<?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"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for Child of the Enlightenment</title>
	<atom:link href="http://childoftheenlightenment.wordpress.com/comments/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://childoftheenlightenment.wordpress.com</link>
	<description>Reason is natural revelation</description>
	<pubDate>Sat, 17 May 2008 22:09:59 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=MU</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Comment on They should have seen it coming&#8230; by johnnypeepers</title>
		<link>http://childoftheenlightenment.wordpress.com/2008/03/09/they-should-have-seen-it-coming/#comment-29</link>
		<dc:creator>johnnypeepers</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Mar 2008 00:20:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://childoftheenlightenment.wordpress.com/?p=39#comment-29</guid>
		<description>The Clinton dynasty will not be denied. Power corrupts, absolute power is kinda cool.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Clinton dynasty will not be denied. Power corrupts, absolute power is kinda cool.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Obama, the wussy by budgiebabe</title>
		<link>http://childoftheenlightenment.wordpress.com/2008/03/06/obama-the-wussy/#comment-28</link>
		<dc:creator>budgiebabe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 09 Mar 2008 19:10:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://childoftheenlightenment.wordpress.com/?p=38#comment-28</guid>
		<description>Sorry, but shoudn't he smash Mr. Cain because he is in the opposition? I mean what sense does it make to fight people from your own party? Would you vote for a party which has internal conflict?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sorry, but shoudn&#8217;t he smash Mr. Cain because he is in the opposition? I mean what sense does it make to fight people from your own party? Would you vote for a party which has internal conflict?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Obama, the wussy by johnnypeepers</title>
		<link>http://childoftheenlightenment.wordpress.com/2008/03/06/obama-the-wussy/#comment-26</link>
		<dc:creator>johnnypeepers</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 07 Mar 2008 02:53:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://childoftheenlightenment.wordpress.com/?p=38#comment-26</guid>
		<description>Hillary is gonna take him because he is weak. She will open the Michigan and Florida primaries for their delegate votes. He doesn't have a backbone. His intent to run a "clean" campaign and the hope schtick has bottomed out. I get a kick out of watching these two socialists race to the bottom.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hillary is gonna take him because he is weak. She will open the Michigan and Florida primaries for their delegate votes. He doesn&#8217;t have a backbone. His intent to run a &#8220;clean&#8221; campaign and the hope schtick has bottomed out. I get a kick out of watching these two socialists race to the bottom.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Obama, the wussy by Obama, the wussy</title>
		<link>http://childoftheenlightenment.wordpress.com/2008/03/06/obama-the-wussy/#comment-25</link>
		<dc:creator>Obama, the wussy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 07 Mar 2008 02:26:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://childoftheenlightenment.wordpress.com/?p=38#comment-25</guid>
		<description>[...] eric b wrote an interesting post today onHere&#8217;s a quick excerptBarack Obama is a wussy. There is no other way of putting it. Politics is a bloodsport and Obama cannot even hit back effectively at Hillary Clinton. It will be a slaughter if McCain gets a chance to crush this guy. Either Obama needs to get a spine soon or he will be destroyed by Hillary Clinton or softened up to the point that John McCain will smash him with one arm tied behind his back just to make it fair. The American people want a leader not a hoper. They want someone who will stand up for them and smash those who get in the way. If Barack cannot smash Hillary, will he be able to stand up to foreign tyrants? This is the modern Democratic Party. If they cannot win this election, the last one out of the party should turn off the lights. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] eric b wrote an interesting post today onHere&#8217;s a quick excerptBarack Obama is a wussy. There is no other way of putting it. Politics is a bloodsport and Obama cannot even hit back effectively at Hillary Clinton. It will be a slaughter if McCain gets a chance to crush this guy. Either Obama needs to get a spine soon or he will be destroyed by Hillary Clinton or softened up to the point that John McCain will smash him with one arm tied behind his back just to make it fair. The American people want a leader not a hoper. They want someone who will stand up for them and smash those who get in the way. If Barack cannot smash Hillary, will he be able to stand up to foreign tyrants? This is the modern Democratic Party. If they cannot win this election, the last one out of the party should turn off the lights. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on &#8220;We&#8217;ll be fine&#8230;&#8221; by anunlovedone</title>
		<link>http://childoftheenlightenment.wordpress.com/2008/02/22/well-be-fine/#comment-24</link>
		<dc:creator>anunlovedone</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Mar 2008 17:37:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://childoftheenlightenment.wordpress.com/?p=33#comment-24</guid>
		<description>The statement was copied from Sen. John Edwards, who said it in nearly every debate. For example during a debate in October: "As a matter of fact, it’s not about any of us. The truth is, when this election is over, I’m going to be fine. Senator Clinton is going to be fine. Senator Obama’s going to be fine. Will America be fine?"

or during a debate in November: "You know, before I came over here tonight, I was thinking, we’re going to have this debate; when we finish, all of you are going to be on television saying, oh, who scored points, who won the debate. All of us are going to be fine. The question is, will America be fine?"

or during a debate in December: "What’s not at stake are any of us. All of us are going to be just fine no matter what happens in this election. But what’s at stake is whether America is going to be fine”

So the credit should go to Sen. Edwards. (and Bill Clinton, cause another part of this statement was a copy of his answer from an interview in 1992) 
http://anunlovedone.wordpress.com/2008/02/24/clinton-lies-about-nafta-and-xerox-speeches/</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The statement was copied from Sen. John Edwards, who said it in nearly every debate. For example during a debate in October: &#8220;As a matter of fact, it’s not about any of us. The truth is, when this election is over, I’m going to be fine. Senator Clinton is going to be fine. Senator Obama’s going to be fine. Will America be fine?&#8221;</p>
<p>or during a debate in November: &#8220;You know, before I came over here tonight, I was thinking, we’re going to have this debate; when we finish, all of you are going to be on television saying, oh, who scored points, who won the debate. All of us are going to be fine. The question is, will America be fine?&#8221;</p>
<p>or during a debate in December: &#8220;What’s not at stake are any of us. All of us are going to be just fine no matter what happens in this election. But what’s at stake is whether America is going to be fine”</p>
<p>So the credit should go to Sen. Edwards. (and Bill Clinton, cause another part of this statement was a copy of his answer from an interview in 1992)<br />
<a href="http://anunlovedone.wordpress.com/2008/02/24/clinton-lies-about-nafta-and-xerox-speeches/" rel="nofollow">http://anunlovedone.wordpress.com/2008/02/24/clinton-lies-about-nafta-and-xerox-speeches/</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on About by bibomedia</title>
		<link>http://childoftheenlightenment.wordpress.com/about/#comment-21</link>
		<dc:creator>bibomedia</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Mar 2008 09:02:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-21</guid>
		<description>:)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> <img src='http://s.wordpress.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on So Obama&#8217;s wife is unpatriotic&#8230; by Bowie, NV</title>
		<link>http://childoftheenlightenment.wordpress.com/2008/02/18/so-obamas-wife-is-unpatriotic/#comment-10</link>
		<dc:creator>Bowie, NV</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 19 Feb 2008 01:16:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://childoftheenlightenment.wordpress.com/?p=30#comment-10</guid>
		<description>I look at Michelle Obama and she reminds me of the entitlement brigade. Somehow the whole world is against us and this is our chance to pay the m back in kind type of folks!

God, these people have forever made me sick. The Obama bandwagon is all about mediocrity!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I look at Michelle Obama and she reminds me of the entitlement brigade. Somehow the whole world is against us and this is our chance to pay the m back in kind type of folks!</p>
<p>God, these people have forever made me sick. The Obama bandwagon is all about mediocrity!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Interventionism works&#8230; by Interventionism works&#8230;</title>
		<link>http://childoftheenlightenment.wordpress.com/2008/02/17/interventionism-works/#comment-9</link>
		<dc:creator>Interventionism works&#8230;</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 18 Feb 2008 04:47:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://childoftheenlightenment.wordpress.com/?p=28#comment-9</guid>
		<description>[...] Dave On Fire wrote an interesting post today onHere&#8217;s a quick excerptThe UK Independent has a wonderful piece on why liberal interventionism works and Kosovo is a good example of it: Today, Kosovo becomes only the third new country of the 21st century. Its declaration of independence will be recognised by a majority of the European Union, including the United Kingdom, and by the United States, but not by Russia. Its birth is more contested and difficult even than that of Montenegro in 2006, which was also detached from an unwilling Serbia, or of East Timor in 2002, which was wrested from Indonesia. The pessimists have had free run of the Balkans recently, so let us for one day at least join in the celebrations of most of the Kosovar people and reflect on why their statehood is a good thing. Of course, as the nay-sayers point out, Kosovo is a barely viable statelet where life for most of the population is poor [&#8230;] [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Dave On Fire wrote an interesting post today onHere&#8217;s a quick excerptThe UK Independent has a wonderful piece on why liberal interventionism works and Kosovo is a good example of it: Today, Kosovo becomes only the third new country of the 21st century. Its declaration of independence will be recognised by a majority of the European Union, including the United Kingdom, and by the United States, but not by Russia. Its birth is more contested and difficult even than that of Montenegro in 2006, which was also detached from an unwilling Serbia, or of East Timor in 2002, which was wrested from Indonesia. The pessimists have had free run of the Balkans recently, so let us for one day at least join in the celebrations of most of the Kosovar people and reflect on why their statehood is a good thing. Of course, as the nay-sayers point out, Kosovo is a barely viable statelet where life for most of the population is poor [&#8230;] [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on McCain&#8217;s son returns from serving in Iraq&#8230; by underdog</title>
		<link>http://childoftheenlightenment.wordpress.com/2008/02/14/mccains-son-returns-from-serving-in-iraq/#comment-8</link>
		<dc:creator>underdog</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 14 Feb 2008 15:28:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://childoftheenlightenment.wordpress.com/?p=20#comment-8</guid>
		<description>Hero worship?  Support the troops syndrome STTS?

No one questions the valor or honorable service of John McCain or his son.   The issue is not service ... it is purpose.

Logic is a pesty thing you know.   Logic, SunTzu, The Powell Doctrine, STRATEGIC defense, Justice.

The war in Iraq no matter how it was begun and for what purpose, (that purpose actually being fulfilled ergo - Saddam is dead and and IED is hardly a weapon of mass destruction.) has now evolved into a counter insurgent war against occupation and a civil war between sectarian divides.   The task of protecting our National Security has been suplainted by the difficult job of nation building.

No member of our military dies in vain in the defense of our nation and our strategic security.   However, death in the throws of another nations internal struggles, or at the hands of cowards who could not reach him otherwise, is neither heroic or justifiable.
The failure is not that of the grunt on the ground - but the incompetent leadership of command that does not recognize the true purpose of war.

War is not to be undending.   War is not for the purposes of forced adhearance to democracy.   War is not for the purpose of dividing the tribal bloodshead of others heaping fresh blood upon the centuries of carnage.   War is not for revenge.   War is not for chasing phantoms across the desert sands.

Staying in Iraq 100 years is a delusional, incompetent analysis and false comparison with other conflicts such as Germany or Japan.   In both of those cases we subjegated the masses of each nation to the wrath of TOTAL WAR, and heaped upon them the suffering that lead to total capitulation and surrender.   That is WAR.    It is absolute, final and catastrophic anihilation of the enemy.   And then - and only then - can occupation and nation building succeed.    The cultures of the middle east however are less likely to capitulate, and we are not prepared to heap upon them the suffering of anihilation that would cause them to hault their fanatical cause.

Thus 100 years at 800 soldiers per year will be 80,000 dead.  At 200 Billion dollars per year your grandchildren and their children will be foraging in the refuse piles of desolation, in a poor 3rd world country called America.

Our founding fathers wisely discouraged the entrapments of forieng wars for profit or territorial expasion.   (after all it was a pretty big continent and there was plenty of space to do that right here).    

The blood and treasure of this nation would be better served if John McCain and his son went to Texas to secure our own borders, protect our own citizens, to help in time of need and natural disaster, and to stand ready against true STRATEGIC threats that may emerge in the coming decades.

As for the klingons.... "let them die"</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hero worship?  Support the troops syndrome STTS?</p>
<p>No one questions the valor or honorable service of John McCain or his son.   The issue is not service &#8230; it is purpose.</p>
<p>Logic is a pesty thing you know.   Logic, SunTzu, The Powell Doctrine, STRATEGIC defense, Justice.</p>
<p>The war in Iraq no matter how it was begun and for what purpose, (that purpose actually being fulfilled ergo - Saddam is dead and and IED is hardly a weapon of mass destruction.) has now evolved into a counter insurgent war against occupation and a civil war between sectarian divides.   The task of protecting our National Security has been suplainted by the difficult job of nation building.</p>
<p>No member of our military dies in vain in the defense of our nation and our strategic security.   However, death in the throws of another nations internal struggles, or at the hands of cowards who could not reach him otherwise, is neither heroic or justifiable.<br />
The failure is not that of the grunt on the ground - but the incompetent leadership of command that does not recognize the true purpose of war.</p>
<p>War is not to be undending.   War is not for the purposes of forced adhearance to democracy.   War is not for the purpose of dividing the tribal bloodshead of others heaping fresh blood upon the centuries of carnage.   War is not for revenge.   War is not for chasing phantoms across the desert sands.</p>
<p>Staying in Iraq 100 years is a delusional, incompetent analysis and false comparison with other conflicts such as Germany or Japan.   In both of those cases we subjegated the masses of each nation to the wrath of TOTAL WAR, and heaped upon them the suffering that lead to total capitulation and surrender.   That is WAR.    It is absolute, final and catastrophic anihilation of the enemy.   And then - and only then - can occupation and nation building succeed.    The cultures of the middle east however are less likely to capitulate, and we are not prepared to heap upon them the suffering of anihilation that would cause them to hault their fanatical cause.</p>
<p>Thus 100 years at 800 soldiers per year will be 80,000 dead.  At 200 Billion dollars per year your grandchildren and their children will be foraging in the refuse piles of desolation, in a poor 3rd world country called America.</p>
<p>Our founding fathers wisely discouraged the entrapments of forieng wars for profit or territorial expasion.   (after all it was a pretty big continent and there was plenty of space to do that right here).    </p>
<p>The blood and treasure of this nation would be better served if John McCain and his son went to Texas to secure our own borders, protect our own citizens, to help in time of need and natural disaster, and to stand ready against true STRATEGIC threats that may emerge in the coming decades.</p>
<p>As for the klingons&#8230;. &#8220;let them die&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Picking a running mate&#8230; by John McCain &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Picking a running mate&#8230;</title>
		<link>http://childoftheenlightenment.wordpress.com/2008/02/13/picking-a-running-mate/#comment-7</link>
		<dc:creator>John McCain &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Picking a running mate&#8230;</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 Feb 2008 15:24:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://childoftheenlightenment.wordpress.com/?p=17#comment-7</guid>
		<description>[...] unknown wrote an interesting post today onHere&#8217;s a quick excerptNow seeing John McCain can probably only be stopped by divine intervention from winning the Republican nomination, the speculation over who he should has his vice-presidential nominee is running rampant. Here are some of my personal favorites that have been listed: Tim Pawlenty (Governor of Minnesota), Mark Sanford (Governor of South Carolina), Bobby Jindal (Governor of Louisiana), Mike Pence (Congressman from Indiana), and Sarah Palin (Governor of Alaska). Each bring something to the table and with the exception of Pence are the same age or younger than Obama. All are to the right of McCain and have had track records of success and fighting corruption. Pawlenty brings the most to the ticket from an electoral perspective as he flip Minnesota Republican and possibly Wisconsin. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] unknown wrote an interesting post today onHere&#8217;s a quick excerptNow seeing John McCain can probably only be stopped by divine intervention from winning the Republican nomination, the speculation over who he should has his vice-presidential nominee is running rampant. Here are some of my personal favorites that have been listed: Tim Pawlenty (Governor of Minnesota), Mark Sanford (Governor of South Carolina), Bobby Jindal (Governor of Louisiana), Mike Pence (Congressman from Indiana), and Sarah Palin (Governor of Alaska). Each bring something to the table and with the exception of Pence are the same age or younger than Obama. All are to the right of McCain and have had track records of success and fighting corruption. Pawlenty brings the most to the ticket from an electoral perspective as he flip Minnesota Republican and possibly Wisconsin. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
