-would-be-asking-for-another-911/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/sheila-jackson-lee-privatizing-tsa-screeners-would-be-asking-for-another-911/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 10:07:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Congress]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/sheila-jackson-lee-privatizing-tsa-screeners-would-be-asking-for-another-911/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ **Written by Doug Powers Texas Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee believes that the only thing standing between America and another horrific day like 9/11 is an army of blue-gloved unionized government employees . From Politico : Handing airport screening duties to private companies could result in another terrorist attack like Sept. 11, Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee said Tuesday afternoon. The Federal Aviation Administration authorization bill awaiting President Barack Obama’s signature directs the Transportation Security Administration to let more airports privatize their screening areas. “My comment: we are looking forward to returning to 9/11,” Jackson Lee (D-Texas) said at a House Homeland Security subcommittee hearing. You know who I wouldn’t want working airport security? A sizable chunk of Congress, starting with Sheila Jackson Lee — and she’s a government employee… go figure. Note to SJL: It’s not as if the government-...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> **Written by Doug Powers Texas Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee believes that the only thing standing between America and another horrific day like 9/11 is an army of blue-gloved unionized government employees . From Politico : Handing airport screening duties to private companies could result in another terrorist attack like Sept. 11, Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee said Tuesday afternoon. The Federal Aviation Administration authorization bill awaiting President Barack Obama’s signature directs the Transportation Security Administration to let more airports privatize their screening areas. “My comment: we are looking forward to returning to 9/11,” Jackson Lee (D-Texas) said at a House Homeland Security subcommittee hearing. You know who I wouldn’t want working airport security? A sizable chunk of Congress, starting with Sheila Jackson Lee — and she’s a government employee… go figure. Note to SJL: It’s not as if the government-&#8230;</p>
<p>See original here:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://michellemalkin.com/2012/02/07/sheila-jackson-lee-privatizing-tsa-screeners-would-be-asking-for-another-911/" title="Sheila Jackson Lee: Privatizing TSA Screeners Would Be Asking for Another 9/11">Sheila Jackson Lee: Privatizing TSA Screeners Would Be Asking for Another 9/11</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/sheila-jackson-lee-privatizing-tsa-screeners-would-be-asking-for-another-911/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Another Green Prophet Defects</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/another-green-prophet-defects/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/another-green-prophet-defects/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 09:48:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Climategate]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[energy policy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/another-green-prophet-defects/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[(John Hinderaker) One by one, the more honest of the scientists who fell for the anthropogenic global warming hoax are confessing their error. The latest is Germany’s Professor Fritz Vahrenholt. Melanie Phillips explains: [A] new book, Die Kalte Sonne , written by Prof Dr Fritz Vahrenholt and geologist/paleontologist Dr. Sebastian Lüning, has caused a sensation even in advance of its official publication yesterday. For Prof. Vahrenholt, a renewable energy expert, was one of the fathers of the modern German green movement and believed everything preached by the IPCC. But according to Focus magazine, he is...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>(John Hinderaker) One by one, the more honest of the scientists who fell for the anthropogenic global warming hoax are confessing their error. The latest is Germany’s Professor Fritz Vahrenholt. Melanie Phillips explains: [A] new book, Die Kalte Sonne , written by Prof Dr Fritz Vahrenholt and geologist/paleontologist Dr. Sebastian Lüning, has caused a sensation even in advance of its official publication yesterday. For Prof. Vahrenholt, a renewable energy expert, was one of the fathers of the modern German green movement and believed everything preached by the IPCC. But according to Focus magazine, he is&#8230;</p>
<p>See the original post:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://feeds.powerlineblog.com/~r/powerlineblog/livefeed/~3/KZS6RadmYnA/another-green-prophet-defects.php" title="Another Green Prophet Defects">Another Green Prophet Defects</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/another-green-prophet-defects/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Chris Matthews: Obama’s Smile Is Worth Five Or Ten Points In The General Election</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/chris-matthews-obamas-smile-is-worth-five-or-ten-points-in-the-general-election/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/chris-matthews-obamas-smile-is-worth-five-or-ten-points-in-the-general-election/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 09:46:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/chris-matthews-obamas-smile-is-worth-five-or-ten-points-in-the-general-election/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Chris Matthews is the epitome of an “in the tank media figure.” Who could ever forget his comments during the 2008 election that forever labeled him  with the nickname tingles? Commenting about Obama’s interview with Matt Lauer before the Super Bowl, Matthews said that Obama’s smile was worth five or ten points in the general. ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Chris Matthews is the epitome of an “in the tank media figure.” Who could ever forget his comments during the 2008 election that forever labeled him  with the nickname tingles? Commenting about Obama’s interview with Matt Lauer before the Super Bowl, Matthews said that Obama’s smile was worth five or ten points in the general. </p>
<p>See the article here:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://feeds.wizbangblog.com/~r/Wizbang/~3/bWhW849vdCc/" title="Chris Matthews: Obama’s Smile Is Worth Five Or Ten Points In The General Election">Chris Matthews: Obama’s Smile Is Worth Five Or Ten Points In The General Election</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/chris-matthews-obamas-smile-is-worth-five-or-ten-points-in-the-general-election/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Wipeout</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/wipeout/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/wipeout/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 09:40:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/wipeout/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ It's looking like Romney will not win a single county in Missouri. ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> It&#8217;s looking like Romney will not win a single county in Missouri. </p>
<p>Go here to see the original:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Talking-Points-Memo/~3/UcN4DOQ9UfE/wipeout.php" title="Wipeout">Wipeout</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/wipeout/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Bozell Column: The Secular Media vs. Religious Liberty</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/bozell-column-the-secular-media-vs-religious-liberty/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/bozell-column-the-secular-media-vs-religious-liberty/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 09:40:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/bozell-column-the-secular-media-vs-religious-liberty/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ The Obama administration is waging war on Christianity. Somehow, the networks haven’t seen this as newsworthy. On January 20, Obama’s Department of Health and Human Services announced its perverse attempt to force Catholic schools, hospitals, and other charitable agencies to finance sterilization, abortifacients and contraceptives in their insurance plans starting in 2013. Speaking for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, Archbishop Timothy Dolan roared like a lion in a press statement: “In effect, the president is saying we have a year to figure out how to violate our consciences.” He asserted  "To force American citizens to choose between violating their consciences and forgoing their healthcare is literally unconscionable.” In its first online dispatch on January 20, The New York Times loaded up quotes from liberals and only carried ...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> The Obama administration is waging war on Christianity. Somehow, the networks haven’t seen this as newsworthy. On January 20, Obama’s Department of Health and Human Services announced its perverse attempt to force Catholic schools, hospitals, and other charitable agencies to finance sterilization, abortifacients and contraceptives in their insurance plans starting in 2013. Speaking for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, Archbishop Timothy Dolan roared like a lion in a press statement: “In effect, the president is saying we have a year to figure out how to violate our consciences.” He asserted  &#8220;To force American citizens to choose between violating their consciences and forgoing their healthcare is literally unconscionable.” In its first online dispatch on January 20, The New York Times loaded up quotes from liberals and only carried &#8230;</p>
<p>Follow this link:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://newsbusters.org/blogs/brent-bozell/2012/02/07/bozell-column-secular-media-vs-religious-liberty" title="Bozell Column: The Secular Media vs. Religious Liberty">Bozell Column: The Secular Media vs. Religious Liberty</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/bozell-column-the-secular-media-vs-religious-liberty/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Minnesota Goes To Santorum</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/minnesota-goes-to-santorum/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/minnesota-goes-to-santorum/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 09:27:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/minnesota-goes-to-santorum/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ Make that 2 out of 2 so far for Rick Santorum. Missouri and Minnesota , with Colorado still to be decided. ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> Make that 2 out of 2 so far for Rick Santorum. Missouri and Minnesota , with Colorado still to be decided. </p>
<p>See original here:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Talking-Points-Memo/~3/Xlch-yfJC-c/minnesota_goes_to_santorum.php" title="Minnesota Goes To Santorum">Minnesota Goes To Santorum</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/minnesota-goes-to-santorum/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Who’s Afraid of Dirty Harry?</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/whos-afraid-of-dirty-harry/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/whos-afraid-of-dirty-harry/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 09:19:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/whos-afraid-of-dirty-harry/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[(Steven Hayward) Well, this didn’t take long.  Clint Eastwood is going to regret doing that “halftime” ad after all the parodists get done with it. First up: Rush, naturally. But our pal Remy Munasifi does Rush one better, with a full-scale video parody: ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>(Steven Hayward) Well, this didn’t take long.  Clint Eastwood is going to regret doing that “halftime” ad after all the parodists get done with it. First up: Rush, naturally. But our pal Remy Munasifi does Rush one better, with a full-scale video parody: </p>
<p>Read this article:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://feeds.powerlineblog.com/~r/powerlineblog/livefeed/~3/Ig2-vWBgoUA/whos-afraid-of-dirty-harry.php" title="Who’s Afraid of Dirty Harry?">Who’s Afraid of Dirty Harry?</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/whos-afraid-of-dirty-harry/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>“The United States Constitution is terse and old, and it guarantees relatively few rights”</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/the-united-states-constitution-is-terse-and-old-and-it-guarantees-relatively-few-rights/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/the-united-states-constitution-is-terse-and-old-and-it-guarantees-relatively-few-rights/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 09:11:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/the-united-states-constitution-is-terse-and-old-and-it-guarantees-relatively-few-rights/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[So writes Adam Liptak of The New York Times, in an article entitled “‘We The People’ Loses Its Appeal With People Around The World.” In 1987, on the Constitution’s bicentennial, Time magazine calculated that “of the 170 countries that exist today, more than 160 have written charters modeled directly or indirectly on the U.S. version.” ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So writes Adam Liptak of The New York Times, in an article entitled “‘We The People’ Loses Its Appeal With People Around The World.” In 1987, on the Constitution’s bicentennial, Time magazine calculated that “of the 170 countries that exist today, more than 160 have written charters modeled directly or indirectly on the U.S. version.” </p>
<p>See original here:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://feeds.wizbangblog.com/~r/Wizbang/~3/DyM_QTanDy0/" title="“The United States Constitution is terse and old, and it guarantees relatively few rights”">“The United States Constitution is terse and old, and it guarantees relatively few rights”</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/the-united-states-constitution-is-terse-and-old-and-it-guarantees-relatively-few-rights/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Networks Call Missouri for Santorum</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/networks-call-missouri-for-santorum/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/networks-call-missouri-for-santorum/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 08:46:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/networks-call-missouri-for-santorum/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ NBC, CNN, and ABC have all called Missouri for Rick Santorum now. This is the state where Newt Gingrich isn’t on the ballot, and unfortunately for Santorum, this is also the state that will hold caucuses in March to determine who actually wins the state.  But for Santorum’s argument that he’s more formidable against Mitt Romney than Gingrich is, the Missouri results are a boon. With 41 percent of precincts reporting, Santorum’s at 54 percent to Romney’s 26 percent. ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> NBC, CNN, and ABC have all called Missouri for Rick Santorum now. This is the state where Newt Gingrich isn’t on the ballot, and unfortunately for Santorum, this is also the state that will hold caucuses in March to determine who actually wins the state.  But for Santorum’s argument that he’s more formidable against Mitt Romney than Gingrich is, the Missouri results are a boon. With 41 percent of precincts reporting, Santorum’s at 54 percent to Romney’s 26 percent. </p>
<p>Original post:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/290477/networks-call-missouri-santorum-katrina-trinko" title="Networks Call Missouri for Santorum">Networks Call Missouri for Santorum</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/networks-call-missouri-for-santorum/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>SANTORUM HAS HUGE NIGHT &#8211; Cleans Up In Colorado, Missouri and Minnesota</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/santorum-has-huge-night-cleans-up-in-colorado-missouri-and-minnesota/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/santorum-has-huge-night-cleans-up-in-colorado-missouri-and-minnesota/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 08:46:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/santorum-has-huge-night-cleans-up-in-colorado-missouri-and-minnesota/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ Former Senator Rick Santorum is having a HUGE NIGHT tonight. The AP just called Missouri for Rick Santorum. The conservative Republican is leading in Missouri 1,252 of 3,134 Precincts Reporting &#124; ★ = Projected Winner &#124; Delegates = Estimated Delegate Count Candidates Vote % Votes Rick Santorum 54% 58,087 Mitt Romney 26% 27,757 Ron Paul 12% 12,754 My friend Ed @EdBigCon is attending the Santorum election party tonight in St. Charles. Dana Loesch and David Limbaugh are at the Santorum party tonight. Santorum is also winning in Colorado with 50% of the vote so far. ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> Former Senator Rick Santorum is having a HUGE NIGHT tonight. The AP just called Missouri for Rick Santorum. The conservative Republican is leading in Missouri 1,252 of 3,134 Precincts Reporting | ★ = Projected Winner | Delegates = Estimated Delegate Count Candidates Vote % Votes Rick Santorum 54% 58,087 Mitt Romney 26% 27,757 Ron Paul 12% 12,754 My friend Ed @EdBigCon is attending the Santorum election party tonight in St. Charles. Dana Loesch and David Limbaugh are at the Santorum party tonight. Santorum is also winning in Colorado with 50% of the vote so far. </p>
<p>Link:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2012/02/santorum-cleans-up-in-colorado-missouri-and-minnesota/" title="SANTORUM HAS HUGE NIGHT &#8211; Cleans Up In Colorado, Missouri and Minnesota">SANTORUM HAS HUGE NIGHT &#8211; Cleans Up In Colorado, Missouri and Minnesota</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/santorum-has-huge-night-cleans-up-in-colorado-missouri-and-minnesota/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>That Doesn&#8217;t Make Sense</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/that-doesnt-make-sense/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/that-doesnt-make-sense/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 08:44:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/that-doesnt-make-sense/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ The word coming from the Mitt campaign is that Missouri doesn't really matter because there are no delegates there and they didn't commit time or money. The problem, though, is that Santorum doesn't really have any time or money to commit there either. And if you're the frontrunner, the presumed nominee, you get clobbered in a swing state just because you didn't aggressively campaign there? That's a very, very low standard. Santorum is clearly leaning hard on evangelicals. And really this isn't about Santorum. It's about Romney. Absent crushing spending and a week or so to focus on a single state, Romney seems to have a really rough time. That's bad, especially in the Midwest where a Republican candidate has to run strong. And especially when he's faltering in national polls versus President]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> The word coming from the Mitt campaign is that Missouri doesn&#8217;t really matter because there are no delegates there and they didn&#8217;t commit time or money. The problem, though, is that Santorum doesn&#8217;t really have any time or money to commit there either. And if you&#8217;re the frontrunner, the presumed nominee, you get clobbered in a swing state just because you didn&#8217;t aggressively campaign there? That&#8217;s a very, very low standard. Santorum is clearly leaning hard on evangelicals. And really this isn&#8217;t about Santorum. It&#8217;s about Romney. Absent crushing spending and a week or so to focus on a single state, Romney seems to have a really rough time. That&#8217;s bad, especially in the Midwest where a Republican candidate has to run strong. And especially when he&#8217;s faltering in national polls versus President</p>
<p>See the article here:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Talking-Points-Memo/~3/1LWNWygum6M/that_doesnt_make_sense.php" title="That Doesn't Make Sense">That Doesn&#8217;t Make Sense</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/that-doesnt-make-sense/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Andrew Breitbart Prepares for His Piers Morgan Interview at Midnight</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/andrew-breitbart-prepares-for-his-piers-morgan-interview-at-midnight/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/andrew-breitbart-prepares-for-his-piers-morgan-interview-at-midnight/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 08:35:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/andrew-breitbart-prepares-for-his-piers-morgan-interview-at-midnight/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Not a put-up, either. Was really reading the comments when caught. Although it was zoomed for the picture. Thanks to @starchambermaid Chrysler Ad Parody:...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Not a put-up, either. Was really reading the comments when caught. Although it was zoomed for the picture. Thanks to @starchambermaid Chrysler Ad Parody:&#8230;</p>
<p>See the rest here:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://minx.cc/?post=326530" title="Andrew Breitbart Prepares for His Piers Morgan Interview at Midnight">Andrew Breitbart Prepares for His Piers Morgan Interview at Midnight</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/andrew-breitbart-prepares-for-his-piers-morgan-interview-at-midnight/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Mitt Hoping for Jazz</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/mitt-hoping-for-jazz/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/mitt-hoping-for-jazz/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 08:31:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/mitt-hoping-for-jazz/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ I'm looking at the county by county breakdown of the Missouri numbers here . And there are no results in from either Kansas City or St. Louis. I'd figure those have to be better for Mitt than most of the rest of the state. But but at the moment, with 23% of precincts reporting, Santorum is up over Romney by over 27%. So they're going to have to be radically different or Mitt's toast. ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> I&#8217;m looking at the county by county breakdown of the Missouri numbers here . And there are no results in from either Kansas City or St. Louis. I&#8217;d figure those have to be better for Mitt than most of the rest of the state. But but at the moment, with 23% of precincts reporting, Santorum is up over Romney by over 27%. So they&#8217;re going to have to be radically different or Mitt&#8217;s toast. </p>
<p>Go here to read the rest:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Talking-Points-Memo/~3/MHuBXNDx0Gg/old_st_louis.php" title="Mitt Hoping for Jazz">Mitt Hoping for Jazz</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/mitt-hoping-for-jazz/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>In WTF Territory?</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/in-wtf-territory/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/in-wtf-territory/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 08:16:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/in-wtf-territory/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ As they say, we're still really, really early. But we have 12% reporting in Missouri and Santorum is up over Romney by over 24 points. That's a big spread even with so few results. It's a similar margin in Minnesota , albeit with a meager 3%. If Romney loses 2 of 3 of these contests, what's the headline tomorrow morning? ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> As they say, we&#8217;re still really, really early. But we have 12% reporting in Missouri and Santorum is up over Romney by over 24 points. That&#8217;s a big spread even with so few results. It&#8217;s a similar margin in Minnesota , albeit with a meager 3%. If Romney loses 2 of 3 of these contests, what&#8217;s the headline tomorrow morning? </p>
<p>Read the rest here:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Talking-Points-Memo/~3/JeybmzJ6jy4/in_wtf_territory.php" title="In WTF Territory?">In WTF Territory?</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/in-wtf-territory/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>“Let me go on. I’m not yielding my time.”</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/let-me-go-on-im-not-yielding-my-time/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/let-me-go-on-im-not-yielding-my-time/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 08:04:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Congress]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/let-me-go-on-im-not-yielding-my-time/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ Renee Ellmers (R-NC), took on Henry Waxman (D-CA) in spectacular fashion today in a joint House-Senate hearing on the payroll tax cut extension. Unfortunately a transcript is not yet available, but Rep. Ellmers takes the whole committee to task on ineffectiveness, useless rhetoric, and grandstanding, in a classic rant. It is especially satisfying to hear someone in Congress call out Democrats on their use of “emergency” rhetoric after failing to take care of any of our economic problems, or even pass a budget, last year. More of this, please. ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> Renee Ellmers (R-NC), took on Henry Waxman (D-CA) in spectacular fashion today in a joint House-Senate hearing on the payroll tax cut extension. Unfortunately a transcript is not yet available, but Rep. Ellmers takes the whole committee to task on ineffectiveness, useless rhetoric, and grandstanding, in a classic rant. It is especially satisfying to hear someone in Congress call out Democrats on their use of “emergency” rhetoric after failing to take care of any of our economic problems, or even pass a budget, last year. More of this, please. </p>
<p>Excerpt from:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.redstate.com/absentee/2012/02/07/let-me-go-on-im-not-yielding-my-time/" title="“Let me go on. I’m not yielding my time.”">“Let me go on. I’m not yielding my time.”</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/let-me-go-on-im-not-yielding-my-time/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>lolbama! Part 82</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/lolbama-part-82/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/lolbama-part-82/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 08:04:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[lolbama]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/lolbama-part-82/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ This week, That One . Next week, terrorists . Submit for either at lolterizt@gmail.com Meanwhile, pass ‘em around, spread the love, and if you make your own, don’t be shy about dropping a link to your pics in the comments. The more, the merrier. NOTE TO READERS: Hovering your mouse over the picture activates closed captioning for the l33t-speak/txtmsg impaired. From James: [ ref 1 , ref 2 ] From James: [ reference link ] From James: From James: [ reference link ] From Les of Brick Moon : [ reference link ] My favorites from the submissions using...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> This week, That One . Next week, terrorists . Submit for either at lolterizt@gmail.com Meanwhile, pass ‘em around, spread the love, and if you make your own, don’t be shy about dropping a link to your pics in the comments. The more, the merrier. NOTE TO READERS: Hovering your mouse over the picture activates closed captioning for the l33t-speak/txtmsg impaired. From James: [ ref 1 , ref 2 ] From James: [ reference link ] From James: From James: [ reference link ] From Les of Brick Moon : [ reference link ] My favorites from the submissions using&#8230;</p>
<p>Visit link:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.imao.us/index.php/2012/02/lolbama-part-82/" title="lolbama! Part 82">lolbama! Part 82</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/lolbama-part-82/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Republican Leader McConnell on Obamacare Mandate: &#8220;First Amendment Rights of the American People Must Be Protected&#8221; (Video)</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/republican-leader-mcconnell-on-obamacare-mandate-first-amendment-rights-of-the-american-people-must-be-protected-video/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/republican-leader-mcconnell-on-obamacare-mandate-first-amendment-rights-of-the-american-people-must-be-protected-video/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 07:57:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Congress]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/republican-leader-mcconnell-on-obamacare-mandate-first-amendment-rights-of-the-american-people-must-be-protected-video/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ Republican leader Mitch McConnell weighed in on the Obamacare mandate today on the Senate floor. McConnell promised today that Congress will act if the Obama Administration does not reconsider their monumental mistake. “Throughout my Senate career, I’ve spent a lot of time to defending the First Amendment. “Most of it I’ve spent defending one particular clause of that amendment, the one relating to the right of free speech. But recent events have shown, quite unexpectedly, the urgent need to defend another clause in the First Amendment. I’m referring, of course, to the right of the free exercise of...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> Republican leader Mitch McConnell weighed in on the Obamacare mandate today on the Senate floor. McConnell promised today that Congress will act if the Obama Administration does not reconsider their monumental mistake. “Throughout my Senate career, I’ve spent a lot of time to defending the First Amendment. “Most of it I’ve spent defending one particular clause of that amendment, the one relating to the right of free speech. But recent events have shown, quite unexpectedly, the urgent need to defend another clause in the First Amendment. I’m referring, of course, to the right of the free exercise of&#8230;</p>
<p>Excerpt from:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2012/02/republican-leader-mcconnell-on-obamacare-mandate-first-amendment-rights-of-the-american-people-must-be-protected-video/" title="Republican Leader McConnell on Obamacare Mandate: &#8220;First Amendment Rights of the American People Must Be Protected&#8221; (Video)">Republican Leader McConnell on Obamacare Mandate: &#8220;First Amendment Rights of the American People Must Be Protected&#8221; (Video)</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/republican-leader-mcconnell-on-obamacare-mandate-first-amendment-rights-of-the-american-people-must-be-protected-video/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Rush Limbaugh: The Real Target of Obama&#8217;s HHS Birth Control Mandate Is the Constitution (Video)</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/rush-limbaugh-the-real-target-of-obamas-hhs-birth-control-mandate-is-the-constitution-video/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/rush-limbaugh-the-real-target-of-obamas-hhs-birth-control-mandate-is-the-constitution-video/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 07:45:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/rush-limbaugh-the-real-target-of-obamas-hhs-birth-control-mandate-is-the-constitution-video/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ Rush Limbaugh told his audience today that the real target of the Obama Administration’s birth control mandate is the US Constitution. The Blaze reported: “It‘s not the government’s business to make any church or any religion ‘modernize’ …there is no permissible way the government can do this, according to our Constitution,” Rush Limbaugh said during his Tuesday radio broadcast. Limbaugh, who believes the real target of the Obama administrations contraceptives mandate is in fact, the U.S. Constitution, “pure and simple.” The Catholic Church, according to Limbaugh, “is just the latest springboard.” “But the Constitution doesn’t matter here, which is really what this is all about,” he added. “The Constitution doesn’t matter to the [Obama] regime. The regime is simply saying,’To hell with the Constitution. We’re gonna implement this regardless what the Constitution ...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> Rush Limbaugh told his audience today that the real target of the Obama Administration’s birth control mandate is the US Constitution. The Blaze reported: “It‘s not the government’s business to make any church or any religion ‘modernize’ …there is no permissible way the government can do this, according to our Constitution,” Rush Limbaugh said during his Tuesday radio broadcast. Limbaugh, who believes the real target of the Obama administrations contraceptives mandate is in fact, the U.S. Constitution, “pure and simple.” The Catholic Church, according to Limbaugh, “is just the latest springboard.” “But the Constitution doesn’t matter here, which is really what this is all about,” he added. “The Constitution doesn’t matter to the [Obama] regime. The regime is simply saying,’To hell with the Constitution. We’re gonna implement this regardless what the Constitution &#8230;</p>
<p>Original post:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2012/02/rush-limbaugh-the-real-target-of-obamas-hhs-birth-control-mandate-is-the-constitution-video/" title="Rush Limbaugh: The Real Target of Obama&#8217;s HHS Birth Control Mandate Is the Constitution (Video)">Rush Limbaugh: The Real Target of Obama&#8217;s HHS Birth Control Mandate Is the Constitution (Video)</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/rush-limbaugh-the-real-target-of-obamas-hhs-birth-control-mandate-is-the-constitution-video/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Why Same-Sex Marriage Bans Qualify as Sex Discrimination</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/why-same-sex-marriage-bans-qualify-as-sex-discrimination/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/why-same-sex-marriage-bans-qualify-as-sex-discrimination/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 07:35:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/why-same-sex-marriage-bans-qualify-as-sex-discrimination/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ Today’s Ninth Circuit decision striking down California’s Proposition 8 banning same-sex marriage is unpersuasive because it claims that the law fails to meet even minimal “rational basis” scrutiny. Eugene Volokh does a good job of explaining why. But there is an alternative constitutional rationale for striking down same-sex marriage bans that avoids this problem. Proposition 8 is an example of sex discrimination, and must be evaluated under the higher standards of scrutiny applied to gender discrimination by the Supreme Court. Although the sex discrimination argument has been advanced by several academic advocates of gay marriage, nonacademics tend to be skeptical because ...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> Today’s Ninth Circuit decision striking down California’s Proposition 8 banning same-sex marriage is unpersuasive because it claims that the law fails to meet even minimal “rational basis” scrutiny. Eugene Volokh does a good job of explaining why. But there is an alternative constitutional rationale for striking down same-sex marriage bans that avoids this problem. Proposition 8 is an example of sex discrimination, and must be evaluated under the higher standards of scrutiny applied to gender discrimination by the Supreme Court. Although the sex discrimination argument has been advanced by several academic advocates of gay marriage, nonacademics tend to be skeptical because &#8230;</p>
<p>More here:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://volokh.com/2012/02/07/same-sex-marriage-bans-and-sex-discrimination/" title="Why Same-Sex Marriage Bans Qualify as Sex Discrimination">Why Same-Sex Marriage Bans Qualify as Sex Discrimination</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/why-same-sex-marriage-bans-qualify-as-sex-discrimination/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The First Trickle of Results</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/the-first-trickle-of-results/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/the-first-trickle-of-results/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 07:28:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/the-first-trickle-of-results/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ 8:31 PM : We've got a tiny trickle of results in from both Missouri and Minnesota . And they show Rick Santorum ahead in both states. But at again, at or 1%. So just the first hints. Nothing more. ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> 8:31 PM : We&#8217;ve got a tiny trickle of results in from both Missouri and Minnesota . And they show Rick Santorum ahead in both states. But at again, at or 1%. So just the first hints. Nothing more. </p>
<p>Read the original post:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Talking-Points-Memo/~3/CmEj_uP6Vrs/the_first_trickle_of_results.php" title="The First Trickle of Results">The First Trickle of Results</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/the-first-trickle-of-results/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Sessions Scolds the AWOL Democrats</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/sessions-scolds-the-awol-democrats/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/sessions-scolds-the-awol-democrats/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 07:04:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Congress]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/sessions-scolds-the-awol-democrats/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[(John Hinderaker) Ben Bernanke testified before the Senate Budget Committee today. As is the usual practice, ranking Republican Jeff Sessions delivered an opening statement. It provided an excellent summary of the history that has brought us to the current budgetary crisis. It was a challenge to Barack Obama and the Democrats to come up with a credible budget plan, which for three years they have refused to do. And it was about as eloquent as you can be, talking about the federal budget. Here is Sessions’ statement, in its entirety: Good morning, Chairman Bernanke, and thank you for ...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>(John Hinderaker) Ben Bernanke testified before the Senate Budget Committee today. As is the usual practice, ranking Republican Jeff Sessions delivered an opening statement. It provided an excellent summary of the history that has brought us to the current budgetary crisis. It was a challenge to Barack Obama and the Democrats to come up with a credible budget plan, which for three years they have refused to do. And it was about as eloquent as you can be, talking about the federal budget. Here is Sessions’ statement, in its entirety: Good morning, Chairman Bernanke, and thank you for &#8230;</p>
<p>Read more:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://feeds.powerlineblog.com/~r/powerlineblog/livefeed/~3/jL0P0dDpDUk/sessions-scolds-the-awol-democrats.php" title="Sessions Scolds the AWOL Democrats">Sessions Scolds the AWOL Democrats</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/sessions-scolds-the-awol-democrats/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Colorado, Minnesota and Missouri… oh, mzzzzz</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/colorado-minnesota-and-missouri-oh-mzzzzz/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/colorado-minnesota-and-missouri-oh-mzzzzz/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 07:00:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2012 Election]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/colorado-minnesota-and-missouri-oh-mzzzzz/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ [Posted by Karl] “ No delegates, just expectations and momentum, the intangibles open to interpretation .” OK, here’s a little more . Interpret. (And here are your results links for CO , MN and MO .) –Karl ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> [Posted by Karl] “ No delegates, just expectations and momentum, the intangibles open to interpretation .” OK, here’s a little more . Interpret. (And here are your results links for CO , MN and MO .) –Karl </p>
<p>Read more:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://patterico.com/2012/02/07/colorado-minnesota-and-missouri-oh-mzzzzz/" title="Colorado, Minnesota and Missouri… oh, mzzzzz">Colorado, Minnesota and Missouri… oh, mzzzzz</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/colorado-minnesota-and-missouri-oh-mzzzzz/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Minnesota, Missouri And Colorado Results</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/minnesota-missouri-and-colorado-results/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/minnesota-missouri-and-colorado-results/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 06:59:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/minnesota-missouri-and-colorado-results/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Missouri close at 8 eastern. Minnesota starts at 8 eastern, Colorado at 9 eastern.* The conventional wisdom is Minnesota is in play for either Santorum, Paul or Romney. Missouri's "primary" is purely a beauty contest, they hold a caucus later...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Missouri close at 8 eastern. Minnesota starts at 8 eastern, Colorado at 9 eastern.* The conventional wisdom is Minnesota is in play for either Santorum, Paul or Romney. Missouri&#8217;s &#8220;primary&#8221; is purely a beauty contest, they hold a caucus later&#8230;</p>
<p>See more here:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://minx.cc/?post=326526" title="Minnesota, Missouri And Colorado Results">Minnesota, Missouri And Colorado Results</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/minnesota-missouri-and-colorado-results/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Abu Qatada Is A Fat Extremist</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/abu-qatada-is-a-fat-extremist/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/abu-qatada-is-a-fat-extremist/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 06:56:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/abu-qatada-is-a-fat-extremist/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[(John Hinderaker) Abu Qatada has been described as “Osama bin Laden’s right-hand man in Europe.” His own legal defense team has called him a “grave risk” to national security. He has been imprisoned for some time in Great Britain, and apparently is about to be released; as a result, he has been in the news lately. Which is what caused the BBC to decree that its reporters not refer to Mr. Qatada as an “extremist.” “Radical” is OK, but “extremist” implies a “value judgment.” Oh, one more thing–the BBC isn’t supposed to show any photos or video of Qatada that “[suggest] the ...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>(John Hinderaker) Abu Qatada has been described as “Osama bin Laden’s right-hand man in Europe.” His own legal defense team has called him a “grave risk” to national security. He has been imprisoned for some time in Great Britain, and apparently is about to be released; as a result, he has been in the news lately. Which is what caused the BBC to decree that its reporters not refer to Mr. Qatada as an “extremist.” “Radical” is OK, but “extremist” implies a “value judgment.” Oh, one more thing–the BBC isn’t supposed to show any photos or video of Qatada that “[suggest] the &#8230;</p>
<p>Originally posted here:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://feeds.powerlineblog.com/~r/powerlineblog/livefeed/~3/nXltDQU6vqs/abu-qatada-is-a-fat-extremist.php" title="Abu Qatada Is A Fat Extremist">Abu Qatada Is A Fat Extremist</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/abu-qatada-is-a-fat-extremist/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Results Moments Away</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/results-moments-away/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/results-moments-away/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 06:55:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/results-moments-away/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ We're a few minutes away from the first results from the Missouri primary. We'll have live county by county results here . This is, to put it mildly, a weird contest. First, it's non-binding. No delegates are actually at stake. Second, Newt Gingrich did not manage to get on the ballot. So it's Romney, Santorum and Paul. There's been very little polling of this contest. But the latest poll out this morning shows Rick Santorum with a double digit lead over Romney. Add anecdotal reports of light turnout. And that makes it even more unpredictable]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> We&#8217;re a few minutes away from the first results from the Missouri primary. We&#8217;ll have live county by county results here . This is, to put it mildly, a weird contest. First, it&#8217;s non-binding. No delegates are actually at stake. Second, Newt Gingrich did not manage to get on the ballot. So it&#8217;s Romney, Santorum and Paul. There&#8217;s been very little polling of this contest. But the latest poll out this morning shows Rick Santorum with a double digit lead over Romney. Add anecdotal reports of light turnout. And that makes it even more unpredictable</p>
<p>Excerpt from:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Talking-Points-Memo/~3/yW8ovJvgWak/results_moments_away.php" title="Results Moments Away">Results Moments Away</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/results-moments-away/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>CO/MN/MO Results Coveritlive!</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/comnmo-results-coveritlive/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/comnmo-results-coveritlive/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 06:54:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/comnmo-results-coveritlive/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ Should be an interesting night. Click the box or join in in the comments! ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> Should be an interesting night. Click the box or join in in the comments! </p>
<p>Read more:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.redstate.com/leon_h_wolf/2012/02/07/comnmo-results-coveritlive/" title="CO/MN/MO Results Coveritlive!">CO/MN/MO Results Coveritlive!</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/comnmo-results-coveritlive/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>What Counts as a Rational Basis To Pass a Symbolic Law?</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/what-counts-as-a-rational-basis-to-pass-a-symbolic-law/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/what-counts-as-a-rational-basis-to-pass-a-symbolic-law/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 06:48:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/what-counts-as-a-rational-basis-to-pass-a-symbolic-law/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ Having read Judge Reinhardt’s opinion in Perry v. Brown , it seems to me that the weight of the analysis hinges on an interesting question: What counts as a rational basis to enact a symbolic law? Reinhardt’s basic reasoning is that Prop 8 is unconstitutional because it was merely symbolic. The ballot initiative didn’t do anything substantive: It amended the California Constitution to say that “Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California,” but it left in place domestic partnerships with most or all the rights of marriage. According to Reinhardt’s opinion, this dooms Prop 8. The rational basis ...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> Having read Judge Reinhardt’s opinion in Perry v. Brown , it seems to me that the weight of the analysis hinges on an interesting question: What counts as a rational basis to enact a symbolic law? Reinhardt’s basic reasoning is that Prop 8 is unconstitutional because it was merely symbolic. The ballot initiative didn’t do anything substantive: It amended the California Constitution to say that “Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California,” but it left in place domestic partnerships with most or all the rights of marriage. According to Reinhardt’s opinion, this dooms Prop 8. The rational basis &#8230;</p>
<p>See more here:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://volokh.com/2012/02/07/what-is-a-rational-basis-for-symbolic-laws/" title="What Counts as a Rational Basis To Pass a Symbolic Law?">What Counts as a Rational Basis To Pass a Symbolic Law?</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/what-counts-as-a-rational-basis-to-pass-a-symbolic-law/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>#SecurityStateFail</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/securitystatefail/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/securitystatefail/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 06:37:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/securitystatefail/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ Free advice for Syrian President Bashar al-Assad: Don't use the password " 12345 ." ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> Free advice for Syrian President Bashar al-Assad: Don&#8217;t use the password &#8221; 12345 .&#8221; </p>
<p>See the rest here:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Talking-Points-Memo/~3/68WmqZWfTbQ/securitystatefail.php" title="#SecurityStateFail">#SecurityStateFail</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/securitystatefail/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>A thank you to the retiring Rep. Myrick (R-NC9) – PLUS: Rep. Watt also retiring?</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/a-thank-you-to-the-retiring-rep-myrick-r-nc9-plus-rep-watt-also-retiring/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/a-thank-you-to-the-retiring-rep-myrick-r-nc9-plus-rep-watt-also-retiring/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 06:31:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Congress]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/a-thank-you-to-the-retiring-rep-myrick-r-nc9-plus-rep-watt-also-retiring/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ Congresswoman Sue Myrick announced her retirement today in a video message to supporters. The AP via local Charlotte news station WCNC  has the details : CHARLOTTE, N.C. (AP) — U.S. Rep. Sue Myrick of Charlotte says she won’t run again for re-election to North Carolina’s 9th Congressional District. Myrick made the announcement Tuesday through Facebook and her campaign site with a brief video. She said she made the decision after thoughtful discussion with her family and plans to serve out her ninth two-year term through the end of the year. “After thoughtful discussion with my family, I have decided not to run for another term in Congress,...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> Congresswoman Sue Myrick announced her retirement today in a video message to supporters. The AP via local Charlotte news station WCNC  has the details : CHARLOTTE, N.C. (AP) — U.S. Rep. Sue Myrick of Charlotte says she won’t run again for re-election to North Carolina’s 9th Congressional District. Myrick made the announcement Tuesday through Facebook and her campaign site with a brief video. She said she made the decision after thoughtful discussion with her family and plans to serve out her ninth two-year term through the end of the year. “After thoughtful discussion with my family, I have decided not to run for another term in Congress,&#8230;</p>
<p>Read the original post:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://sistertoldjah.com/archives/2012/02/07/a-thank-you-to-the-retiring-rep-sue-myrick/" title="A thank you to the retiring Rep. Myrick (R-NC9) – PLUS: Rep. Watt also retiring?">A thank you to the retiring Rep. Myrick (R-NC9) – PLUS: Rep. Watt also retiring?</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/a-thank-you-to-the-retiring-rep-myrick-r-nc9-plus-rep-watt-also-retiring/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Former Tucson DEA Head:  Either Eric Holder Knew About Gunwalking Or He Deliberately Avoided Finding Out</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/former-tucson-dea-head-either-eric-holder-knew-about-gunwalking-or-he-deliberately-avoided-finding-out/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/former-tucson-dea-head-either-eric-holder-knew-about-gunwalking-or-he-deliberately-avoided-finding-out/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 06:26:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/former-tucson-dea-head-either-eric-holder-knew-about-gunwalking-or-he-deliberately-avoided-finding-out/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It does seem like a very risky thing. Wouldn't an under-staffer want the okay from his boss before executing a covert operation to pour truckfulls of guns into the hands of the Mexican cartel? Wouldn't he need that reassurance, to...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It does seem like a very risky thing. Wouldn&#8217;t an under-staffer want the okay from his boss before executing a covert operation to pour truckfulls of guns into the hands of the Mexican cartel? Wouldn&#8217;t he need that reassurance, to&#8230;</p>
<p>Read more:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://minx.cc/?post=326521" title="Former Tucson DEA Head:  Either Eric Holder Knew About Gunwalking Or He Deliberately Avoided Finding Out">Former Tucson DEA Head:  Either Eric Holder Knew About Gunwalking Or He Deliberately Avoided Finding Out</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/former-tucson-dea-head-either-eric-holder-knew-about-gunwalking-or-he-deliberately-avoided-finding-out/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Caucus night open thread: Colorado, Minnesota, Missouri</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/caucus-night-open-thread-colorado-minnesota-missouri/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/caucus-night-open-thread-colorado-minnesota-missouri/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 06:24:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[White House]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/caucus-night-open-thread-colorado-minnesota-missouri/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ A look at today’s contests in Colorado, Minnesota, and Missouri: Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum, sensing Mitt Romney’s lingering weakness with the party’s conservative base, looked Tuesday to revive his campaign with victories or a strong second-place showing in caucus votes in Colorado and Minnesota. Polling in those states showed Santorum, a former Pennsylvania senator, in contention with Romney, the former Massachusetts governor who was coming off resounding victories in Florida and Nevada last week. Romney throttled top challenger Newt Gingrich in those contests, victories ...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> A look at today’s contests in Colorado, Minnesota, and Missouri: Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum, sensing Mitt Romney’s lingering weakness with the party’s conservative base, looked Tuesday to revive his campaign with victories or a strong second-place showing in caucus votes in Colorado and Minnesota. Polling in those states showed Santorum, a former Pennsylvania senator, in contention with Romney, the former Massachusetts governor who was coming off resounding victories in Florida and Nevada last week. Romney throttled top challenger Newt Gingrich in those contests, victories &#8230;</p>
<p>See original here:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://michellemalkin.com/2012/02/07/caucus-night-open-thread-colorado-minnesota-missouri/" title="Caucus night open thread: Colorado, Minnesota, Missouri">Caucus night open thread: Colorado, Minnesota, Missouri</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/caucus-night-open-thread-colorado-minnesota-missouri/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>#Occupiers Pillage Portland &#8212; Smash Windows, Dump Trash, Harass Media/Cops, Riot (Video)</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/occupiers-pillage-portland-smash-windows-dump-trash-harass-mediacops-riot-video/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/occupiers-pillage-portland-smash-windows-dump-trash-harass-mediacops-riot-video/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 06:18:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/occupiers-pillage-portland-smash-windows-dump-trash-harass-mediacops-riot-video/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ The #Occupy goons tore up Portland last night. Don’t expect the state-run media to report on this. The hoodlums smashed windows, dumped trashed, intimidated cops-media and rioted. You won’t believe this— Hat Tip Mara From the video: February 7, 2012: Violence/Language warning. Viewer Discretion Is Advised. What was supposed to be another “Peaceful Protest” by Occupy Portland ran hopelessly awry and out of control this evening. The self described mob shouted profanity, broke windows, and sought to intimidate police and citizen journalists who would try and film it. Some occupiers overturned trash cans while others seemingly not in agreement with the vandals, uprighted the cans and tried to clean up the mess. Portland Police responded with the riot squad. A total of ten...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> The #Occupy goons tore up Portland last night. Don’t expect the state-run media to report on this. The hoodlums smashed windows, dumped trashed, intimidated cops-media and rioted. You won’t believe this— Hat Tip Mara From the video: February 7, 2012: Violence/Language warning. Viewer Discretion Is Advised. What was supposed to be another “Peaceful Protest” by Occupy Portland ran hopelessly awry and out of control this evening. The self described mob shouted profanity, broke windows, and sought to intimidate police and citizen journalists who would try and film it. Some occupiers overturned trash cans while others seemingly not in agreement with the vandals, uprighted the cans and tried to clean up the mess. Portland Police responded with the riot squad. A total of ten&#8230;</p>
<p>Read more:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2012/02/occupiers-pillage-portland-smash-windows-dump-trash-intimidate-mediacops-riot-video/" title="#Occupiers Pillage Portland &#8212; Smash Windows, Dump Trash, Harass Media/Cops, Riot (Video)">#Occupiers Pillage Portland &#8212; Smash Windows, Dump Trash, Harass Media/Cops, Riot (Video)</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/occupiers-pillage-portland-smash-windows-dump-trash-harass-mediacops-riot-video/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>THE RINO Hour of Power: Political Potpourri</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/the-rino-hour-of-power-political-potpourri/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/the-rino-hour-of-power-political-potpourri/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 06:02:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[rino hour of power]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/the-rino-hour-of-power-political-potpourri/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The RINO Hour of Power is back! Two of the most famous RINO’s on the web — Jazz Shaw and Rick Moran — are ready to rock your political world with their unique blend of humor, wit, and sharp analysis. Jazz and Rick will be joined by IBD’s Andrew Malcolm. The guys will discuss a broad ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The RINO Hour of Power is back! Two of the most famous RINO’s on the web — Jazz Shaw and Rick Moran — are ready to rock your political world with their unique blend of humor, wit, and sharp analysis. Jazz and Rick will be joined by IBD’s Andrew Malcolm. The guys will discuss a broad </p>
<p>Follow this link:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://rightwingnuthouse.com/archives/2012/02/07/the-rino-hour-of-power-political-potpourri/" title="THE RINO Hour of Power: Political Potpourri">THE RINO Hour of Power: Political Potpourri</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/the-rino-hour-of-power-political-potpourri/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Barrasso: Obama&#8217;s Keystone Call a &#8216;Terrible Mistake&#8217;</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/barrasso-obamas-keystone-call-a-terrible-mistake/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/barrasso-obamas-keystone-call-a-terrible-mistake/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 06:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/barrasso-obamas-keystone-call-a-terrible-mistake/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Continue reading here: Barrasso: Obama&#8217;s Keystone Call a &#8216;Terrible Mistake&#8217;]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[</p>
<p>Continue reading here:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.newsmax.com/US/keystone-pipeline-obama/2012/02/08/id/428755" title="Barrasso: Obama's Keystone Call a 'Terrible Mistake'">Barrasso: Obama&#8217;s Keystone Call a &#8216;Terrible Mistake&#8217;</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/08/barrasso-obamas-keystone-call-a-terrible-mistake/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>IDB&#8217;s Andrew Malcolm guests on Moran&#8217;s show</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/idbs-andrew-malcolm-guests-on-morans-show/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/idbs-andrew-malcolm-guests-on-morans-show/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 05:47:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[editor's note]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/idbs-andrew-malcolm-guests-on-morans-show/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Tonight's caucuses and other hot topics making news will be discussed.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Tonight&#8217;s caucuses and other hot topics making news will be discussed.</p>
<p>Read more here:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2012/02/idbs_andrew_malcolm_guests_on_morans_show.html" title="IDB's Andrew Malcolm guests on Moran's show">IDB&#8217;s Andrew Malcolm guests on Moran&#8217;s show</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/idbs-andrew-malcolm-guests-on-morans-show/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Government Employer Free to Fire Human Resources Officials Who Publicly Criticize the Propriety of Gay Rights Laws</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/government-employer-free-to-fire-human-resources-officials-who-publicly-criticize-the-propriety-of-gay-rights-laws/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/government-employer-free-to-fire-human-resources-officials-who-publicly-criticize-the-propriety-of-gay-rights-laws/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 05:45:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/government-employer-free-to-fire-human-resources-officials-who-publicly-criticize-the-propriety-of-gay-rights-laws/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ So holds Dixon v. University of Toledo (N.D. Ohio Feb, 6, 2012) . (I blogged about this case when it was filed .) A few thoughts: (1) Some of the analysis seems limited to high-level “policymaking” employees, such as a university Associate Vice President. (2) But some of the argument suggests that any time any government manager with hiring and firing authority — or even with substantial input into hiring and firing decisions — speaks out in opposition to civil rights laws protecting gays, the government may fire the manager on the grounds that the speech (a) “could disrupt the … [d]epartment by making homosexual employees uncomfortable or disgruntled,” (b) might lead “homosexual prospective employees [to] reconsider applications,” and (c) might “lead to challenges to her personnel decisions.” (3) This in turn ...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> So holds Dixon v. University of Toledo (N.D. Ohio Feb, 6, 2012) . (I blogged about this case when it was filed .) A few thoughts: (1) Some of the analysis seems limited to high-level “policymaking” employees, such as a university Associate Vice President. (2) But some of the argument suggests that any time any government manager with hiring and firing authority — or even with substantial input into hiring and firing decisions — speaks out in opposition to civil rights laws protecting gays, the government may fire the manager on the grounds that the speech (a) “could disrupt the … [d]epartment by making homosexual employees uncomfortable or disgruntled,” (b) might lead “homosexual prospective employees [to] reconsider applications,” and (c) might “lead to challenges to her personnel decisions.” (3) This in turn &#8230;</p>
<p>See the rest here:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://volokh.com/2012/02/07/government-employer-free-to-fire-human-resources-officials-who-publicly-criticize-the-propriety-of-gay-rights-laws/" title="Government Employer Free to Fire Human Resources Officials Who Publicly Criticize the Propriety of Gay Rights Laws">Government Employer Free to Fire Human Resources Officials Who Publicly Criticize the Propriety of Gay Rights Laws</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/government-employer-free-to-fire-human-resources-officials-who-publicly-criticize-the-propriety-of-gay-rights-laws/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Even Chris Matthews Sees Danger for Obama after &#8216;Frightening&#8217; Birth Control Decision</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/even-chris-matthews-sees-danger-for-obama-after-frightening-birth-control-decision/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/even-chris-matthews-sees-danger-for-obama-after-frightening-birth-control-decision/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 05:15:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/even-chris-matthews-sees-danger-for-obama-after-frightening-birth-control-decision/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ Even Chris Matthews, who famously gushed about the " thrill " Barack Obama gave his leg, is troubled by the President's "frightening" decision to force Catholic charities to provide birth control through health care. Discussing the issue on Tuesday's Hardball, the host sputtered, "...How can you make the [religious] teacher pay for birth control without losing their authority, their moral authority?" Matthews didn't seem sure how to broach the subject. Talking to E.J. Dionne of the Washington Post and Susan Milligan of U.S. News and World Reports , he warned, " It gets to that interesting point to me, which is frightening, when the state tells the church what to do ." (Interesting?) Matthews took the Obama administration's decision to its logical conclusion: "If they start financing, under the law, what ...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> Even Chris Matthews, who famously gushed about the &#8221; thrill &#8221; Barack Obama gave his leg, is troubled by the President&#8217;s &#8220;frightening&#8221; decision to force Catholic charities to provide birth control through health care. Discussing the issue on Tuesday&#8217;s Hardball, the host sputtered, &#8220;&#8230;How can you make the [religious] teacher pay for birth control without losing their authority, their moral authority?&#8221; Matthews didn&#8217;t seem sure how to broach the subject. Talking to E.J. Dionne of the Washington Post and Susan Milligan of U.S. News and World Reports , he warned, &#8221; It gets to that interesting point to me, which is frightening, when the state tells the church what to do .&#8221; (Interesting?) Matthews took the Obama administration&#8217;s decision to its logical conclusion: &#8220;If they start financing, under the law, what &#8230;</p>
<p>Visit link:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://newsbusters.org/blogs/scott-whitlock/2012/02/07/even-chris-matthews-sees-danger-obama-after-frightening-birth-contro" title="Even Chris Matthews Sees Danger for Obama after 'Frightening' Birth Control Decision">Even Chris Matthews Sees Danger for Obama after &#8216;Frightening&#8217; Birth Control Decision</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/even-chris-matthews-sees-danger-for-obama-after-frightening-birth-control-decision/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Friday Night Follies:  Gee, The Administration Sure Likes Releasing Solyndra Documents on Friday Night, Doesn&#8217;t It?</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/friday-night-follies-gee-the-administration-sure-likes-releasing-solyndra-documents-on-friday-night-doesnt-it/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/friday-night-follies-gee-the-administration-sure-likes-releasing-solyndra-documents-on-friday-night-doesnt-it/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 05:04:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[White House]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/friday-night-follies-gee-the-administration-sure-likes-releasing-solyndra-documents-on-friday-night-doesnt-it/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Not that the media would rap them for Solyndra. But the wicked fleeth when no man pursueth. Friday, Sept. 30: ... Awkward headlines for the White House include OMB staff warning that bad days are coming and senior Obama staffers...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Not that the media would rap them for Solyndra. But the wicked fleeth when no man pursueth. Friday, Sept. 30: &#8230; Awkward headlines for the White House include OMB staff warning that bad days are coming and senior Obama staffers&#8230;</p>
<p>Go here to see the original:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://minx.cc/?post=326522" title="Friday Night Follies:  Gee, The Administration Sure Likes Releasing Solyndra Documents on Friday Night, Doesn't It?">Friday Night Follies:  Gee, The Administration Sure Likes Releasing Solyndra Documents on Friday Night, Doesn&#8217;t It?</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/friday-night-follies-gee-the-administration-sure-likes-releasing-solyndra-documents-on-friday-night-doesnt-it/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Liberal Media Showed True Colors In Heavily Slanted Treatment of Komen, GetReligion&#8217;s Hemingway Writes</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/liberal-media-showed-true-colors-in-heavily-slanted-treatment-of-komen-getreligions-hemingway-writes/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/liberal-media-showed-true-colors-in-heavily-slanted-treatment-of-komen-getreligions-hemingway-writes/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 04:57:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/liberal-media-showed-true-colors-in-heavily-slanted-treatment-of-komen-getreligions-hemingway-writes/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ Media critic Mollie Hemingway, a contributor to GetReligion.org , has an excellent post up today at CNN's Belief Blog about how the liberal media did a horrible job when it came to objectively reporting the implications of the recent Komen for the Cure/Planned Parenthood row. In fact, the media have shown themselves "effective partisans" by telling only "half the story," the half spoon-fed by socially liberal lobby groups like Planned Parenthood. Be sure to check out the whole thing here, but below the page break I've appended some key excerpts (emphasis mine): The media bought Planned Parenthood’s public relations campaign hook, line and sinker. Planned Parenthood argued that Komen’s ...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> Media critic Mollie Hemingway, a contributor to GetReligion.org , has an excellent post up today at CNN&#8217;s Belief Blog about how the liberal media did a horrible job when it came to objectively reporting the implications of the recent Komen for the Cure/Planned Parenthood row. In fact, the media have shown themselves &#8220;effective partisans&#8221; by telling only &#8220;half the story,&#8221; the half spoon-fed by socially liberal lobby groups like Planned Parenthood. Be sure to check out the whole thing here, but below the page break I&#8217;ve appended some key excerpts (emphasis mine): The media bought Planned Parenthood’s public relations campaign hook, line and sinker. Planned Parenthood argued that Komen’s &#8230;</p>
<p>Read more:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://newsbusters.org/blogs/ken-shepherd/2012/02/07/liberal-media-showed-true-colors-heavily-slanted-treatment-komen-getre" title="Liberal Media Showed True Colors In Heavily Slanted Treatment of Komen, GetReligion's Hemingway Writes">Liberal Media Showed True Colors In Heavily Slanted Treatment of Komen, GetReligion&#8217;s Hemingway Writes</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/liberal-media-showed-true-colors-in-heavily-slanted-treatment-of-komen-getreligions-hemingway-writes/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>And the Winner is &#8230;.?</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/and-the-winner-is/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/and-the-winner-is/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 04:57:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/and-the-winner-is/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ At CPAC, the big annual conservative confab that kicks off in DC on Thursday, Accuracy in Media will be presenting the Reed Irvine Accuracy in Media Award to Sharyl Attkisson of CBS News. ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> At CPAC, the big annual conservative confab that kicks off in DC on Thursday, Accuracy in Media will be presenting the Reed Irvine Accuracy in Media Award to Sharyl Attkisson of CBS News. </p>
<p>View original post here:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Talking-Points-Memo/~3/AsWfSrnhtnI/and_the_winner_is.php" title="And the Winner is ....?">And the Winner is &#8230;.?</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/and-the-winner-is/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Candidates on Fannie and Freddie&#8217;s Future</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/the-candidates-on-fannie-and-freddies-future/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/the-candidates-on-fannie-and-freddies-future/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 04:50:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/the-candidates-on-fannie-and-freddies-future/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ Freddie Mac has played a large role in the presidential race: Newt Gingrich’s work for it has served as one of Mitt Romney’s key lines of attack. But all of the conversation has been backward looking: The candidates have said very little about what they would seek to do about Freddie (and Fannie Mae) in office. The two most specific plans have come from Ron Paul (naturally) and Rick Santorum. Paul said two years ago that Fannie and Freddie should be abolished and replaced with nothing . Santorum has also said he wants to phase out Fannie and Freddie . Keep reading this post . . . ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> Freddie Mac has played a large role in the presidential race: Newt Gingrich’s work for it has served as one of Mitt Romney’s key lines of attack. But all of the conversation has been backward looking: The candidates have said very little about what they would seek to do about Freddie (and Fannie Mae) in office. The two most specific plans have come from Ron Paul (naturally) and Rick Santorum. Paul said two years ago that Fannie and Freddie should be abolished and replaced with nothing . Santorum has also said he wants to phase out Fannie and Freddie . Keep reading this post . . . </p>
<p>View original post here:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/290461/candidates-fannie-and-freddies-future-ramesh-ponnuru" title="The Candidates on Fannie and Freddie's Future">The Candidates on Fannie and Freddie&#8217;s Future</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/the-candidates-on-fannie-and-freddies-future/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Contraception Mandate and Religious Freedom</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/the-contraception-mandate-and-religious-freedom/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/the-contraception-mandate-and-religious-freedom/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 04:34:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/the-contraception-mandate-and-religious-freedom/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ Our nation has a long legacy of defending individuals’ religious freedoms. James Madison, the father of our nation’s Constitution and the author of the Bill of Rights, once wrote that “conscience is the most sacred of all property.” Since our nation’s earliest days, the U.S. Supreme Court has consistently affirmed our First Amendment right to exercise our religious beliefs freely. But today, recent decisions by the Obama administration are threatening Americans’ religious liberty. This past summer, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) exercised its authority under the new health-care law to announce a rule that most employer-provided health insurance plans cover contraception, sterilization, and abortion-inducing drugs. This new mandate contains a “religious employer” exception, but the exception is so narrow ...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> Our nation has a long legacy of defending individuals’ religious freedoms. James Madison, the father of our nation’s Constitution and the author of the Bill of Rights, once wrote that “conscience is the most sacred of all property.” Since our nation’s earliest days, the U.S. Supreme Court has consistently affirmed our First Amendment right to exercise our religious beliefs freely. But today, recent decisions by the Obama administration are threatening Americans’ religious liberty. This past summer, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) exercised its authority under the new health-care law to announce a rule that most employer-provided health insurance plans cover contraception, sterilization, and abortion-inducing drugs. This new mandate contains a “religious employer” exception, but the exception is so narrow &#8230;</p>
<p>See original here:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/290460/contraception-mandate-and-religious-freedom-jerry-moran" title="The Contraception Mandate and Religious Freedom">The Contraception Mandate and Religious Freedom</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/the-contraception-mandate-and-religious-freedom/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Sebelius&#8217;s Spin</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/sebeliuss-spin/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/sebeliuss-spin/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 04:11:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/sebeliuss-spin/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ If the federal government can succeed in forcing people to violate their faith, it will have the power to force anyone to do anything. It is therefore sad but not surprising that Health and Human Services secretary Kathleen Sebelius took to USA Today this week to spin rather than explain her boss’s decision to force people and entities all over the country to fund abortifacients, contraception, and sterilization against their consciences. Keep reading this post . . . ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> If the federal government can succeed in forcing people to violate their faith, it will have the power to force anyone to do anything. It is therefore sad but not surprising that Health and Human Services secretary Kathleen Sebelius took to USA Today this week to spin rather than explain her boss’s decision to force people and entities all over the country to fund abortifacients, contraception, and sterilization against their consciences. Keep reading this post . . . </p>
<p>Read the original:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/290449/sebeliuss-spin-alan-sears" title="Sebelius's Spin">Sebelius&#8217;s Spin</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/sebeliuss-spin/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Everyone Has A Conscientious Objection To Obamacare</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/everyone-has-a-conscientious-objection-to-obamacare/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/everyone-has-a-conscientious-objection-to-obamacare/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 04:10:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/everyone-has-a-conscientious-objection-to-obamacare/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[OK, so this has been brewing for a while now. Two questions. 1) Does the Catholic church think it should have the sole legal protection from this regulation over this matter of conscience? Because it seems to me that there...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>OK, so this has been brewing for a while now. Two questions. 1) Does the Catholic church think it should have the sole legal protection from this regulation over this matter of conscience? Because it seems to me that there&#8230;</p>
<p>Continued here:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://minx.cc/?post=326512" title="Everyone Has A Conscientious Objection To Obamacare">Everyone Has A Conscientious Objection To Obamacare</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/everyone-has-a-conscientious-objection-to-obamacare/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Mitch McConnell Speaks for Religious Liberty from the Senate Floor</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/mitch-mcconnell-speaks-for-religious-liberty-from-the-senate-floor/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/mitch-mcconnell-speaks-for-religious-liberty-from-the-senate-floor/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 04:03:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/mitch-mcconnell-speaks-for-religious-liberty-from-the-senate-floor/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ Mitch McConnell on the Senate floor today: Throughout my Senate career, I’ve spent a lot of time to defending the First Amendment. Keep reading this post . . . ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> Mitch McConnell on the Senate floor today: Throughout my Senate career, I’ve spent a lot of time to defending the First Amendment. Keep reading this post . . . </p>
<p>See the original post:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/290455/mitch-mcconnell-speaks-religious-liberty-senate-floor-kathryn-jean-lopez" title="Mitch McConnell Speaks for Religious Liberty from the Senate Floor">Mitch McConnell Speaks for Religious Liberty from the Senate Floor</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/mitch-mcconnell-speaks-for-religious-liberty-from-the-senate-floor/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>13 Year-Old Girls Given Contraceptive Inserts at School Without Their Parents Knowing</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/13-year-old-girls-given-contraceptive-inserts-at-school-without-their-parents-knowing/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/13-year-old-girls-given-contraceptive-inserts-at-school-without-their-parents-knowing/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 04:00:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/13-year-old-girls-given-contraceptive-inserts-at-school-without-their-parents-knowing/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ Coming to a school near you? 13 year-old girls were given contraceptive inserts at school in Great Britain without their parents knowing. The Telegraph reported: Girls as young as 13 have been fitted with contraceptive implants at school without their parents knowing. The procedure was carried out in Southampton, Hants, as part of a government initiative to drive down teenage pregnancies. As many as nine secondary schools in the city are thought to have been involved. But it has caused a backlash from parents who weren’t aware that their daughters had been fitted with the 4cm device, which sits under the skin. It is currently unknown exactly how many youngsters have taken part in the scheme. ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> Coming to a school near you? 13 year-old girls were given contraceptive inserts at school in Great Britain without their parents knowing. The Telegraph reported: Girls as young as 13 have been fitted with contraceptive implants at school without their parents knowing. The procedure was carried out in Southampton, Hants, as part of a government initiative to drive down teenage pregnancies. As many as nine secondary schools in the city are thought to have been involved. But it has caused a backlash from parents who weren’t aware that their daughters had been fitted with the 4cm device, which sits under the skin. It is currently unknown exactly how many youngsters have taken part in the scheme. </p>
<p>Read more:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2012/02/13-year-old-girls-given-contraceptive-inserts-at-school-without-their-parents-knowing/" title="13 Year-Old Girls Given Contraceptive Inserts at School Without Their Parents Knowing">13 Year-Old Girls Given Contraceptive Inserts at School Without Their Parents Knowing</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/13-year-old-girls-given-contraceptive-inserts-at-school-without-their-parents-knowing/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Introducing the Tuscaloosa Marine Shale</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/introducing-the-tuscaloosa-marine-shale/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/introducing-the-tuscaloosa-marine-shale/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 04:00:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/introducing-the-tuscaloosa-marine-shale/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ Around these parts, we have a word that aptly describes shale formations: ubitquitious . (sic) Every conventional oil and gas basin must have a hydrocarbon source, and that source is a shale. And since shales are low in permeability, we’re finding that the source rock still contains plenty of hydrocarbons, if you can figure out how to get the stuff out. One of the newly-emerging plays is the Tuscaloosa Marine Shale, which is being explored in a wide arc that cuts across central Louisiana and southern Mississippi. Although the...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> Around these parts, we have a word that aptly describes shale formations: ubitquitious . (sic) Every conventional oil and gas basin must have a hydrocarbon source, and that source is a shale. And since shales are low in permeability, we’re finding that the source rock still contains plenty of hydrocarbons, if you can figure out how to get the stuff out. One of the newly-emerging plays is the Tuscaloosa Marine Shale, which is being explored in a wide arc that cuts across central Louisiana and southern Mississippi. Although the&#8230;</p>
<p>Read more here:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.redstate.com/vladimir/2012/02/07/introducing-the-tuscaloosa-marine-shale/" title="Introducing the Tuscaloosa Marine Shale">Introducing the Tuscaloosa Marine Shale</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/introducing-the-tuscaloosa-marine-shale/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Marriage Means So Much and So Little?</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/marriage-means-so-much-and-so-little/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/marriage-means-so-much-and-so-little/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 03:47:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/marriage-means-so-much-and-so-little/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ After slogging through the Ninth Circuit’s lengthy opinion overturning Proposition 8, I must confess that I’m confused. Does the definition of marriage matter? Or does it not? To the court the answer seemed to depend on whether the argument for marital significance helps or harms the case for gay marriage. When discussing the power of marriage to provide dignity and meaning to relationships, the court waxes eloquent (see pages 38 and 39 for an extended paragraph about the significance of the word “marriage” to communicate meaning and purpose in relationships). Yet when the time comes to evaluate the justifications for reserving ...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> After slogging through the Ninth Circuit’s lengthy opinion overturning Proposition 8, I must confess that I’m confused. Does the definition of marriage matter? Or does it not? To the court the answer seemed to depend on whether the argument for marital significance helps or harms the case for gay marriage. When discussing the power of marriage to provide dignity and meaning to relationships, the court waxes eloquent (see pages 38 and 39 for an extended paragraph about the significance of the word “marriage” to communicate meaning and purpose in relationships). Yet when the time comes to evaluate the justifications for reserving &#8230;</p>
<p>Read more here:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/290447/marriage-means-so-much-and-so-little-david-french" title="Marriage Means So Much and So Little?">Marriage Means So Much and So Little?</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/marriage-means-so-much-and-so-little/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Not a Catholic Issue</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/not-a-catholic-issue/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/not-a-catholic-issue/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 03:47:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/not-a-catholic-issue/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ A reader from Seattle writes, and she is right: Okay, earlier today I sent an email asking that Corner posters make it clear that we are not just talking about Catholics being the only body with objections to the HHS mandates — Protestants do, too, as do I’m sure other religions. Keep reading this post . . . ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> A reader from Seattle writes, and she is right: Okay, earlier today I sent an email asking that Corner posters make it clear that we are not just talking about Catholics being the only body with objections to the HHS mandates — Protestants do, too, as do I’m sure other religions. Keep reading this post . . . </p>
<p>Go here to read the rest:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/290451/not-catholic-issue-kathryn-jean-lopez" title="Not a Catholic Issue">Not a Catholic Issue</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/not-a-catholic-issue/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Congresswoman Shows Remarkable Sudden Progress in Cognitive Function, Speaking Abilities</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/congresswoman-shows-remarkable-sudden-progress-in-cognitive-function-speaking-abilities/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/congresswoman-shows-remarkable-sudden-progress-in-cognitive-function-speaking-abilities/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 03:43:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Congress]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/congresswoman-shows-remarkable-sudden-progress-in-cognitive-function-speaking-abilities/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Old headline: Former Congresswoman Kathy Dahlkemper: I Would Never Have Cast Crucial Vote In Favor of ObamaCare Had I Known Obama Planned a Top-Down, Command-and-Control Scheme To Force All Plans To Follow Birth-Control-For-All Federal Mandates I don't know how to...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Old headline: Former Congresswoman Kathy Dahlkemper: I Would Never Have Cast Crucial Vote In Favor of ObamaCare Had I Known Obama Planned a Top-Down, Command-and-Control Scheme To Force All Plans To Follow Birth-Control-For-All Federal Mandates I don&#8217;t know how to&#8230;</p>
<p>See original here:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://minx.cc/?post=326515" title="Congresswoman Shows Remarkable Sudden Progress in Cognitive Function, Speaking Abilities">Congresswoman Shows Remarkable Sudden Progress in Cognitive Function, Speaking Abilities</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/congresswoman-shows-remarkable-sudden-progress-in-cognitive-function-speaking-abilities/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Meanwhile, in Another California Court</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/meanwhile-in-another-california-court/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/meanwhile-in-another-california-court/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 03:36:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/meanwhile-in-another-california-court/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ From the Sacramento Bee : A federal judge for the first time in U.S. history heard arguments Monday in a case that could determine whether animals enjoy the same constitutional protection against slavery as human beings. Keep reading this post . . . ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> From the Sacramento Bee : A federal judge for the first time in U.S. history heard arguments Monday in a case that could determine whether animals enjoy the same constitutional protection against slavery as human beings. Keep reading this post . . . </p>
<p>More:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/290441/meanwhile-another-california-court-charles-c-w-cooke" title="Meanwhile, in Another California Court">Meanwhile, in Another California Court</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/meanwhile-in-another-california-court/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Phoniness</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/phoniness/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/phoniness/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 03:24:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/phoniness/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ Below , Maggie Gallagher has posted a video claiming that Romney is a big phony. She says, “just to be clear,” that she disagrees with the video. She then says, “The real Romney would be a much better candidate than the guy who is pretending he’s not rich.” I’ve watched pretty much all the debates, I think, and Romney has been called on several times to defend his wealth. He always has, saying he has been successful and wants to help others be successful as well. In my view, he has been admirably unapologetic. Keep reading this post . . . ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> Below , Maggie Gallagher has posted a video claiming that Romney is a big phony. She says, “just to be clear,” that she disagrees with the video. She then says, “The real Romney would be a much better candidate than the guy who is pretending he’s not rich.” I’ve watched pretty much all the debates, I think, and Romney has been called on several times to defend his wealth. He always has, saying he has been successful and wants to help others be successful as well. In my view, he has been admirably unapologetic. Keep reading this post . . . </p>
<p>The rest is here:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/290445/phoniness-jay-nordlinger" title="Phoniness">Phoniness</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/phoniness/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Ninth Circus: Prop. 8 Unconstitutional</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/ninth-circus-prop-8-unconstitutional/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/ninth-circus-prop-8-unconstitutional/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 03:24:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/ninth-circus-prop-8-unconstitutional/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ With Reinhardt and Hawkins on the panel, the question was not whether this would happen, but how. And the answer is: they chose to forego a sweeping ruling in favor of a narrower one, the reasoning of which is more likely to appeal to Anthony Kennedy. No principles to be found here. Just naked power, restrained only by an awareness of a greater power in D.C. Decision may be read here . If you care to read such sophistry. ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> With Reinhardt and Hawkins on the panel, the question was not whether this would happen, but how. And the answer is: they chose to forego a sweeping ruling in favor of a narrower one, the reasoning of which is more likely to appeal to Anthony Kennedy. No principles to be found here. Just naked power, restrained only by an awareness of a greater power in D.C. Decision may be read here . If you care to read such sophistry. </p>
<p>Read more:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://patterico.com/2012/02/07/ninth-circus-prop-8-unconstitutional/" title="Ninth Circus: Prop. 8 Unconstitutional">Ninth Circus: Prop. 8 Unconstitutional</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/ninth-circus-prop-8-unconstitutional/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Sweet Meteor of Death Announces Plan for Child-Care, Family Planning</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/sweet-meteor-of-death-announces-plan-for-child-care-family-planning/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/sweet-meteor-of-death-announces-plan-for-child-care-family-planning/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 03:14:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/sweet-meteor-of-death-announces-plan-for-child-care-family-planning/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Sweet Meteor of Death has hired another media adviser, and he's produced this ad....]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sweet Meteor of Death has hired another media adviser, and he&#8217;s produced this ad&#8230;.</p>
<p>Here is the original post:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://minx.cc/?post=326514" title="Sweet Meteor of Death Announces Plan for Child-Care, Family Planning">Sweet Meteor of Death Announces Plan for Child-Care, Family Planning</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/sweet-meteor-of-death-announces-plan-for-child-care-family-planning/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Gay (Marriage) Across the USA</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/gay-marriage-across-the-usa/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/gay-marriage-across-the-usa/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 03:08:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/gay-marriage-across-the-usa/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ Map shows the status of Gay Marriage in states across the USA. Click image to see full chart. ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> Map shows the status of Gay Marriage in states across the USA. Click image to see full chart. </p>
<p>Original post:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Talking-Points-Memo/~3/Tn1F-HWfu7Y/gay_marriage_across_the_usa.php" title="Gay (Marriage) Across the USA">Gay (Marriage) Across the USA</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/gay-marriage-across-the-usa/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Who Makes the Most From Oil and Gas Leases on Public Land?</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/who-makes-the-most-from-oil-and-gas-leases-on-public-land/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/who-makes-the-most-from-oil-and-gas-leases-on-public-land/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 02:59:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Congress]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[energy policy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/who-makes-the-most-from-oil-and-gas-leases-on-public-land/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[(Steven Hayward) A Power Line reader left me a curious telephone tip yesterday to check out a couple of obscure government reports, and indeed this looks like an interesting story, albeit one that is very complicated and hard to summarize briefly.  But on to the question: who makes the most money from oil and gas leases on public land—the oil and gas companies, or the federal government?  Most good Power Line readers will immediately default to the counter-intuitive position, and answer that the government makes the most.  And it looks like this is right. There’s a lot of deep background to this.  The Government Accountability ...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>(Steven Hayward) A Power Line reader left me a curious telephone tip yesterday to check out a couple of obscure government reports, and indeed this looks like an interesting story, albeit one that is very complicated and hard to summarize briefly.  But on to the question: who makes the most money from oil and gas leases on public land—the oil and gas companies, or the federal government?  Most good Power Line readers will immediately default to the counter-intuitive position, and answer that the government makes the most.  And it looks like this is right. There’s a lot of deep background to this.  The Government Accountability &#8230;</p>
<p>Excerpt from:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://feeds.powerlineblog.com/~r/powerlineblog/livefeed/~3/inoA9dAnZ3o/who-makes-the-most-from-oil-and-gas-leases-on-public-land.php" title="Who Makes the Most From Oil and Gas Leases on Public Land?">Who Makes the Most From Oil and Gas Leases on Public Land?</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/who-makes-the-most-from-oil-and-gas-leases-on-public-land/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Obama Kicks the Iranian Nuclear Can Down the Road</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/obama-kicks-the-iranian-nuclear-can-down-the-road/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/obama-kicks-the-iranian-nuclear-can-down-the-road/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 02:53:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[richard n. weltz]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/obama-kicks-the-iranian-nuclear-can-down-the-road/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[And Israel wonders how much longer she can last.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>And Israel wonders how much longer she can last.</p>
<p>Continue reading here:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2012/02/obama_kicks_the_iranian_nuclear_can_down_the_road.html" title="Obama Kicks the Iranian Nuclear Can Down the Road">Obama Kicks the Iranian Nuclear Can Down the Road</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/obama-kicks-the-iranian-nuclear-can-down-the-road/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Former Democrat Rep. Regrets Vote for Obamacare Due to Contraceptive Coverage</title>
		<link>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/former-democrat-rep-regrets-vote-for-obamacare-due-to-contraceptive-coverage/</link>
		<comments>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/former-democrat-rep-regrets-vote-for-obamacare-due-to-contraceptive-coverage/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 02:40:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Blog Feed</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservative Bloggers News Feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Congress]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/former-democrat-rep-regrets-vote-for-obamacare-due-to-contraceptive-coverage/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ **Written by Doug Powers If she actually couldn’t see this coming, her family might want to make sure she never crosses the street unescorted: Former Democratic congresswoman Kathy Dahlkemper, a Catholic from Erie, Pennsylvania, cast a crucial vote in favor of Obamacare in 2010. She lost her seat that November in part because of her controversial support of Obamacare. But Dahlkemper said recently that she would have never voted for the health care bill had she known that the Department of Health and Human Services would require all private insurers, including Catholic charities and hospitals, to provide free coverage of contraception, ...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> **Written by Doug Powers If she actually couldn’t see this coming, her family might want to make sure she never crosses the street unescorted: Former Democratic congresswoman Kathy Dahlkemper, a Catholic from Erie, Pennsylvania, cast a crucial vote in favor of Obamacare in 2010. She lost her seat that November in part because of her controversial support of Obamacare. But Dahlkemper said recently that she would have never voted for the health care bill had she known that the Department of Health and Human Services would require all private insurers, including Catholic charities and hospitals, to provide free coverage of contraception, &#8230;</p>
<p>See the original post here:<br />
<a target="_blank" href="http://michellemalkin.com/2012/02/07/democrat-obamacare/" title="Former Democrat Rep. Regrets Vote for Obamacare Due to Contraceptive Coverage">Former Democrat Rep. Regrets Vote for Obamacare Due to Contraceptive Coverage</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.liberalwhoppers.com/2012/02/07/former-democrat-rep-regrets-vote-for-obamacare-due-to-contraceptive-coverage/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Page Caching using disk: basic
Database Caching using disk: basic
Object Caching 9047/9941 objects using disk: basic

Served from: www.liberalwhoppers.com @ 2012-02-08 13:01:19 -->
