<?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: TED RALL IS AN IDIOT</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/ted_rall_is_an_idiot/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/ted_rall_is_an_idiot/</link>
	<description>Online Journal of Politics and Foreign Affairs</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 27 Nov 2009 01:10:12 -0600</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: PoliBlogger</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/ted_rall_is_an_idiot/comment-page-1/#comment-922</link>
		<dc:creator>PoliBlogger</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=1567#comment-922</guid>
		<description>Not to mention:

-Republicans actually do better with small donations than Democrats do (far better, in fact).

-There really wasnât much of Democratic primary in 2000 when Gore was the presumptive nominee pretty much from the word &quot;go&quot;.

-And Dukakis was made fun of well before Bush donned a flight suit.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Not to mention:</p>
<p>-Republicans actually do better with small donations than Democrats do (far better, in fact).</p>
<p>-There really wasnât much of Democratic primary in 2000 when Gore was the presumptive nominee pretty much from the word "go".</p>
<p>-And Dukakis was made fun of well before Bush donned a flight suit.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Katewerk</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/ted_rall_is_an_idiot/comment-page-1/#comment-923</link>
		<dc:creator>Katewerk</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=1567#comment-923</guid>
		<description>And not to mention, part II:

The era of &quot;Reagan economic failure&quot; is a persistant urban myth. 

A  Case Study in Liberal Bias

L. Brent Bozell III
Founder and President, Media Research Center
Vol. 23, No. 11, November 1994

In the 1980s, there was a consensus among the members of the national media that Ronald Reagan was going to fail and that he was going to bring on economic disaster. But. . .the economy didnât collapse. In fact, it soared to unprecedented levels.

The media stubbornly refused to admit that âReaganomicsâ was responsible. The drumbeat of negative opposition to the presidentâs policies continued through the 1980s. By 1986. . . the ratio of negative to positive stories was seven to one. In other words, as the economy was improving, media reports on the economy were becoming increasingly negative.

One of the most common allegations in these reports was that the poor got poorer under Reagan, even though the actual number of poor declined from 14 to 13 percent during his administration, and the average income for the lowest one-fifth of Americans rose from $7,008 to $9,431.

Inflation declined 48%, from 8.9 to 4.6%. Unemployment declined 45%, from 7.5 to 5.2.%. Interest rates declined 71.9%, from 21 to 5.9%. Twenty-one million new jobs were created. The so-called âgreedy â80sâ witnessed the largest peacetime economic expansion in our nationâs history, yet the media remained deaf, dumb and blind.

source: Hillsdale College &quot;Imprimis&quot; Dec. 2002 issue

-- 
Kate</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>And not to mention, part II:</p>
<p>The era of "Reagan economic failure" is a persistant urban myth. </p>
<p>A  Case Study in Liberal Bias</p>
<p>L. Brent Bozell III<br />
Founder and President, Media Research Center<br />
Vol. 23, No. 11, November 1994</p>
<p>In the 1980s, there was a consensus among the members of the national media that Ronald Reagan was going to fail and that he was going to bring on economic disaster. But. . .the economy didnât collapse. In fact, it soared to unprecedented levels.</p>
<p>The media stubbornly refused to admit that âReaganomicsâ was responsible. The drumbeat of negative opposition to the presidentâs policies continued through the 1980s. By 1986. . . the ratio of negative to positive stories was seven to one. In other words, as the economy was improving, media reports on the economy were becoming increasingly negative.</p>
<p>One of the most common allegations in these reports was that the poor got poorer under Reagan, even though the actual number of poor declined from 14 to 13 percent during his administration, and the average income for the lowest one-fifth of Americans rose from $7,008 to $9,431.</p>
<p>Inflation declined 48%, from 8.9 to 4.6%. Unemployment declined 45%, from 7.5 to 5.2.%. Interest rates declined 71.9%, from 21 to 5.9%. Twenty-one million new jobs were created. The so-called âgreedy â80sâ witnessed the largest peacetime economic expansion in our nationâs history, yet the media remained deaf, dumb and blind.</p>
<p>source: Hillsdale College "Imprimis" Dec. 2002 issue</p>
<p>--<br />
Kate</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: James Joyner</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/ted_rall_is_an_idiot/comment-page-1/#comment-924</link>
		<dc:creator>James Joyner</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=1567#comment-924</guid>
		<description>Kate,

All true.  Unemployment did soar to freakishly high levels for a short time during the shake-out period and recession, but the recovery was well underway long before the 1984 election.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Kate,</p>
<p>All true.  Unemployment did soar to freakishly high levels for a short time during the shake-out period and recession, but the recovery was well underway long before the 1984 election.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: PoliBlogger</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/ted_rall_is_an_idiot/comment-page-1/#comment-925</link>
		<dc:creator>PoliBlogger</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=1567#comment-925</guid>
		<description>Plus, I think that much of the boom of the 1990s was the result of investment in R&amp;D that was made possible by the growth under Reagan in the 1980s.

You know, tax cuts and freeing up capital and all that jazz...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Plus, I think that much of the boom of the 1990s was the result of investment in R&#038;D that was made possible by the growth under Reagan in the 1980s.</p>
<p>You know, tax cuts and freeing up capital and all that jazz...</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Woody Harrelson</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/ted_rall_is_an_idiot/comment-page-1/#comment-926</link>
		<dc:creator>Woody Harrelson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=1567#comment-926</guid>
		<description>And since when are most registered voters Democrats?  The only way to justify that comment is if you exclude your analysis to people declaring a partisan affiliation.  Most registered voters are &quot;independents&quot; (small &quot;i&quot;).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>And since when are most registered voters Democrats?  The only way to justify that comment is if you exclude your analysis to people declaring a partisan affiliation.  Most registered voters are "independents" (small "i").</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: James Joyner</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/ted_rall_is_an_idiot/comment-page-1/#comment-927</link>
		<dc:creator>James Joyner</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=1567#comment-927</guid>
		<description>WH: Good point.  It&#039;s true that &quot;more&quot; are registered Dems, not &quot;most.&quot; Indeed, I&#039;ve never lived in a state that had party registration at all.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>WH: Good point.  It's true that "more" are registered Dems, not "most." Indeed, I've never lived in a state that had party registration at all.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: David Perron</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/ted_rall_is_an_idiot/comment-page-1/#comment-928</link>
		<dc:creator>David Perron</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=1567#comment-928</guid>
		<description>Does a fisking of Rall count as feeding the trolls?  If so, this one&#039;s stuffed.  Also in the British sense of the word, is my fervent hope.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Does a fisking of Rall count as feeding the trolls?  If so, this one's stuffed.  Also in the British sense of the word, is my fervent hope.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Asymmetrical Information</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/ted_rall_is_an_idiot/comment-page-1/#comment-929</link>
		<dc:creator>Asymmetrical Information</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=1567#comment-929</guid>
		<description>&lt;strong&gt;http://www.janegalt.net/blog/archives/004160.html&lt;/strong&gt;
It&#039;s always delightful to stumble across someone who thinks that a presidential election campaign should be run like sixth grade

---</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong><a href="http://www.janegalt.net/blog/archives/004160.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.janegalt.net/blog/archives/004160.html</a></strong><br />
It's always delightful to stumble across someone who thinks that a presidential election campaign should be run like sixth grade</p>
<p>---</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
