<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The fight for a grand bargain</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2012/11/29/the-fight-for-a-grand-bargain/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2012/11/29/the-fight-for-a-grand-bargain/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 20 May 2013 00:19:37 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: todnwth</title>
		<link>http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2012/11/29/the-fight-for-a-grand-bargain/comment-page-1/#comment-67832</link>
		<dc:creator>todnwth</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 02 Dec 2012 02:13:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=15798#comment-67832</guid>
		<description>Ayatoallah Norquist has hid head up his behind for if has a half an ounce of brains, he got to understand that the taxes on the rich will rise if the republicans do not vote for the tax hike for they have already voted in 2001 to raise the rates on January 1, 2010, but a deal which republicans pulled on Obama they were extended through December 31, 2012 so on January 1, 2013 they will to back to the 2000 rates along with all others which in a way I would be happy about so we can balance the budget and get money from Ayatoallah Norquist and his cohorts who want all the perks of the USA, but want the poor and middle class to pay the bill while they fill the banks with cash!!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ayatoallah Norquist has hid head up his behind for if has a half an ounce of brains, he got to understand that the taxes on the rich will rise if the republicans do not vote for the tax hike for they have already voted in 2001 to raise the rates on January 1, 2010, but a deal which republicans pulled on Obama they were extended through December 31, 2012 so on January 1, 2013 they will to back to the 2000 rates along with all others which in a way I would be happy about so we can balance the budget and get money from Ayatoallah Norquist and his cohorts who want all the perks of the USA, but want the poor and middle class to pay the bill while they fill the banks with cash!!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Samrch</title>
		<link>http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2012/11/29/the-fight-for-a-grand-bargain/comment-page-1/#comment-67827</link>
		<dc:creator>Samrch</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 01 Dec 2012 22:13:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=15798#comment-67827</guid>
		<description>In a recession the middle class (workers with stable jobs) take lest hit.  The poor (workers with temporary or unstable jobs) take the biggest hit.  Business with high fixed cost take as big a hit.   Therefore, it is not the time to hit either the poor or rich.

Recessions are not the time to reduce debt in any way that reduces demand.  Cutting trade deficits are ok as is taxing money will not be spent for some time for the most part like inheritances.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In a recession the middle class (workers with stable jobs) take lest hit.  The poor (workers with temporary or unstable jobs) take the biggest hit.  Business with high fixed cost take as big a hit.   Therefore, it is not the time to hit either the poor or rich.</p>
<p>Recessions are not the time to reduce debt in any way that reduces demand.  Cutting trade deficits are ok as is taxing money will not be spent for some time for the most part like inheritances.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: MoBioph</title>
		<link>http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2012/11/29/the-fight-for-a-grand-bargain/comment-page-1/#comment-67529</link>
		<dc:creator>MoBioph</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Nov 2012 16:04:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=15798#comment-67529</guid>
		<description>Newly elected or re-elected members of the United States House or Senate take the Congressional Oath:

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.

Those who swear that they “take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion,” and yet have not previously disavowed conflicting oaths they have taken, such as an oath to do the bidding of Grover Norquist, Grover Cleveland, Grover the Groover, Grover of Sesame Street, or any other Grover, presumably render their Congressional Oath null and void, in which case, by rights, they should either resign or be removed from office. “With malice toward none, [and] with charity for all,” however, such miscreants could be granted the opportunity to first disavow any and all previously sworn/grovelled Groveral Oaths, and then to reaffirm the Congressional Oath. The sooner the better.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Newly elected or re-elected members of the United States House or Senate take the Congressional Oath:</p>
<p>I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.</p>
<p>Those who swear that they “take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion,” and yet have not previously disavowed conflicting oaths they have taken, such as an oath to do the bidding of Grover Norquist, Grover Cleveland, Grover the Groover, Grover of Sesame Street, or any other Grover, presumably render their Congressional Oath null and void, in which case, by rights, they should either resign or be removed from office. “With malice toward none, [and] with charity for all,” however, such miscreants could be granted the opportunity to first disavow any and all previously sworn/grovelled Groveral Oaths, and then to reaffirm the Congressional Oath. The sooner the better.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: JL4</title>
		<link>http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2012/11/29/the-fight-for-a-grand-bargain/comment-page-1/#comment-67527</link>
		<dc:creator>JL4</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Nov 2012 15:50:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=15798#comment-67527</guid>
		<description>We&#039;re going to see many more pledge defections from Republican House and Senate members, and Governors shortly, but I don&#039;t for one minute believe they&#039;ve seen the economic recovery light - they&#039;ve seen the re-election light. 

Now they&#039;ll wax poetic about refusing to sign pledges and their heartfelt commitment to the Holy American Family through bipartisan cooperation. Gimme a break.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>We&#8217;re going to see many more pledge defections from Republican House and Senate members, and Governors shortly, but I don&#8217;t for one minute believe they&#8217;ve seen the economic recovery light &#8211; they&#8217;ve seen the re-election light. </p>
<p>Now they&#8217;ll wax poetic about refusing to sign pledges and their heartfelt commitment to the Holy American Family through bipartisan cooperation. Gimme a break.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
