<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<rss version="2.0">
	<channel>
		<title>gdp's Comments</title>
		<language>en-us</language>
		<link>https://www.intensedebate.com/users/773680</link>
		<description>Comments by SchriSchri</description>
<item>
<title>Big Government : Wednesday Open Thread: SOTU Edition</title>
<link>http://biggovernment.com/publius/2010/01/27/wednesday-open-thread-sotu-edition/#IDComment54115565</link>
<description>Methinks thou dost protest too much.  </description>
<pubDate>Wed, 27 Jan 2010 20:40:45 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://biggovernment.com/publius/2010/01/27/wednesday-open-thread-sotu-edition/#IDComment54115565</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Big Government : Wednesday Open Thread: SOTU Edition</title>
<link>http://biggovernment.com/publius/2010/01/27/wednesday-open-thread-sotu-edition/#IDComment54113617</link>
<description>Are the qualifiers &amp;quot;circular patterning,&amp;quot; &amp;quot;bloated,&amp;quot; &amp;quot;keen sense,&amp;quot; essential here? Do they enhance your remarks? Did I reference self-assurance or the absence of it? Did I cast aspersions like &amp;quot;marsh dwellers&amp;quot; etc?  According to the instrument/s used for verification, a definitive conclusion about the perceived color of the sky can be determined. </description>
<pubDate>Wed, 27 Jan 2010 20:20:26 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://biggovernment.com/publius/2010/01/27/wednesday-open-thread-sotu-edition/#IDComment54113617</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Big Government : Wednesday Open Thread: SOTU Edition</title>
<link>http://biggovernment.com/publius/2010/01/27/wednesday-open-thread-sotu-edition/#IDComment54110175</link>
<description>I&amp;#039;m not doing diagnosis.  I consistently labelled one counterpart as a bully.  That is not diagnosis.  It is behavioral management.   What do you think the posture should be when encountering an oddity? </description>
<pubDate>Wed, 27 Jan 2010 19:55:19 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://biggovernment.com/publius/2010/01/27/wednesday-open-thread-sotu-edition/#IDComment54110175</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Big Government : Wednesday Open Thread: SOTU Edition</title>
<link>http://biggovernment.com/publius/2010/01/27/wednesday-open-thread-sotu-edition/#IDComment54108333</link>
<description>Can you explain how you reached the conclusion? </description>
<pubDate>Wed, 27 Jan 2010 19:48:25 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://biggovernment.com/publius/2010/01/27/wednesday-open-thread-sotu-edition/#IDComment54108333</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Big Government : Wednesday Open Thread: SOTU Edition</title>
<link>http://biggovernment.com/publius/2010/01/27/wednesday-open-thread-sotu-edition/#IDComment54107558</link>
<description>It doesn&amp;#039;t matter who I am.   Nor do I have any attachment to the illusion of control. The more questions asked, the more material I garner.    </description>
<pubDate>Wed, 27 Jan 2010 19:45:26 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://biggovernment.com/publius/2010/01/27/wednesday-open-thread-sotu-edition/#IDComment54107558</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Big Government : Wednesday Open Thread: SOTU Edition</title>
<link>http://biggovernment.com/publius/2010/01/27/wednesday-open-thread-sotu-edition/#IDComment54106492</link>
<description>Once again, self assertion and bluster.  See my comments elsewhere. (It is a desirable step away from bullying however.  So in this reformation, you must be commended.) </description>
<pubDate>Wed, 27 Jan 2010 19:41:13 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://biggovernment.com/publius/2010/01/27/wednesday-open-thread-sotu-edition/#IDComment54106492</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Big Government : Wednesday Open Thread: SOTU Edition</title>
<link>http://biggovernment.com/publius/2010/01/27/wednesday-open-thread-sotu-edition/#IDComment54106208</link>
<description>dAnconia_Copper, your wish for prestige and status are understandable, considering your bullying behavior.    Analysis is a subset of narrative.  Often a very small subheading or series of subheadings in a narrative of breadth and scope.  You have given your remarks a lower status than what I attributed to them. </description>
<pubDate>Wed, 27 Jan 2010 19:37:49 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://biggovernment.com/publius/2010/01/27/wednesday-open-thread-sotu-edition/#IDComment54106208</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Big Government : Wednesday Open Thread: SOTU Edition</title>
<link>http://biggovernment.com/publius/2010/01/27/wednesday-open-thread-sotu-edition/#IDComment54105685</link>
<description>Ahem. Do cite when I asked for your help. </description>
<pubDate>Wed, 27 Jan 2010 19:31:07 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://biggovernment.com/publius/2010/01/27/wednesday-open-thread-sotu-edition/#IDComment54105685</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Big Government : Wednesday Open Thread: SOTU Edition</title>
<link>http://biggovernment.com/publius/2010/01/27/wednesday-open-thread-sotu-edition/#IDComment54105275</link>
<description>Yes. With a bully, you must consistently insist that they back off until they do so.   Then, in the management of a bully, you must recognize their positive behavioral and postural changes with verbal acknowledgements.   In the verbal exchanges that comprise the manifold spaces of this thread, I have gotten you to back off. </description>
<pubDate>Wed, 27 Jan 2010 19:26:27 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://biggovernment.com/publius/2010/01/27/wednesday-open-thread-sotu-edition/#IDComment54105275</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Big Government : Wednesday Open Thread: SOTU Edition</title>
<link>http://biggovernment.com/publius/2010/01/27/wednesday-open-thread-sotu-edition/#IDComment54104848</link>
<description>Your preference for self-assertion is noted.  Noted as well is your belief that bullying is a show of  something other than weakness.  My questions i.e. regarding &amp;quot;proof&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;scientific&amp;quot; are intended to interrogate assumptions.    You rely on these assumptions to make a narrow way around reality.  It will take hard, hard work to rescue you from this.  For instance, do you have a passport? Do you speak a language in addition to english? Have you been invited to the home of an acquaintance/stranger in a non-english speaking society? </description>
<pubDate>Wed, 27 Jan 2010 19:21:15 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://biggovernment.com/publius/2010/01/27/wednesday-open-thread-sotu-edition/#IDComment54104848</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Big Government : MSM Leaping to Conclusions -- While Big Government Waits for Facts</title>
<link>http://biggovernment.com/abreitbart/2010/01/26/wait-until-the-facts-are-in/#IDComment54103382</link>
<description>Thank you Brian Garst.  Unlike another counterpart who has been responding to my post, you identify this as an open forum.  The norms (limited) you describe are more congruent with my own understanding.  Can you describe an instance of &amp;quot;valiant defense of freedom?&amp;quot; How about a defense of freedom that features the absence of valiance?  Have I asserted any ideas? Can you cite them? Can you cite the incapable defense of them you imply?  Is it important to establish a &amp;quot;very&amp;quot; definition of racism here? </description>
<pubDate>Wed, 27 Jan 2010 19:04:32 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://biggovernment.com/abreitbart/2010/01/26/wait-until-the-facts-are-in/#IDComment54103382</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Big Government : MSM Leaping to Conclusions -- While Big Government Waits for Facts</title>
<link>http://biggovernment.com/abreitbart/2010/01/26/wait-until-the-facts-are-in/#IDComment54102591</link>
<description>Can you explain the mixed metaphor &amp;quot;playing the race card? What is a right here? And what is a racist in this context? </description>
<pubDate>Wed, 27 Jan 2010 18:55:16 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://biggovernment.com/abreitbart/2010/01/26/wait-until-the-facts-are-in/#IDComment54102591</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Big Government : Wednesday Open Thread: SOTU Edition</title>
<link>http://biggovernment.com/publius/2010/01/27/wednesday-open-thread-sotu-edition/#IDComment54102043</link>
<description>My numbers are easily verified.   Go to the contributors page and do the tabulations.  </description>
<pubDate>Wed, 27 Jan 2010 18:49:40 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://biggovernment.com/publius/2010/01/27/wednesday-open-thread-sotu-edition/#IDComment54102043</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Big Government : Wednesday Open Thread: SOTU Edition</title>
<link>http://biggovernment.com/publius/2010/01/27/wednesday-open-thread-sotu-edition/#IDComment54101729</link>
<description>If you are pictured and named (along with a narrative bio) on the contributors page, I know enough to have incorporated you into the findings. </description>
<pubDate>Wed, 27 Jan 2010 18:46:16 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://biggovernment.com/publius/2010/01/27/wednesday-open-thread-sotu-edition/#IDComment54101729</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Big Government : Wednesday Open Thread: SOTU Edition</title>
<link>http://biggovernment.com/publius/2010/01/27/wednesday-open-thread-sotu-edition/#IDComment54101481</link>
<description>Could we entertain this is as the question of intention? Usefulness might then depend on intention - would it not?  Additionally you are interrogating methodology?   What is then the priority, process or outcome?  </description>
<pubDate>Wed, 27 Jan 2010 18:43:33 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://biggovernment.com/publius/2010/01/27/wednesday-open-thread-sotu-edition/#IDComment54101481</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Big Government : Wednesday Open Thread: SOTU Edition</title>
<link>http://biggovernment.com/publius/2010/01/27/wednesday-open-thread-sotu-edition/#IDComment54100816</link>
<description>That is a narrative.    Is it one of many possible or the only one?    Do you feel we can only be comfortable by insisting on and continually reinforcing perceptual and functional norms?  </description>
<pubDate>Wed, 27 Jan 2010 18:36:07 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://biggovernment.com/publius/2010/01/27/wednesday-open-thread-sotu-edition/#IDComment54100816</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Big Government : Wednesday Open Thread: SOTU Edition</title>
<link>http://biggovernment.com/publius/2010/01/27/wednesday-open-thread-sotu-edition/#IDComment54100457</link>
<description>Do you believe others, strangers included, are seeking your help? </description>
<pubDate>Wed, 27 Jan 2010 18:32:25 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://biggovernment.com/publius/2010/01/27/wednesday-open-thread-sotu-edition/#IDComment54100457</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Big Government : Wednesday Open Thread: SOTU Edition</title>
<link>http://biggovernment.com/publius/2010/01/27/wednesday-open-thread-sotu-edition/#IDComment54100213</link>
<description>Okay.  Now you are backing off - that&amp;#039;s better. </description>
<pubDate>Wed, 27 Jan 2010 18:29:25 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://biggovernment.com/publius/2010/01/27/wednesday-open-thread-sotu-edition/#IDComment54100213</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Big Government : Wednesday Open Thread: SOTU Edition</title>
<link>http://biggovernment.com/publius/2010/01/27/wednesday-open-thread-sotu-edition/#IDComment54100129</link>
<description>...so long as the principle is just...  And how is a just principle identified?  In the example of Bin Laden that you pose, for instance, can there not be many either 1)certainties or 2)ambiguities depending on the identifier?   </description>
<pubDate>Wed, 27 Jan 2010 18:28:32 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://biggovernment.com/publius/2010/01/27/wednesday-open-thread-sotu-edition/#IDComment54100129</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Big Government : Wednesday Open Thread: SOTU Edition</title>
<link>http://biggovernment.com/publius/2010/01/27/wednesday-open-thread-sotu-edition/#IDComment54099738</link>
<description>What is the derivation of your association &amp;quot;Modern Liberals&amp;quot; here? What about the association &amp;quot;jury pool?&amp;quot; </description>
<pubDate>Wed, 27 Jan 2010 18:23:48 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://biggovernment.com/publius/2010/01/27/wednesday-open-thread-sotu-edition/#IDComment54099738</guid>
</item>	</channel>
</rss>