<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title>Disqus - Latest Comments for mindonly</title><link>http://disqus.com/by/mindonly/</link><description></description><atom:link href="http://disqus.com/mindonly/comments.rss" rel="self"></atom:link><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Thu, 05 Dec 2013 23:21:25 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: Blackstone Made Money on Credit-Default Swaps With This One Weird Trick</title><link>http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-12-05/blackstone-made-money-on-credit-default-swaps-with-this-one-weird-trick.html#comment-1152488786</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Clever???? Hardly. I'm surprised the CDS issuers can't sue.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">mindonly</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 05 Dec 2013 23:21:25 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Margaret Simons and the Australian</title><link>http://www.themonthly.com.au/blog-margaret-simons-and-australian-robert-manne-5235#comment-538141876</link><description>&lt;p&gt;There's no conflict of interest. This is a beat-up - the Fourth Estate is power drunk. Like Rebecca Brooks and her thugs who got tripped up by unrelated events. Robber barons, trade unions, politicians and the media - the power pendulum in perpetual motion.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">mindonly</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 25 May 2012 00:05:33 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Margaret Simons and the Australian</title><link>http://www.themonthly.com.au/blog-margaret-simons-and-australian-robert-manne-5235#comment-538133562</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Robert's criticism is, on the contrary, entirely valid. It's not time to "move on", but The Oz needs to answer to monopolising the bully pulpit in this way. We saw this behaviour with Rebecca Brooks and her gang of thugs. The power pendulum has swung way too far into the court of the Fourth Estate.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">mindonly</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 24 May 2012 23:44:13 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: The Real Mahatma Gandhi - Magazine - The Atlantic</title><link>http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2011/07/the-real-mahatma-gandhi/8550/#comment-247209600</link><description>&lt;p&gt;This is a far more considered (sans blinkers) view:&lt;br&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.newyorker.com/arts/critics/books/2011/05/02/110502crbo_books_mishra" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://www.newyorker.com/arts/critics/books/2011/05/02/110502crbo_books_mishra"&gt;http://www.newyorker.com/ar...&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">mindonly</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 10 Jul 2011 11:12:45 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: The Tragedy of Sarah Palin - Magazine - The Atlantic</title><link>http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2011/06/the-tragedy-of-sarah-palin/8492/#comment-215306868</link><description>&lt;p&gt;We're supposed to ignore all her media appearances, her pidgin English, her inability to think linearly or to communicate in full sentences? Her poisonous partisanship (and, according to your spin, her breathtaking abandonment of her previous principles)? Her ignorance of the Bible? Of America? The world? Because she fixed one or two problems while truly messing up the rest? For that, you think she'd have done a better job?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Really? *Senior* editor? Of The Atlantic? &lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">mindonly</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 01 Jun 2011 03:11:50 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>