<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"><channel><title>Disqus - Latest Comments for Roehl</title><link xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" rel="http://api.friendfeed.com/2008/03#sup" href="http://disqus.com/sup/all.sup#usercomments-cd08a801" type="application/json"/><link>http://disqus.com/people/Roehl/</link><description></description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Fri, 09 Jan 2009 03:05:52 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: Education is the Best Predictor -- Political Wire</title><link>http://politicalwire.com/archives/2009/01/08/education_is_the_best_predictor.html#comment-5002004</link><description>Referencing without comment may be the easiest way to explain something, but it's definitely not the most effective.  I read your posts and you may have a valid point, but the writing comes off as smug to me.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;If it's a waste of time, I would say don't bother trying to make the point.  I'm just saying.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Roehl</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 09 Jan 2009 03:05:52 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Education is the Best Predictor -- Political Wire</title><link>http://politicalwire.com/archives/2009/01/08/education_is_the_best_predictor.html#comment-5001612</link><description>Respectfully, you would do well to argue your case beyond linking to Wikipedia like some teenager pointing to his silk-screened slogan t-shirt and claiming we would be "shocked how much I think if you knew who I was." OK, who are you?  How much do you know?  Why are you keeping it a secret?&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Can you adequately articulate your own opinion?</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Roehl</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 09 Jan 2009 02:35:20 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Congress to Count the Votes -- Political Wire</title><link>http://politicalwire.com/archives/2009/01/07/congress_to_count_the_votes.html#comment-4977638</link><description>Can I put money on this at Intrade?</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Roehl</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 08 Jan 2009 04:01:43 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Reid Pledges to Stay as Majority Leader Until 2015 -- Political Wire</title><link>http://politicalwire.com/archives/2009/01/07/reid_pledges_to_stay_as_majority_leader_until_2015.html#comment-4960285</link><description>"Leading" the Senate is such a suspect term when applied to Reid.  Couldn't do anything about Lieberman, and may very well get steamrolled by the Burris appointment in the end.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Let's see, though, what he can do with 59 Democratic Senators in the next twelve months.  I could be pleasantly surprised.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Roehl</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 07 Jan 2009 15:28:23 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Bennet Begins Campaign -- Political Wire</title><link>http://politicalwire.com/archives/2009/01/06/bennet_begins_campaign.html#comment-4934434</link><description>It just keeps getting earlier.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Roehl</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 06 Jan 2009 16:29:28 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: The Month Ahead -- Political Wire</title><link>http://politicalwire.com/archives/2009/01/05/the_month_ahead.html#comment-4911775</link><description>Not sure about amazing, because November 2008 rates pretty high.  Perhaps one of the most important, though.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Of course, I'll always come here either way.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Roehl</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 05 Jan 2009 16:44:25 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Bigger Than Bush -- Political Wire</title><link>http://politicalwire.com/archives/2009/01/03/bigger_than_bush.html#comment-4876569</link><description>Down from 58% in 2004, white participation down from 77% in 2004 to 74% in 2008.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;There is no indication at all to suggest that we'll see those numbers rebound.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Roehl</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 04 Jan 2009 07:11:12 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Franken Prevails in Recount -- Political Wire</title><link>http://politicalwire.com/archives/2009/01/03/franken_prevails_in_recount.html#comment-4873914</link><description>By now, had Coleman been leading, Republicans would be screaming at Franken, bullying him into conceding for the good of the country, similar to how they forced Gore out of the race in 2000.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Where are the Democrats on this?  They don't have to be disagreeable.  Franken has maintained a consistent lead as of late, there are no indications that Franken's going to lose his lead, and there are more than enough indications to suggest that Coleman is playing scorched earth with the recount.  Coleman's not bowing out without at least some pressure from the left (or a Supreme Court ruling, but the MN judicial system appears to run as slow as frozen maple syrup).</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Roehl</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 04 Jan 2009 03:05:51 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Military Still Wary of Obama -- Political Wire</title><link>http://politicalwire.com/archives/2009/01/02/military_still_wary_of_obama.html#comment-4831406</link><description>That's too convenient, awfully close to deliberately cherry-picking the results you like without saying as much.  I did notice that in that post you wanted to point out that Zogby's poll (which had McCain ahead) was more accurate than Gallup.  Also very convenient.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;I've never heard this "acceptable research" bit from you before; all I know is when it doesn't fit your worldview, I don't hear anything about "acceptable research." Then you insist that reality is different when you don't have the data to lean on.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Me, I don't care one way or the other about this particular survey.  I just knew that people like you would jump on it like it was candy from a pinata.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Roehl</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 02 Jan 2009 17:34:50 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Military Still Wary of Obama -- Political Wire</title><link>http://politicalwire.com/archives/2009/01/02/military_still_wary_of_obama.html#comment-4830859</link><description>"I don't believe in polls" - jgrillo (&lt;a href="http://politicalwire.com/archives/2008/09/02/gallup_tracking_obama_hits_50_support.html" rel="nofollow"&gt;http://politicalwire.com/archives/2008/09/02/ga...&lt;/a&gt;)</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Roehl</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 02 Jan 2009 16:51:45 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Quote of the Day -- Political Wire</title><link>http://politicalwire.com/archives/2008/12/29/quote_of_the_day.html#comment-4726508</link><description>Dick Cheney is a prime example of someone who is desperate to be an island entire of itself.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Problem is, it's impossible.  And when one tries, they usually turn into a hot mess, like Three Mile Island hot mess.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Roehl</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 29 Dec 2008 16:24:10 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Bush's Books -- Political Wire</title><link>http://politicalwire.com/archives/2008/12/28/bushs_books.html#comment-4709602</link><description>I was gonna go with the Mr. Men books, but you beat me to the general idea.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Roehl</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 29 Dec 2008 07:59:06 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Quote of the Day -- Political Wire</title><link>http://politicalwire.com/archives/2008/12/28/quote_of_the_day.html#comment-4709242</link><description>This was the Bush administration's chief talking point to quash Iraqi dissent against the occupation.  Whenever anyone talked about disapproval among Iraqis of American forces in their country, Bush or his people would always deflect the criticism, saying, "Isn't that what freedom is all about?" They never took on the merits of such dissent even once in the last five years.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;I'm looking forward to a more intelligent discourse come January 20th.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Roehl</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 29 Dec 2008 07:56:47 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Most Admired -- Political Wire</title><link>http://politicalwire.com/archives/2008/12/26/most_admired.html#comment-4636149</link><description>As reprehensible as McCain's general election campaign was, it's hard to imagine that Bush (5%) fared better than McCain (3%) in this poll.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Roehl</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 26 Dec 2008 15:59:41 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Coleman's Lead Now Single Digits -- Political Wire</title><link>http://politicalwire.com/archives/2008/12/18/colemans_lead_now_single_digits.html#comment-4521223</link><description>Even IRV has problems (in some cases, you can have the inane possibility of having a third-, fourth- or even fifth-ranked, and so on, candidate winning on runoff).  Approval voting is much simpler than IRV and doesn't require ranking.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;In any case, IRV wouldn't stop a recount like the one in Minnesota from happening.  In any rational democracy with any voting system, an extremely close election requires a recount.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Roehl</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 19 Dec 2008 15:05:06 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Quote of the Day -- Political Wire</title><link>http://politicalwire.com/archives/2008/12/18/quote_of_the_day.html#comment-4480494</link><description>This is no doubt an indictment of his own chief of staff.  What a horrible failure he must have been under this criterion.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Roehl</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 18 Dec 2008 15:02:42 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Quote of the Day -- Political Wire</title><link>http://politicalwire.com/archives/2008/12/17/quote_of_the_day.html#comment-4458733</link><description>Not really a quote of the day; I believe he said the same thing on 60 Minutes right after the election.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Roehl</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 17 Dec 2008 15:26:12 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Jackson Has Been Working With Prosecutors -- Political Wire</title><link>http://politicalwire.com/archives/2008/12/16/jackson_has_been_working_with_prosecutors.html#comment-4441898</link><description>How ironic that you accuse me of not getting your assertions when I'm trying to be just as diplomatic.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Hey, like I said, if it's true, it's true, it don't matter when it comes out, or where it comes from.  If it's not true, that's another story.  But I'm not making any judgments just yet.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Roehl</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 17 Dec 2008 02:24:51 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Jackson Has Been Working With Prosecutors -- Political Wire</title><link>http://politicalwire.com/archives/2008/12/16/jackson_has_been_working_with_prosecutors.html#comment-4441753</link><description>I have no idea what this means.  If it's true, it's true, it don't matter when it comes out.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Unless you are, in fact, trying to imply that it's all lies.  Me, I have no opinion yet.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Roehl</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 17 Dec 2008 02:16:04 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Quote of the Day -- Political Wire</title><link>http://politicalwire.com/archives/2008/12/16/quote_of_the_day.html#comment-4428710</link><description>Can impeachment be posthumous?</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Roehl</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 16 Dec 2008 15:28:35 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: How Powerful is Valerie Jarrett? -- Political Wire</title><link>http://politicalwire.com/archives/2008/12/15/how_powerful_is_valerie_jarrett.html#comment-4422251</link><description>Exactly why Jarrett dismissed any talk of taking the Senate seat.  I won't deny there's power in the Senate, but you can either be one of a hundred, working in the shadow of the previous occupant, or you can be the next Karl Rove (only, I hope, tons more progressive, nicer and more benevolent).</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Roehl</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 16 Dec 2008 02:33:55 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Loophole Eliminates Limits on Bank Executive Pay -- Political Wire</title><link>http://politicalwire.com/archives/2008/12/15/loophole_eliminates_limits_on_bank_executive_pay.html#comment-4410088</link><description>So THAT'S where the $700 billion is going...</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Roehl</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 15 Dec 2008 14:52:13 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Quote of the Day -- Political Wire</title><link>http://politicalwire.com/archives/2008/12/14/quote_of_the_day.html#comment-4403565</link><description>I disagree.  I would've enjoyed a much more civil campaign on McCain's part, and the country would be all the better without all the "who's the real Barack Obama?" charges coming from the top of the Republican Presidential campaign.  That's how confident I was of Obama winning the election.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Roehl</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 15 Dec 2008 02:19:30 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Quote of the Day -- Political Wire</title><link>http://politicalwire.com/archives/2008/12/14/quote_of_the_day.html#comment-4399324</link><description>If he was this reasonable during the general election campaign, he would've still lost because of the economic crisis and the widespread appeal of and ground game by Obama, but he wouldn't have gotten blown out by such a huge electoral vote margin.  Maybe he gets a state like North Carolina back.  Maybe New Hampshire would've been more competitive.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Roehl</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 14 Dec 2008 19:13:39 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Behind Jarrett's Decision Not to Seek Senate -- Political Wire</title><link>http://politicalwire.com/archives/2008/12/13/behind_jarretts_decision_not_to_seek_senate.html#comment-4386486</link><description>It's so simple, that can't possibly be it.  Republicans wouldn't allow something as mundane as "it's so much cooler to work in the White House" to pass as truth.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Roehl</dc:creator><pubDate>Sat, 13 Dec 2008 14:45:14 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>