<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
<channel>
	<title><![CDATA[Grist - Comment Feed for The <em>Washington Post</em> offers a late entry for Worst Story of the Year]]></title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.grist.org/rss/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<description>Grist Comment Feed</description>
	<language>en</language>
    
		<item>
            <title>Comment #1 by josullivan58</title>
			<link>http://www.grist.org/article/bush-plays-baker-part-i/</link>
			<pubDate>Thu, 03 Jan 2008 03:50:40 -0800</pubDate>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.grist.org/article/bush-plays-baker-part-i/1</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>What?<p>Yes Bush is going to pursue a pro-environmental agenda. And the check's in the mail. And I gave at the office. And I'll call in the morning.<p>
Add it to the list of lines that everyone knows, or should know, are BS.<p>
Yes 2008 will different. That's why 16 states and 5 environmental groups (including Fred Krupp's Environmental Defense) sued the Bush administration the first day of 2008 the courts were open because Bush is blocking their global warming plans .<br>
From NRDC The Great Galvanizer<br>
<a href="http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/ddoniger/the_great_galvanizer.html" rel="nofollow">http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/ddoniger/the_great_galv ...<p>
Eileen Claussen summed it up best, yes the public image has changed, but its only image.<p>
Bush has always been virulently anti-environmental, but there has been a big push back that has been getting a lot of public attention. <p>
In response the Bush administration is launching a PR campaign to cover their losses and cover up their extremist behavior. The Bush administration is also framing the debate for the upcoming struggles with congress, the courts, the states and environmentalists.<p>
The Washington Post article ends with the question whats the next step. That's easy, it will be the same as the previous steps.</p></p></p></p></a></br></br></p></p></p></strong></p>
			]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>What?<p>Yes Bush is going to pursue a pro-environmental agenda. And the check's in the mail. And I gave at the office. And I'll call in the morning.<p>
Add it to the list of lines that everyone knows, or should know, are BS.<p>
Yes 2008 will different. That's why 16 states and 5 environmental groups (including Fred Krupp's Environmental Defense) sued the Bush administration the first day of 2008 the courts were open because Bush is blocking their global warming plans .<br>
From NRDC The Great Galvanizer<br>
<a href="http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/ddoniger/the_great_galvanizer.html" rel="nofollow">http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/ddoniger/the_great_galv ...<p>
Eileen Claussen summed it up best, yes the public image has changed, but its only image.<p>
Bush has always been virulently anti-environmental, but there has been a big push back that has been getting a lot of public attention. <p>
In response the Bush administration is launching a PR campaign to cover their losses and cover up their extremist behavior. The Bush administration is also framing the debate for the upcoming struggles with congress, the courts, the states and environmentalists.<p>
The Washington Post article ends with the question whats the next step. That's easy, it will be the same as the previous steps.</p></p></p></p></a></br></br></p></p></p></strong></p>
			]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
    
 </channel>
</rss>