<?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 McCain economics]]></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 GreyFlcn</title>
			<link>http://www.grist.org/article/mccain-economics/</link>
			<pubDate>Thu, 14 Aug 2008 16:01:19 -0700</pubDate>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.grist.org/article/mccain-economics/1</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>The logic</strong></p><p>I'm not entirely sure I get the Iraq bit. Is the Obama campaign now trying to cast Iraq as some sort of pampered welfare recipient? I know it now has an oil surplus, but it's not exactly like they're sitting pretty over there.</p><p>
Yeah, but the argument is "Why are we spending $10 billion a month on Iraq, when they got a $79 billion dollar oil surplus".

<p>-David Ahlport</p></p>
			]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>The logic</strong></p><p>I'm not entirely sure I get the Iraq bit. Is the Obama campaign now trying to cast Iraq as some sort of pampered welfare recipient? I know it now has an oil surplus, but it's not exactly like they're sitting pretty over there.</p><p>
Yeah, but the argument is "Why are we spending $10 billion a month on Iraq, when they got a $79 billion dollar oil surplus".

<p>-David Ahlport</p></p>
			]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
    
 </channel>
</rss>