<?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: That &#8217;90s show</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.dankennedy.net/2009/09/30/that-90s-show/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.dankennedy.net/2009/09/30/that-90s-show/</link>
	<description>By Dan Kennedy • The press, politics, technology, culture and other passions</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 15 Mar 2010 23:05:31 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Dan Kennedy</title>
		<link>http://www.dankennedy.net/2009/09/30/that-90s-show/comment-page-1/#comment-50112</link>
		<dc:creator>Dan Kennedy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Oct 2009 21:21:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dankennedy.net/?p=6318#comment-50112</guid>
		<description>Laurence; I don&#039;t know if they use a macro, but yes. Sometimes I try to help — I usually give them &lt;em&gt;organisation&lt;/em&gt; all on my own now. But, essentially, the Guardian runs everything through a Britishizer on their end.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Laurence; I don&#8217;t know if they use a macro, but yes. Sometimes I try to help — I usually give them <em>organisation</em> all on my own now. But, essentially, the Guardian runs everything through a Britishizer on their end.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Laurence Glavin</title>
		<link>http://www.dankennedy.net/2009/09/30/that-90s-show/comment-page-1/#comment-50109</link>
		<dc:creator>Laurence Glavin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Oct 2009 21:10:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dankennedy.net/?p=6318#comment-50109</guid>
		<description>Dan, when you submit your column to The Guardian, do you spell it &#039;favorable&#039; and a macro on the other end transcribes it to &#039;favourable&#039;?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dan, when you submit your column to The Guardian, do you spell it &#8216;favorable&#8217; and a macro on the other end transcribes it to &#8216;favourable&#8217;?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dan Kennedy</title>
		<link>http://www.dankennedy.net/2009/09/30/that-90s-show/comment-page-1/#comment-50104</link>
		<dc:creator>Dan Kennedy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Oct 2009 16:32:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dankennedy.net/?p=6318#comment-50104</guid>
		<description>Sorry, Tony, but if the Clintons had been gettable, they would have been gotten. Never have so many tried so hard for so long.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sorry, Tony, but if the Clintons had been gettable, they would have been gotten. Never have so many tried so hard for so long.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tony Schinella</title>
		<link>http://www.dankennedy.net/2009/09/30/that-90s-show/comment-page-1/#comment-50103</link>
		<dc:creator>Tony Schinella</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Oct 2009 16:22:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dankennedy.net/?p=6318#comment-50103</guid>
		<description>&quot;Prosecutorial misconduct run amok. And, needless to say, the goal was to get the Clintons. Didn’t happen.&quot;

True, it didn&#039;t get the Clintons - but it got a whole lotta FOBs involved in the S&amp;L scandal, land deals, all kinds of crap at the SBA down there and everything else. 

For those people interested in what really happened down there, read Martin Gross&#039; &quot;The Great Whitewater Fiasco,&quot; Roger Morris&#039; &quot;Partners in Power,&quot; and &quot;Arkansas Mischief,&quot; by James MacDougal and former Globie Curtis Wilkie. All of these books document all kinds of evidence and information that Ken Starr, for whatever reason, never got a hold of, that shows the Clintons were involved in all kinds of prosecutable things down there. But like almost everything these people have done, they simply skated from it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Prosecutorial misconduct run amok. And, needless to say, the goal was to get the Clintons. Didn’t happen.&#8221;</p>
<p>True, it didn&#8217;t get the Clintons &#8211; but it got a whole lotta FOBs involved in the S&amp;L scandal, land deals, all kinds of crap at the SBA down there and everything else. </p>
<p>For those people interested in what really happened down there, read Martin Gross&#8217; &#8220;The Great Whitewater Fiasco,&#8221; Roger Morris&#8217; &#8220;Partners in Power,&#8221; and &#8220;Arkansas Mischief,&#8221; by James MacDougal and former Globie Curtis Wilkie. All of these books document all kinds of evidence and information that Ken Starr, for whatever reason, never got a hold of, that shows the Clintons were involved in all kinds of prosecutable things down there. But like almost everything these people have done, they simply skated from it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: lafcadio mullarkey</title>
		<link>http://www.dankennedy.net/2009/09/30/that-90s-show/comment-page-1/#comment-50098</link>
		<dc:creator>lafcadio mullarkey</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Oct 2009 13:55:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dankennedy.net/?p=6318#comment-50098</guid>
		<description>Great column. You&#039;re in top form Dan. 

I appreciated the link to the Google book that discusses the skepticism of journalistic objectivity. To paraphrase, if I follow it correctly, &quot;objectivity&quot; doesn&#039;t imply a naive notion that journalists are free of bias. Quite the contrary, it assumes it, and says the way to overcome this bias is to employ a &quot;transparent approach to evidence&quot;. Objectivity achieved by use of scientific method, as much as possible, as opposed to an &quot;aim&quot;. Good stuff.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great column. You&#8217;re in top form Dan. </p>
<p>I appreciated the link to the Google book that discusses the skepticism of journalistic objectivity. To paraphrase, if I follow it correctly, &#8220;objectivity&#8221; doesn&#8217;t imply a naive notion that journalists are free of bias. Quite the contrary, it assumes it, and says the way to overcome this bias is to employ a &#8220;transparent approach to evidence&#8221;. Objectivity achieved by use of scientific method, as much as possible, as opposed to an &#8220;aim&#8221;. Good stuff.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Neil</title>
		<link>http://www.dankennedy.net/2009/09/30/that-90s-show/comment-page-1/#comment-50089</link>
		<dc:creator>Neil</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Oct 2009 05:39:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dankennedy.net/?p=6318#comment-50089</guid>
		<description>Wiser words were never spoken:

&lt;i&gt;The trouble these days is that one of our two major parties has run entirely off the rails. And our media system, dependent as it is on false notions of objectivity, rarely acknowledges it.

&lt;b&gt;The media&#039;s first obligation should be to the truth – not to some phony notion of journalistic balance. &lt;/b&gt;Evidently they have learned nothing after all these years.&lt;/i&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wiser words were never spoken:</p>
<p><i>The trouble these days is that one of our two major parties has run entirely off the rails. And our media system, dependent as it is on false notions of objectivity, rarely acknowledges it.</p>
<p><b>The media&#8217;s first obligation should be to the truth – not to some phony notion of journalistic balance. </b>Evidently they have learned nothing after all these years.</i></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dan Kennedy</title>
		<link>http://www.dankennedy.net/2009/09/30/that-90s-show/comment-page-1/#comment-50086</link>
		<dc:creator>Dan Kennedy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Oct 2009 02:51:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dankennedy.net/?p=6318#comment-50086</guid>
		<description>Prosecutorial misconduct run amok. And, needless to say, the goal was to get the Clintons. Didn&#039;t happen.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Prosecutorial misconduct run amok. And, needless to say, the goal was to get the Clintons. Didn&#8217;t happen.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tony Schinella</title>
		<link>http://www.dankennedy.net/2009/09/30/that-90s-show/comment-page-1/#comment-50085</link>
		<dc:creator>Tony Schinella</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Oct 2009 02:40:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dankennedy.net/?p=6318#comment-50085</guid>
		<description>Whitewater wasn&#039;t bogus and plenty of people were found guilty of all kinds of crimes during the investigation.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Whitewater wasn&#8217;t bogus and plenty of people were found guilty of all kinds of crimes during the investigation.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steve Stein</title>
		<link>http://www.dankennedy.net/2009/09/30/that-90s-show/comment-page-1/#comment-50080</link>
		<dc:creator>Steve Stein</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Sep 2009 23:08:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dankennedy.net/?p=6318#comment-50080</guid>
		<description>Heh.  As you observe, &#039;twas ever thus (at least for the last 18 or so years).  Notice Friedman today?  &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.dailyhowler.com/dh093009.shtml&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Somerby did&lt;/a&gt;.

&quot;The right impeached Bill Clinton and hounded him from Day 1 with the bogus Whitewater “scandal.” &quot;

Gee, it wasn&#039;t &quot;the right&quot;, Tom.  It was your very own New York Times.

Alas, most of the country is brainwashed beyond reasoned debate that the &quot;media is librul!&quot;

(gee I wish there was a &quot;preview&quot;)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Heh.  As you observe, &#8217;twas ever thus (at least for the last 18 or so years).  Notice Friedman today?  <a href="http://www.dailyhowler.com/dh093009.shtml" rel="nofollow">Somerby did</a>.</p>
<p>&#8220;The right impeached Bill Clinton and hounded him from Day 1 with the bogus Whitewater “scandal.” &#8221;</p>
<p>Gee, it wasn&#8217;t &#8220;the right&#8221;, Tom.  It was your very own New York Times.</p>
<p>Alas, most of the country is brainwashed beyond reasoned debate that the &#8220;media is librul!&#8221;</p>
<p>(gee I wish there was a &#8220;preview&#8221;)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
