<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?>
<!-- generator="FeedCreator 1.7.2" -->
<rss version="2.0">
    <channel>
        <title>MedWorm Tags: boehner</title>
        <description>MedWorm provides a medical RSS filtering service. Over 6000 RSS medical sources are combined and output via different filters. This feed contains the latest medical blog items that have been tagged with 'boehner'.</description>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.medworm.com/rss/search.php?qu=%22boehner%22&t=%22boehner%22&r=Exact&o=d&f=tag]]></link>
        <lastBuildDate>Sat, 03 Sep 2011 02:16:41 +0100</lastBuildDate>
        <item>
            <title>Republicans Employ Education Weapons, Too</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5077662&amp;cid=t_420540_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FOErsIXsuuXQ%2F</link>
            <description>By Neal McCluskeyA couple of days ago I blasted President Obama for, in repugnant tradition, using &amp;#8220;education&amp;#8221; as a political weapon, invoking it to scare Americans into demanding increased taxes for &amp;#8220;the rich.&amp;#8221; House Speaker John Boehner, thankfully, did not abuse education similarly in his rebuttal. But his proposal for raising the debt ceiling illustrates just how weak the GOP&amp;#8217;s commitment is to returning the federal government to its constitutional &amp;#8212; and affordable &amp;#8212; size. And I say this not because of the relative puniness of his proposed cuts, but what the proposal would do in education, the only area it specifically targets: increase funding for Pell Grants.
Now, I know what many people will say to this: Pell is a de facto ent...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5077662</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 28 Jul 2011 14:46:25 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5077662</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Thoughts on the Boehner Plan</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5069444&amp;cid=t_420540_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FiwiXkM-Rmxs%2F</link>
            <description>By Tad DeHavenThese are the times that try budget analysts’ souls—especially budget analysts who’d like to see Washington dramatically cut spending. The debate over lifting the debt ceiling has produced a number of proposals from Capitol Hill—none of them have been worth celebrating. We can now add House Speaker John Boehner’s latest proposal to the pile.
Boehner’s proposal boils down to the following: cap discretionary spending over 10 years to achieve $1.2 trillion in savings; have (another) bipartisan group of policymakers come up with $1.8 trillion in “deficit reductions” over ten years; and get a vote on a balanced budget amendment. In exchange, the president would get to increase the deficit by $900 billion this year and by another $1.6 trillion next year.
Here are so...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5069444</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 26 Jul 2011 20:11:29 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5069444</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>White House: ‘We Have Never Been at War in Northafrica!’</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4934097&amp;cid=t_420540_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FQifV1CO3_to%2F</link>
            <description>By Gene HealyPardon the somewhat trite Orwell reference in the title to this post. But sometimes this administration&amp;#8217;s wordgames make it hard to resist invoking our keenest analyst of politics and the English language.
Some months ago, the Obama team began telling us that the Libyan War wasn&amp;#8217;t a war&amp;#8212;it was a &amp;#8220;kinetic military action.&amp;#8221; (Go here to watch Defense Secretary Robert Gates try&amp;#8212;and fail&amp;#8212;to maintain a straight face selling that line to Katie Couric on 60 Minutes).
In April, the president&amp;#8217;s Office of Legal Counsel made the (bogus) argument that the president hadn&amp;#8217;t violated the War Powers Resolution because the WPR recognized his authority to engage in hostilities for at least 60 days without congressional approval.  We&amp;#8217;re...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4934097</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 16 Jun 2011 20:40:16 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4934097</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Congress Debates the Libya War</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4893390&amp;cid=t_420540_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FVbD6rCsA4DM%2F</link>
            <description>By Christopher PrebleBetter late than never.
The House of Representatives today debated two different resolutions purportedly aimed at forcing the Obama administration to comply with its statutory and constitutional obligations to secure formal authorization for the ongoing military campaign in Libya.
I say &amp;#8220;purportedly&amp;#8221; because it seems quite clear that the real intent of House Speaker John Boehner&amp;#8217;s resolution was to lure away a sufficient number of Republicans who otherwise would have been inclined to vote for Rep. Dennis Kucinich&amp;#8217;s (D-OH) measure. Whereas the Kucinich resolution would have compelled the Obama administration to withdraw from all military operations in Libya within the next 15 days, Boehner&amp;#8217;s resolution bars the administration from deploying...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4893390</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 03 Jun 2011 20:55:56 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4893390</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Boehner’s Price for Increasing the Federal Debt Limit</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4820822&amp;cid=t_420540_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FJVTIs8aBKcc%2F</link>
            <description>By William A. NiskanenHouse Speaker John Boehner, in his speech to the Economic Club of New York on Monday night, was very clear about the conditions for which he would support an increase in the federal debt limit:
… Without significant spending cuts and reforms to reduce our debt, there will be no debt limit increase.  And the cuts should be greater than the accompanying increase in debt authority the president is given.
We should be talking about cuts of trillions, not just billions.
They should be actual cuts and program reforms, not broad deficit or debt targets that punt the tough questions to the future.
And with the exception of tax hikes &amp;#8212; which will destroy jobs &amp;#8212; everything is on the table.
Congress is institutionally incapable of formulating and approving a large...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4820822</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 12 May 2011 20:35:40 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4820822</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>John Boehner’s Spending and Debt Promise</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4813252&amp;cid=t_420540_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Fsz2DdYdus4o%2F</link>
            <description>By Chris EdwardsHouse Speaker John Boehner has promised to tie substantial spending cuts to upcoming debt-limit legislation. He said spending cuts will have to be at least as large as the dollar value of the allowed debt increase. Thus, if the legislation increased the legal debt limit by $2 trillion, then Congress would have to cut spending over time by at least $2 trillion.
How can we be sure that spending cuts are real?
There are only two types of solid and tough-to-reverse spending cuts—legislated changes to reduce entitlement benefit levels and complete termination of discretionary programs. Republicans will have to define what time period they are talking about, but let’s assume it’s the standard 10-year budget window.

Entitlements: The legislation, for example, could change t...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4813252</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 11 May 2011 14:38:49 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4813252</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>House Leadership’s Transparency Leadership</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4789219&amp;cid=t_420540_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F104kfJkYcBE%2F</link>
            <description>By Jim HarperLast week, House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) and Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) wrote a letter to the House clerk calling for new data standards that will make Congress more open and accountable. Spot on.
The THOMAS legislative database was a huge improvement when it came online in 1995 at the behest of the new Republican Congress, but the Internet has moved on. Today, publishing text or PDF documents is inadequate transparency. It&amp;#8217;s more important to make available the data that represent various documents and activities in the legislative process. &amp;#8220;Web 2.0&amp;#8243; will use that data various ways to deliver public oversight.
I&amp;#8217;ll have much more to say in the near future, but here are the kinds of things get to full transparency, which the House leaders&amp;#8...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4789219</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 04 May 2011 18:51:33 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4789219</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Monday Links</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4775373&amp;cid=t_420540_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FIn343nt1Z4k%2F</link>
            <description>By George Scoville
Habeas corpus applies to anyone, citizen or not, in custody under American law, no matter what President Bush and President Obama decree.
House Republicans&amp;#8217; cuts to the Department of Education, which will spend over $70 billion next year, didn&amp;#8217;t even amount to $1 billion.
&amp;#8220;Regardless of whether Pakistan gets its way, its impudence in pushing Afghanistan to abandon America exposes the real balance of power in the region.&amp;#8221;
&amp;#8220;It doesn&amp;#8217;t make a lot of sense to refer to a government whose intelligence service assists military efforts by al Qaeda and the Taliban against U.S. troops in Afghanistan as an &amp;#8216;ally.&amp;#8217;&amp;#8221;
Here are five ways to cut military spending today without changing our strategic focus:



Monday Links is a post f...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4775373</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 02 May 2011 14:29:08 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4775373</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Obama/Boehner’s Phony Spending Cuts</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4714716&amp;cid=t_420540_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FYt3CADRA5Ds%2F</link>
            <description>By Caleb O. Brown
President Obama and Congress have agreed to cut $38 billion in federal spending, right? If you go by so-called &amp;#8220;budget authority,&amp;#8221; that may be true. But real spending cuts come when you actually cut real spending, not &amp;#8220;budget authority.&amp;#8221; Outlays in fiscal year 2011 will likely be considerably higher than last year&amp;#8217;s outlays. That means the spending cuts advertised by President Obama and House Speaker John Boehner are laughably fraudulent. Learn more at downsizinggovernment.org.
Video produced by Caleb O. Brown and Austin Bragg.
Obama/Boehner&amp;#8217;s Phony Spending Cuts is a post from Cato @ Liberty - Cato Institute Blog (Source: Cato-at-liberty)</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4714716</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 14 Apr 2011 22:08:58 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4714716</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>“The Largest Annual Spending Cut in Our History”?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4696607&amp;cid=t_420540_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FGaYv4vnKj9A%2F</link>
            <description>By David BoazIn this week&amp;#8217;s Britannica column, I look at the claims being made for the budget cuts in the weekend deal:
“The largest annual spending cut in our history,” President Obama said. Speaker of the House John Boehner called it the “largest real dollar spending cut in American history.” Saturday’s front-page, upper-right headline in the Washington Post proclaimed:
BIGGEST CUTS
IN U.S. HISTORY
The story went on to say that Obama “said the cuts would be painful but necessary.”
NPR’s Andrea Seabrook reported, “The Republicans got big, big cuts.”
And are they?
Please. It’s a cut of $38 billion in a budget of $3,819 billion. That’s 1 percent. That’s a rounding error in federal budgeting&amp;#8230;.
That same budget table shows that federal spending fell f...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4696607</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 11 Apr 2011 13:20:24 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4696607</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>OMG! They Give Awards for the Most Money Spent Lobbying Congress!</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4684751&amp;cid=t_420540_150_f&amp;fid=34889&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fpharmamkting.blogspot.com%2F2011%2F04%2Fomg-they-give-awards-for-most-money.html</link>
            <description>Last night, John Castellani, president and CEO of PhRMA -- arguably the single largest Washington lobbyist (aka &quot;advocacy group&quot;) -- was the recipient of the 2011 Bryce Harlow Business-Government Relations Award, which is given to individuals who have made &quot;significant contributions&quot; to the advocacy profession.More like significant contributions to politicians!John also had the &quot;thrill&quot; of meeting one of those politicians PhRMA has undoubtedly helped fund over the years. According to this obsequious post on PhRMA's blog, &quot;John ... had the added thrill of being introduced by House Speaker Boehner. Many in attendance were touched by this gesture of professional respect and friendship on the part of the Speaker.&quot;Yeah, I bet they are friends! Did Boehner bawl or just kiss John? Whatever. I'm s...</description>
            <author>Pharma Marketing Blog</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4684751</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 07 Apr 2011 18:46:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4684751</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Obama’s Little Evidence Problem</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4658366&amp;cid=t_420540_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FFXcuFE3ki1g%2F</link>
            <description>By Neal McCluskeyLast month I wrote a post on President Obama's selective citation of evidence when debating which education programs to kill and which to keep. Well yesterday the administration struck again, issuing the following statement opposing a bill that would revive DC's bleeding-out voucher program:
STATEMENT OF ADMINISTRATION POLICY
H.R. 471 – Scholarships for Opportunity and Results Act
(Rep. Boehner, R-Ohio, and 50 cosponsors)
While the Administration appreciates that H.R. 471 would provide Federal support for improving public schools in the District of Columbia (D.C.), including expanding and improving high-quality D.C. public charter schools, the Administration opposes the creation or expansion of private school voucher programs that are authorized by this bill.  The Fede...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4658366</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 30 Mar 2011 13:56:12 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4658366</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The Transparency Contest Heats Up</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4605813&amp;cid=t_420540_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Fwd0_aYzR0dg%2F</link>
            <description>By Jim HarperBack in January, I wrote in Politico about the potential for House Republicans to &quot;eclipse&quot; President Obama on transparency. Perhaps the most important element of that piece was the subtle pun on the &quot;government in the sunshine&quot; motif. (Sunshine? Eclipse? Get it?) House Republicans appear to be more ready than ever to move forward on transparency with the announcement by Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) and Jason Chaffetz (R-UT) of a working group to update the House's use of technology.
That could end up as so much window dressing---Twitter accounts for everybody!---or it could result in substantive changes, such as publishing bills and amendments in real time (from committee markups, too) and tagging them with semantic data to make their meaning readily and instantly available to...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4605813</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 17 Mar 2011 12:18:39 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4605813</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Republican $100 Billion Spending Cut</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4318311&amp;cid=t_420540_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FdCAQMHXCqlY%2F</link>
            <description>By Chris EdwardsA top agenda item for the incoming House Republicans is to immediately start cutting spending. The GOP promised to reduce “nondefense” (or alternatively “nonsecurity”) spending for 2011 to the 2008 level, representing a $100 billion cut. GOP leaders are now being accused of backsliding on that promise, so let’s take a look at the numbers.
The idea is to reduce fiscal 2011 “budget authority” to the level it was in fiscal 2008. The chart shows the growth in nondefense budget authority since 2000. The spike in 2009 is from $265 billion in discretionary spending authorized in the “stimulus” bill.

Congress currently has a “continuing resolution” in place that keeps 2011 spending at about the same level as 2010, as shown in the chart. Thus, the House GOP wi...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4318311</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 06 Jan 2011 19:33:55 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4318311</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Toward Restoring Constitutional Government</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4318316&amp;cid=t_420540_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Fv3Wt14owxPE%2F</link>
            <description>By Roger PilonToday POLITICO Arena asks:
In light of today&amp;#8217;s reading of the Constitution in the new House, what misinterpretations of the Constitution do you regularly see in American politics? And are House Republicans implying that the previous Democratic majority did not have a firm grasp of the government&amp;#8217;s founding document?
My response:
Thanks to the Tea Party, as I wrote in Tuesday&amp;#8217;s Wall Street Journal, Congress seems to be rediscovering the Constitution &amp;#8212; or at least many House Republicans seem to be. When members read the document aloud today, apparently for the first time in the nation&amp;#8217;s history, they&amp;#8217;ll be throwing down a marker: &amp;#8220;We take the Constitution seriously, and intend to abide by its principles.&amp;#8221; If true, how refreshing....</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4318316</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 06 Jan 2011 15:14:08 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4318316</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Avoiding Crucial Conversations: Death Panels Win</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4314001&amp;cid=t_420540_87_f&amp;fid=38368&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.aannet.org%2Ffiles%2Fpublic%2FAAN%2520Policy%2520Brief%2520-%2520Advance%2520Care%2520Planning.pdf</link>
            <description>By Diana J. Mason, PhD, RN. I was quite distressed to read in this morning&amp;#8217;s news that the Obama Administration had reversed the new Medicare regulation that would pay for periodic conversations between physicians and patients about preferences for end-of-life care.  According to today&amp;#8217;s New York Times, Speaker John Boehner said that  &amp;#8220;the provision could be a step &amp;#8216;down a treacherous path toward government-encouraged euthanasia.&amp;#8217;&amp;#8221;
Sara Palin started this rhetorical myth when she declared efforts to incorporate paying for such conversations under Medicare in the House health care reform bill (not included in the final law) as creating &amp;#8220;death panels&amp;#8221;. This lie is undermining advances that advocates for better end-of-life care have worked on ...</description>
            <author>Disruptive Women in Health Care</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4314001</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 05 Jan 2011 18:11:39 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4314001</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Citing the Constitution</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4313992&amp;cid=t_420540_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FV2VVba4E5A0%2F</link>
            <description>By Ilya ShapiroA few responses to my mention yesterday of the new House rule requiring each introduced bill to cite a specific constitutional provision for Congress&amp;#8217;s authority to pass it asked me to elaborate on what this would mean in practice. Well, this is apparently a new thing so nobody knows exactly, but the Republican leadership has provided a fascinating memo providing guidance to all (not just GOP) lawmakers.
First of all, the Constitution has to be cited &amp;#8220;as specifically as practicable.&amp;#8221;  For example: &amp;#8221;The constitutional authority on which this bill rests is the power of Congress to make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces, as enumerated in Article I, Section 8, Clause 14 of the United States Constitution.&amp;#8221; ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4313992</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 05 Jan 2011 15:21:41 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4313992</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>John Boehner Cries and Atlas Shrugs</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4266149&amp;cid=t_420540_136_f&amp;fid=37852&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fdonnatrussell.com%2F2010%2F12%2F16%2Fjohn-boehner-cries-and-atlas-shrugs%2F</link>
            <description>My new post on Politics Daily / Woman Up. John Boehner Cries and Atlas Shrugs.
My mother once complained about a TV show that featured too much &amp;#8220;full frontal crying.&amp;#8221;
James Stewart
Crying is not pretty. Even the most attractive folks don&amp;#8217;t look good with their faces scrunched up, and a swollen red nose, and tiny slits where eyes used to be. Ugh.
I&amp;#8217;ve watched the footage: John Boehner Gets Weepy, Frequently. What&amp;#8217;s the big deal? I don&amp;#8217;t care a thing for the Iron John defense of male crying. I just think some people live in a cornball universe.
Take James Stewart. Politically he was so conservative that he and his former roommate Henry Fonda had to stop talking politics in order to continue their long friendship.
Read the rest on Politics Daily. John...</description>
            <author>Donna Trussell</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4266149</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 16 Dec 2010 17:22:18 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4266149</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>‘Prince of Pork’ to Chair Appropriations</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4245290&amp;cid=t_420540_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FB3kZLGLHMRY%2F</link>
            <description>By Tad DeHavenHouse Republican leaders went with Rep. Hal Rogers (R-KY) – a.k.a. “The Prince of Pork” – to chair the House Appropriations Committee. As I wrote last week, the prospect of Rogers chairing Appropriations is about as inspiring as re-heated meatloaf when it comes to his potential for pushing serious spending reforms.
Republican leaders in the House chose to ignore the concerns of tea party activists and other proponents of limited government, who were more supportive of Rep. Jack Kingston’s (R-GA) dark-horse push for the chairmanship. Kingston’s plan to “change the culture” on Appropriations offered a lot of positive ideas suggesting that he was more in tune with the voters that gave Republicans the majority.
Politico reported that Kingston received “the cold ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4245290</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 09 Dec 2010 15:30:42 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4245290</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Boehner to Protect the Fed?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4225218&amp;cid=t_420540_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FyAIbn8_Wl1Q%2F</link>
            <description>By Mark A. CalabriaWith Republicans taking control of the House in January, long-time Federal Reserve critic Rep. Ron Paul is in line to take over chairmanship of the House Financial Service Committee&amp;#8217;s Subcommittee on Domestic Monetary Policy and Technology.  This is the subcommittee with direct oversight of the Federal Reserve.
The thought of having some actual oversight of the Fed is apparently making Wall Street and the rest of the banking industry nervous.  Recent disclosures of Fed lending to foreign banks and Wall Street did not help the public image of either Wall Street or the Fed.  With Congressman Paul pushing for a full audit of the Fed, it is likely even dirtier secrets of the Fed may come to light.
So where have the Fed and Wall Street turned for protection?  Acc...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4225218</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 03 Dec 2010 19:23:41 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4225218</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Rep. Kingston’s Spending Cut Plan</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4219734&amp;cid=t_420540_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FiA6aPbmuWSk%2F</link>
            <description>By Tad DeHavenAn indicator of the incoming House Republican majority’s seriousness about cutting spending will be which members the party selects to head the various committees.
Many of the members in line to chair committees leave a lot to be desired from a limited government perspective (see here and here). In particular, the top candidates in line to chair the critical House Appropriations Committee, Reps. Jerry Lewis (R-Calif.) and Hal Rogers (R-Ky.), are about as inspiring as re-heated meatloaf when it comes to their potential for pushing serious spending reforms.
According to the Wall Street Journal, appropriator Jack Kingston (R-Ga.), is eyeing the chairman’s gavel even though he’s only fifth in line in terms of seniority. Kingston has put together a spending restraint plan in...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4219734</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 01 Dec 2010 15:35:10 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4219734</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Depression: Is It A “Character Issue” And A Disqualifier For Leadership?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4164522&amp;cid=t_420540_87_f&amp;fid=39187&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fgetbetterhealth.com%2Fdepression-is-it-a-character-issue-and-a-disqualifier-for-leadership%2F2010.11.14</link>
            <description>When the Republicans took back the House of Representatives [recently], John Boehner, the presumptive new Speaker and current Senator from Ohio, unleashed a “sob heard round the world.” As The New York Times quotes:
“I’ve spent my whole life chasing the American dream,” (Boehner) said, beginning to cry. He swallowed and tried again. But describing all the bad jobs he had once led to near sobbing when he got to the line, “I poured my heart and soul into running a small business.”
Boehner has cried in public many other times, the recent election night being only the largest stage to date. The tears also flow at his annual golf tournament, or while watching a child pledge allegiance to the flag, listening to a Republican colleague speak about his Vietnam War experiences, the unv...</description>
            <author>Better Health</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4164522</comments>
            <pubDate>Sun, 14 Nov 2010 20:00:36 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4164522</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>First Up: A Symbolic Cut in Pay</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4142738&amp;cid=t_420540_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FaOSbmLJa5V0%2F</link>
            <description>By Jim HarperThe Hill reports that the likely Speaker of the new Republican House, John Boehner (R-OH) will move first to cut representatives&amp;#8217; pay.
Cutting member pay would show voters the new GOP majority in the House is going to lead by example in their efforts to rein in spending and start with their own wallets, say officials with three prominent taxpayer advocacy groups in Washington, D.C. 
Give a read to the whole article, and some themes recur: &amp;#8220;gesture&amp;#8221;, &amp;#8220;symbols&amp;#8221;, &amp;#8220;symbolic gestures&amp;#8221;, &amp;#8220;symbolic moves&amp;#8221;, &amp;#8220;symbolic things&amp;#8221;, &amp;#8220;the right message&amp;#8221;, &amp;#8220;signals and symbols&amp;#8221;, &amp;#8220;symbol to the public&amp;#8221;.
Symbols are great, but they don&amp;#8217;t actually do anything. Rather than symbols, it might be...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4142738</comments>
            <pubDate>Sun, 07 Nov 2010 02:59:54 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4142738</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>What the 2010 Election Will Mean for Trade</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4133679&amp;cid=t_420540_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FWvPLjnK5VpY%2F</link>
            <description>By Daniel GriswoldOne of the many implications of yesterday’s election is that the new Congress will likely be more friendly toward trade-expanding agreements and less inclined to raise trade barriers.
Trade was not a deciding factor in the election, despite efforts by a number of incumbent Democrats to make it so. Many House and Senate contests were peppered with ads accusing an opponent of favoring trade agreements that gave away U.S. jobs to China. It was a stock line in President Obama’s stump speeches that Republicans favored tax breaks for U.S. companies that ship jobs overseas (a charge I dismantled in an op-ed last week). Yet on Election Day the trade-skeptical rhetoric and ads did not save Democratic seats.
Republicans Pat Toomey, Rob Portman, and Mark Kirk all won Senate seat...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4133679</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 03 Nov 2010 16:11:25 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4133679</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>How Long Can the Politics of Compromise Continue?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4118886&amp;cid=t_420540_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FwPmiyuEoHsg%2F</link>
            <description>By Roger PilonToday POLITICO Arena asks:
Are Mitch McConnell&amp;#8217;s and John Boehner&amp;#8217;s recent statements about not compromising a refreshing bit of candor from top political leaders, rather than the usual platitudes about bipartisanship and working across the aisle?
My response:
Mitch McConnell&amp;#8217;s comment about making Obama &amp;#8220;a one-term president&amp;#8221; and John Boehner&amp;#8217;s vow that Republicans will not &amp;#8220;compromise on their principles&amp;#8221; if they win the majority do indeed challenge &amp;#8220;the usual platitudes about bipartisanship and working across the aisle.&amp;#8221; But they also reflect a deeper problem that the midterm campaigns have begun to unmask, namely, that decades of compromises have brought us to a state where further compromise is no longer te...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4118886</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 28 Oct 2010 17:13:18 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4118886</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Boehner Endorses More Medicare Spending: Meet the New Boss, Same as the Old Boss?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4118890&amp;cid=t_420540_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FQ4l5iBZWyZY%2F</link>
            <description>By Daniel J. MitchellWhile flipping through the radio on my way to pick my son up from school yesterday afternoon, I was dumbfounded to hear Congressman John Boehner talk about repealing Obama&amp;#8217;s Medicare cuts on Sean Hannity&amp;#8217;s show.
I wasn&amp;#8217;t shocked that Boehner was referring to non-existent cuts (Medicare spending is projected to jump from $519 billion in 2010 to $677 billion in 2015 according to the Congressional Budget Office). I&amp;#8217;ve been dealing with Washington&amp;#8217;s dishonest definition of &amp;#8220;spending cuts&amp;#8221; for decades, so I&amp;#8217;m hardly fazed by that type of routine inaccuracy.
But I was amazed that the presumptive future Speaker of the House went on a supposedly conservative talk radio show and said that increasing Medicare spending would be on...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4118890</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 28 Oct 2010 15:08:47 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4118890</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Not Just a ‘Special Interest,’ A Super Special Interest</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3854507&amp;cid=t_420540_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FVft88mk0MxI%2F</link>
            <description>By Neal McCluskeyIn the gag-inducing tradition of National Education Association propaganda, President Obama&amp;#8217;s &amp;#8220;Organizing for America&amp;#8221; has released the video below taking issue with House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) calling teachers a &amp;#8220;special interest.&amp;#8221; Watch&amp;#8230;and wince.

Now, certainly many teachers want nothing more than to teach and do a good job. Some might even do it as much &amp;#8220;for the kids&amp;#8221; as their own personal satisfaction.  But teachers, at least as represented by the NEA and the American Federation of Teachers, sure as heck are a special interest. Indeed, they might be called a super-special interest, with unparalled sway over Democrats especially, and an incredible ability to get money out of taxpayers.
But what about teach...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3854507</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 10 Aug 2010 18:53:50 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3854507</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>In Last Minute Reprieve, Senate Passes Temporary Medicare “Doc Fix”</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3676611&amp;cid=t_420540_83_f&amp;fid=34856&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Finsidesurgery.com%2F2010%2F06%2Fminute-reprieve-senate-passes-temporary-medicare-doc-fix%2F</link>
            <description>In a somewhat surprisingly turnaround from twenty-four hours ago, the US Senate passed a temporary, six-month delay in the scheduled 21% cut in Medicare reimbursement that was due to retroactively kick in on June 18, 2010. The measure also included a temporary 2.2% rate hike for the six month period. Senatorys Harry Reid and Jim Boehner worked together to craft the bill, which passed by unaminous consent today on the Senate Floor. (Source: Inside Surgery)</description>
            <author>Inside Surgery</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3676611</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 18 Jun 2010 22:53:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3676611</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>A Tale of Two Frauds</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3354300&amp;cid=t_420540_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FwQuYeknmjsg%2F</link>
            <description>By Tad DeHavenThe President has announced a government crackdown on Medicare and Medicaid fraud. The effort appears to be an attempt to make it easier for Americans to swallow the health care “reform” he’s trying to shove down their throats. As House Republican leader John Boehner correctly asked, “Why can’t we crack down on fraud without a big-government takeover of health care?”
As I’ve noted before, improper payments made by Medicare and Medicaid is may well be $50 billion more than the already appalling $100 billion annual figure the president cited. Administrative efforts to rein in fraud and abuse are welcome, but they won’t solve the huge and fundamental inefficiencies of these programs. Because the law requires government health care programs to quickly get payments...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3354300</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 11 Mar 2010 16:10:42 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3354300</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>David Frum Analyzes Why ‘The Crazies’ Are Running the GOP</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2724814&amp;cid=t_420540_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FAt84iZaQaoM%2F</link>
            <description>In a discussion on Bloggingheads, David Frum offers his thoughts on the sad state of the GOP these days:

He blames the predicament, in part, on the &amp;#8220;conservative entertainment-industrial complex,&amp;#8221; a term coined by Andrew Sullivan.  In Frum&amp;#8217;s telling, this complex has &amp;#8220;distorted conservative dialogue to suit the wishes of the Fox audience.&amp;#8221;  He says that drawing on such a group, &amp;#8220;you can get seriously rich out of that, but you can&amp;#8217;t govern a country with that kind of voter base, it&amp;#8217;s a tiny minority-within-a-minority.&amp;#8221;
This is an interesting thesis.  Frum was the coauthor of a seemingly successful, widely discussed foreign-policy book titled An End to Evil, which posited that terrorism posed a &amp;#8220;threat to the survival of our n...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2724814</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 21 Aug 2009 17:03:51 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2724814</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>I'm All for Change, But this?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2616814&amp;cid=t_420540_131_f&amp;fid=35743&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fthegenesherpa.blogspot.com%2F2009%2F07%2Fim-all-for-change-but-this.html</link>
            <description>I hope you can get a deep understanding of how absolutely and completely worse off we will be with this complicated system. You can say, &quot;well can't the US government track submarines underwater while also tracking missles overhead and STILL collect taxes?&quot; They can, but this is even more complex. Listen, it would be nice to have a cheaper Not For Profit system out there to pay for care. Remember, having access to health insurance, is NOT having access to healthcare.......It's having access to health insurance. I don't know if anyone reads Investors Business Daily, I do and on Wednesday I read something which almost made me $h!t my pants. The House bill went public all 1018 pages of it.....On Page 16 there is something very, very scary on it.........From IBD (Not to be confused with Crohn'...</description>
            <author>Gene Sherpas: Personalized Medicine and You</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2616814</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 20 Jul 2009 11:35:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2616814</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>JEC/GOP Chart of House Democrats’ Health Plan</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2610887&amp;cid=t_420540_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FHn9Z5ivfmb8%2F</link>
            <description>I was on the Glenn Beck Show yesterday&amp;#8230;

&amp;#8230;talking about this rendering of the House Democrats&amp;#8217; 1,018-page health care plan:

That&amp;#8217;s you all the way on the left, and your doctor/hospital all the way on the right.
What could be simpler? (Source: Cato-at-liberty)</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2610887</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 16 Jul 2009 15:00:42 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2610887</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>How to Encourage Terrorists</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2469437&amp;cid=t_420540_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FhQQUcn2TrBs%2F</link>
            <description>The news yesterday that a Guantanamo detainee has been moved to New York to stand trial struck me with bemusement.
The Obama administration has apparently determined that it can roll over opposition to bringing detainees into the country for trial and imprisonment. Arguments against doing so are fear-based pap, and political losers.
House Minority Leader John Boehner has not failed to provide. He said in a statement:
This is the first step in the Democrats’ plan to import terrorists into America. . . . . There are more than 200 of the world’s most dangerous men held at the Guantanamo Bay prison. Does the Administration plan to transfer all of them into our nation in this way?
Boehner&amp;#8217;s apparent aim was to make political gains by appealing to the fears of a domestic U.S. audience,...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2469437</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 10 Jun 2009 17:50:44 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2469437</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>No Wonder the GOP Has No Credibility on Spending</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2255977&amp;cid=t_420540_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F3_a3DVK1-PU%2F</link>
            <description>You would think Barack Obama&amp;#8217;s tsunami of federal spending would provide an easy target for Republicans.  But they apparently haven&amp;#8217;t learned the right lessons after two successive electoral debacles.
Earmarks don&amp;#8217;t account for a lot of money in Washington terms.  You know, just a few billion dollars out of trillions or quadrillions or whatever we are now up to &amp;#8212; it&amp;#8217;s so easy to lose track!
Nevertheless, earmarks are a powerful symbol.  So trust the &amp;#8220;stupid party&amp;#8221; to muff its chance.  Reports Politico:
Bashing Democrats on the day President Obama signed the $410 billion omnibus spending bill was the easy part for Republican leaders Wednesday.
But getting Rep. John Boehner and Sen. Mitch McConnell on the same page on earmarks will be a lot tou...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2255977</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 12 Mar 2009 12:34:29 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2255977</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Blocked by a Boner</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2141360&amp;cid=t_420540_135_f&amp;fid=35250&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fblogs.poz.com%2Fshawn%2Farchives%2F2009%2F01%2Fblocked_by_a_bo.html</link>
            <description>The Medicaid Family Planning State Option was dropped from the stimulus package after a public outcry from House Minority Leader, John Boehner (pronounced &quot;BAY-ner&quot;). 
This would have either: a) provided health care coverage for 2.3 million women while generating savings for states and the federal government or b) funded the pro-abortion business. That's depending on whether you side with Planned Parenthood or John Boehner. 
My thinking is that contraceptives and condoms are secretly viewed as abortions by many lawmakers. As a sex educator, I support the Medicaid Family Planning State Option as part of the stimulus package, because I do think that unwanted pregnancies (which are usually followed by unwanted marriages, unwanted families, unwanted in-laws and unloved children) are quite cost...</description>
            <author>Shawn's HIV Blog</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2141360</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 29 Jan 2009 02:17:23 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2141360</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Will Wyeth Sue The Republican Party?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1451976&amp;cid=t_420540_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2F293437382%2F</link>
            <description>Last week, the Republicans in Washington rolled out a new slogan which, at first blush, may have sounded clever, because it took a poke at Barack Obama. The slogan? &amp;#8216;The Change You Deserve.&amp;#8217; Almost immediately, though, the effort was ridiculed. That&amp;#8217;s because the slogan has been used by Wyeth to promote its Effexor antidepressant, and it appears to have been trademarked.
House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, a Maryland Democrat, declared that &amp;#8220;Democrats, not drugs, is what the American people need.&amp;#8221; The slogan, he added, has side effects and &amp;#8220;can make you sick. 82 percent of Americans have indicated they are sick and tired of the policies that have been pursued by the Bush-Boehner administration.&amp;#8221; House Minority Leader John Boehner, a Louisiana Republ...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1451976</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 19 May 2008 12:02:49 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1451976</guid>        </item>
    </channel>
</rss>

