<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Is Obama Playing The Triangle ?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://themoderatevoice.com/43776/is-obama-playing-the-triangle/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://themoderatevoice.com/43776/is-obama-playing-the-triangle/</link>
	<description>An Internet hub with domestic and international news, analysis, original reporting, and popular features from the left, center, indies, centrists, moderates, and right</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 15 Feb 2012 04:43:19 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: DLS</title>
		<link>http://themoderatevoice.com/43776/is-obama-playing-the-triangle/comment-page-1/#comment-206647</link>
		<dc:creator>DLS</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Aug 2009 22:17:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://themoderatevoice.com/?p=43776#comment-206647</guid>
		<description>&quot;Triangulation doesn&#039;t apply here. In 1994 [...]&quot;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;And despite what a very few have speculated, I believe there won&#039;t be another 1994 in next year&#039;s elections, despite how badly the Democrats have been misbehaving.  The GOP was rejected by so much of the public in 2006 and 2008 because they&#039;ve misbehaved in ways similar to the Dems, in large part; they currently are sidelined in large part because of their own failures, including failure to reform to a point where the public welcomes them as a refreshing alternative, which was the case and more in 1994.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Triangulation doesn&#39;t apply here. In 1994 [...]&#8220;</p>
<p>And despite what a very few have speculated, I believe there won&#39;t be another 1994 in next year&#39;s elections, despite how badly the Democrats have been misbehaving.  The GOP was rejected by so much of the public in 2006 and 2008 because they&#39;ve misbehaved in ways similar to the Dems, in large part; they currently are sidelined in large part because of their own failures, including failure to reform to a point where the public welcomes them as a refreshing alternative, which was the case and more in 1994.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: DLS</title>
		<link>http://themoderatevoice.com/43776/is-obama-playing-the-triangle/comment-page-1/#comment-206646</link>
		<dc:creator>DLS</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Aug 2009 22:14:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://themoderatevoice.com/?p=43776#comment-206646</guid>
		<description>With this health care effort, but earlier with the Lysenkoist climate stuff (which concerned the public at that time), Obama surfaced as a lib Dem like the lib Dems in Congress who really need muzzling, as Obama did regarding the Bush-Cheney investigation nut cases (though now he may be relenting on this, too).&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;This is not triangulation.  These days it&#039;s the Dems running rampant (and perhaps trying to do all they can get away with until suffient numbers of them have to retreat in order to get re-elected).  &quot;Bi-partisanship&quot; for these Dems has always been &quot;do it our way, or else&quot; and they&#039;re ready with the health care effort (as if they were pathetic chest-thumping dictators in small, remote nations) to push bad legislation by the GOP through unethical means in Congress, as if they have a pathological need to save face over their mess.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;All I will say about Clinton that&#039;s tangential but appropriate (because it involves him) is that when Clinton (the one we all are paying attention to currently) visited Obama for a North Korea-related visit, no doubt, I wouldn&#039;t be surprised if strategy and tactics over health care and perhaps future efforts (immigration, etc.) were discussed and Clinton&#039;s advice received, even sought.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>With this health care effort, but earlier with the Lysenkoist climate stuff (which concerned the public at that time), Obama surfaced as a lib Dem like the lib Dems in Congress who really need muzzling, as Obama did regarding the Bush-Cheney investigation nut cases (though now he may be relenting on this, too).</p>
<p>This is not triangulation.  These days it&#39;s the Dems running rampant (and perhaps trying to do all they can get away with until suffient numbers of them have to retreat in order to get re-elected).  &#8220;Bi-partisanship&#8221; for these Dems has always been &#8220;do it our way, or else&#8221; and they&#39;re ready with the health care effort (as if they were pathetic chest-thumping dictators in small, remote nations) to push bad legislation by the GOP through unethical means in Congress, as if they have a pathological need to save face over their mess.</p>
<p>All I will say about Clinton that&#39;s tangential but appropriate (because it involves him) is that when Clinton (the one we all are paying attention to currently) visited Obama for a North Korea-related visit, no doubt, I wouldn&#39;t be surprised if strategy and tactics over health care and perhaps future efforts (immigration, etc.) were discussed and Clinton&#39;s advice received, even sought.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: joep</title>
		<link>http://themoderatevoice.com/43776/is-obama-playing-the-triangle/comment-page-1/#comment-206349</link>
		<dc:creator>joep</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Aug 2009 03:13:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://themoderatevoice.com/?p=43776#comment-206349</guid>
		<description>Triangulation doesn&#039;t apply here.  In 1994 Clinton was dealing with a Republican controlled House.  He had to go to the middle for any kind of legislation.  Obama can lose 30 Democrats in the House and 8 in the Senate and he still gets what he wants (yes reconciliation is on the table).&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;I think what you will see is pure power politics.  Continue to show bi-partisanship until 9/14 at midnight.  Grassley either delivers a compromise that the Republican leadership will not explicitly fight or the Obama solution gets shoved down their throats through reconciliation.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;End of story.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Triangulation doesn&#39;t apply here.  In 1994 Clinton was dealing with a Republican controlled House.  He had to go to the middle for any kind of legislation.  Obama can lose 30 Democrats in the House and 8 in the Senate and he still gets what he wants (yes reconciliation is on the table).</p>
<p>I think what you will see is pure power politics.  Continue to show bi-partisanship until 9/14 at midnight.  Grassley either delivers a compromise that the Republican leadership will not explicitly fight or the Obama solution gets shoved down their throats through reconciliation.</p>
<p>End of story.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: shannonlee</title>
		<link>http://themoderatevoice.com/43776/is-obama-playing-the-triangle/comment-page-1/#comment-206304</link>
		<dc:creator>shannonlee</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Aug 2009 00:37:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://themoderatevoice.com/?p=43776#comment-206304</guid>
		<description>I thought the triangle was out of Phil Jackson&#039;s playbook?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I thought the triangle was out of Phil Jackson&#39;s playbook?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: pacatrue</title>
		<link>http://themoderatevoice.com/43776/is-obama-playing-the-triangle/comment-page-1/#comment-206298</link>
		<dc:creator>pacatrue</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Aug 2009 00:15:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://themoderatevoice.com/?p=43776#comment-206298</guid>
		<description>Interesting article, Patrick. I just wanted to add (because one can always nitpick) that advocating for a &quot;public option&quot; is not the same as claiming the government will set up death panels. I don&#039;t read many political blogs, so the tone may have been similar between the two issues. But the actual idea of a public option is a fine policy program with benefits and drawbacks, while death panels are simply made-up fear-mongering.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Interesting article, Patrick. I just wanted to add (because one can always nitpick) that advocating for a &#8220;public option&#8221; is not the same as claiming the government will set up death panels. I don&#39;t read many political blogs, so the tone may have been similar between the two issues. But the actual idea of a public option is a fine policy program with benefits and drawbacks, while death panels are simply made-up fear-mongering.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rambie</title>
		<link>http://themoderatevoice.com/43776/is-obama-playing-the-triangle/comment-page-1/#comment-206290</link>
		<dc:creator>Rambie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 19 Aug 2009 23:44:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://themoderatevoice.com/?p=43776#comment-206290</guid>
		<description>Seems like Obama was conned by some Republican Senators who were just pretending to want to work in a bipartisan way.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Seems like Obama was conned by some Republican Senators who were just pretending to want to work in a bipartisan way.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

