<?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: A very simple question for the GOP candidates</title>
	<atom:link href="http://michellemalkin.com/2007/11/26/a-very-simple-question-for-the-gop-candidates/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://michellemalkin.com/2007/11/26/a-very-simple-question-for-the-gop-candidates/</link>
	<description>news and commentary from a conservative perspective</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 23 Nov 2009 17:00:49 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Gregor</title>
		<link>http://michellemalkin.com/2007/11/26/a-very-simple-question-for-the-gop-candidates/comment-page-1/#comment-180509</link>
		<dc:creator>Gregor</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Nov 2007 16:51:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://michellemalkin.com/2007/11/26/a-very-simple-question-for-the-gop-candidates/#comment-180509</guid>
		<description>Forget about it.  All indications are ... that they&#039;re not remotely interested in what we have to say.

&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.firesociety.com/article/19402/Special-Report--Government-Border-Fence-Trickery/?src=101 &quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;It&#039;s all smoke and mirrors&lt;/a&gt;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Forget about it.  All indications are &#8230; that they&#8217;re not remotely interested in what we have to say.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.firesociety.com/article/19402/Special-Report--Government-Border-Fence-Trickery/?src=101 " rel="nofollow">It&#8217;s all smoke and mirrors</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mr_Conservative_Cat</title>
		<link>http://michellemalkin.com/2007/11/26/a-very-simple-question-for-the-gop-candidates/comment-page-1/#comment-180174</link>
		<dc:creator>Mr_Conservative_Cat</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Nov 2007 02:27:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://michellemalkin.com/2007/11/26/a-very-simple-question-for-the-gop-candidates/#comment-180174</guid>
		<description>Isn&#039;t it weird, strange and incomprehensible that as intelligent and intellectually honest conservatives how we simply blindly accept the MSM status quo, and never say, the first thing when we hear Republican candidates will be debating on CNN, &lt;em&gt;&quot;where are the cowardly Democrats and why aren&#039;t they debating on Fox?!&quot;&lt;/em&gt;

But they have us too well trained, don&#039;t they? In fact, they have us so well trained, we might as well not bother expressing ourselves on message boards, because we&#039;re just too well trained to win, aren&#039;t we?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Isn&#8217;t it weird, strange and incomprehensible that as intelligent and intellectually honest conservatives how we simply blindly accept the MSM status quo, and never say, the first thing when we hear Republican candidates will be debating on CNN, <em>&#8220;where are the cowardly Democrats and why aren&#8217;t they debating on Fox?!&#8221;</em></p>
<p>But they have us too well trained, don&#8217;t they? In fact, they have us so well trained, we might as well not bother expressing ourselves on message boards, because we&#8217;re just too well trained to win, aren&#8217;t we?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: zorro</title>
		<link>http://michellemalkin.com/2007/11/26/a-very-simple-question-for-the-gop-candidates/comment-page-1/#comment-180068</link>
		<dc:creator>zorro</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Nov 2007 23:52:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://michellemalkin.com/2007/11/26/a-very-simple-question-for-the-gop-candidates/#comment-180068</guid>
		<description>Good luck getting the question asked.  It is important and valid to ask what the nitwits would do if they make it to the Oval Office.  I&#039;ll be watching just to see if Hot Air makes the cut.

By the way, Bryan is using &lt;em&gt;your&lt;/em&gt; laptop!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Good luck getting the question asked.  It is important and valid to ask what the nitwits would do if they make it to the Oval Office.  I&#8217;ll be watching just to see if Hot Air makes the cut.</p>
<p>By the way, Bryan is using <em>your</em> laptop!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: blacktygrrrr</title>
		<link>http://michellemalkin.com/2007/11/26/a-very-simple-question-for-the-gop-candidates/comment-page-1/#comment-180023</link>
		<dc:creator>blacktygrrrr</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Nov 2007 22:55:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://michellemalkin.com/2007/11/26/a-very-simple-question-for-the-gop-candidates/#comment-180023</guid>
		<description>Christopher Dodd has a question for the GOP? I have a question for him.

Senator Dodd,

Did you ever apologize to the waitresses at La Brassiere for sitting by as Senator Kennedy sexually assaulted one of them right in front of you and throwing her on your lap?

Senator Dodd should take his fake pious outrage and go home to his family, the only people at this point voting for him.

Respectfully,

eric aka www.blacktygrrrr.wordpress.com</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Christopher Dodd has a question for the GOP? I have a question for him.</p>
<p>Senator Dodd,</p>
<p>Did you ever apologize to the waitresses at La Brassiere for sitting by as Senator Kennedy sexually assaulted one of them right in front of you and throwing her on your lap?</p>
<p>Senator Dodd should take his fake pious outrage and go home to his family, the only people at this point voting for him.</p>
<p>Respectfully,</p>
<p>eric aka <a href="http://www.blacktygrrrr.wordpress.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.blacktygrrrr.wordpress.com</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: TXRose</title>
		<link>http://michellemalkin.com/2007/11/26/a-very-simple-question-for-the-gop-candidates/comment-page-1/#comment-179994</link>
		<dc:creator>TXRose</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Nov 2007 22:10:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://michellemalkin.com/2007/11/26/a-very-simple-question-for-the-gop-candidates/#comment-179994</guid>
		<description>I don&#039;t know what will happen in TX but some of the
border cities have denied the state the right to build
the fence in the area around their cities. Of course, they are sitting there with their hands out for that
federal money and would scream like banshees if it is
taken away from them. Just waiting to see if TX still
lives up to Gen&#039;l R.E. Lee&#039;s opinion of them in the
Mexican/American War when he said, &quot;Send up the
Texans, they will get the job done.&quot; They did then, but
will they now?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t know what will happen in TX but some of the<br />
border cities have denied the state the right to build<br />
the fence in the area around their cities. Of course, they are sitting there with their hands out for that<br />
federal money and would scream like banshees if it is<br />
taken away from them. Just waiting to see if TX still<br />
lives up to Gen&#8217;l R.E. Lee&#8217;s opinion of them in the<br />
Mexican/American War when he said, &#8220;Send up the<br />
Texans, they will get the job done.&#8221; They did then, but<br />
will they now?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Papa Louie</title>
		<link>http://michellemalkin.com/2007/11/26/a-very-simple-question-for-the-gop-candidates/comment-page-1/#comment-179993</link>
		<dc:creator>Papa Louie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Nov 2007 22:07:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://michellemalkin.com/2007/11/26/a-very-simple-question-for-the-gop-candidates/#comment-179993</guid>
		<description>I have been leaning toward Rudy since the Betray-us ad in the NYT.  I loved the way he responded and called their bluff.  We need someone with the courage to stand up to these guys.  But he&#039;s losing me with some of his more recent comments.
  
Rudy gave a speech to small business owners a few weeks ago that got almost no play in the media.  He told them he would not punish businesses that hire illegals because it was the responsibility of the federal government to stop illegal immigration.

Yes, the federal government is responsible, but why can&#039;t it require cooperation from businesses and local government to help enforce the law? Would Giuliani punish businesses that refuse to withhold federal taxes from employee paychecks?  Afterall, taxes are the fed&#039;s responsibility, not business&#039;s. How much bigger would the federal government have to grow to collect taxes directly from individuals? By requiring cooperation from business, they streamline the process and save a lot of money. 

The same thing is true with illegal immigration.  If jobs are easily available, which they will be if there is no penalty for providing them, then illegal immigration will continue unabated no matter what the Feds do.  Either Rudy is too stupid to see this or he really does not want to end illegal immigration.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have been leaning toward Rudy since the Betray-us ad in the NYT.  I loved the way he responded and called their bluff.  We need someone with the courage to stand up to these guys.  But he&#8217;s losing me with some of his more recent comments.</p>
<p>Rudy gave a speech to small business owners a few weeks ago that got almost no play in the media.  He told them he would not punish businesses that hire illegals because it was the responsibility of the federal government to stop illegal immigration.</p>
<p>Yes, the federal government is responsible, but why can&#8217;t it require cooperation from businesses and local government to help enforce the law? Would Giuliani punish businesses that refuse to withhold federal taxes from employee paychecks?  Afterall, taxes are the fed&#8217;s responsibility, not business&#8217;s. How much bigger would the federal government have to grow to collect taxes directly from individuals? By requiring cooperation from business, they streamline the process and save a lot of money. </p>
<p>The same thing is true with illegal immigration.  If jobs are easily available, which they will be if there is no penalty for providing them, then illegal immigration will continue unabated no matter what the Feds do.  Either Rudy is too stupid to see this or he really does not want to end illegal immigration.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: donnab13</title>
		<link>http://michellemalkin.com/2007/11/26/a-very-simple-question-for-the-gop-candidates/comment-page-1/#comment-179991</link>
		<dc:creator>donnab13</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Nov 2007 22:03:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://michellemalkin.com/2007/11/26/a-very-simple-question-for-the-gop-candidates/#comment-179991</guid>
		<description>Fred Thompson on federal funding in regards to illegal immigration:
Enforce Existing Federal Laws. Enforce the laws Congress has already enacted to prevent illegal aliens from unlawfully benefiting from their presence in the country:

   1. End Sanctuary Cities by cutting off discretionary federal grant funds as appropriate to any community that, by law, ordinance, executive order, or other formal policy directs its public officials not to comply with the provisions of 8 USC 1373 and 8 USC 1644, which prohibit any state or local government from restricting in any way communications with the Department of Homeland Security &quot;regarding the immigration status, lawful or unlawful, of an alien in the United States.&quot;

   2. Deny discretionary Federal education grants as appropriate to public universities that violate federal law by offering in-state tuition rates to illegal aliens without also offering identical benefits to United States citizens, regardless of whether or not they live in the state, as required by 8 USC 1623.

   3. Deny discretionary Federal grants as appropriate to states and local governments that violate federal law by offering public benefits to illegal aliens, as prohibited by 8 USC 1621(a).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Fred Thompson on federal funding in regards to illegal immigration:<br />
Enforce Existing Federal Laws. Enforce the laws Congress has already enacted to prevent illegal aliens from unlawfully benefiting from their presence in the country:</p>
<p>   1. End Sanctuary Cities by cutting off discretionary federal grant funds as appropriate to any community that, by law, ordinance, executive order, or other formal policy directs its public officials not to comply with the provisions of 8 USC 1373 and 8 USC 1644, which prohibit any state or local government from restricting in any way communications with the Department of Homeland Security &#8220;regarding the immigration status, lawful or unlawful, of an alien in the United States.&#8221;</p>
<p>   2. Deny discretionary Federal education grants as appropriate to public universities that violate federal law by offering in-state tuition rates to illegal aliens without also offering identical benefits to United States citizens, regardless of whether or not they live in the state, as required by 8 USC 1623.</p>
<p>   3. Deny discretionary Federal grants as appropriate to states and local governments that violate federal law by offering public benefits to illegal aliens, as prohibited by 8 USC 1621(a).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: News2Use</title>
		<link>http://michellemalkin.com/2007/11/26/a-very-simple-question-for-the-gop-candidates/comment-page-1/#comment-179980</link>
		<dc:creator>News2Use</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Nov 2007 21:46:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://michellemalkin.com/2007/11/26/a-very-simple-question-for-the-gop-candidates/#comment-179980</guid>
		<description>Michelle
I understand you are the author of the question. 
Is this the Tancredo legislation referenced in the question?

&lt;blockquote&gt;
&lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanctuary_cities&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;On June 16, 2007 &lt;/a&gt;the United States House of Representatives passed an amendment to a Department of Homeland Security spending bill that would withhold federal emergency services funds from sanctuary cities. Congressman &lt;strong&gt;Tom Tancredo &lt;/strong&gt;(Republican-Colorado) was the sponsor of this amendment.

September 18, 2007, Republican Congresspersons introduced legislation targeting sanctuary cities. Reps. Brian Bilbray, R-Cal., Ginny Brown-Waite, R-Fla., Thelma Drake, R-Va., Jeff Miller, R-Fla., and &lt;strong&gt;Tom Tancredo&lt;/strong&gt;, R-Colo introduced the bill. The legislation would make illegal immigrant status a felony, instead of a civil offence. Also, the bill targets sanctuary cities by withholding up to 50 percent of Department of Homeland Security funds from the cities.&lt;/blockquote&gt;  

The first reference is an amendment, not stand alone, Tancredo sponsored and as such, a &#039;yes&#039;or a &#039;no&#039; answer would encompass all the 194 amendments to the bill (less those withdrawn). 
The second reference has multiple co-sponsors and may not fit the terminology &#039;Tancredo legislation&#039;.

In any case, I see no banning of all federal funding in either reference, just emergency services funds and half of the DHS funding. 

The question as stated implies a ban of all Federal funding which is not an option expressed in the legislation.  But, it&#039;s a great &#039;got ya&#039; question when a &#039;yes&#039; answer indicates support for everything in the bill and included in the amendments.
That is the only way the &#039;Tancredo legislation&#039; can be signed into law.
A &#039;no&#039; answer is a &#039;got ya&#039; too.

Anyone giving a one word answer should be in the White House, checking for bugs. (not the electronic listening device kind)

Halving the DHS funding is easily overcome by doubling the funds available and then awarding half of that amount, plus, there is the question of the definition of &#039;santurary city&#039; which has not been stated as of yet.

But then, perhaps I don&#039;t know what I am talking about..</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Michelle<br />
I understand you are the author of the question.<br />
Is this the Tancredo legislation referenced in the question?</p>
<blockquote><p>
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanctuary_cities" rel="nofollow">On June 16, 2007 </a>the United States House of Representatives passed an amendment to a Department of Homeland Security spending bill that would withhold federal emergency services funds from sanctuary cities. Congressman <strong>Tom Tancredo </strong>(Republican-Colorado) was the sponsor of this amendment.</p>
<p>September 18, 2007, Republican Congresspersons introduced legislation targeting sanctuary cities. Reps. Brian Bilbray, R-Cal., Ginny Brown-Waite, R-Fla., Thelma Drake, R-Va., Jeff Miller, R-Fla., and <strong>Tom Tancredo</strong>, R-Colo introduced the bill. The legislation would make illegal immigrant status a felony, instead of a civil offence. Also, the bill targets sanctuary cities by withholding up to 50 percent of Department of Homeland Security funds from the cities.</p></blockquote>
<p>The first reference is an amendment, not stand alone, Tancredo sponsored and as such, a &#8216;yes&#8217;or a &#8216;no&#8217; answer would encompass all the 194 amendments to the bill (less those withdrawn).<br />
The second reference has multiple co-sponsors and may not fit the terminology &#8216;Tancredo legislation&#8217;.</p>
<p>In any case, I see no banning of all federal funding in either reference, just emergency services funds and half of the DHS funding. </p>
<p>The question as stated implies a ban of all Federal funding which is not an option expressed in the legislation.  But, it&#8217;s a great &#8216;got ya&#8217; question when a &#8216;yes&#8217; answer indicates support for everything in the bill and included in the amendments.<br />
That is the only way the &#8216;Tancredo legislation&#8217; can be signed into law.<br />
A &#8216;no&#8217; answer is a &#8216;got ya&#8217; too.</p>
<p>Anyone giving a one word answer should be in the White House, checking for bugs. (not the electronic listening device kind)</p>
<p>Halving the DHS funding is easily overcome by doubling the funds available and then awarding half of that amount, plus, there is the question of the definition of &#8217;santurary city&#8217; which has not been stated as of yet.</p>
<p>But then, perhaps I don&#8217;t know what I am talking about..</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jukin</title>
		<link>http://michellemalkin.com/2007/11/26/a-very-simple-question-for-the-gop-candidates/comment-page-1/#comment-179965</link>
		<dc:creator>jukin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Nov 2007 21:28:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://michellemalkin.com/2007/11/26/a-very-simple-question-for-the-gop-candidates/#comment-179965</guid>
		<description>Will the questions from [i]undecided voters[/i] be rightwing activists and stffers of Republican lawmakers?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Will the questions from [i]undecided voters[/i] be rightwing activists and stffers of Republican lawmakers?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: allrsn</title>
		<link>http://michellemalkin.com/2007/11/26/a-very-simple-question-for-the-gop-candidates/comment-page-1/#comment-179961</link>
		<dc:creator>allrsn</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Nov 2007 21:22:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://michellemalkin.com/2007/11/26/a-very-simple-question-for-the-gop-candidates/#comment-179961</guid>
		<description>If this was a democratic showing real questions and important questions would NOT be asked.

This is a republican showing on liberal cable, real, important, and unanswerable questions WILL be asked. 

Yes, I think Bryans question could be picked. I do not think they will use Bryan to ask it because that will give Hot Air credibility.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If this was a democratic showing real questions and important questions would NOT be asked.</p>
<p>This is a republican showing on liberal cable, real, important, and unanswerable questions WILL be asked. </p>
<p>Yes, I think Bryans question could be picked. I do not think they will use Bryan to ask it because that will give Hot Air credibility.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Boomer</title>
		<link>http://michellemalkin.com/2007/11/26/a-very-simple-question-for-the-gop-candidates/comment-page-1/#comment-179954</link>
		<dc:creator>Boomer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Nov 2007 21:14:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://michellemalkin.com/2007/11/26/a-very-simple-question-for-the-gop-candidates/#comment-179954</guid>
		<description>bit_boy it sounds like you are stuck in the People&#039;s Republic of Washington or worse yet King County.  My condolences the theft of the Governor’s Mansion by the cheating liberals by their recounting until votes magically appeared to allow them to win still amazes me.  I’m sure the DOJ and new AG will be investigating in 5, 4, 3, 2…….</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>bit_boy it sounds like you are stuck in the People&#8217;s Republic of Washington or worse yet King County.  My condolences the theft of the Governor’s Mansion by the cheating liberals by their recounting until votes magically appeared to allow them to win still amazes me.  I’m sure the DOJ and new AG will be investigating in 5, 4, 3, 2…….</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: bit_boy</title>
		<link>http://michellemalkin.com/2007/11/26/a-very-simple-question-for-the-gop-candidates/comment-page-1/#comment-179949</link>
		<dc:creator>bit_boy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Nov 2007 21:08:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://michellemalkin.com/2007/11/26/a-very-simple-question-for-the-gop-candidates/#comment-179949</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;RE:  NBF #11 For crying out loud… Can you give us a transcript for those who can’t view the video?&lt;/blockquote&gt;

Yes, we of the disadvantaged band width can play the vids but the downloadtime required to do so is prohibitive.  A vid synopsis would be a great aid, but then beggars can&#039;t be choosers. 

Having said that, what are the men of this brave new world pandering to.  There are 197 million voter aged in America and 142 million registered voters.  So while the men who would be President because a small number of Mexicans and perhaps a large number of illegals voted for them &lt;em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;there is a hammer of 55 million angry Americans&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/em&gt; that could determine their success.  They take there base for stupid and fight for the fringe to win.  It is time for the Silent Majority to speak. 

In my state the dems have a fail safe win method call the &lt;em&gt;Greogoire-Gore&lt;/em&gt;.  The Federal Court has agreed with the dems to allow them to find votes until they have found enough votes to win (this includes electronic voting machines that were previously not counted).  Though my state is an amnesty state, including issuing driver licenses, it has outgrown the need for illegal votes by registering more dems than residents in the largest county (the largest vote fraud in state history that has not been corrected).  A state government rotten from the top down and sanctioned by a rotten court system.  Sure your vote counts.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>RE:  NBF #11 For crying out loud… Can you give us a transcript for those who can’t view the video?</p></blockquote>
<p>Yes, we of the disadvantaged band width can play the vids but the downloadtime required to do so is prohibitive.  A vid synopsis would be a great aid, but then beggars can&#8217;t be choosers. </p>
<p>Having said that, what are the men of this brave new world pandering to.  There are 197 million voter aged in America and 142 million registered voters.  So while the men who would be President because a small number of Mexicans and perhaps a large number of illegals voted for them <em><strong>there is a hammer of 55 million angry Americans</strong></em> that could determine their success.  They take there base for stupid and fight for the fringe to win.  It is time for the Silent Majority to speak. </p>
<p>In my state the dems have a fail safe win method call the <em>Greogoire-Gore</em>.  The Federal Court has agreed with the dems to allow them to find votes until they have found enough votes to win (this includes electronic voting machines that were previously not counted).  Though my state is an amnesty state, including issuing driver licenses, it has outgrown the need for illegal votes by registering more dems than residents in the largest county (the largest vote fraud in state history that has not been corrected).  A state government rotten from the top down and sanctioned by a rotten court system.  Sure your vote counts.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: TXRose</title>
		<link>http://michellemalkin.com/2007/11/26/a-very-simple-question-for-the-gop-candidates/comment-page-1/#comment-179948</link>
		<dc:creator>TXRose</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Nov 2007 21:06:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://michellemalkin.com/2007/11/26/a-very-simple-question-for-the-gop-candidates/#comment-179948</guid>
		<description>I don&#039;t think ANY pres candidate from either party will
give a yes or no answer about signing Tom Tancredo&#039;s
bill into law. Very few political candidates will give a 
yes or no answer to any question.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t think ANY pres candidate from either party will<br />
give a yes or no answer about signing Tom Tancredo&#8217;s<br />
bill into law. Very few political candidates will give a<br />
yes or no answer to any question.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Milwaukee Mike</title>
		<link>http://michellemalkin.com/2007/11/26/a-very-simple-question-for-the-gop-candidates/comment-page-1/#comment-179939</link>
		<dc:creator>Milwaukee Mike</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Nov 2007 20:58:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://michellemalkin.com/2007/11/26/a-very-simple-question-for-the-gop-candidates/#comment-179939</guid>
		<description>I do believe that this question has a legit chance of being used.  Much unlike the softballs served up to the Dems.  A snowman?  Please!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I do believe that this question has a legit chance of being used.  Much unlike the softballs served up to the Dems.  A snowman?  Please!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: pgtips</title>
		<link>http://michellemalkin.com/2007/11/26/a-very-simple-question-for-the-gop-candidates/comment-page-1/#comment-179936</link>
		<dc:creator>pgtips</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Nov 2007 20:52:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://michellemalkin.com/2007/11/26/a-very-simple-question-for-the-gop-candidates/#comment-179936</guid>
		<description>What is the question? The video is no longer available :(</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What is the question? The video is no longer available <img src='http://michellemalkin.com/wp/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_sad.gif' alt=':(' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
<!-- NEW -->
