<?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"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Obama&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;#039;s Lips Say Reagan, But His Eyes Say Mondale</title>
	<atom:link href="http://moorethoughts.com/2008/01/17/obamas-lips-say-reagan-but-his-eyes-say-mondale/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://moorethoughts.com/2008/01/17/obamas-lips-say-reagan-but-his-eyes-say-mondale/</link>
	<description>Conservatism, Freedom, Capitalism</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 16 May 2010 00:37:48 -0600</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Volunteer Voters &#187; Reagan? Try Mondale</title>
		<link>http://moorethoughts.com/2008/01/17/obamas-lips-say-reagan-but-his-eyes-say-mondale/comment-page-1/#comment-189821</link>
		<dc:creator>Volunteer Voters &#187; Reagan? Try Mondale</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Jan 2008 18:19:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://moorethoughts.com/2008/01/17/obamas-lips-say-reagan-but-his-eyes-say-mondale/#comment-189821</guid>
		<description>[...] Nathan Moore is not taking the bait on a YouTube clip where Democratic candidate Barack Obama puts himself beside Ronald Reagan: Mondale was as much interested in change as anyone. But it was bad change, poorly delivered, and the voters buried him for it. Truth is, Obama is as presumptuous about Ronald Reagan as Hillary Clinton was with Margaret Thatcher. He has virtually nothing in common with Ronald Reagan’s idea of change and individual empowerment. Obama’s world view and extraordinarily liberal record, wrought with a marked distrust of individualism, makes him more appropriately the political progeny of Walter Mondale than Ronald Reagan. The difference between Obama and Mondale is one of superficiality. Obama is a smoother campaigner, who has a better mastery of what to say when, and what not to say ever, than Mondale did. Substantively, where it counts, the two are nearly indistinguishable, but Mondale lost a record 49 states in 1984 - I don’t see Obama bringing him up anytime soon.   Share and Enjoy: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Nathan Moore is not taking the bait on a YouTube clip where Democratic candidate Barack Obama puts himself beside Ronald Reagan: Mondale was as much interested in change as anyone. But it was bad change, poorly delivered, and the voters buried him for it. Truth is, Obama is as presumptuous about Ronald Reagan as Hillary Clinton was with Margaret Thatcher. He has virtually nothing in common with Ronald Reagan’s idea of change and individual empowerment. Obama’s world view and extraordinarily liberal record, wrought with a marked distrust of individualism, makes him more appropriately the political progeny of Walter Mondale than Ronald Reagan. The difference between Obama and Mondale is one of superficiality. Obama is a smoother campaigner, who has a better mastery of what to say when, and what not to say ever, than Mondale did. Substantively, where it counts, the two are nearly indistinguishable, but Mondale lost a record 49 states in 1984 &#8211; I don’t see Obama bringing him up anytime soon.   Share and Enjoy: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
