<?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: Harper&#8217;s Index. Bush-era recap</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.willisbros.net/blog/2009/01/20/harpers-index-bush-era-recap/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.willisbros.net/blog/2009/01/20/harpers-index-bush-era-recap/</link>
	<description>The WBB is a group blog written by the Willis brothers and their friends.</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 10 Sep 2010 13:36:54 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7.1</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: hemp</title>
		<link>http://www.willisbros.net/blog/2009/01/20/harpers-index-bush-era-recap/comment-page-1/#comment-256513</link>
		<dc:creator>hemp</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Jan 2009 02:21:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.willisbros.net/blog/2009/01/20/harpers-index-bush-era-recap/#comment-256513</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;how are any of these numbers or statistics (assuming generously that they are just that) relevant unless they are given in some context to some standard?&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;for example:"portion of all U.S. income gains during the Bush Administration that have gone to the top 1 percent of earners: 3/4"&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;what was the percentage during clinton? bush? reagan? carter? 
what was the average during the first four year? last four years? how much did the top 1% see in tax increases during the same measured periods versus the bottom 99%? 
how does harpers justify publishing this one sided crap? it serves no purpose.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;if we want to data mine for misleading sound bites about a person then by all means i want the job! i could find a wealth if them on the clintons alone! 
and obama....ohhh  bama!  he would make me rich!&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>how are any of these numbers or statistics (assuming generously that they are just that) relevant unless they are given in some context to some standard?</p>

<p>for example:&#8221;portion of all U.S. income gains during the Bush Administration that have gone to the top 1 percent of earners: 3/4&#8243;</p>

<p>what was the percentage during clinton? bush? reagan? carter? 
what was the average during the first four year? last four years? how much did the top 1% see in tax increases during the same measured periods versus the bottom 99%? 
how does harpers justify publishing this one sided crap? it serves no purpose.</p>

<p>if we want to data mine for misleading sound bites about a person then by all means i want the job! i could find a wealth if them on the clintons alone! 
and obama&#8230;.ohhh  bama!  he would make me rich!</p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: esch</title>
		<link>http://www.willisbros.net/blog/2009/01/20/harpers-index-bush-era-recap/comment-page-1/#comment-256140</link>
		<dc:creator>esch</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 Jan 2009 03:37:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.willisbros.net/blog/2009/01/20/harpers-index-bush-era-recap/#comment-256140</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;Minimum number of Bush appointees who have regulated industries they used to represent as lobbyists: 98&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Minimum number of Bush appointees who have regulated industries they used to represent as lobbyists: 98</p>]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
