<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	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/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Quiglag.com &#187; Politics</title>
	<atom:link href="http://quiglag.com/category/politics/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://quiglag.com</link>
	<description>Thoughts, Photos, Things, and Stuff...    Quick Like.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 13 Oct 2011 06:44:20 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Auto bail out?</title>
		<link>http://quiglag.com/2008/11/17/auto-bail-out</link>
		<comments>http://quiglag.com/2008/11/17/auto-bail-out#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 17 Nov 2008 22:55:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Quiglag</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bail out]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UAW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[unions]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://quiglag.com/?p=288</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[If you look at my past blogs about unions, you probably know how I feel about the thought of an auto industry bail out. Just the fact that they say if they file for chapter 11 they would be able to restructure, and renegotiate union contracts, is all the info I need. This is coming [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If you look at my past blogs about unions, you probably know how I feel about the thought of an auto industry bail out. Just the fact that they say if they file for chapter 11 they would be able to restructure, and renegotiate union contracts, is all the info I need. This is coming from a person that only buys Ford products.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://quiglag.com/2008/11/17/auto-bail-out/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Can Obama run the whole country, he cant even manage his website.</title>
		<link>http://quiglag.com/2008/06/10/can-obama-run-the-whole-country-he-cant-even-manage-his-website</link>
		<comments>http://quiglag.com/2008/06/10/can-obama-run-the-whole-country-he-cant-even-manage-his-website#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Jun 2008 19:47:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Quiglag</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://quiglag.com/2008/06/10/can-obama-run-the-whole-country-he-cant-even-manage-his-website</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Keep in mind that I have not posted in a long time, but this I had to get out. He can&#8217;t even control the little things. His own website is full of security holes, as well has hate speech. First the security holes. A while back it was noted on LGF that the BO website [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Keep in mind that I have not posted in a long time, but this I had to get out. He can&#8217;t even control the little things. His own website is full of security holes, as well has hate speech.</p>
<p>First the security holes.</p>
<p>A while back it was noted on LGF that the BO website was full of open directories. Now everyone knows that open directories are bad. While a person can not modify the files, they can view the files, and potentially find a why to hack into the network. He wants to run the most powerful country in the world, and keep us safe and secure. Yet he can&#8217;t even keep his on website secure. Now, I am sure that he himself is not the one that is managing the entire website, but it is his job, to make sure the person in charge, is doing their job. NOW BO is looking for a <a href="http://my.barackobama.com/page/s/sectechinterest">security expert</a>. A little late?</p>
<p>Now on to the hate.</p>
<p>The hate does not come directly from Obama himself, but is does come from his website. I would think that he would want everything on his website to reflect his views, but I guess I am wrong. BO has a My Obama section to his website. This is a place where ordinary people can set up their own blog, and write about politics and why BO is the the greatest man to ever live. Does this sound like a good idea or a bad idea to you? A good idea if you are MySpace, but a bad idea if you want to become president. As it turns out, non of the blogs are moderated, and neither are any of the groups. So what happens? Well, <a href="http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/29347_New_Black_Panther_Party_on_Obama_Site_-_Approved_by_Campaign">the new black panther party joins up</a>.</p>
<p>Just more lack of leadership skills as far as I can tell.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://quiglag.com/2008/06/10/can-obama-run-the-whole-country-he-cant-even-manage-his-website/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Ron Paul wasn&#8217;t excluded from Fox debate</title>
		<link>http://quiglag.com/2007/12/30/ron-paul-wasnt-excluded-from-fox-debate</link>
		<comments>http://quiglag.com/2007/12/30/ron-paul-wasnt-excluded-from-fox-debate#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 30 Dec 2007 22:49:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Quiglag</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S.]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://quiglag.com/2007/12/30/ron-paul-wasnt-excluded-from-fox-debate/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In fact, there was no debate. See how news on the Internet spreads like a wildfire; even wrong news. It turns out the debate set for January 6 was canceled three weeks ago. But the Ron Paul fan boys seem to have slow brains. They are still seeking out their revenge for Fox not excluding [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.nolanchart.com/article797.html">In fact, there was no debate.</a> See how news on the Internet spreads like a wildfire; even wrong news. It turns out the debate set for January 6 was canceled three weeks ago. But the Ron Paul fan boys seem to have slow brains. They are still <a href="http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=28441&amp;only&amp;rss">seeking out their revenge</a> for Fox <em>not</em> excluding Ron Paul from a debate that was never going to happen in the first place.</p>
<p>See »<a href="http://quiglag.com/2007/12/29/fox-debate-excludes-ron-paul/" rel="bookmark" title="Fox debate excludes Ron Paul?">Fox debate excludes Ron Paul?</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://quiglag.com/2007/12/30/ron-paul-wasnt-excluded-from-fox-debate/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Fox debate excludes Ron Paul?</title>
		<link>http://quiglag.com/2007/12/29/fox-debate-excludes-ron-paul</link>
		<comments>http://quiglag.com/2007/12/29/fox-debate-excludes-ron-paul#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 29 Dec 2007 21:14:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Quiglag</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[debate]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GOP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Paul]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ron]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ron Paul]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://quiglag.com/2007/12/29/fox-debate-excludes-ron-paul/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A new report says that Fox News has excluded Ron Paul from the next Republican debate. Not really a big surprise here, seeing that his poll numbers are substantially lower then his competition. But that doesn&#8217;t stop the outcry from loyal Ron Paul supporters. The Ron Paul campaign points to the recent success from their [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A new report says that Fox News has <a href="http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/071228/20071228005378.html?.v=1">excluded Ron Paul </a>from the next Republican debate. Not really a big surprise here, seeing that his poll numbers are substantially  lower then his competition. But that doesn&#8217;t stop the outcry from loyal Ron Paul supporters. The Ron Paul campaign points to the recent success from their historic fundraiser as to why they should still be included.</p>
<p>Via &#8211; <a href="http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=28434_Fox_Bails_on_Kook#comments">little green footballs</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://quiglag.com/2007/12/29/fox-debate-excludes-ron-paul/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>RIP incandescent light bulb.</title>
		<link>http://quiglag.com/2007/12/28/rip-incandescent-light-bulb</link>
		<comments>http://quiglag.com/2007/12/28/rip-incandescent-light-bulb#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 Dec 2007 20:07:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Quiglag</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Global Warming]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Gore]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://quiglag.com/2007/12/28/rip-incandescent-light-bulb/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A few days ago Congress and the President passed into law a new energy bill. Inside this new energy bill is a provision to kill off the incandescent light bulb within the next 4 to 12 years. Its very sad news. They want to replace our 100 watt friend with ugly twisty CFL bulbs that [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A few days ago Congress and the President passed into law a new energy bill. Inside this new energy bill is a provision to kill off the incandescent light bulb within the next 4 to 12 years. Its very sad news. They want to replace our 100 watt friend with ugly twisty CFL bulbs that are supposed to be better for the environment. Too bad for us, each one of those Polar Bear saving bulbs, have poisonous Hg(mercury) in them. I guess its OK for people to pay the consequences, as long as the earth is safe.</p>
<blockquote><p>These feel-good <a href="http://hotair.com/archives/2007/05/06/dim-congress-drafts-rules-to-phase-out-incandescent-bulbs/">dim bulbs</a> give you <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/29/AR2007042901500.html?hpid=smartliving">crappy </a> lighting, <a href="http://www.independent.ie/opinion/letters/future-not-bright-for-green-bulbs-1249748.html">don’t live up</a> to their longevity promises, and are a <a href="http://www.punny.org/money/five-year-guaranteed-light-bulbs-how-can-i-lose/">pain in the neck</a> to <a href="http://www.qando.net/details.aspx?Entry=5962">dispose </a>of–but they sure make enviro-nitwits and Big Greenie water-carriers feel good about themselves.</p>
<p>What happened to keeping government out of our bedroom? And our bathroom? And our utility closets?</p>
<p>The Gore-ing of America continues…  <strong>Via-</strong> <a href="http://michellemalkin.com/2007/12/19/incandescent-stupidity-washington-outlaws-100-watt-lightbulbs/">MichelleMalkin</a></p></blockquote>
<p>Too bad for me I live in California, and will probably be one of the first to have to pay for this.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://quiglag.com/2007/12/28/rip-incandescent-light-bulb/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

