<?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/"
		xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd"
	xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Oh, The Hypocrisy!</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.brunoandtheprofessor.com/2006/12/oh_the_hypocrisy.php/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.brunoandtheprofessor.com/2006/12/oh_the_hypocrisy.php</link>
	<description>Bruno and the Professor is a progressive, liberal weekly talk radio podcast covering issues from Seattle, the United States, and the World</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 28 Jan 2012 01:48:19 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bruno</title>
		<link>http://www.brunoandtheprofessor.com/2006/12/oh_the_hypocrisy.php/comment-page-1#comment-460</link>
		<dc:creator>Bruno</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Jan 2007 23:10:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.brunoandtheprofessor.com/2006/12/oh_the_hypocrisy.php#comment-460</guid>
		<description>The &quot;special interests&quot; are really not the issue.  The real issue is whether or not a politician can advocate on others&#039; behalf.  And of course they can, because that&#039;s what representative democracy is all about.

What would be the alternative? Are only women allowed to talk about women&#039;s issues? Can only soldiers talk about war?  That last one would put most of the right-wing blogosphere out of business. :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The &#8220;special interests&#8221; are really not the issue.  The real issue is whether or not a politician can advocate on others&#8217; behalf.  And of course they can, because that&#8217;s what representative democracy is all about.</p>
<p>What would be the alternative? Are only women allowed to talk about women&#8217;s issues? Can only soldiers talk about war?  That last one would put most of the right-wing blogosphere out of business. <img src='http://www.brunoandtheprofessor.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: superblair</title>
		<link>http://www.brunoandtheprofessor.com/2006/12/oh_the_hypocrisy.php/comment-page-1#comment-459</link>
		<dc:creator>superblair</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 31 Dec 2006 19:13:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.brunoandtheprofessor.com/2006/12/oh_the_hypocrisy.php#comment-459</guid>
		<description>Seems legitimate to me. Has it only been 2 years since John Edwards advocated that the poor should not be able to get loans? In a speech, he wanted to shut down predatory lendors while at the same time he called for no banking reform. Poor people don&#039;t need big loans that banks offer. They need short-term micro-loans. John Edwards is in the pocket of special interest. Helping the poor is just campaign rhetoric. And the story&#039;s on MSNBC, not Fox. Let not the details confuse your partisanship. My blog is an example of the poor advocating for the poor.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Seems legitimate to me. Has it only been 2 years since John Edwards advocated that the poor should not be able to get loans? In a speech, he wanted to shut down predatory lendors while at the same time he called for no banking reform. Poor people don&#8217;t need big loans that banks offer. They need short-term micro-loans. John Edwards is in the pocket of special interest. Helping the poor is just campaign rhetoric. And the story&#8217;s on MSNBC, not Fox. Let not the details confuse your partisanship. My blog is an example of the poor advocating for the poor.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

