<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Presidential Eyes</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2008/02/23/presidential-eyes/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2008/02/23/presidential-eyes/</link>
	<description></description>
	<pubDate>Sun,  7 Sep 2008 21:50:00 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Kenneth</title>
		<link>http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2008/02/23/presidential-eyes/#comment-133060</link>
		<dc:creator>Kenneth</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 Feb 2008 06:27:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2008/02/23/presidential-eyes/#comment-133060</guid>
		<description>Or rather, OH SH-</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Or rather, OH SH-</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Eric</title>
		<link>http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2008/02/23/presidential-eyes/#comment-132895</link>
		<dc:creator>Eric</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 Feb 2008 23:24:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2008/02/23/presidential-eyes/#comment-132895</guid>
		<description>If you look at Sam Koritz's website (samkoritz.com), under books, you will notice a predilection for books that explore whether Jeffersonian democracy is really just a sham surface pantomime, whereas what is really going on is a sociobiologically-driven process. The titles reek of cynicism with regard to enlightenment ideals, such as those espoused by our nation's dunder-headed founders — titles like "Darwinian Politics" and "The Myth of the Rational Voter". He has a marked preference for reading tomes that expound on the idea that the existence of even a possibility of honest political national discourse is a fairy tale believed only by the little people, not the elites who actually run things — a viewpoint that has much in common with that of Leo Strauss and his evil minions.

It's no wonder that Koritz picked up this neat "blue eyes" trick, and it's also no wonder that he found it while perusing the works of Michael Medved.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If you look at Sam Koritz&#8217;s website (samkoritz.com), under books, you will notice a predilection for books that explore whether Jeffersonian democracy is really just a sham surface pantomime, whereas what is really going on is a sociobiologically-driven process. The titles reek of cynicism with regard to enlightenment ideals, such as those espoused by our nation&#8217;s dunder-headed founders — titles like &#8220;Darwinian Politics&#8221; and &#8220;The Myth of the Rational Voter&#8221;. He has a marked preference for reading tomes that expound on the idea that the existence of even a possibility of honest political national discourse is a fairy tale believed only by the little people, not the elites who actually run things — a viewpoint that has much in common with that of Leo Strauss and his evil minions.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s no wonder that Koritz picked up this neat &#8220;blue eyes&#8221; trick, and it&#8217;s also no wonder that he found it while perusing the works of Michael Medved.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Eric</title>
		<link>http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2008/02/23/presidential-eyes/#comment-132503</link>
		<dc:creator>Eric</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 Feb 2008 03:27:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2008/02/23/presidential-eyes/#comment-132503</guid>
		<description>Michael Medved's views are so extreme and hateful, and so at variance with antiwar.com's mission, that I think alarm is due on finding that your letters editor happens to read Medved for enlightenment.

I guess things haven't reached the socially required minimum level of obviousness which would allow one to point something like this out, without being insulted in response.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Michael Medved&#8217;s views are so extreme and hateful, and so at variance with antiwar.com&#8217;s mission, that I think alarm is due on finding that your letters editor happens to read Medved for enlightenment.</p>
<p>I guess things haven&#8217;t reached the socially required minimum level of obviousness which would allow one to point something like this out, without being insulted in response.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Matt Barganier</title>
		<link>http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2008/02/23/presidential-eyes/#comment-132455</link>
		<dc:creator>Matt Barganier</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 Feb 2008 01:36:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2008/02/23/presidential-eyes/#comment-132455</guid>
		<description>You were so impressed with your original comment that you felt the need for a reprise? Hmm. For the record, Sam didn't endorse any of Medved's positions; he simply passed along a statistic from one of Medved's columns. Get a life.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You were so impressed with your original comment that you felt the need for a reprise? Hmm. For the record, Sam didn&#8217;t endorse any of Medved&#8217;s positions; he simply passed along a statistic from one of Medved&#8217;s columns. Get a life.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Eric</title>
		<link>http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2008/02/23/presidential-eyes/#comment-132409</link>
		<dc:creator>Eric</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 25 Feb 2008 22:49:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2008/02/23/presidential-eyes/#comment-132409</guid>
		<description>Earlier I wrote:

"Just wondering: does Sam Koritz habitually consult Michale Medved’s opinions — and trust his research and analysis — concerning the issues of the day?

"If so, is this not a curious habit of mind in a staffer working for antiwar.com?"

Bearing that in mind, let us further consider that this person is the gatekeeper for the antiwar.com "Letters" page.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Earlier I wrote:</p>
<p>&#8220;Just wondering: does Sam Koritz habitually consult Michale Medved’s opinions — and trust his research and analysis — concerning the issues of the day?</p>
<p>&#8220;If so, is this not a curious habit of mind in a staffer working for antiwar.com?&#8221;</p>
<p>Bearing that in mind, let us further consider that this person is the gatekeeper for the antiwar.com &#8220;Letters&#8221; page.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Eugene Costa</title>
		<link>http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2008/02/23/presidential-eyes/#comment-132401</link>
		<dc:creator>Eugene Costa</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 25 Feb 2008 22:12:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2008/02/23/presidential-eyes/#comment-132401</guid>
		<description>Eye-color, like skin color, is strictly a function of the strength of the sun where one's progenitors may have spent, say, the last ten thousand years.

Want to see some real blond, blue-eyed Arya? Try Kurdistan or Iran.

Race is largely a bad joke, especially based on skin color.

Talking about "Anglo-Saxons" or the "British race" merely shows utter ignorance, or utter lack of scruple.

But as Mencken saw in his little essay on Anglo-Saxons, the chosen of the chosen in the US, who are the cream of the White Racists, striding blue-eyed and barefoot through them thar hills and toting shotguns and their Hebrew Bible really do take the cake for belly laughs.

Consult the Venerable Bede.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Eye-color, like skin color, is strictly a function of the strength of the sun where one&#8217;s progenitors may have spent, say, the last ten thousand years.</p>
<p>Want to see some real blond, blue-eyed Arya? Try Kurdistan or Iran.</p>
<p>Race is largely a bad joke, especially based on skin color.</p>
<p>Talking about &#8220;Anglo-Saxons&#8221; or the &#8220;British race&#8221; merely shows utter ignorance, or utter lack of scruple.</p>
<p>But as Mencken saw in his little essay on Anglo-Saxons, the chosen of the chosen in the US, who are the cream of the White Racists, striding blue-eyed and barefoot through them thar hills and toting shotguns and their Hebrew Bible really do take the cake for belly laughs.</p>
<p>Consult the Venerable Bede.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jeff</title>
		<link>http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2008/02/23/presidential-eyes/#comment-132370</link>
		<dc:creator>jeff</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 25 Feb 2008 20:40:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2008/02/23/presidential-eyes/#comment-132370</guid>
		<description>Has anyone verified this. Sounds flimsy. Please keep in mind, 99 % of voters wont be able to identify a candidate's eye color.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Has anyone verified this. Sounds flimsy. Please keep in mind, 99 % of voters wont be able to identify a candidate&#8217;s eye color.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: peace</title>
		<link>http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2008/02/23/presidential-eyes/#comment-132364</link>
		<dc:creator>peace</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 25 Feb 2008 20:24:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2008/02/23/presidential-eyes/#comment-132364</guid>
		<description>Not too long ago a German visitor to the USA told me that blue-eyed people were superior.  Could it be that this notion might play into one's voting decisions?  Just asking.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Not too long ago a German visitor to the USA told me that blue-eyed people were superior.  Could it be that this notion might play into one&#8217;s voting decisions?  Just asking.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Eugene Costa</title>
		<link>http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2008/02/23/presidential-eyes/#comment-132359</link>
		<dc:creator>Eugene Costa</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 25 Feb 2008 20:07:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2008/02/23/presidential-eyes/#comment-132359</guid>
		<description>"Out of touch" may be the wrong word, since the mainstream media's goal from the getgo was to engineer the result.

But this involved a complex of problems that required a two-pronged strategy.

One prong was positive--to market the winners. As you say, Giuliani and Clinton.

The other was negative--to have the audience ignore, not the other candidates, but issues such as the high price of oil, the catastrophe in Iraq, the collapse of real estate and credit, the fall in the dollar, and so forth.

The very fact that the mainstream has been covering up the negative, and trying to defuse its significance when it had to be reported at all, shows they were not out of touch at all.

In fact, the economy has been in recession for at least three years, and recession is rather a mild characterization of where it is headed.

Oil was $29 a barrel in 2002. It is now hovering around $98-100.

This is a direct consequence of the war in Iraq, and has immediate consequences in the economy, including higher food and fuel prices, which in turn put the squeeze on those laboring to keep up with mortgages and other credit payments.

The collapse of sub-prime was just the canary in the mine shaft.

One sign of the mainstream's problem was a short article about a year ago discussing high gasoline prices.

"High Gas Prices May Have Upside", read the title. the article went on to detail all the health benefits high gas prices entailed, including walking and bicycling.

It did not mention higher food prices, but it had much to say about Americans being overweight.

Arbeit macht frei....</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Out of touch&#8221; may be the wrong word, since the mainstream media&#8217;s goal from the getgo was to engineer the result.</p>
<p>But this involved a complex of problems that required a two-pronged strategy.</p>
<p>One prong was positive&#8211;to market the winners. As you say, Giuliani and Clinton.</p>
<p>The other was negative&#8211;to have the audience ignore, not the other candidates, but issues such as the high price of oil, the catastrophe in Iraq, the collapse of real estate and credit, the fall in the dollar, and so forth.</p>
<p>The very fact that the mainstream has been covering up the negative, and trying to defuse its significance when it had to be reported at all, shows they were not out of touch at all.</p>
<p>In fact, the economy has been in recession for at least three years, and recession is rather a mild characterization of where it is headed.</p>
<p>Oil was $29 a barrel in 2002. It is now hovering around $98-100.</p>
<p>This is a direct consequence of the war in Iraq, and has immediate consequences in the economy, including higher food and fuel prices, which in turn put the squeeze on those laboring to keep up with mortgages and other credit payments.</p>
<p>The collapse of sub-prime was just the canary in the mine shaft.</p>
<p>One sign of the mainstream&#8217;s problem was a short article about a year ago discussing high gasoline prices.</p>
<p>&#8220;High Gas Prices May Have Upside&#8221;, read the title. the article went on to detail all the health benefits high gas prices entailed, including walking and bicycling.</p>
<p>It did not mention higher food prices, but it had much to say about Americans being overweight.</p>
<p>Arbeit macht frei&#8230;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: salem s</title>
		<link>http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2008/02/23/presidential-eyes/#comment-132349</link>
		<dc:creator>salem s</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 25 Feb 2008 19:10:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2008/02/23/presidential-eyes/#comment-132349</guid>
		<description>Maybe,we are the stupid ones who allowed such people to control so much!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Maybe,we are the stupid ones who allowed such people to control so much!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: SanFernandoCurt</title>
		<link>http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2008/02/23/presidential-eyes/#comment-132296</link>
		<dc:creator>SanFernandoCurt</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 25 Feb 2008 16:01:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2008/02/23/presidential-eyes/#comment-132296</guid>
		<description>Woo-eee. Is this what it's come to? Last week you crunched some demographics numbers to reveal the next president would be... Clutch Cargo... or somebody...

This week, it's eyeballs. What next? We divine the outcome in November by spattering some chicken blood and clog-dancing around a crock pot? Or maybe pick through pigeon entrails?

The real story of this election is how out of touch the mainstream media has become with the American public. Last fall, we were presented with the certain coronations of Hillary Clinton and Rudolph Giuliani. That prophecy hit the fan smartly.

Our estrangement with the establishment media indicates its irrelevance. The media simply can't tell the peasantry what to think anymore. We want change - not the same old tired line.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Woo-eee. Is this what it&#8217;s come to? Last week you crunched some demographics numbers to reveal the next president would be&#8230; Clutch Cargo&#8230; or somebody&#8230;</p>
<p>This week, it&#8217;s eyeballs. What next? We divine the outcome in November by spattering some chicken blood and clog-dancing around a crock pot? Or maybe pick through pigeon entrails?</p>
<p>The real story of this election is how out of touch the mainstream media has become with the American public. Last fall, we were presented with the certain coronations of Hillary Clinton and Rudolph Giuliani. That prophecy hit the fan smartly.</p>
<p>Our estrangement with the establishment media indicates its irrelevance. The media simply can&#8217;t tell the peasantry what to think anymore. We want change - not the same old tired line.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Larry Sincliar</title>
		<link>http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2008/02/23/presidential-eyes/#comment-132167</link>
		<dc:creator>Larry Sincliar</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 25 Feb 2008 10:04:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2008/02/23/presidential-eyes/#comment-132167</guid>
		<description>Obama has blue balls.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Obama has blue balls.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
