<?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: Video: Michelle vs. InstaGlenn on Conservatism 2.0</title>
	<atom:link href="http://hotair.com/archives/2008/11/20/video-michelle-vs-instaglenn-on-conservatism-20/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2008/11/20/video-michelle-vs-instaglenn-on-conservatism-20/</link>
	<description>The world’s first, full-service conservative Internet broadcast network</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 14 Feb 2012 05:20:52 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Video: Michelle vs. InstaGlenn on Conservatism 2.0 &#171; Top Daily Digest Reading</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2008/11/20/video-michelle-vs-instaglenn-on-conservatism-20/comment-page-1/#comment-1862673</link>
		<dc:creator>Video: Michelle vs. InstaGlenn on Conservatism 2.0 &#171; Top Daily Digest Reading</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Feb 2009 13:24:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/?p=35228#comment-1862673</guid>
		<description>[...] Read about it here. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Read about it here. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steynian 287 &#171; Free Canuckistan!</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2008/11/20/video-michelle-vs-instaglenn-on-conservatism-20/comment-page-1/#comment-1667209</link>
		<dc:creator>Steynian 287 &#171; Free Canuckistan!</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 Nov 2008 19:24:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/?p=35228#comment-1667209</guid>
		<description>[...] VIDEO: Michelle vs. InstaGlenn on Conservatism 2.0 &#8230;. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] VIDEO: Michelle vs. InstaGlenn on Conservatism 2.0 &#8230;. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Christine</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2008/11/20/video-michelle-vs-instaglenn-on-conservatism-20/comment-page-1/#comment-1666826</link>
		<dc:creator>Christine</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 Nov 2008 17:39:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/?p=35228#comment-1666826</guid>
		<description>Glenn&#039;s fine, but that shirt! I kept wanting to unbutton that second button and arrange the shirt for him. Yea, I&#039;m OCD and he&#039;s a Libertarian has has the right to have an ill-fitting shirt.
Michelle was beautiful in body and mind, as always, but I&#039;d spice up her outfit with some color! Send in Tim Gunn! ;-)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Glenn&#8217;s fine, but that shirt! I kept wanting to unbutton that second button and arrange the shirt for him. Yea, I&#8217;m OCD and he&#8217;s a Libertarian has has the right to have an ill-fitting shirt.<br />
Michelle was beautiful in body and mind, as always, but I&#8217;d spice up her outfit with some color! Send in Tim Gunn! ;-)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: aelhues</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2008/11/20/video-michelle-vs-instaglenn-on-conservatism-20/comment-page-1/#comment-1666208</link>
		<dc:creator>aelhues</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 Nov 2008 13:47:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/?p=35228#comment-1666208</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;We should be planning a convention. Just because the Yearly KOS loons are impotent, and their candidates are flakes, those facts say NOTHING about what we might be able to accomplish.

AllahPundit presumes that we would invite high profile candidates/media figures/celebrities to attend (like the KOS kiddies). In keeping with TRUE conservative principles, I think that we should disqualify and exclude these people at the outset (granting exceptions for AllahPundit, Ed, and Michelle since they are our hosts). We don’t WANT Kathleen Parker or Andrew Sullivan or David Brooks or Peggy Noonan in attendance, and we don’t NEED “has been” Presidential contenders. An over abundance of celebrities only serves to distort the goals and skew the agenda of the convention. Our aim should be to draw up our resolutions/recommendations for the future and, once agreed upon and drafted, deliver/issue these recommendations to the uppity-ups — and if that sounds like an independent political party drafting it’s party platform, so be it.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

I agree completely.  There is no reason to discount an idea simply because it&#039;s been done poorly in the past.  
I wouldn&#039;t be interested in it if it was made into a big media circus with all of the current Republican names showing up.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>We should be planning a convention. Just because the Yearly KOS loons are impotent, and their candidates are flakes, those facts say NOTHING about what we might be able to accomplish.</p>
<p>AllahPundit presumes that we would invite high profile candidates/media figures/celebrities to attend (like the KOS kiddies). In keeping with TRUE conservative principles, I think that we should disqualify and exclude these people at the outset (granting exceptions for AllahPundit, Ed, and Michelle since they are our hosts). We don’t WANT Kathleen Parker or Andrew Sullivan or David Brooks or Peggy Noonan in attendance, and we don’t NEED “has been” Presidential contenders. An over abundance of celebrities only serves to distort the goals and skew the agenda of the convention. Our aim should be to draw up our resolutions/recommendations for the future and, once agreed upon and drafted, deliver/issue these recommendations to the uppity-ups — and if that sounds like an independent political party drafting it’s party platform, so be it.</p></blockquote>
<p>I agree completely.  There is no reason to discount an idea simply because it&#8217;s been done poorly in the past.<br />
I wouldn&#8217;t be interested in it if it was made into a big media circus with all of the current Republican names showing up.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: eh</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2008/11/20/video-michelle-vs-instaglenn-on-conservatism-20/comment-page-1/#comment-1666086</link>
		<dc:creator>eh</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 Nov 2008 09:21:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/?p=35228#comment-1666086</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;Conservatism 2.0&lt;/blockquote&gt;

i just puked when i read that. never type that again, please.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>Conservatism 2.0</p></blockquote>
<p>i just puked when i read that. never type that again, please.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Elektra</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2008/11/20/video-michelle-vs-instaglenn-on-conservatism-20/comment-page-1/#comment-1665889</link>
		<dc:creator>Elektra</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 Nov 2008 05:00:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/?p=35228#comment-1665889</guid>
		<description>Hallelujah, lock and load!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hallelujah, lock and load!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gohawgs</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2008/11/20/video-michelle-vs-instaglenn-on-conservatism-20/comment-page-1/#comment-1665608</link>
		<dc:creator>Gohawgs</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 Nov 2008 03:13:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/?p=35228#comment-1665608</guid>
		<description>Governor Huckabee is NOT Presidential material, maybe HHS (like lil Tommy Daschle) but NOT President. Having seen his administration in action gives me an insight that most every commenter here just doesn&#039;t have. He&#039;s a nice guy, a good speaker, a Baptist preacher and, he lost 100 pounds. But, he&#039;s not close to being disciplined or principled enough (conservative wise) to be POTUS.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Governor Huckabee is NOT Presidential material, maybe HHS (like lil Tommy Daschle) but NOT President. Having seen his administration in action gives me an insight that most every commenter here just doesn&#8217;t have. He&#8217;s a nice guy, a good speaker, a Baptist preacher and, he lost 100 pounds. But, he&#8217;s not close to being disciplined or principled enough (conservative wise) to be POTUS.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Beatnik Joe</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2008/11/20/video-michelle-vs-instaglenn-on-conservatism-20/comment-page-1/#comment-1665467</link>
		<dc:creator>Beatnik Joe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 Nov 2008 01:37:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/?p=35228#comment-1665467</guid>
		<description>It&#039;s nice listening to people who really &quot;get it&quot;.  Kind of like an anti-Kondracke.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s nice listening to people who really &#8220;get it&#8221;.  Kind of like an anti-Kondracke.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Christian Conservative</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2008/11/20/video-michelle-vs-instaglenn-on-conservatism-20/comment-page-1/#comment-1665425</link>
		<dc:creator>Christian Conservative</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 Nov 2008 01:15:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/?p=35228#comment-1665425</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;If over time, Mitt can convince us that he IS a conservative, then he could be a good pick in 2012. However, he needs time to convince us, just like Palin needs time to get up to speed on national issues.
Sapwolf&lt;/blockquote&gt;
Certainly seems to me that Mitt can convice us much better than Huck.  No wonder Huck loved McCain -- they&#039;re both RINO&#039;s.  That&#039;s why we lost -- as Michelle says, Fake democrats lose to real democrats every time.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>If over time, Mitt can convince us that he IS a conservative, then he could be a good pick in 2012. However, he needs time to convince us, just like Palin needs time to get up to speed on national issues.<br />
Sapwolf</p></blockquote>
<p>Certainly seems to me that Mitt can convice us much better than Huck.  No wonder Huck loved McCain &#8212; they&#8217;re both RINO&#8217;s.  That&#8217;s why we lost &#8212; as Michelle says, Fake democrats lose to real democrats every time.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Red State State of Mind</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2008/11/20/video-michelle-vs-instaglenn-on-conservatism-20/comment-page-1/#comment-1665375</link>
		<dc:creator>Red State State of Mind</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 Nov 2008 00:53:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/?p=35228#comment-1665375</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;Principles:

Count to 10 on November 20, 2008 at 5:44 PM&lt;/blockquote&gt;

Excellent !</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>Principles:</p>
<p>Count to 10 on November 20, 2008 at 5:44 PM</p></blockquote>
<p>Excellent !</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sapwolf</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2008/11/20/video-michelle-vs-instaglenn-on-conservatism-20/comment-page-1/#comment-1665331</link>
		<dc:creator>Sapwolf</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 Nov 2008 00:33:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/?p=35228#comment-1665331</guid>
		<description>If over time, Mitt can convince us that he IS a conservative, then he could be a good pick in 2012.  However, he needs time to convince us, just like Palin needs time to get up to speed on national issues.

Mitt/Sarah could actually be a good pair, but we need to get the party reborn and rearmed for 2010 with a good big tent platform and fundraising infrastructure.

There is a TON of work to do before we really get into 2012.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If over time, Mitt can convince us that he IS a conservative, then he could be a good pick in 2012.  However, he needs time to convince us, just like Palin needs time to get up to speed on national issues.</p>
<p>Mitt/Sarah could actually be a good pair, but we need to get the party reborn and rearmed for 2010 with a good big tent platform and fundraising infrastructure.</p>
<p>There is a TON of work to do before we really get into 2012.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sapwolf</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2008/11/20/video-michelle-vs-instaglenn-on-conservatism-20/comment-page-1/#comment-1665326</link>
		<dc:creator>Sapwolf</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 Nov 2008 00:31:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/?p=35228#comment-1665326</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;Thanks Michelle for laying into Huckabee. I’m so done with him. As far as I’m concerned, if here weren’t around, Romney would have won Iowa, propelled to barely win New Hampshire, and sailed his way through Nevada and Michigan for a close race in South Carolina and a win in Florida.

...

iamse7en on November 20, 2008 at 4:45 PM
&lt;blockquote&gt;

And then promptly got his butt kicked by Obama by 9%+ popular vote.  However, he&#039;d have done better than Huckster.&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;/blockquote&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>Thanks Michelle for laying into Huckabee. I’m so done with him. As far as I’m concerned, if here weren’t around, Romney would have won Iowa, propelled to barely win New Hampshire, and sailed his way through Nevada and Michigan for a close race in South Carolina and a win in Florida.</p>
<p>&#8230;</p>
<p>iamse7en on November 20, 2008 at 4:45 PM</p>
<blockquote>
<p>And then promptly got his butt kicked by Obama by 9%+ popular vote.  However, he&#8217;d have done better than Huckster.</p></blockquote>
</blockquote>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: thecountofincognito</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2008/11/20/video-michelle-vs-instaglenn-on-conservatism-20/comment-page-1/#comment-1665216</link>
		<dc:creator>thecountofincognito</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2008 23:35:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/?p=35228#comment-1665216</guid>
		<description>John The Baptist on November 20, 2008 at 6:23 PM

It was just Huck&#039;s fault that McCain got the chance to screw it up.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>John The Baptist on November 20, 2008 at 6:23 PM</p>
<p>It was just Huck&#8217;s fault that McCain got the chance to screw it up.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John The Baptist</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2008/11/20/video-michelle-vs-instaglenn-on-conservatism-20/comment-page-1/#comment-1665194</link>
		<dc:creator>John The Baptist</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2008 23:23:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/?p=35228#comment-1665194</guid>
		<description>Mitt would have never made it--his flip flops haunt him to bad.
He should  have, and still should, do what he does best---a cabinet position would be great---but not POTUS.

And it was McCains fault not Hucks.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mitt would have never made it&#8211;his flip flops haunt him to bad.<br />
He should  have, and still should, do what he does best&#8212;a cabinet position would be great&#8212;but not POTUS.</p>
<p>And it was McCains fault not Hucks.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John The Baptist</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2008/11/20/video-michelle-vs-instaglenn-on-conservatism-20/comment-page-1/#comment-1665189</link>
		<dc:creator>John The Baptist</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2008 23:21:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/?p=35228#comment-1665189</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;You gotta hand it to Michelle. She’s STILL promoting Romney while ripping everyonee else!

Consistent. But unable to admit her clear bias for Romney during the primaries.

She banned me from MM for even suggesting it.

Regardless of how great Michelle is, tolerance is certainly not her virtue.

Al-Ozarka on November 20, 2008 at 4:18 PM&lt;/blockquote&gt;


Well said</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>You gotta hand it to Michelle. She’s STILL promoting Romney while ripping everyonee else!</p>
<p>Consistent. But unable to admit her clear bias for Romney during the primaries.</p>
<p>She banned me from MM for even suggesting it.</p>
<p>Regardless of how great Michelle is, tolerance is certainly not her virtue.</p>
<p>Al-Ozarka on November 20, 2008 at 4:18 PM</p></blockquote>
<p>Well said</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: JammieWearingFool</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2008/11/20/video-michelle-vs-instaglenn-on-conservatism-20/comment-page-1/#comment-1665147</link>
		<dc:creator>JammieWearingFool</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2008 23:06:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/?p=35228#comment-1665147</guid>
		<description>I don&#039;t think the right needs to do a Yearly Kos type convention. There&#039;s already CPAC.

Better candidates and no open primaries would be a good starting point.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t think the right needs to do a Yearly Kos type convention. There&#8217;s already CPAC.</p>
<p>Better candidates and no open primaries would be a good starting point.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ronsfi</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2008/11/20/video-michelle-vs-instaglenn-on-conservatism-20/comment-page-1/#comment-1665144</link>
		<dc:creator>ronsfi</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2008 23:05:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/?p=35228#comment-1665144</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;    No, I’ve seen a girl naked before :P

    lorien1973 on November 20, 2008 at 4:35 PM&lt;/blockquote&gt;

Walking in on your Grandma in the can does not count. Sorry.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>    No, I’ve seen a girl naked before :P</p>
<p>    lorien1973 on November 20, 2008 at 4:35 PM</p></blockquote>
<p>Walking in on your Grandma in the can does not count. Sorry.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: CyberCipher</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2008/11/20/video-michelle-vs-instaglenn-on-conservatism-20/comment-page-1/#comment-1665131</link>
		<dc:creator>CyberCipher</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2008 22:58:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/?p=35228#comment-1665131</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;The money question at 13:45: Should conservative bloggers follow the Yearly Kos model and start organizing conferences? To which I say: What for? Has Yearly Kos accomplished anything aside from having the Democratic candidates show up, pay lip service, and then hilariously ignore their most cherished causes and hobbyhorses once in power? &lt;/blockquote&gt;

I was chatting with MadisonConservative/Limerick about this a couple of days ago. We should be planning a convention. Just because the Yearly KOS loons are impotent, and their candidates are flakes, those facts say NOTHING about what we might be able to accomplish.

AllahPundit presumes that we would invite high profile candidates/media figures/celebrities to attend (like the KOS kiddies). In keeping with TRUE conservative principles, I think that we should disqualify and exclude these people at the outset (granting exceptions for AllahPundit, Ed, and Michelle since they are our hosts). We don&#039;t WANT Kathleen Parker or Andrew Sullivan or David Brooks or Peggy Noonan in attendance, and we don&#039;t NEED &quot;has been&quot; Presidential contenders. An over abundance of celebrities only serves to distort the goals and skew the agenda of the convention. Our aim should be to draw up our resolutions/recommendations for the future and, once agreed upon and drafted, deliver/issue these recommendations to the uppity-ups -- and if that sounds like  an independent political party drafting it&#039;s party platform, so be it.

My collie says:
&lt;blockquote&gt;Don&#039;t forget to put some teeth into the resolutions. We HAVE more connections, influence, and internet talent than AllahPundit thinks we do. The only question is, do we have the resolve?&lt;/blockquote&gt;

BTW, did anyone else besides me notice all the banter in that video clip about the Reagan legacy of positive thinking. AllahPundit, you are SUCH a heretic.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>The money question at 13:45: Should conservative bloggers follow the Yearly Kos model and start organizing conferences? To which I say: What for? Has Yearly Kos accomplished anything aside from having the Democratic candidates show up, pay lip service, and then hilariously ignore their most cherished causes and hobbyhorses once in power? </p></blockquote>
<p>I was chatting with MadisonConservative/Limerick about this a couple of days ago. We should be planning a convention. Just because the Yearly KOS loons are impotent, and their candidates are flakes, those facts say NOTHING about what we might be able to accomplish.</p>
<p>AllahPundit presumes that we would invite high profile candidates/media figures/celebrities to attend (like the KOS kiddies). In keeping with TRUE conservative principles, I think that we should disqualify and exclude these people at the outset (granting exceptions for AllahPundit, Ed, and Michelle since they are our hosts). We don&#8217;t WANT Kathleen Parker or Andrew Sullivan or David Brooks or Peggy Noonan in attendance, and we don&#8217;t NEED &#8220;has been&#8221; Presidential contenders. An over abundance of celebrities only serves to distort the goals and skew the agenda of the convention. Our aim should be to draw up our resolutions/recommendations for the future and, once agreed upon and drafted, deliver/issue these recommendations to the uppity-ups &#8212; and if that sounds like  an independent political party drafting it&#8217;s party platform, so be it.</p>
<p>My collie says:</p>
<blockquote><p>Don&#8217;t forget to put some teeth into the resolutions. We HAVE more connections, influence, and internet talent than AllahPundit thinks we do. The only question is, do we have the resolve?</p></blockquote>
<p>BTW, did anyone else besides me notice all the banter in that video clip about the Reagan legacy of positive thinking. AllahPundit, you are SUCH a heretic.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: KDANAZ</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2008/11/20/video-michelle-vs-instaglenn-on-conservatism-20/comment-page-1/#comment-1665116</link>
		<dc:creator>KDANAZ</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2008 22:50:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/?p=35228#comment-1665116</guid>
		<description>I very much disagree Huck will not win in 2012...not even close!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I very much disagree Huck will not win in 2012&#8230;not even close!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Count to 10</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2008/11/20/video-michelle-vs-instaglenn-on-conservatism-20/comment-page-1/#comment-1665106</link>
		<dc:creator>Count to 10</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2008 22:46:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/?p=35228#comment-1665106</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;

I think one of the major failures of the GOP these days is that they’ve been running almost exclusively on the social con and national security issues - there’s been little or no showing of fiscal conservatism or libertarianism in the last several years.

ErikTheRed on November 20, 2008 at 5:36 PM
&lt;/blockquote&gt;
Until we can present it all as one big good-governance-principles package, we are going to be loosing segments of voters we should be getting.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote>
<p>I think one of the major failures of the GOP these days is that they’ve been running almost exclusively on the social con and national security issues &#8211; there’s been little or no showing of fiscal conservatism or libertarianism in the last several years.</p>
<p>ErikTheRed on November 20, 2008 at 5:36 PM
</p></blockquote>
<p>Until we can present it all as one big good-governance-principles package, we are going to be loosing segments of voters we should be getting.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Count to 10</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2008/11/20/video-michelle-vs-instaglenn-on-conservatism-20/comment-page-1/#comment-1665101</link>
		<dc:creator>Count to 10</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2008 22:44:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/?p=35228#comment-1665101</guid>
		<description>Principles:
&lt;blockquote&gt;Security:  Strong Military, Law Enforcement, Boarder Enforcement
Economy:  Free Trade, Low and Simple Taxes, Private Enterprise, reasonable (not excessive) regulation
Morality:  Personal Responsibility, Religious Freedom
Security + Economy:  Trade and Security agreements, Protection of Trade Routs
Security + Morality:  Promotion of Liberty and Democracy Abroad, Right of Self Defense
Economy + Morality:  Private Charities instead of Entitlements, Reasonable Environmentalism
All:  Rule of Law, Judicial Restraint, Federalism 
&lt;/blockquote&gt;
(Oh, and Allah, if this is getting annoying, warn me before you ban me...)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Principles:</p>
<blockquote><p>Security:  Strong Military, Law Enforcement, Boarder Enforcement<br />
Economy:  Free Trade, Low and Simple Taxes, Private Enterprise, reasonable (not excessive) regulation<br />
Morality:  Personal Responsibility, Religious Freedom<br />
Security + Economy:  Trade and Security agreements, Protection of Trade Routs<br />
Security + Morality:  Promotion of Liberty and Democracy Abroad, Right of Self Defense<br />
Economy + Morality:  Private Charities instead of Entitlements, Reasonable Environmentalism<br />
All:  Rule of Law, Judicial Restraint, Federalism
</p></blockquote>
<p>(Oh, and Allah, if this is getting annoying, warn me before you ban me&#8230;)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ErikTheRed</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2008/11/20/video-michelle-vs-instaglenn-on-conservatism-20/comment-page-1/#comment-1665077</link>
		<dc:creator>ErikTheRed</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2008 22:36:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/?p=35228#comment-1665077</guid>
		<description>I think one of the major failures of the GOP these days is that they&#039;ve been running almost exclusively on the social con and national security issues - there&#039;s been little or no showing of fiscal conservatism or libertarianism in the last several years.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think one of the major failures of the GOP these days is that they&#8217;ve been running almost exclusively on the social con and national security issues &#8211; there&#8217;s been little or no showing of fiscal conservatism or libertarianism in the last several years.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chuck In Hawaii</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2008/11/20/video-michelle-vs-instaglenn-on-conservatism-20/comment-page-1/#comment-1665007</link>
		<dc:creator>Chuck In Hawaii</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2008 22:16:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/?p=35228#comment-1665007</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;

Huck will win in 2012. Sorry, but it’s true.

marklmail on November 20, 2008 at 4:51 PM
&lt;/blockquote&gt;

Hell NO. I don&#039;t want a &lt;strong&gt;theocracy&lt;/strong&gt; based on &quot;feel-good&quot; politics.
Anybody &lt;strong&gt;BUT Huckabee&lt;/strong&gt;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote>
<p>Huck will win in 2012. Sorry, but it’s true.</p>
<p>marklmail on November 20, 2008 at 4:51 PM
</p></blockquote>
<p>Hell NO. I don&#8217;t want a <strong>theocracy</strong> based on &#8220;feel-good&#8221; politics.<br />
Anybody <strong>BUT Huckabee</strong>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: hawksruleva</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2008/11/20/video-michelle-vs-instaglenn-on-conservatism-20/comment-page-1/#comment-1665006</link>
		<dc:creator>hawksruleva</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2008 22:16:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/?p=35228#comment-1665006</guid>
		<description>If Huck wins, then the &quot;nominate a Conservative&quot; effort will have failed. And the Beltway boys will have tapped another watered down whipping boy to hand to the Dems.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If Huck wins, then the &#8220;nominate a Conservative&#8221; effort will have failed. And the Beltway boys will have tapped another watered down whipping boy to hand to the Dems.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: MirCat</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2008/11/20/video-michelle-vs-instaglenn-on-conservatism-20/comment-page-1/#comment-1665003</link>
		<dc:creator>MirCat</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2008 22:15:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/?p=35228#comment-1665003</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;he money question at 13:45: Should conservative bloggers follow the Yearly Kos model and start organizing conferences? To which I say: What for?&lt;/blockquote&gt;

I think CPAC already trumps this.  Just make sure Bloggers show up.

- The Cat</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>he money question at 13:45: Should conservative bloggers follow the Yearly Kos model and start organizing conferences? To which I say: What for?</p></blockquote>
<p>I think CPAC already trumps this.  Just make sure Bloggers show up.</p>
<p>- The Cat</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
