
<?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: Liberals uneasy with power</title>
	<atom:link href="http://themoderatevoice.com/49988/liberals-uneasy-with-power/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://themoderatevoice.com/49988/liberals-uneasy-with-power/</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, 30 May 2012 23:31:01 +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/49988/liberals-uneasy-with-power/comment-page-1/#comment-223948</link>
		<dc:creator>DLS</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 Oct 2009 16:14:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://themoderatevoice.com/?p=49988#comment-223948</guid>
		<description>Dalitso, you need better sources if you believe Obama and his fellow libs are uneasy with power.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;That they are inept and out of touch with reality, and with so much of the public, is what their behavior has shown from the start.  But uneasy with power?  Among their other sins is an excessive [ab]use of power and growth of (and centralization) of power in Washington.  Where else in the world (or elsewhere) have you been?&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Having to occasionally concede to reality (disgraceful events like Van Jones; the most pathetic kinds of &quot;outreach&quot; lately with the likes of Olympia Snowe, who should be a Democrat; the failure to please the more radical and even more unrealistic ambitious lefties, who are making all kinds of noise now about health care &quot;reform,&quot; in particular, demanding they get more of what they want, even if so many more do not) in no way constitutes a &quot;great compromise&quot; or &quot;shattering of dreams&quot; except among the delusional.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dalitso, you need better sources if you believe Obama and his fellow libs are uneasy with power.</p>
<p>That they are inept and out of touch with reality, and with so much of the public, is what their behavior has shown from the start.  But uneasy with power?  Among their other sins is an excessive [ab]use of power and growth of (and centralization) of power in Washington.  Where else in the world (or elsewhere) have you been?</p>
<p>Having to occasionally concede to reality (disgraceful events like Van Jones; the most pathetic kinds of &#8220;outreach&#8221; lately with the likes of Olympia Snowe, who should be a Democrat; the failure to please the more radical and even more unrealistic ambitious lefties, who are making all kinds of noise now about health care &#8220;reform,&#8221; in particular, demanding they get more of what they want, even if so many more do not) in no way constitutes a &#8220;great compromise&#8221; or &#8220;shattering of dreams&#8221; except among the delusional.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Leonidas</title>
		<link>http://themoderatevoice.com/49988/liberals-uneasy-with-power/comment-page-1/#comment-223884</link>
		<dc:creator>Leonidas</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 Oct 2009 11:33:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://themoderatevoice.com/?p=49988#comment-223884</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt; But make no mistake, President Obama&#039;s policies will double what &quot;W&quot; left behind.&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;br&gt;Triple according to the official released figures, 1.4 trillon.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;U.S. Budget Gap Hits Record $1.4 Trillion&lt;br&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory?id=8847568&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory?id=884...&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt; Still, it was more than three times as large as the $459 billion deficit racked up in the prior fiscal year&lt;/blockquote&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p> But make no mistake, President Obama&#39;s policies will double what &#8220;W&#8221; left behind.</p></blockquote>
<p>Triple according to the official released figures, 1.4 trillon.</p>
<p>U.S. Budget Gap Hits Record $1.4 Trillion<br /><a href="http://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory?id=8847568" rel="nofollow">http://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory?id=884&#8230;</a></p>
<blockquote><p> Still, it was more than three times as large as the $459 billion deficit racked up in the prior fiscal year</p></blockquote>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: kritt11</title>
		<link>http://themoderatevoice.com/49988/liberals-uneasy-with-power/comment-page-1/#comment-223711</link>
		<dc:creator>kritt11</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Oct 2009 21:01:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://themoderatevoice.com/?p=49988#comment-223711</guid>
		<description>Well, I&#039;m no economist, but I think he had to put the stimulus bill into motion-- the market was crashing and unemployment has not been this high since the Great Depression.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;And where he has talked about making some cuts in Medicare-- the GOP has been up in arms -- getting the Seniors galvanized against it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well, I&#39;m no economist, but I think he had to put the stimulus bill into motion&#8211; the market was crashing and unemployment has not been this high since the Great Depression.</p>
<p>And where he has talked about making some cuts in Medicare&#8211; the GOP has been up in arms &#8212; getting the Seniors galvanized against it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: JeffersonDavis</title>
		<link>http://themoderatevoice.com/49988/liberals-uneasy-with-power/comment-page-1/#comment-223655</link>
		<dc:creator>JeffersonDavis</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Oct 2009 16:54:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://themoderatevoice.com/?p=49988#comment-223655</guid>
		<description>There is no argument that Bush did, indeed, create the current deficit.&lt;br&gt;That&#039;s a no brainer.  It&#039;s one of the reasons I did not like GW Bush as President.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;But make no mistake, President Obama&#039;s policies will double what &quot;W&quot; left behind.&lt;br&gt;We are spending at a rate that cannot be sustained.  Most liberals agree with that statement because it is impossible to ignore.  Can Obama reduce the deficit as Clinton did?  Not without drastically raising taxes.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;And I don&#039;t know about you, but I cannot afford more taxes - it&#039;s tight already in my house.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There is no argument that Bush did, indeed, create the current deficit.<br />That&#39;s a no brainer.  It&#39;s one of the reasons I did not like GW Bush as President.</p>
<p>But make no mistake, President Obama&#39;s policies will double what &#8220;W&#8221; left behind.<br />We are spending at a rate that cannot be sustained.  Most liberals agree with that statement because it is impossible to ignore.  Can Obama reduce the deficit as Clinton did?  Not without drastically raising taxes.</p>
<p>And I don&#39;t know about you, but I cannot afford more taxes &#8211; it&#39;s tight already in my house.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: superdestroyer</title>
		<link>http://themoderatevoice.com/49988/liberals-uneasy-with-power/comment-page-1/#comment-223562</link>
		<dc:creator>superdestroyer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 18 Oct 2009 23:28:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://themoderatevoice.com/?p=49988#comment-223562</guid>
		<description>All of the spending in FY09 was approved by the Democrat controlled House and Senate.  If Democrats cared about deficits, they could have voted them down.  &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Also, how cares what the Republicans did in the past since the Republican party is irrelevant.  The real question is how high will government spending go in the coming one party state.  Will the Democrats be willing to increase taxes and cut spending during the boom times.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>All of the spending in FY09 was approved by the Democrat controlled House and Senate.  If Democrats cared about deficits, they could have voted them down.  </p>
<p>Also, how cares what the Republicans did in the past since the Republican party is irrelevant.  The real question is how high will government spending go in the coming one party state.  Will the Democrats be willing to increase taxes and cut spending during the boom times.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Don Quijote</title>
		<link>http://themoderatevoice.com/49988/liberals-uneasy-with-power/comment-page-1/#comment-223549</link>
		<dc:creator>Don Quijote</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 18 Oct 2009 22:30:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://themoderatevoice.com/?p=49988#comment-223549</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;Yes, there were deficits in the Bush years.......but Obama deficits in one year are larger than all of Bush&#039;s combined...ineffectual deflection&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;The deficits that exist today are the consequences of the Bush policies...&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2009/06/09/business/economy/20090610-leonhardt-graphic.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;How Trillion Dollar Deficits are created&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/10/business/economy/10leonhardt.html?_r=1&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;America’s Sea of Red Ink Was Years in the Making &lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;The story of today’s deficits starts in January 2001, as President Bill Clinton was leaving office. &lt;b&gt;The Congressional Budget Office estimated then that the government would run an average annual surplus of more than $800 billion a year from 2009 to 2012. Today, the government is expected to run a $1.2 trillion annual deficit in those years.&lt;/b&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;You can think of that roughly $2 trillion swing as coming from four broad categories: the business cycle, &lt;b&gt;President George W. Bush’s policies,&lt;/b&gt; policies from the Bush years that are scheduled to expire but that Mr. Obama has chosen to extend, and new policies proposed by Mr. Obama.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;The first category — the business cycle — accounts for 37 percent of the $2 trillion swing. It’s a reflection of the fact that both the 2001 recession and the current one reduced tax revenue, required more spending on safety-net programs and changed economists’ assumptions about how much in taxes the government would collect in future years.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;b&gt;About 33 percent of the swing stems from new legislation signed by Mr. Bush. That legislation, like his tax cuts and the Medicare prescription drug benefit, not only continue to cost the government but have also increased interest payments on the national debt.&lt;/b&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Mr. Obama’s main contribution to the deficit is his extension of several Bush policies, like the Iraq war and tax cuts for households making less than $250,000.&lt;b&gt; Such policies — together with the Wall Street bailout, which was signed by Mr. Bush and supported by Mr. Obama — account for 20 percent of the swing.&lt;/b&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;b&gt;About 7 percent comes from the stimulus bill that Mr. Obama signed in February. And only 3 percent comes from Mr. Obama’s agenda on health care, education, energy and other areas.&lt;/b&gt; &lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt; Bush has just completed eight years in office, Obama has only been there nine month.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;PS. I don&#039;t remember hearing to many Conservatives or Moderates bitch when Shrub cut taxes, forgot to regulate and just plain drove the economy over a cliff.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;PPS. The last two presidents who actually balanced a budget were named Clinton &amp; Johnson.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>Yes, there were deficits in the Bush years&#8230;&#8230;.but Obama deficits in one year are larger than all of Bush&#39;s combined&#8230;ineffectual deflection</p></blockquote>
<p>The deficits that exist today are the consequences of the Bush policies&#8230;</p>
<p><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2009/06/09/business/economy/20090610-leonhardt-graphic.html" rel="nofollow">How Trillion Dollar Deficits are created</a></p>
<p><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/10/business/economy/10leonhardt.html?_r=1" rel="nofollow">America’s Sea of Red Ink Was Years in the Making </a><br />
<blockquote>The story of today’s deficits starts in January 2001, as President Bill Clinton was leaving office. <b>The Congressional Budget Office estimated then that the government would run an average annual surplus of more than $800 billion a year from 2009 to 2012. Today, the government is expected to run a $1.2 trillion annual deficit in those years.</b></p>
<p>You can think of that roughly $2 trillion swing as coming from four broad categories: the business cycle, <b>President George W. Bush’s policies,</b> policies from the Bush years that are scheduled to expire but that Mr. Obama has chosen to extend, and new policies proposed by Mr. Obama.</p>
<p>The first category — the business cycle — accounts for 37 percent of the $2 trillion swing. It’s a reflection of the fact that both the 2001 recession and the current one reduced tax revenue, required more spending on safety-net programs and changed economists’ assumptions about how much in taxes the government would collect in future years.</p>
<p><b>About 33 percent of the swing stems from new legislation signed by Mr. Bush. That legislation, like his tax cuts and the Medicare prescription drug benefit, not only continue to cost the government but have also increased interest payments on the national debt.</b></p>
<p>Mr. Obama’s main contribution to the deficit is his extension of several Bush policies, like the Iraq war and tax cuts for households making less than $250,000.<b> Such policies — together with the Wall Street bailout, which was signed by Mr. Bush and supported by Mr. Obama — account for 20 percent of the swing.</b></p>
<p><b>About 7 percent comes from the stimulus bill that Mr. Obama signed in February. And only 3 percent comes from Mr. Obama’s agenda on health care, education, energy and other areas.</b> </p></blockquote>
<p> Bush has just completed eight years in office, Obama has only been there nine month.</p>
<p>PS. I don&#39;t remember hearing to many Conservatives or Moderates bitch when Shrub cut taxes, forgot to regulate and just plain drove the economy over a cliff.</p>
<p>PPS. The last two presidents who actually balanced a budget were named Clinton &#038; Johnson.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: casualobserver</title>
		<link>http://themoderatevoice.com/49988/liberals-uneasy-with-power/comment-page-1/#comment-223533</link>
		<dc:creator>casualobserver</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 18 Oct 2009 20:04:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://themoderatevoice.com/?p=49988#comment-223533</guid>
		<description>Yes, there were deficits in the Bush years.......but Obama deficits in one year are larger than all of Bush&#039;s combined...ineffectual deflection&lt;BR&gt;&lt;BR&gt;· This year, Washington will spend $30,958 per household, tax $17,576 per household, and borrow $13,392 per household. This spending is not just temporary: President Obama would permanently keep annual spending between $5,000 and $8,000 per household higher than it had been under President Bush.&lt;BR&gt;&lt;BR&gt;· The 22 percent spending increase projected for 2009 represents the largest government expansion since the 1952 height of the Korean War (adjusted for inflation). Federal spending is up 57 percent since 2001.&lt;BR&gt;&lt;BR&gt;· The 2009 budget deficit will be larger than all budget deficits from 2002 through 2007 combined. More than 43 cents of every dollar Washington spends in 2009 will have been borrowed.&lt;BR&gt;&lt;BR&gt;· One would expect the post-recession deficit to revert back to the $150 billion to $350 billion budget deficits that were typical before the recession. Instead, by 2019, the President forecasts a $917 billion budget deficit, a public debt of 77 percent of GDP, and annual net interest spending of $774 billion.&lt;BR&gt;&lt;BR&gt;· The White House projects $10.6 trillion in new deficits between 2009 and 2019—nearly $80,000 per household in new borrowing.&lt;BR&gt;&lt;BR&gt;· None of these estimates include the cost of health reform.&lt;/BR&gt;&lt;/BR&gt;&lt;/BR&gt;&lt;/BR&gt;&lt;/BR&gt;&lt;/BR&gt;&lt;/BR&gt;&lt;/BR&gt;&lt;/BR&gt;&lt;/BR&gt;&lt;/BR&gt;&lt;/BR&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes, there were deficits in the Bush years&#8230;&#8230;.but Obama deficits in one year are larger than all of Bush&#39;s combined&#8230;ineffectual deflection</p>
<p>· This year, Washington will spend $30,958 per household, tax $17,576 per household, and borrow $13,392 per household. This spending is not just temporary: President Obama would permanently keep annual spending between $5,000 and $8,000 per household higher than it had been under President Bush.</p>
<p>· The 22 percent spending increase projected for 2009 represents the largest government expansion since the 1952 height of the Korean War (adjusted for inflation). Federal spending is up 57 percent since 2001.</p>
<p>· The 2009 budget deficit will be larger than all budget deficits from 2002 through 2007 combined. More than 43 cents of every dollar Washington spends in 2009 will have been borrowed.</p>
<p>· One would expect the post-recession deficit to revert back to the $150 billion to $350 billion budget deficits that were typical before the recession. Instead, by 2019, the President forecasts a $917 billion budget deficit, a public debt of 77 percent of GDP, and annual net interest spending of $774 billion.</p>
<p>· The White House projects $10.6 trillion in new deficits between 2009 and 2019—nearly $80,000 per household in new borrowing.</p>
<p>· None of these estimates include the cost of health reform.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: kritt11</title>
		<link>http://themoderatevoice.com/49988/liberals-uneasy-with-power/comment-page-1/#comment-223526</link>
		<dc:creator>kritt11</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 18 Oct 2009 19:23:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://themoderatevoice.com/?p=49988#comment-223526</guid>
		<description>The real truth lies in Obama&#039;s answer- NOT in the boy&#039;s question. Liberals may be disappointed, but Obama understands that being president means that he will necessarily have to disappoint many people who feel he hasn&#039;t met their expectations, as well as those who  adamantly opposed him and his agenda in the first place. So some are going to accuse him of betraying liberal causes, others will feel he&#039;s the second coming of  Lenin. Its nothing that every leader that has attempted to govern as a moderate hasn&#039;t met with, and Obama is mature enough to realize that -instead of choosing to play the role of a victim.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;He&#039;s facing some of the most severe challenges in our nation&#039;s history, but  was left with nothing in the treasury but deficits by his predecessor to meet them. So I think he is doing about as well as can be expected given the partisanship that tears this country apart on a daily basis.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The real truth lies in Obama&#39;s answer- NOT in the boy&#39;s question. Liberals may be disappointed, but Obama understands that being president means that he will necessarily have to disappoint many people who feel he hasn&#39;t met their expectations, as well as those who  adamantly opposed him and his agenda in the first place. So some are going to accuse him of betraying liberal causes, others will feel he&#39;s the second coming of  Lenin. Its nothing that every leader that has attempted to govern as a moderate hasn&#39;t met with, and Obama is mature enough to realize that -instead of choosing to play the role of a victim.</p>
<p>He&#39;s facing some of the most severe challenges in our nation&#39;s history, but  was left with nothing in the treasury but deficits by his predecessor to meet them. So I think he is doing about as well as can be expected given the partisanship that tears this country apart on a daily basis.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: imavettoo</title>
		<link>http://themoderatevoice.com/49988/liberals-uneasy-with-power/comment-page-1/#comment-223520</link>
		<dc:creator>imavettoo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 18 Oct 2009 18:20:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://themoderatevoice.com/?p=49988#comment-223520</guid>
		<description>Needs work.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Needs work.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: dn86</title>
		<link>http://themoderatevoice.com/49988/liberals-uneasy-with-power/comment-page-1/#comment-223515</link>
		<dc:creator>dn86</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 18 Oct 2009 17:05:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://themoderatevoice.com/?p=49988#comment-223515</guid>
		<description>@imavettoo- sarcasm my friend, sarcasm</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@imavettoo- sarcasm my friend, sarcasm</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: imavettoo</title>
		<link>http://themoderatevoice.com/49988/liberals-uneasy-with-power/comment-page-1/#comment-223513</link>
		<dc:creator>imavettoo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 18 Oct 2009 16:46:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://themoderatevoice.com/?p=49988#comment-223513</guid>
		<description>Obama had a choice when taking over the office from a popular two term president, he could either govern in the same narrow-partisan fashion or he could govern as a moderate with a liberal compass.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Popular president?  What planet were you on the last 8 years?  GW Bush was as popular as dog sh*t on new sneakers.  And it wasn&#039;t just &quot;Liberals&quot; who knew he was a worthless warmonger!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Obama had a choice when taking over the office from a popular two term president, he could either govern in the same narrow-partisan fashion or he could govern as a moderate with a liberal compass.</p>
<p>Popular president?  What planet were you on the last 8 years?  GW Bush was as popular as dog sh*t on new sneakers.  And it wasn&#39;t just &#8220;Liberals&#8221; who knew he was a worthless warmonger!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: superdestroyer</title>
		<link>http://themoderatevoice.com/49988/liberals-uneasy-with-power/comment-page-1/#comment-223512</link>
		<dc:creator>superdestroyer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 18 Oct 2009 16:30:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://themoderatevoice.com/?p=49988#comment-223512</guid>
		<description>The Democratic establishment is dominated by lawyers.  Lawyers make their living second guessing and nitpicking the decisions of others.  Thus, Democrats are very reluctant to make decisions.  That is why they had rather set policy in the courts than in the legislature.  If a judge says to do something, the politicians have someone else to blame for something that the politicians really wanted to do.  Now that the Democratic Party is the one, relevant party in the U.S., they have faced with being blame for everything that will happen in the future. &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Also, liberals are extreme hypocrites who hide behind political correctness so that they avoid dealing with problems.  Does anyone really believe that an administration of prep school, Ivy league educated attorneys will ever deal with crime, education, or immigration.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Democratic establishment is dominated by lawyers.  Lawyers make their living second guessing and nitpicking the decisions of others.  Thus, Democrats are very reluctant to make decisions.  That is why they had rather set policy in the courts than in the legislature.  If a judge says to do something, the politicians have someone else to blame for something that the politicians really wanted to do.  Now that the Democratic Party is the one, relevant party in the U.S., they have faced with being blame for everything that will happen in the future. </p>
<p>Also, liberals are extreme hypocrites who hide behind political correctness so that they avoid dealing with problems.  Does anyone really believe that an administration of prep school, Ivy league educated attorneys will ever deal with crime, education, or immigration.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

