<?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"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Washington Post Was Once A Great Paper</title>
	<atom:link href="http://susiemadrak.com/2008/03/20/06/01/the-washington-post-was-once-a-great-paper/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://susiemadrak.com/2008/03/20/06/01/the-washington-post-was-once-a-great-paper/</link>
	<description>Keeping a jaundiced eye on the corporate media.</description>
	<pubDate>Sat, 05 Jul 2008 22:03:59 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: sparrow</title>
		<link>http://susiemadrak.com/2008/03/20/06/01/the-washington-post-was-once-a-great-paper/#comment-139024</link>
		<dc:creator>sparrow</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Mar 2008 21:39:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://susiemadrak.com/2008/03/20/06/01/the-washington-post-was-once-a-great-paper/#comment-139024</guid>
		<description>They probably sleep very well at night.  Many were probably smart enough to invest in Halliburton early on in the war and may even  have shifted most of their assets to gold just before the bubble broke.  Not a worry.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>They probably sleep very well at night.  Many were probably smart enough to invest in Halliburton early on in the war and may even  have shifted most of their assets to gold just before the bubble broke.  Not a worry.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mad Martigan</title>
		<link>http://susiemadrak.com/2008/03/20/06/01/the-washington-post-was-once-a-great-paper/#comment-139017</link>
		<dc:creator>Mad Martigan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Mar 2008 19:12:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://susiemadrak.com/2008/03/20/06/01/the-washington-post-was-once-a-great-paper/#comment-139017</guid>
		<description>Gosh, Ken; facts are so complicated that you forget to mention any? People die during hostile occupations, too. We are not at war with Iraq, nor are we at war in Iraq. We are occupying Iraq in order to seize oil rights. 

Calling the homegrown insurgents 'Al-Queda in Iraq' does not mean they are in any way affilliated with a global terror organization. So you can't convince me this is part of a war or terror either. The terrorists are in Afganistan and Pakistan. 

Try to keep it straight, (without your beauty pagent bullshit).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Gosh, Ken; facts are so complicated that you forget to mention any? People die during hostile occupations, too. We are not at war with Iraq, nor are we at war in Iraq. We are occupying Iraq in order to seize oil rights. </p>
<p>Calling the homegrown insurgents &#8216;Al-Queda in Iraq&#8217; does not mean they are in any way affilliated with a global terror organization. So you can&#8217;t convince me this is part of a war or terror either. The terrorists are in Afganistan and Pakistan. </p>
<p>Try to keep it straight, (without your beauty pagent bullshit).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ken</title>
		<link>http://susiemadrak.com/2008/03/20/06/01/the-washington-post-was-once-a-great-paper/#comment-139011</link>
		<dc:creator>ken</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Mar 2008 18:07:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://susiemadrak.com/2008/03/20/06/01/the-washington-post-was-once-a-great-paper/#comment-139011</guid>
		<description>Are you people really this dim? You don't even know the basics of international oil trading. It's all emotion with you people. Facts are just too complicated for certain minds, I suspect. You live by the mantra "If it sound good, it must be true." And what part of the word war do you people not understand? Ahem, guess what? People die in war. I guess you people are like Miss America beauty contest candidates who think that if we could all hold hands, all of the world's children would suddenly be fed, and peace would reign across the planet.  Oooooo, my toes are tingling. It MUST be true!!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Are you people really this dim? You don&#8217;t even know the basics of international oil trading. It&#8217;s all emotion with you people. Facts are just too complicated for certain minds, I suspect. You live by the mantra &#8220;If it sound good, it must be true.&#8221; And what part of the word war do you people not understand? Ahem, guess what? People die in war. I guess you people are like Miss America beauty contest candidates who think that if we could all hold hands, all of the world&#8217;s children would suddenly be fed, and peace would reign across the planet.  Oooooo, my toes are tingling. It MUST be true!!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: sneaux</title>
		<link>http://susiemadrak.com/2008/03/20/06/01/the-washington-post-was-once-a-great-paper/#comment-139007</link>
		<dc:creator>sneaux</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Mar 2008 17:42:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://susiemadrak.com/2008/03/20/06/01/the-washington-post-was-once-a-great-paper/#comment-139007</guid>
		<description>How do they sleep at night? On a giant pile of money.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>How do they sleep at night? On a giant pile of money.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mad Martigan</title>
		<link>http://susiemadrak.com/2008/03/20/06/01/the-washington-post-was-once-a-great-paper/#comment-139003</link>
		<dc:creator>Mad Martigan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Mar 2008 17:03:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://susiemadrak.com/2008/03/20/06/01/the-washington-post-was-once-a-great-paper/#comment-139003</guid>
		<description>I think the point is that you're not going to hear the truth about Iraq from our good friends in the *CFM. There really is an agenda that they prefer we don't discuss, or even know about. Better if we just worry about whether or not Brittany has seen her kids lately. Or where Hillary was when Bill was seeing Monica. Or where Hillary was when Vince died. Or what Barrack's pastor is preaching today. 

Permanent military installations in Iraq (on the Korean model) are just none of our damn bidness. The surge is working. Everything is fine. Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain.


*Corporate Fucking Media</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think the point is that you&#8217;re not going to hear the truth about Iraq from our good friends in the *CFM. There really is an agenda that they prefer we don&#8217;t discuss, or even know about. Better if we just worry about whether or not Brittany has seen her kids lately. Or where Hillary was when Bill was seeing Monica. Or where Hillary was when Vince died. Or what Barrack&#8217;s pastor is preaching today. </p>
<p>Permanent military installations in Iraq (on the Korean model) are just none of our damn bidness. The surge is working. Everything is fine. Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain.</p>
<p>*Corporate Fucking Media</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Izquierdo</title>
		<link>http://susiemadrak.com/2008/03/20/06/01/the-washington-post-was-once-a-great-paper/#comment-138994</link>
		<dc:creator>Izquierdo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Mar 2008 16:22:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://susiemadrak.com/2008/03/20/06/01/the-washington-post-was-once-a-great-paper/#comment-138994</guid>
		<description>The Washington Post was a good paper in the 1970's.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Washington Post was a good paper in the 1970&#8217;s.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Susie</title>
		<link>http://susiemadrak.com/2008/03/20/06/01/the-washington-post-was-once-a-great-paper/#comment-138987</link>
		<dc:creator>Susie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Mar 2008 16:00:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://susiemadrak.com/2008/03/20/06/01/the-washington-post-was-once-a-great-paper/#comment-138987</guid>
		<description>That's the Washington TIMES, not the Post.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>That&#8217;s the Washington TIMES, not the Post.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Miguel</title>
		<link>http://susiemadrak.com/2008/03/20/06/01/the-washington-post-was-once-a-great-paper/#comment-138985</link>
		<dc:creator>Miguel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Mar 2008 15:56:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://susiemadrak.com/2008/03/20/06/01/the-washington-post-was-once-a-great-paper/#comment-138985</guid>
		<description>WHEN exactly was the Washington Post a good paper? It's owned by the freaking MOONIES!!!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>WHEN exactly was the Washington Post a good paper? It&#8217;s owned by the freaking MOONIES!!!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: brendancalling</title>
		<link>http://susiemadrak.com/2008/03/20/06/01/the-washington-post-was-once-a-great-paper/#comment-138980</link>
		<dc:creator>brendancalling</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Mar 2008 14:51:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://susiemadrak.com/2008/03/20/06/01/the-washington-post-was-once-a-great-paper/#comment-138980</guid>
		<description>As I mentioned over at BMT, I heard the BBC this morning talkign about the 5th anniversary of the crappy war.  Seems that while there was a parade celebrating the fall of Saddam Hussein in Baghdad yesterday, no such parades are scheduled for England.  And of course there haven't been any celebrations here int eh US (that I know of).

But just yesterday, the NYT described Bush as "swaggering" at the Pentagon as they marked the grim date, and Cheney in the same piece described Iraq as "phenomenal".  So I'm wondering: why are there no parades celebrating our victory?    I mean, it's gone so well according to our Glorious Leader and his Chancellor.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As I mentioned over at BMT, I heard the BBC this morning talkign about the 5th anniversary of the crappy war.  Seems that while there was a parade celebrating the fall of Saddam Hussein in Baghdad yesterday, no such parades are scheduled for England.  And of course there haven&#8217;t been any celebrations here int eh US (that I know of).</p>
<p>But just yesterday, the NYT described Bush as &#8220;swaggering&#8221; at the Pentagon as they marked the grim date, and Cheney in the same piece described Iraq as &#8220;phenomenal&#8221;.  So I&#8217;m wondering: why are there no parades celebrating our victory?    I mean, it&#8217;s gone so well according to our Glorious Leader and his Chancellor.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mad Martigan</title>
		<link>http://susiemadrak.com/2008/03/20/06/01/the-washington-post-was-once-a-great-paper/#comment-138961</link>
		<dc:creator>Mad Martigan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Mar 2008 13:51:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://susiemadrak.com/2008/03/20/06/01/the-washington-post-was-once-a-great-paper/#comment-138961</guid>
		<description>Iraq has been a great success from the Bush-Cheney point of view. All with acceptable costs in blood and treasure. Once the oil revenue sharing law is completed, and Big Oil controls 67% of $30 Trillion in untapped reserves, they could pay off the national debt. Twice.  

Read Jim Holt's take on the endeavor, (from last fall) in the London Review of Books:  http://www.lrb.co.uk/v29/n20/holt01_.html

Hint: It's the Oil</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Iraq has been a great success from the Bush-Cheney point of view. All with acceptable costs in blood and treasure. Once the oil revenue sharing law is completed, and Big Oil controls 67% of $30 Trillion in untapped reserves, they could pay off the national debt. Twice.  </p>
<p>Read Jim Holt&#8217;s take on the endeavor, (from last fall) in the London Review of Books:  <a href="http://www.lrb.co.uk/v29/n20/holt01_.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.lrb.co.uk/v29/n20/holt01_.html</a></p>
<p>Hint: It&#8217;s the Oil</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
