<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?>
<rss version="2.0">
<channel>
<title>Blogcritics: Comments on A Manic Monday for John Kerry</title>
<link>http://blogcritics.org/</link>
<description>A sinister cabal of superior bloggers on music, books, film, popular culture, politics, and technology - updated continuously.</description>
<language>en</language>
<copyright>Copyright 2005 by the authors</copyright>
<lastBuildDate>Mon, 30 Aug 2004 18:13:37 EDT</lastBuildDate>
<docs>http://backend.userland.com/rss</docs>
<generator>Blogcritics.org custom software</generator>

<item>
<title>Comment by Hal Pawluk</title>
<link>http://blogcritics.org/archives/2004/08/30/114530.php#comment-82516</link>
<description>Bad guess, Doug, as I didn&#039;t drop a thing - what I said stands.

As to quagmire in Iraq:  approaching 1,000 dead Americans, no end in sight, and resources being expended in and focus still on Iraq instead of on fighting terrorism.

But what &quot;rest&quot; of my argument?  

Do you mean: &quot;the Bush administration&#039;s total incompetence at governance?&quot; That&#039;s certainly still there.





</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">82516@blogcritics.org</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 30 Aug 2004 18:13:37 EDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by Doug</title>
<link>http://blogcritics.org/archives/2004/08/30/114530.php#comment-82510</link>
<description>Hal,
What is your definition of a quagmire?  I see quite a bit of good news coming out of Iraq on a weekly basis.  I realize that this doesn&#039;t fit into your world view so you choose to ignore it.  Are there still major problems?  Sure, but they are well on their way.  My point about the press not calling it a quagmire was simply that they started the whole thing, and then backed off when they realized it wasn&#039;t true.

Regarding your parsing of the unemployment figures.  If one looks at the data one can clearly see that unemployment was trending sharply upwards all through Clinton&#039;s last year in office.  Of course some of the numbers depend on exactly which set of data you choose to view.  Part of the problem is that our government has so obscured the numbers it&#039;s truly difficult to see what the &quot;true&quot; unemployment figures are.

I guess you dropped the rest of your arguement when you realized it was untenable.</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">82510@blogcritics.org</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 30 Aug 2004 17:18:46 EDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by jack e. jett</title>
<link>http://blogcritics.org/archives/2004/08/30/114530.php#comment-82485</link>
<description>i fear that if bush is elected and/or selected again, it will be four years of manic mondays.  

it might be cool though.  at that point he will have nothing to win or loose.  the press will never get to him, he can spend four years drinking beer at crawford (with his daughters) and laura can start smoking again.

jack</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">82485@blogcritics.org</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 30 Aug 2004 16:15:00 EDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by Hal Pawluk</title>
<link>http://blogcritics.org/archives/2004/08/30/114530.php#comment-82479</link>
<description>Doug, Clearly you don&#039;t have the facts.

Whether the press calls it a quagmire or not does not change what&#039;s going on there.

On unemployment, you need to visit the Bureau of Labor Statistics site.

There you&#039;ll find that in July 2000 there were 4 million unemployed. In July 2004 there were 8.2 million unemployed.  

What the BLS site will also show you is an additional 4.7 million who are not counted in the various stats produced, but do not have work and want to work.

It is a very grim picture.

Don&#039;t you pay attention to what you read? Or do you read only right wing materials?
</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">82479@blogcritics.org</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 30 Aug 2004 15:14:15 EDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by Doug</title>
<link>http://blogcritics.org/archives/2004/08/30/114530.php#comment-82475</link>
<description>Hal,
&quot;...quagmire in Iraq&quot;??  Have you been stuck in a Sadaam hole for the last couple of months?  Even the mainstream media isn&#039;t calling it a quagmire anymore.  Ditto with your alleged issues on terrorism and unemployment...don&#039;t you read?  Health care?  Yeah, that&#039;s still a problem but you act like the BA created it...they didn&#039;t and the next administration (whoever is elected) isn&#039;t going to solve it either.  If you believe differently then you really are in a Sadaam hole.  </description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">82475@blogcritics.org</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 30 Aug 2004 14:56:26 EDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by Hal Pawluk</title>
<link>http://blogcritics.org/archives/2004/08/30/114530.php#comment-82464</link>
<description>If Kerry and his camp aren&#039;t sleeping well it&#039;s for the same reasons you shouldn&#039;t be, either:  the quagmire in Iraq, the negative progress on terrorism, the 13 million unemployed, the 45 million without health care - hell, let&#039;s just summarize it:  the Bush administration&#039;s total incompetence at governance.

</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">82464@blogcritics.org</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 30 Aug 2004 12:34:55 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

</channel>
</rss>