<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1" ?>




































































  <rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
    <channel>
      <title>Comments On: Minimum presidential standard
    
      by Harold Henderson</title>
      <link>http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2007/10/22/minimum-presidential-standard</link>
      <atom:link href="http://www.chicagoreader.com/chicago/Rss.xml?oid=944532&amp;id=comments" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />      <description>Comments On: Minimum presidential standard
    
      by Harold Henderson</description>
      <language>en-us</language>
      <copyright>Copyright 2009 Chicago Reader. All rights reserved. This RSS file is offered to individuals, Chicago Reader readers, and non-commercial organizations only. Any commercial websites wishing to use this RSS file, please contact Chicago Reader.</copyright>
      <webMaster>wil@desert.net (Chicago Reader Webmaster)</webMaster>
      <pubDate>Sat, 21 Nov 2009 00:00:01 -0600</pubDate>
      <lastBuildDate>Sat, 21 Nov 2009 23:00:00 -0600</lastBuildDate>
      <generator>Foundation</generator>
      <docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
      
        
          <item>
    
    <title><![CDATA[Re: Minimum presidential standard]]></title>
    
    
    <link><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2007/10/22/minimum-presidential-standard/#953149]]></link>
    
    <guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2007/10/22/minimum-presidential-standard/#953149]]></guid>
    <author><![CDATA[Paul Botts]]></author>
    <description>
      
      <![CDATA[I agree that it would be, though I am personally someone who is not religious. But I don't think Pollitt is actually proposing that, rather she is yearning for a candidate willing to be proudly and privately religious.
    
    If I thought that most lefty voters today really meant what Pollitt does, I might feel a whole lot better than I do about modern progressivism. Alas they mostly don't, rather they want to impose a new puritanism.
        
        <br />
        
          Posted by Paul Botts]]>
    </description>
    <pubDate>Mon, 22 Oct 2007 11:47:04 -0500</pubDate> 
    <source url="http://www.chicagoreader.com">Chicago Reader</source>
  </item>
        
          <item>
    
    <title><![CDATA[Re: Minimum presidential standard]]></title>
    
    
    <link><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2007/10/22/minimum-presidential-standard/#966883]]></link>
    
    <guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2007/10/22/minimum-presidential-standard/#966883]]></guid>
    <author><![CDATA[John Powers]]></author>
    <description>
      
      <![CDATA[The "private and personsal" ghettoization of religion is one of the failures of American society.  So it is all right to be Religious as long as no one knows it?  
    
    I slightly agree that candidates making up a religiosity for themselves is a nuisance, but demanding that candidates appear as irreligious to satisfy the Left has to be a worse outcome.
    
    JBP
        
        <br />
        
          Posted by John Powers]]>
    </description>
    <pubDate>Mon, 22 Oct 2007 10:03:45 -0500</pubDate> 
    <source url="http://www.chicagoreader.com">Chicago Reader</source>
  </item>
        
      
    </channel>
  </rss>




