<?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: Objectively Pro-Lynching</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.oliverwillis.com/2005/06/15/objectively-pro-lynching/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.oliverwillis.com/2005/06/15/objectively-pro-lynching/</link>
	<description>Like Kryptonite To Stupid</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Feb 2012 02:42:44 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.4</generator>
<xhtml:meta xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" name="robots" content="noindex" />
	<item>
		<title>By: hibiscusroto</title>
		<link>http://www.oliverwillis.com/2005/06/15/objectively-pro-lynching/#comment-99</link>
		<dc:creator>hibiscusroto</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 19 Jun 2005 21:06:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://improveman.com/ow2008/?p=32#comment-99</guid>
		<description>Adding a link to your comment must be &quot;a tad complicated&quot; as well.  Perhaps you should issue an apology.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Adding a link to your comment must be &#8220;a tad complicated&#8221; as well.  Perhaps you should issue an apology.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: NoSeasPendejo</title>
		<link>http://www.oliverwillis.com/2005/06/15/objectively-pro-lynching/#comment-98</link>
		<dc:creator>NoSeasPendejo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Jun 2005 23:06:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://improveman.com/ow2008/?p=32#comment-98</guid>
		<description>The issue is a tad more complicated.

Read &lt;a&gt;this&lt;/a&gt;, but be warned, it´s dense.

The point, in brief?  Congress doesn´t have any right to make an apology.  It wasn´t Congress´ fault; it was the fault of the Supreme Court, and the Supreme Court has issued no apology.

I´ve no idea what the individual reasons for not signing the bill were...for all I know, every non-signer could have been KKK at one point.  But for a guy like Oliver, who makes a living being smart, signing this bill shouldn´t be, as he put it, &quot;a knee-jerk vote.&quot;  The truth is more complicated.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The issue is a tad more complicated.</p>
<p>Read <a>this</a>, but be warned, it´s dense.</p>
<p>The point, in brief?  Congress doesn´t have any right to make an apology.  It wasn´t Congress´ fault; it was the fault of the Supreme Court, and the Supreme Court has issued no apology.</p>
<p>I´ve no idea what the individual reasons for not signing the bill were&#8230;for all I know, every non-signer could have been KKK at one point.  But for a guy like Oliver, who makes a living being smart, signing this bill shouldn´t be, as he put it, &#8220;a knee-jerk vote.&#8221;  The truth is more complicated.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: noidea</title>
		<link>http://www.oliverwillis.com/2005/06/15/objectively-pro-lynching/#comment-97</link>
		<dc:creator>noidea</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Jun 2005 16:06:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://improveman.com/ow2008/?p=32#comment-97</guid>
		<description>And don&#039;t forget we&#039;re talking about southerners here - even people from North Carolina, South Carolina, Louisiana, Virginia, Kentucky and Georgia - despite both senators from those states co-sponsoring the bill.

&#039;Southerner&#039; is a big, scary word, I guess - adds a lot more punch to the post, even if it doesn&#039;t serve reality well.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>And don&#8217;t forget we&#8217;re talking about southerners here &#8211; even people from North Carolina, South Carolina, Louisiana, Virginia, Kentucky and Georgia &#8211; despite both senators from those states co-sponsoring the bill.</p>
<p>&#8216;Southerner&#8217; is a big, scary word, I guess &#8211; adds a lot more punch to the post, even if it doesn&#8217;t serve reality well.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: neoconsrloopy</title>
		<link>http://www.oliverwillis.com/2005/06/15/objectively-pro-lynching/#comment-96</link>
		<dc:creator>neoconsrloopy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Jun 2005 11:06:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://improveman.com/ow2008/?p=32#comment-96</guid>
		<description>Again, I ask, what non-racist reasons could there be?
Ken Conrad and Reed added their names to the resolution, by the way.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Again, I ask, what non-racist reasons could there be?<br />
Ken Conrad and Reed added their names to the resolution, by the way.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jay C</title>
		<link>http://www.oliverwillis.com/2005/06/15/objectively-pro-lynching/#comment-95</link>
		<dc:creator>Jay C</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Jun 2005 04:06:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://improveman.com/ow2008/?p=32#comment-95</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt;What non-racist reasons could there be?&lt;/i&gt;

This is unreal. A person is now a racist if they didn&#039;t co-sponsor a resolution? This wasn&#039;t legislation. It&#039;s not a law. It&#039;s a piece of paper that says, &quot;Oh by the way, we&#039;re sorry that people in the past didn&#039;t pass anti-lynching legislation.&quot; Get a grip.

And Oliver, I didn&#039;t ask you whether or not they should be ashamed. I asked if you were going to say that Kent Conrad and Jack Reed are pro-lynching. They must be according to your logic and as such, why would you want Democrats who support lynchings part of the party that defeated the Nazis (snicker)?
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>What non-racist reasons could there be?</i></p>
<p>This is unreal. A person is now a racist if they didn&#8217;t co-sponsor a resolution? This wasn&#8217;t legislation. It&#8217;s not a law. It&#8217;s a piece of paper that says, &#8220;Oh by the way, we&#8217;re sorry that people in the past didn&#8217;t pass anti-lynching legislation.&#8221; Get a grip.</p>
<p>And Oliver, I didn&#8217;t ask you whether or not they should be ashamed. I asked if you were going to say that Kent Conrad and Jack Reed are pro-lynching. They must be according to your logic and as such, why would you want Democrats who support lynchings part of the party that defeated the Nazis (snicker)?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: TomY</title>
		<link>http://www.oliverwillis.com/2005/06/15/objectively-pro-lynching/#comment-94</link>
		<dc:creator>TomY</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Jun 2005 22:06:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://improveman.com/ow2008/?p=32#comment-94</guid>
		<description>They&#039;re scared of having to go back to their constituencies having voted against lynching. It&#039;s the simplest explanation for the whole thing, which ties up the content as well of the geographic origin of the Senators in a tidy little package. Ockham&#039;s razor and all.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>They&#8217;re scared of having to go back to their constituencies having voted against lynching. It&#8217;s the simplest explanation for the whole thing, which ties up the content as well of the geographic origin of the Senators in a tidy little package. Ockham&#8217;s razor and all.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: neoconsrloopy</title>
		<link>http://www.oliverwillis.com/2005/06/15/objectively-pro-lynching/#comment-93</link>
		<dc:creator>neoconsrloopy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Jun 2005 22:06:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://improveman.com/ow2008/?p=32#comment-93</guid>
		<description>What non-racist reasons could there be?  And if they are standing on some &quot;principle&quot;, then a. Why did &quot;Kitty Killer&quot; forbid a recorded vote and b. Why aren&#039;t the pro-lynching Senators rushing to the mike to condemn what those reasons are?
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What non-racist reasons could there be?  And if they are standing on some &#8220;principle&#8221;, then a. Why did &#8220;Kitty Killer&#8221; forbid a recorded vote and b. Why aren&#8217;t the pro-lynching Senators rushing to the mike to condemn what those reasons are?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jay C</title>
		<link>http://www.oliverwillis.com/2005/06/15/objectively-pro-lynching/#comment-92</link>
		<dc:creator>Jay C</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Jun 2005 19:06:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://improveman.com/ow2008/?p=32#comment-92</guid>
		<description>This is the stupidest thing I have ever read at your site. Because some Senators didn&#039;t sign on as co-sponsors, it makes them &quot;pro-lynching?&quot;

Does the same go for Kent Conrad, Jack Reed and Jeff Bingaman? All three are Democrats and were not co-sponsors of the legislation. Tell them to resign Oliver. I mean, you don&#039;t want Democrats who support lynching representing your party do you?

This kind of nonsense from people is getting ridiculous and it isn&#039;t just liberals. Conservatives pull this kind of crap as well. Some idiot will say something outrageous and people will say, &quot;If so and so doesn&#039;t condemn this, it means he supports it!&quot;

Enough already.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is the stupidest thing I have ever read at your site. Because some Senators didn&#8217;t sign on as co-sponsors, it makes them &#8220;pro-lynching?&#8221;</p>
<p>Does the same go for Kent Conrad, Jack Reed and Jeff Bingaman? All three are Democrats and were not co-sponsors of the legislation. Tell them to resign Oliver. I mean, you don&#8217;t want Democrats who support lynching representing your party do you?</p>
<p>This kind of nonsense from people is getting ridiculous and it isn&#8217;t just liberals. Conservatives pull this kind of crap as well. Some idiot will say something outrageous and people will say, &#8220;If so and so doesn&#8217;t condemn this, it means he supports it!&#8221;</p>
<p>Enough already.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: evergreen</title>
		<link>http://www.oliverwillis.com/2005/06/15/objectively-pro-lynching/#comment-91</link>
		<dc:creator>evergreen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Jun 2005 19:06:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://improveman.com/ow2008/?p=32#comment-91</guid>
		<description>I dont see any reason why those senators who didn&#039;t sign on wouldn&#039;t offer up an explanation as to why. If its no big deal then they should say so. Has anyone heard any reasons offered from the estranged 12? I haven&#039;t yet.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I dont see any reason why those senators who didn&#8217;t sign on wouldn&#8217;t offer up an explanation as to why. If its no big deal then they should say so. Has anyone heard any reasons offered from the estranged 12? I haven&#8217;t yet.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Oliver</title>
		<link>http://www.oliverwillis.com/2005/06/15/objectively-pro-lynching/#comment-90</link>
		<dc:creator>Oliver</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Jun 2005 19:06:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://improveman.com/ow2008/?p=32#comment-90</guid>
		<description>Actually, yes, those senators who didn&#039;t sign on - regardless of party - should be ashamed. This isn&#039;t simply condeming Rick Santorum calling Democrats nazis, this is a formal senate resolution that any senator should have no trouble being in favor of.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Actually, yes, those senators who didn&#8217;t sign on &#8211; regardless of party &#8211; should be ashamed. This isn&#8217;t simply condeming Rick Santorum calling Democrats nazis, this is a formal senate resolution that any senator should have no trouble being in favor of.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Frank_D</title>
		<link>http://www.oliverwillis.com/2005/06/15/objectively-pro-lynching/#comment-89</link>
		<dc:creator>Frank_D</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Jun 2005 19:06:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://improveman.com/ow2008/?p=32#comment-89</guid>
		<description>What I&#039;m hearing from you, Oliver, is that you have no idea why some people didn&#039;t go along.
The Washington Post has no idea, either...
I suspect that there was some other, non - racist reasons, why they did what they did.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What I&#8217;m hearing from you, Oliver, is that you have no idea why some people didn&#8217;t go along.<br />
The Washington Post has no idea, either&#8230;<br />
I suspect that there was some other, non &#8211; racist reasons, why they did what they did.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: amererr</title>
		<link>http://www.oliverwillis.com/2005/06/15/objectively-pro-lynching/#comment-88</link>
		<dc:creator>amererr</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Jun 2005 18:06:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://improveman.com/ow2008/?p=32#comment-88</guid>
		<description>at least you could have some debate on the &quot;America is Great&quot; bill. same cannot be said of lynching.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>at least you could have some debate on the &#8220;America is Great&#8221; bill. same cannot be said of lynching.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: TomY</title>
		<link>http://www.oliverwillis.com/2005/06/15/objectively-pro-lynching/#comment-87</link>
		<dc:creator>TomY</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Jun 2005 16:06:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://improveman.com/ow2008/?p=32#comment-87</guid>
		<description>Frank, lynching may not have been a Democratic or Republican issue, but it most certainly always has been a Southern conservative issue. Or do you think it was liberals who were murdering civil rights activists in Mississippi?
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Frank, lynching may not have been a Democratic or Republican issue, but it most certainly always has been a Southern conservative issue. Or do you think it was liberals who were murdering civil rights activists in Mississippi?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dugger</title>
		<link>http://www.oliverwillis.com/2005/06/15/objectively-pro-lynching/#comment-86</link>
		<dc:creator>Dugger</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Jun 2005 15:06:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://improveman.com/ow2008/?p=32#comment-86</guid>
		<description>Oliver, Shame on even you.

Dugger
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Oliver, Shame on even you.</p>
<p>Dugger</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Oliver</title>
		<link>http://www.oliverwillis.com/2005/06/15/objectively-pro-lynching/#comment-85</link>
		<dc:creator>Oliver</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Jun 2005 13:06:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://improveman.com/ow2008/?p=32#comment-85</guid>
		<description>All they had to do was sponsor simple legislation.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>All they had to do was sponsor simple legislation.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Frank_D</title>
		<link>http://www.oliverwillis.com/2005/06/15/objectively-pro-lynching/#comment-84</link>
		<dc:creator>Frank_D</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Jun 2005 13:06:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://improveman.com/ow2008/?p=32#comment-84</guid>
		<description>Now Republicans are pro - lynching...
Welcome back.
//sigh//
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Now Republicans are pro &#8211; lynching&#8230;<br />
Welcome back.<br />
//sigh//</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: neoconsrloopy</title>
		<link>http://www.oliverwillis.com/2005/06/15/objectively-pro-lynching/#comment-83</link>
		<dc:creator>neoconsrloopy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Jun 2005 11:06:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://improveman.com/ow2008/?p=32#comment-83</guid>
		<description>Can&#039;t offend their core constituency, can they?
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Can&#8217;t offend their core constituency, can they?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

