<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1"?>
<rss version="2.0">
<channel>
<title>Slog - Comments on Bloggers for Richardson (Or, At Least, His Iraq Plan)</title>
<link>http://slog.thestranger.com/2007/09/bloggers_for_richardson_or_at_least_his</link>
<description>This really surprises me, because Richardson is going nowhere and the bloggers involved have pretty strong reps in the liberal netroots. I&apos;m not sure what Stoller, Bowers, and O&apos;Connell are up to here—maybe trying to pressure the other candidates to be more forceful about an Iraq pullout? If so, do they really think this is the right vehicle?...</description>
<copyright>Copyright 2008</copyright>
<pubDate>Tue, 25 Sep 2007 10:43:30 -0800</pubDate>
<lastBuildDate>Tue, 25 Sep 2007 15:21:56 -0800</lastBuildDate>
<generator>http://www.movabletype.org/?v=3.34</generator>
<docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs> 

<item>
<title>Comment by RonK, Seattle</title>
<description><![CDATA[<p>passionate though they may be, these figures are not known for doing things that make sense.</p>

<p>Richardson is an interesting case. In a blogger breakfast here last year, he said "I don't know anything about blogs, but I have people who do".</p>

<p>Bloggers: "So, who are they?"</p>

<p>Richardson: "I don't know, but my staff does. Staff?"</p>

<p>Staff: "Um, we don't know ... but we'll find out."</p>

<p>Fun guy, but not a detail guy.</p>]]></description>
<author>RonK, Seattle</author>
<link>http://slog.thestranger.com/2007/09/bloggers_for_richardson_or_at_least_his#c810856</link>
<guid>http://slog.thestranger.com/2007/09/bloggers_for_richardson_or_at_least_his#c810856</guid>
<category>2008</category>
<pubDate>Tue, 25 Sep 2007 11:26:36 -0800</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by Randy</title>
<description><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.openleft.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=1536" rel="nofollow">Chris Bowers has (of course) blogged about his reasons.</a> Yes, he wants to drive the "no residual troops" option into the national policy debate.</p>]]></description>
<author>Randy</author>
<link>http://slog.thestranger.com/2007/09/bloggers_for_richardson_or_at_least_his#c810903</link>
<guid>http://slog.thestranger.com/2007/09/bloggers_for_richardson_or_at_least_his#c810903</guid>
<category>2008</category>
<pubDate>Tue, 25 Sep 2007 11:41:21 -0800</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by Cascadian</title>
<description><![CDATA[<p>This is a good ad campaign, making a very good point. Richardson, aside from Kucinich and Gravel, has the best position on Iraq. For other reasons, I'm not a big fan of his campaign, but he deserves credit on this. Hopefully, a sustained Richardson campaign that attacks the leading candidates on this issue will eventually bring those leading candidates around, so that the nominee will have the right position. Richardson himself isn't going to be the nominee.</p>]]></description>
<author>Cascadian</author>
<link>http://slog.thestranger.com/2007/09/bloggers_for_richardson_or_at_least_his#c811180</link>
<guid>http://slog.thestranger.com/2007/09/bloggers_for_richardson_or_at_least_his#c811180</guid>
<category>2008</category>
<pubDate>Tue, 25 Sep 2007 13:24:06 -0800</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by Emmett O&apos;Connell</title>
<description><![CDATA[<p>I think its way to early to say that Richardson is going nowhere, <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EK6l2dOgJb0" rel="nofollow">especially when you look</a> closer at polls in the early primary states.</p>]]></description>
<author>Emmett O&apos;Connell</author>
<link>http://slog.thestranger.com/2007/09/bloggers_for_richardson_or_at_least_his#c811432</link>
<guid>http://slog.thestranger.com/2007/09/bloggers_for_richardson_or_at_least_his#c811432</guid>
<category>2008</category>
<pubDate>Tue, 25 Sep 2007 15:21:56 -0800</pubDate>
</item>


</channel>
</rss>