<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
    xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
    xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
    xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/"
    xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
    xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"> 
    
<channel>
    

    <title>Comments by Joseph Loundy</title>
    <author>Joseph Loundy</author>
    <link>http://www.jta.org/user/profile/23623</link>
    <description></description>
    <dc:language>en-us</dc:language>
    <dc:creator>zsilberman@washingtonjewishweek.com</dc:creator>
    <dc:rights>Copyright 2012</dc:rights>
    <dc:date>2012-02-09T;22:54:00-05:00</dc:date>
    <admin:generatorAgent rdf:resource="http://www.pmachine.com/" />


    <item>
      <title>Comment to Obama pledges to end earmarks</title>
      <link></link>
      <description>If 'good earmarks” are so good – why can’t they be approved through the regular budgeting process?  Let’s be mature adults and not try to rationalize a hypocritical double standard where earmarks that we like are good and worthy and earmarks that we don’t personally like are “pork”.  We need to be better than that.</description>
      <content:encoded><![CDATA[If 'good earmarks” are so good – why can’t they be approved through the regular budgeting process?  Let’s be mature adults and not try to rationalize a hypocritical double standard where earmarks that we like are good and worthy and earmarks that we don’t personally like are “pork”.  We need to be better than that.]]></content:encoded>
    <dc:date>2012-02-09T;22:54:00-05:00</dc:date>
    </item>


 
 
</channel>
</rss>
