<?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: How much faith is too much?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://whall.org/blog/2008/11/06/how-much-faith-is-too-much/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://whall.org/blog/2008/11/06/how-much-faith-is-too-much/</link>
	<description>Come on in and stay a while... laugh a little.  Maybe even think.</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 08 Jan 2009 21:49:12 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Amanda</title>
		<link>http://whall.org/blog/2008/11/06/how-much-faith-is-too-much/comment-page-1/#comment-46278</link>
		<dc:creator>Amanda</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Nov 2008 19:40:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://whall.org/blog/?p=2290#comment-46278</guid>
		<description>cissa- The phrase separation of church and state is not actually in the constitution however I believe in it for the protection of religion. This being said, the founders who wrote the constitution still participated in christian practices involving the government. One example would be the 1749 plan of education that was used to teach christianity in public schools. I believe the in God we trust is simply a historical part of our culture and therefore not a form of violation against the amendment.

&lt;abbr&gt;&lt;em&gt;Amanda&#180;s last blog post..&lt;a href="http://bloggingforfaith.blogspot.com/2008/11/theory-of-evolution.html" rel="nofollow"&gt;The theory of evolution&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/abbr&gt;&lt;/em&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>cissa- The phrase separation of church and state is not actually in the constitution however I believe in it for the protection of religion. This being said, the founders who wrote the constitution still participated in christian practices involving the government. One example would be the 1749 plan of education that was used to teach christianity in public schools. I believe the in God we trust is simply a historical part of our culture and therefore not a form of violation against the amendment.</p>
<p><abbr><em>Amanda&#180;s last blog post..<a href="http://bloggingforfaith.blogspot.com/2008/11/theory-of-evolution.html" rel="nofollow">The theory of evolution</a></em></abbr></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Amanda</title>
		<link>http://whall.org/blog/2008/11/06/how-much-faith-is-too-much/comment-page-1/#comment-46277</link>
		<dc:creator>Amanda</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Nov 2008 19:36:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://whall.org/blog/?p=2290#comment-46277</guid>
		<description>Awesome post!

Avi- Anything with guns like he wants to do is against our constitutional rights therefore it isn't too far off to think he would do anything else beyond the checks and balances...not to mention the checks and balances for this term are all liberal. Where's the balance? Confiscation of guns is probably the biggest slap in the face to the constitution. 

ajooja- I am sorry to say but clinton era tax cuts were actually harmful. http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/2006-02-20-debate-oppose_x.htm
http://www.house.gov/jec/fiscal/tx-grwth/reagtxct/reagtxct.htm

&lt;abbr&gt;&lt;em&gt;Amanda&#180;s last blog post..&lt;a href="http://bloggingforfaith.blogspot.com/2008/11/theory-of-evolution.html" rel="nofollow"&gt;The theory of evolution&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/abbr&gt;&lt;/em&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Awesome post!</p>
<p>Avi- Anything with guns like he wants to do is against our constitutional rights therefore it isn&#8217;t too far off to think he would do anything else beyond the checks and balances&#8230;not to mention the checks and balances for this term are all liberal. Where&#8217;s the balance? Confiscation of guns is probably the biggest slap in the face to the constitution. </p>
<p>ajooja- I am sorry to say but clinton era tax cuts were actually harmful. <a href="http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/2006-02-20-debate-oppose_x.htm" rel="nofollow">http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/2006-02-20-debate-oppose_x.htm</a><br />
<a href="http://www.house.gov/jec/fiscal/tx-grwth/reagtxct/reagtxct.htm" rel="nofollow">http://www.house.gov/jec/fiscal/tx-grwth/reagtxct/reagtxct.htm</a></p>
<p><abbr><em>Amanda&#180;s last blog post..<a href="http://bloggingforfaith.blogspot.com/2008/11/theory-of-evolution.html" rel="nofollow">The theory of evolution</a></em></abbr></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: whall</title>
		<link>http://whall.org/blog/2008/11/06/how-much-faith-is-too-much/comment-page-1/#comment-46270</link>
		<dc:creator>whall</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Nov 2008 16:31:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://whall.org/blog/?p=2290#comment-46270</guid>
		<description>&lt;a href="http://eclectichuman.blogspot.com/" rel="nofollow"&gt;&lt;b&gt;marilyn&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/a&gt;, I see your point, but my point was only to wonder if people would react if he did it.  And I think I've rectified the LOLcats shortage since this comment.

&lt;a href="http://www.snackiepoo.com/" rel="nofollow"&gt;&lt;b&gt;Hilly&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/a&gt;, actually, I'd welcome it.

&lt;a href="http://www.banalleakage.com/" rel="nofollow"&gt;&lt;b&gt;martymankins&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/a&gt;, red herring or not, I still want to know - if Obama (or any President for that matter) did [x] item, would you throw up your arms and say "WHY?!?!?!"  To me, your label of red herring means you inherently check the box.

&lt;a href="http://sybillaw-sybilcrankypants.blogspot.com/" rel="nofollow"&gt;&lt;b&gt;Sybil Law&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/a&gt;, I'd get sick of that stereotype as well, so that's why I pose the question of whether someone is a syncophant or an informed decider.

&lt;a href="http://cissafireheart.com/" rel="nofollow"&gt;&lt;b&gt;Cissa Fireheart&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/a&gt;, Very good point, and yes, my list should be for any President, not just Obama.  But I'll be clear that any attempt to license and register a citizen's ability to defend him or herself frightens and angers me greatly.  Bolshevik revolution, anyone?

&lt;a href="http://renagerie.com/" rel="nofollow"&gt;&lt;b&gt;Ren&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/a&gt;, good points, I'll respond in kind.  Also I agree that most of the items could use re-wording to be more precise and fair.

Automatic granting... I should have said "State ID" and not Driver's license.

Reverse tax trend... yup

outlaw bible... yup

Confiscate 401K... ok, I admit I put that there to throw people off.  I happened to know that this is already being presented by Congress.  Congress is interested in &lt;a href="http://americanfuturefund.com/2008/11/06/dems-target-private-retirement-accounts/" rel="nofollow"&gt;TAKING YOUR 401(K) and putting it into social security&lt;/a&gt;.  This should frighten and anger you.  

I'm hoping people who checked that box remember they did so in a year or two when this might start happening.

end handgun sales... yup

Reparations... yup

outlaw free speech... probably requires more debate

UN forces... I shoulda been more specific

William Ayers... it's not about 40 years ago.  It's about 7 years ago.  He's unrepentent for his bombings and says he didn't do enough.  

expiration of tax cuts retroactive... granted

banning oil drilling... yup

martial law... yup

pledge of allegiance... ok

oath of transparency... the point wasn't about the purpose of the oath, the point was about him signing an oath during campaign and going back on it after election.  it's more than a campaign promise.

$3 trillian... it's not magic, just a big number.

remove "in god we trust"... ok

mandatory gun registration... ok.

&lt;a href="http://ablondeandherblog.blogspot.com/" rel="nofollow"&gt;&lt;b&gt;BlondeBlogger&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/a&gt;, heh, good one.

&lt;a href="http://www.cafeindependent.com/" rel="nofollow"&gt;&lt;b&gt;Matt&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/a&gt;, 
 and not only is it already happening in the way you describe, it's &lt;a href="http://americanfuturefund.com/2008/11/06/dems-target-private-retirement-accounts" rel="nofollow"&gt;already happening&lt;a&gt;.

&lt;b&gt;john&lt;/b&gt;, good points, all.  I should have made the poll more open to that point of view.

&lt;a href="http://inaholdingpattern.blogspot.com/" rel="nofollow"&gt;&lt;b&gt;dmarks&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/a&gt;, hmm, I think it was needed to slowly get a stupid population to go along with the idea.  But it should have been removed already.

&lt;a href="http://ajooja.blogspot.com/" rel="nofollow"&gt;&lt;b&gt;ajooja&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/a&gt;, I think I did remove myself by congratulating him, respecting the office, and recognizing the historic event.  Then I proposed how he could win over a lot of republicans and independents.  I don't see why it's so difficult to expect the President (any President, not just Obama) to agree to each of these items without having to discuss them further.  They should ALL seem ludicrous and non-partisan.

Feel free to add any for Bush, McCain, etc.

&lt;b&gt;Sheila&lt;/b&gt;, thanx for the comment - long time no type!

&lt;a href="http://www.charm-school-reject.blogspot.com/" rel="nofollow"&gt;&lt;b&gt;Sheila Charm School Reject)&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/a&gt;, yup - the Bush, McCain, Cheney, Palin bashing on the Internet far outweighs ANY Obama/Biden bashing.  Far exceeds.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://eclectichuman.blogspot.com/" rel="nofollow"><b>marilyn</b></a>, I see your point, but my point was only to wonder if people would react if he did it.  And I think I&#8217;ve rectified the LOLcats shortage since this comment.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.snackiepoo.com/" rel="nofollow"><b>Hilly</b></a>, actually, I&#8217;d welcome it.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.banalleakage.com/" rel="nofollow"><b>martymankins</b></a>, red herring or not, I still want to know - if Obama (or any President for that matter) did [x] item, would you throw up your arms and say &#8220;WHY?!?!?!&#8221;  To me, your label of red herring means you inherently check the box.</p>
<p><a href="http://sybillaw-sybilcrankypants.blogspot.com/" rel="nofollow"><b>Sybil Law</b></a>, I&#8217;d get sick of that stereotype as well, so that&#8217;s why I pose the question of whether someone is a syncophant or an informed decider.</p>
<p><a href="http://cissafireheart.com/" rel="nofollow"><b>Cissa Fireheart</b></a>, Very good point, and yes, my list should be for any President, not just Obama.  But I&#8217;ll be clear that any attempt to license and register a citizen&#8217;s ability to defend him or herself frightens and angers me greatly.  Bolshevik revolution, anyone?</p>
<p><a href="http://renagerie.com/" rel="nofollow"><b>Ren</b></a>, good points, I&#8217;ll respond in kind.  Also I agree that most of the items could use re-wording to be more precise and fair.</p>
<p>Automatic granting&#8230; I should have said &#8220;State ID&#8221; and not Driver&#8217;s license.</p>
<p>Reverse tax trend&#8230; yup</p>
<p>outlaw bible&#8230; yup</p>
<p>Confiscate 401K&#8230; ok, I admit I put that there to throw people off.  I happened to know that this is already being presented by Congress.  Congress is interested in <a href="http://americanfuturefund.com/2008/11/06/dems-target-private-retirement-accounts/" rel="nofollow">TAKING YOUR 401(K) and putting it into social security</a>.  This should frighten and anger you.  </p>
<p>I&#8217;m hoping people who checked that box remember they did so in a year or two when this might start happening.</p>
<p>end handgun sales&#8230; yup</p>
<p>Reparations&#8230; yup</p>
<p>outlaw free speech&#8230; probably requires more debate</p>
<p>UN forces&#8230; I shoulda been more specific</p>
<p>William Ayers&#8230; it&#8217;s not about 40 years ago.  It&#8217;s about 7 years ago.  He&#8217;s unrepentent for his bombings and says he didn&#8217;t do enough.  </p>
<p>expiration of tax cuts retroactive&#8230; granted</p>
<p>banning oil drilling&#8230; yup</p>
<p>martial law&#8230; yup</p>
<p>pledge of allegiance&#8230; ok</p>
<p>oath of transparency&#8230; the point wasn&#8217;t about the purpose of the oath, the point was about him signing an oath during campaign and going back on it after election.  it&#8217;s more than a campaign promise.</p>
<p>$3 trillian&#8230; it&#8217;s not magic, just a big number.</p>
<p>remove &#8220;in god we trust&#8221;&#8230; ok</p>
<p>mandatory gun registration&#8230; ok.</p>
<p><a href="http://ablondeandherblog.blogspot.com/" rel="nofollow"><b>BlondeBlogger</b></a>, heh, good one.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.cafeindependent.com/" rel="nofollow"><b>Matt</b></a>,<br />
 and not only is it already happening in the way you describe, it&#8217;s <a href="http://americanfuturefund.com/2008/11/06/dems-target-private-retirement-accounts" rel="nofollow">already happening</a><a>.</p>
<p><b>john</b>, good points, all.  I should have made the poll more open to that point of view.</p>
<p></a><a href="http://inaholdingpattern.blogspot.com/" rel="nofollow"><b>dmarks</b></a>, hmm, I think it was needed to slowly get a stupid population to go along with the idea.  But it should have been removed already.</p>
<p><a href="http://ajooja.blogspot.com/" rel="nofollow"><b>ajooja</b></a>, I think I did remove myself by congratulating him, respecting the office, and recognizing the historic event.  Then I proposed how he could win over a lot of republicans and independents.  I don&#8217;t see why it&#8217;s so difficult to expect the President (any President, not just Obama) to agree to each of these items without having to discuss them further.  They should ALL seem ludicrous and non-partisan.</p>
<p>Feel free to add any for Bush, McCain, etc.</p>
<p><b>Sheila</b>, thanx for the comment - long time no type!</p>
<p><a href="http://www.charm-school-reject.blogspot.com/" rel="nofollow"><b>Sheila Charm School Reject)</b></a>, yup - the Bush, McCain, Cheney, Palin bashing on the Internet far outweighs ANY Obama/Biden bashing.  Far exceeds.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sheila (Charm School Reject)</title>
		<link>http://whall.org/blog/2008/11/06/how-much-faith-is-too-much/comment-page-1/#comment-46257</link>
		<dc:creator>Sheila (Charm School Reject)</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Nov 2008 21:36:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://whall.org/blog/?p=2290#comment-46257</guid>
		<description>(Whall - sorry for adding a response at such a late date but I never saw in my updates that Hilly responded to my apology.)

Hilly - Believe me, I've read more McCain bash posts than I'd ever have liked and laughed at the same Sarah Palin jokes that you did.  I'm sure that, had McCain won, I would've read many, many  posts such as this regarding him.

&lt;abbr&gt;&lt;em&gt;Sheila (Charm School Reject)&#180;s last blog post..&lt;a href="http://charm-school-reject.blogspot.com/2008/11/okay-today-we-do-sappy.html" rel="nofollow"&gt;Okay - TODAY We Do Sappy&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/abbr&gt;&lt;/em&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>(Whall - sorry for adding a response at such a late date but I never saw in my updates that Hilly responded to my apology.)</p>
<p>Hilly - Believe me, I&#8217;ve read more McCain bash posts than I&#8217;d ever have liked and laughed at the same Sarah Palin jokes that you did.  I&#8217;m sure that, had McCain won, I would&#8217;ve read many, many  posts such as this regarding him.</p>
<p><abbr><em>Sheila (Charm School Reject)&#180;s last blog post..<a href="http://charm-school-reject.blogspot.com/2008/11/okay-today-we-do-sappy.html" rel="nofollow">Okay - TODAY We Do Sappy</a></em></abbr></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sheila</title>
		<link>http://whall.org/blog/2008/11/06/how-much-faith-is-too-much/comment-page-1/#comment-46227</link>
		<dc:creator>Sheila</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 11 Nov 2008 05:27:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://whall.org/blog/?p=2290#comment-46227</guid>
		<description>I wouldn't approve of him banning the Bible, nor would I want him to support keeping "In God we Trust" on our money or in our pledge. As our forefathers understood, the separation of church and state is vital for everyone's religious freedom.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I wouldn&#8217;t approve of him banning the Bible, nor would I want him to support keeping &#8220;In God we Trust&#8221; on our money or in our pledge. As our forefathers understood, the separation of church and state is vital for everyone&#8217;s religious freedom.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ajooja</title>
		<link>http://whall.org/blog/2008/11/06/how-much-faith-is-too-much/comment-page-1/#comment-46194</link>
		<dc:creator>ajooja</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 08 Nov 2008 21:40:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://whall.org/blog/?p=2290#comment-46194</guid>
		<description>I'll take your word that you are not a "fear-mongering hate-spewing conspiracy-theorist Republican" but the letter you wrote to our new president didn't set yourself apart from those people.

I was more "upset" about the letter than the post. I understood your point of the post and the poll. (I voted for "steal your 401k," BTW.)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ll take your word that you are not a &#8220;fear-mongering hate-spewing conspiracy-theorist Republican&#8221; but the letter you wrote to our new president didn&#8217;t set yourself apart from those people.</p>
<p>I was more &#8220;upset&#8221; about the letter than the post. I understood your point of the post and the poll. (I voted for &#8220;steal your 401k,&#8221; BTW.)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: dmarks</title>
		<link>http://whall.org/blog/2008/11/06/how-much-faith-is-too-much/comment-page-1/#comment-46187</link>
		<dc:creator>dmarks</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 07 Nov 2008 19:53:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://whall.org/blog/?p=2290#comment-46187</guid>
		<description>"Affirmative Action is but a bandaid"
It is not a band-aid. It is another wound. No good can come from further rewarding and punishing people based on their skin color, rather than merit or anything the person has done.

&lt;abbr&gt;&lt;em&gt;dmarks&#180;s last blog post..&lt;a href="http://inaholdingpattern.blogspot.com/2008/11/overreacting-to-election.html" rel="nofollow"&gt;Overreacting to the Election&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/abbr&gt;&lt;/em&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Affirmative Action is but a bandaid&#8221;<br />
It is not a band-aid. It is another wound. No good can come from further rewarding and punishing people based on their skin color, rather than merit or anything the person has done.</p>
<p><abbr><em>dmarks&#180;s last blog post..<a href="http://inaholdingpattern.blogspot.com/2008/11/overreacting-to-election.html" rel="nofollow">Overreacting to the Election</a></em></abbr></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: john</title>
		<link>http://whall.org/blog/2008/11/06/how-much-faith-is-too-much/comment-page-1/#comment-46186</link>
		<dc:creator>john</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 07 Nov 2008 13:38:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://whall.org/blog/?p=2290#comment-46186</guid>
		<description>First I see one thing wrong with your survey - it assumes you support Obama - where's that choice... I've already lost any sense of hope in the guy.

Personally I've thought about every single item on that list.  For those who seem to think that we have a system of checks and balances - well sort of.  We used to have one.  We also used to have a constitution that our presidents swore to uphold - Obama doesn't know have of it.

We used to have an electoral college that picks the president - now since the electoral college just votes the way of the popular vote - they really aren't needed any more.  It was never intended for the common voting population to pick the president.  They picked their congress and senators.  Then the electoral college would pick the president based on facts, not fancy speeches and bribes.

As for taxes - when he allows the tax cuts set to expire in 2010 and not keep them in place - almost every wage earning family who pays taxes will pay more.  This of course will not affect those who already don't pay any tax.  Obama has even confused the senators who support him - a recent interview showed that one couldn't tell the difference between capital gains tax and income tax - when the senator was trying to say that Obama would have lower taxes than when Reagan was in office.

As for * Remove “In God We Trust” from money

I don't think he can... The United States Government doesn't own the money supply - the Federal Reserve System is a privately owned banking system.  The Government does do some oversight by appointing the Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board  - however they do not own the USD currency.  So remember the banks can put whatever they want on the money - its their debt notes.

* Appointing William Ayers to *any* Gov’t position

If appointing domestic terrorists who say that they wish they bombed more buildings than they did is ok... then I'm not sure whats wrong.

* Confiscate individual’s 401(K) and IRA’s to fund Social Security

This is sort of already being done with taxes and what isn't done with tax - is done through a hidden tax called inflation.  When you add more money to the circulation to make up the budget shortfall - the value of the existing money supply (i.e. all your savings, etc) goes down.  This is how wars and other large government spending projects have always been paid for.  A small portion comes from taxes and the rest comes from inflation.  

This is enough rant for me for today....</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>First I see one thing wrong with your survey - it assumes you support Obama - where&#8217;s that choice&#8230; I&#8217;ve already lost any sense of hope in the guy.</p>
<p>Personally I&#8217;ve thought about every single item on that list.  For those who seem to think that we have a system of checks and balances - well sort of.  We used to have one.  We also used to have a constitution that our presidents swore to uphold - Obama doesn&#8217;t know have of it.</p>
<p>We used to have an electoral college that picks the president - now since the electoral college just votes the way of the popular vote - they really aren&#8217;t needed any more.  It was never intended for the common voting population to pick the president.  They picked their congress and senators.  Then the electoral college would pick the president based on facts, not fancy speeches and bribes.</p>
<p>As for taxes - when he allows the tax cuts set to expire in 2010 and not keep them in place - almost every wage earning family who pays taxes will pay more.  This of course will not affect those who already don&#8217;t pay any tax.  Obama has even confused the senators who support him - a recent interview showed that one couldn&#8217;t tell the difference between capital gains tax and income tax - when the senator was trying to say that Obama would have lower taxes than when Reagan was in office.</p>
<p>As for * Remove “In God We Trust” from money</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t think he can&#8230; The United States Government doesn&#8217;t own the money supply - the Federal Reserve System is a privately owned banking system.  The Government does do some oversight by appointing the Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board  - however they do not own the USD currency.  So remember the banks can put whatever they want on the money - its their debt notes.</p>
<p>* Appointing William Ayers to *any* Gov’t position</p>
<p>If appointing domestic terrorists who say that they wish they bombed more buildings than they did is ok&#8230; then I&#8217;m not sure whats wrong.</p>
<p>* Confiscate individual’s 401(K) and IRA’s to fund Social Security</p>
<p>This is sort of already being done with taxes and what isn&#8217;t done with tax - is done through a hidden tax called inflation.  When you add more money to the circulation to make up the budget shortfall - the value of the existing money supply (i.e. all your savings, etc) goes down.  This is how wars and other large government spending projects have always been paid for.  A small portion comes from taxes and the rest comes from inflation.  </p>
<p>This is enough rant for me for today&#8230;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Matt (Cafe Independent)</title>
		<link>http://whall.org/blog/2008/11/06/how-much-faith-is-too-much/comment-page-1/#comment-46185</link>
		<dc:creator>Matt (Cafe Independent)</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 07 Nov 2008 02:32:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://whall.org/blog/?p=2290#comment-46185</guid>
		<description>"Confiscate individual's 401(K) and IRA's to fund Social Security"
The government already confiscates my income, and my social security tax already is diverted to uses other than social security. So "no", if Obama were to do this he would not lose favor in my eyes. I already expect this will happen.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Confiscate individual&#8217;s 401(K) and IRA&#8217;s to fund Social Security&#8221;<br />
The government already confiscates my income, and my social security tax already is diverted to uses other than social security. So &#8220;no&#8221;, if Obama were to do this he would not lose favor in my eyes. I already expect this will happen.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: BlondeBlogger</title>
		<link>http://whall.org/blog/2008/11/06/how-much-faith-is-too-much/comment-page-1/#comment-46183</link>
		<dc:creator>BlondeBlogger</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 07 Nov 2008 00:57:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://whall.org/blog/?p=2290#comment-46183</guid>
		<description>Nope...still won't let me because now I've already voted. Is there an ACORN rep here who can help me out?

&lt;abbr&gt;&lt;em&gt;BlondeBlogger&#180;s last blog post..&lt;a href="http://ablondeandherblog.blogspot.com/2008/11/totally-80s.html" rel="nofollow"&gt;Totally 80's&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/abbr&gt;&lt;/em&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nope&#8230;still won&#8217;t let me because now I&#8217;ve already voted. Is there an ACORN rep here who can help me out?</p>
<p><abbr><em>BlondeBlogger&#180;s last blog post..<a href="http://ablondeandherblog.blogspot.com/2008/11/totally-80s.html" rel="nofollow">Totally 80&#8217;s</a></em></abbr></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
