<?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/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Why Obama Wants Hillary at State</title>
	<atom:link href="http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2008/11/20/why-obama-wants-hillary-at-state/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2008/11/20/why-obama-wants-hillary-at-state/</link>
	<description>A blog about politics.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 14 Mar 2010 20:21:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: rose83</title>
		<link>http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2008/11/20/why-obama-wants-hillary-at-state/comment-page-2/#comment-22524</link>
		<dc:creator>rose83</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2008 17:03:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://timeswampland.wordpress.com/?p=8398#comment-22524</guid>
		<description>KT&#039;s right. This is a legitimate story.
--
Elvis, really?! She doesn&#039;t have a Ph.D in IR or a related subject, or any significant scholarly record. She has never worked at the state department, she has never served in the military or worked as a diplomat. She has no &quot;official&quot; foreign policy experience, except from her time in the Senate. She&#039;s not even on the Foreign Relations Committee. She is on the &quot;Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe,&quot; but that&#039;s a very weak qualification. 
--
If she hadn&#039;t been First Lady, this would be close to a Palin-style pick. (Although as I&#039;ve always said, I&#039;m sure if she hadn&#039;t been First Lady in the 90s she would have been a Senator, or a Governor, or something else equally impressive.) Here&#039;s the list of past Secretary of States: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Secretaries_of_State_of_the_United_States
If her time as First Lady doesn&#039;t count as foreign policy experience, their resumes are on a different stratosphere. 
--
BTW, my question wasn&#039;t whether you were reconsidering your choice from the primaries! I was just wondering what you thought about Obama basically rejecting two of his campaign&#039;s arguments against Clinton. I&#039;m impressed by the positive reactions of so many of his primary supporters here - on TPM and OpenLeft they are not handling this so well, which I completely understand. If Clinton had won, and she asked Obama to lead the health care reform effort, I&#039;d be a little upset.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>KT's right. This is a legitimate story.<br />
--<br />
Elvis, really?! She doesn't have a Ph.D in IR or a related subject, or any significant scholarly record. She has never worked at the state department, she has never served in the military or worked as a diplomat. She has no "official" foreign policy experience, except from her time in the Senate. She's not even on the Foreign Relations Committee. She is on the "Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe," but that's a very weak qualification.<br />
--<br />
If she hadn't been First Lady, this would be close to a Palin-style pick. (Although as I've always said, I'm sure if she hadn't been First Lady in the 90s she would have been a Senator, or a Governor, or something else equally impressive.) Here's the list of past Secretary of States: <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Secretaries_of_State_of_the_United_States" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Secretaries_of_State_of_the_United_States</a><br />
If her time as First Lady doesn't count as foreign policy experience, their resumes are on a different stratosphere.<br />
--<br />
BTW, my question wasn't whether you were reconsidering your choice from the primaries! I was just wondering what you thought about Obama basically rejecting two of his campaign's arguments against Clinton. I'm impressed by the positive reactions of so many of his primary supporters here - on TPM and OpenLeft they are not handling this so well, which I completely understand. If Clinton had won, and she asked Obama to lead the health care reform effort, I'd be a little upset.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: southernbell49</title>
		<link>http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2008/11/20/why-obama-wants-hillary-at-state/comment-page-2/#comment-22489</link>
		<dc:creator>southernbell49</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2008 16:20:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://timeswampland.wordpress.com/?p=8398#comment-22489</guid>
		<description>KT, I don&#039;t doubt Hillary is seriously being considered. My point is that the MSM is really hyping the &quot;drama&quot;, thus creating &quot;drama&quot; so they can comment on the &quot;drama&quot;.

I&#039;m probablyr reading too much into this but it&#039;s interesting Bill is stumping for Martin in GA but not Hillary, who was a real trooper for senatorial candidates this past election.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>KT, I don't doubt Hillary is seriously being considered. My point is that the MSM is really hyping the "drama", thus creating "drama" so they can comment on the "drama".</p>
<p>I'm probablyr reading too much into this but it's interesting Bill is stumping for Martin in GA but not Hillary, who was a real trooper for senatorial candidates this past election.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Paul-no not that one</title>
		<link>http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2008/11/20/why-obama-wants-hillary-at-state/comment-page-2/#comment-22480</link>
		<dc:creator>Paul-no not that one</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2008 16:13:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://timeswampland.wordpress.com/?p=8398#comment-22480</guid>
		<description>&quot;Do you need more examples? I really have other work to do.&quot;
.
I&#039;ve seen that before.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>"Do you need more examples? I really have other work to do."<br />
.<br />
I've seen that before.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jacuda1</title>
		<link>http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2008/11/20/why-obama-wants-hillary-at-state/comment-page-2/#comment-22459</link>
		<dc:creator>jacuda1</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2008 16:01:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://timeswampland.wordpress.com/?p=8398#comment-22459</guid>
		<description>Reasons why this pick doesn&#039;t make sense:


1. Even though John Mccain was demonized for the campaign he run, the whole script for the Mccain campaign was written by Hillary during the primaries.


2. Hillary doesn&#039;t agree with Obama&#039;s foregin policy stance on diplomacy with rogue nations.


3. Hill and Bill come with a lot baggage that will bring the Obama administration into negative light and continue to overshaddow the President himself.


4. The Obama-Clinton relationship will be under the microscope and heavy scutiny. Every disagreement will leak to the press who will then blow it out of proportion and stoke the fire of animosity/suspiciousness that already exists.


5. Does anyone remember &quot;shame on you Barack Obama!&quot; and sniper fire?


6. World leaders (especially russia and the middle east) will not be receptive to clinton due to her hawkish nature. Most people don&#039;t believe she has an open mind on most world issues.


7. Why in the world is Obama insisting on bombarding us with the obama-clinton drama? After two years of hearing Obama and clinton in the same breath, Obama should break free and be his own man.


8. Bill Richardson, John Kerry, Jack reed, Chuck hagel, Richard Holbrooke............These are all qualified people that come with no strings/drama attached.


............... The elections are over and one has to wonder why Obama is still trying to court the clinton supporters. If anything, she should have been picked as secretary of HHS since she has more experience in that area.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Reasons why this pick doesn't make sense:</p>
<p>1. Even though John Mccain was demonized for the campaign he run, the whole script for the Mccain campaign was written by Hillary during the primaries.</p>
<p>2. Hillary doesn't agree with Obama's foregin policy stance on diplomacy with rogue nations.</p>
<p>3. Hill and Bill come with a lot baggage that will bring the Obama administration into negative light and continue to overshaddow the President himself.</p>
<p>4. The Obama-Clinton relationship will be under the microscope and heavy scutiny. Every disagreement will leak to the press who will then blow it out of proportion and stoke the fire of animosity/suspiciousness that already exists.</p>
<p>5. Does anyone remember "shame on you Barack Obama!" and sniper fire?</p>
<p>6. World leaders (especially russia and the middle east) will not be receptive to clinton due to her hawkish nature. Most people don't believe she has an open mind on most world issues.</p>
<p>7. Why in the world is Obama insisting on bombarding us with the obama-clinton drama? After two years of hearing Obama and clinton in the same breath, Obama should break free and be his own man.</p>
<p>8. Bill Richardson, John Kerry, Jack reed, Chuck hagel, Richard Holbrooke............These are all qualified people that come with no strings/drama attached.</p>
<p>............... The elections are over and one has to wonder why Obama is still trying to court the clinton supporters. If anything, she should have been picked as secretary of HHS since she has more experience in that area.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jacuda1</title>
		<link>http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2008/11/20/why-obama-wants-hillary-at-state/comment-page-2/#comment-22455</link>
		<dc:creator>jacuda1</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2008 15:58:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://timeswampland.wordpress.com/?p=8398#comment-22455</guid>
		<description>Reasons why this pick doesn&#039;t make sense:

1. Even though John Mccain was demonized for the campaign he run, the whole script for the Mccain campaign was written by Hillary during the primaries.

2. Hillary doesn&#039;t agree with Obama&#039;s foregin policy stance on diplomacy with rogue nations.

3. Hill and Bill come with a lot baggage that will bring the Obama administration into negative light and continue to overshaddow the President himself.

4. The Obama-Clinton relationship will be under the microscope and heavy scutiny. Every disagreement will leak to the press who will then blow it out of proportion and stoke the fire of animosity/suspiciousness that already exists.

5. Does anyone remember &quot;shame on you Barack Obama!&quot; and sniper fire?

6. world leaders (especially russia and the middle east) will not be receptive to clinton due to her hawkish nature. Most people don&#039;t believe she has an open mind on most world issues.

7. Why in the world is Obama insisting on bombarding us with the obama-clinton drama? After two years of hearing Obama and clinton in the same breath, Obama should break free and be his own man.

8. Bill Richardson, John Kerry, Jack reed, Chuck hagel, Richard Holbrooke............These are all qualified people that come with no strings/drama attached.




............... The elections are over and one has to wonder why Obama is still trying to court the clinton supporters. If anything, she should have been picked as secretary of HHS since she has more experience in the area.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Reasons why this pick doesn't make sense:</p>
<p>1. Even though John Mccain was demonized for the campaign he run, the whole script for the Mccain campaign was written by Hillary during the primaries.</p>
<p>2. Hillary doesn't agree with Obama's foregin policy stance on diplomacy with rogue nations.</p>
<p>3. Hill and Bill come with a lot baggage that will bring the Obama administration into negative light and continue to overshaddow the President himself.</p>
<p>4. The Obama-Clinton relationship will be under the microscope and heavy scutiny. Every disagreement will leak to the press who will then blow it out of proportion and stoke the fire of animosity/suspiciousness that already exists.</p>
<p>5. Does anyone remember "shame on you Barack Obama!" and sniper fire?</p>
<p>6. world leaders (especially russia and the middle east) will not be receptive to clinton due to her hawkish nature. Most people don't believe she has an open mind on most world issues.</p>
<p>7. Why in the world is Obama insisting on bombarding us with the obama-clinton drama? After two years of hearing Obama and clinton in the same breath, Obama should break free and be his own man.</p>
<p>8. Bill Richardson, John Kerry, Jack reed, Chuck hagel, Richard Holbrooke............These are all qualified people that come with no strings/drama attached.</p>
<p>............... The elections are over and one has to wonder why Obama is still trying to court the clinton supporters. If anything, she should have been picked as secretary of HHS since she has more experience in the area.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: James, Los Angeles</title>
		<link>http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2008/11/20/why-obama-wants-hillary-at-state/comment-page-2/#comment-22448</link>
		<dc:creator>James, Los Angeles</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2008 15:53:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://timeswampland.wordpress.com/?p=8398#comment-22448</guid>
		<description>KT--
And yet, I&#039;ve never seen you wax snide and gossipy over the father of our present prez:
.
To wit:
.
&lt;blockquote&gt;Connections between the Carlyle [Group] and the Bush family have created controversy, particularly in relation to the War on Terror and the Iraq War. George H. W. Bush and his Secretary of State James A. Baker III have at times been advisors to the group. One writer claimed that Saudi Arabian interests have given $1.4 billion to firms connected to the Bush family.[citation needed] Of this figure, $1.18 billion comes from contracts awarded to defense contractor Braddock, Dunn &amp; McDonald, which Carlyle sold before George H. W. Bush became an advisor.[22] A Carlyle spokesman noted in 2003 that its 7% interest in defense industries was far less than several other Private equity firms.[23] The group has in the past had links with the Bin Laden family, although the group argues investment was relatively minor and made by relatives including a half brother to Osama Bin Laden who had &quot;disowned&quot; him.[24]
.
In February 2008, a U.S. Senate bill was introduced that would increase the regulation of nursing homes such as those run by HCR Manor Care which Carlyle purchased in December 2007.[25] Furthermore in February 2008, a bill was introduced in California that would have barred CalPERS from investing money &quot;with private-equity firms that are partly owned by countries with poor records on human rights,&quot; which would include Carlyle because Mubadala Development is owned by part of the United Arab Emirates. The California bill was later withdrawn.[26]
.
George H. W. Bush, former U.S. President, Senior Advisor to the Carlyle Asia Advisory Board from April 1998 to October 2003. 
George W. Bush, current U.S. President. Was appointed in 1990 to the Board of Directors of one of Carlyle&#039;s first acquisitions, an airline food business called Caterair, which Carlyle eventually sold at a loss. Bush left the board in 1992 to run for Governor of Texas. 
James Baker III, former United States Secretary of State under George H. W. Bush, Staff member under Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush, Carlyle Senior Counselor, served in this capacity from 1993 to 2005. 
Frank C. Carlucci, former United States Secretary of Defense from 1987 to 1989; Also, former Princeton wrestling partner of former US Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld. Carlyle Chairman and Chairman Emeritus from 1989 to 2005. 
Richard Darman, former Director of the U.S. Office of Management and Budget under George H. W. Bush, Senior Advisor and Managing Director of The Carlyle Group from 1993 to the present 
Randal K. Quarles, former Under Secretary of the U.S. Treasury under President George W. Bush, now a Carlyle managing director 
Allan Gotlieb, Canadian ambassador to the United States (1981-89) and member of Carlyle&#039;s Canadian advisory board. 
Arthur Levitt, Chairman of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) under President Bill Clinton, Carlyle Senior Advisor from 2001 to the present 
Dan Senor - political consultant 
&lt;b&gt;Norman Pearlstine - editor-in-chief of Time magazine from (1995-2005) &lt;/b&gt;
&lt;/blockquote&gt;
(Source: Wikipedia, Carlyle Group)
.
Why is that, Karen? Why all the baseless gossip and innuendo about the Clintons, and yet you never write about Republicans in the same way? You, nor anyone at Time.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>KT--<br />
And yet, I've never seen you wax snide and gossipy over the father of our present prez:<br />
.<br />
To wit:<br />
.</p>
<blockquote><p>Connections between the Carlyle [Group] and the Bush family have created controversy, particularly in relation to the War on Terror and the Iraq War. George H. W. Bush and his Secretary of State James A. Baker III have at times been advisors to the group. One writer claimed that Saudi Arabian interests have given $1.4 billion to firms connected to the Bush family.[citation needed] Of this figure, $1.18 billion comes from contracts awarded to defense contractor Braddock, Dunn &amp; McDonald, which Carlyle sold before George H. W. Bush became an advisor.[22] A Carlyle spokesman noted in 2003 that its 7% interest in defense industries was far less than several other Private equity firms.[23] The group has in the past had links with the Bin Laden family, although the group argues investment was relatively minor and made by relatives including a half brother to Osama Bin Laden who had "disowned" him.[24]<br />
.<br />
In February 2008, a U.S. Senate bill was introduced that would increase the regulation of nursing homes such as those run by HCR Manor Care which Carlyle purchased in December 2007.[25] Furthermore in February 2008, a bill was introduced in California that would have barred CalPERS from investing money "with private-equity firms that are partly owned by countries with poor records on human rights," which would include Carlyle because Mubadala Development is owned by part of the United Arab Emirates. The California bill was later withdrawn.[26]<br />
.<br />
George H. W. Bush, former U.S. President, Senior Advisor to the Carlyle Asia Advisory Board from April 1998 to October 2003.<br />
George W. Bush, current U.S. President. Was appointed in 1990 to the Board of Directors of one of Carlyle's first acquisitions, an airline food business called Caterair, which Carlyle eventually sold at a loss. Bush left the board in 1992 to run for Governor of Texas.<br />
James Baker III, former United States Secretary of State under George H. W. Bush, Staff member under Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush, Carlyle Senior Counselor, served in this capacity from 1993 to 2005.<br />
Frank C. Carlucci, former United States Secretary of Defense from 1987 to 1989; Also, former Princeton wrestling partner of former US Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld. Carlyle Chairman and Chairman Emeritus from 1989 to 2005.<br />
Richard Darman, former Director of the U.S. Office of Management and Budget under George H. W. Bush, Senior Advisor and Managing Director of The Carlyle Group from 1993 to the present<br />
Randal K. Quarles, former Under Secretary of the U.S. Treasury under President George W. Bush, now a Carlyle managing director<br />
Allan Gotlieb, Canadian ambassador to the United States (1981-89) and member of Carlyle's Canadian advisory board.<br />
Arthur Levitt, Chairman of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) under President Bill Clinton, Carlyle Senior Advisor from 2001 to the present<br />
Dan Senor - political consultant<br />
<b>Norman Pearlstine - editor-in-chief of Time magazine from (1995-2005) </b>
</p></blockquote>
<p>(Source: Wikipedia, Carlyle Group)<br />
.<br />
Why is that, Karen? Why all the baseless gossip and innuendo about the Clintons, and yet you never write about Republicans in the same way? You, nor anyone at Time.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: poh123</title>
		<link>http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2008/11/20/why-obama-wants-hillary-at-state/comment-page-2/#comment-22443</link>
		<dc:creator>poh123</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2008 15:51:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://timeswampland.wordpress.com/?p=8398#comment-22443</guid>
		<description>Does Obama do what the media wants,  or what is best for the country?  The media should just LEAVE IT ALONE.  But since one of its main features is vulture-like behavior, I suppose it can&#039;t and it will go after this relentlessly.

Hillary should take the job,if it indeed was offered, wow the world and have all those questioning the judgment *&quot;swallow their long, poisoned tongues or pens&quot;.

*I wanted to be a bit more crude...but I abstained myself so that I would not be censured.  But read between intentions regarding their long poisoned tongues or pens.  It has to do with introducing them &quot;where the sun don&#039;t shine&quot;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Does Obama do what the media wants,  or what is best for the country?  The media should just LEAVE IT ALONE.  But since one of its main features is vulture-like behavior, I suppose it can't and it will go after this relentlessly.</p>
<p>Hillary should take the job,if it indeed was offered, wow the world and have all those questioning the judgment *"swallow their long, poisoned tongues or pens".</p>
<p>*I wanted to be a bit more crude...but I abstained myself so that I would not be censured.  But read between intentions regarding their long poisoned tongues or pens.  It has to do with introducing them "where the sun don't shine".</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Paul Dirks</title>
		<link>http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2008/11/20/why-obama-wants-hillary-at-state/comment-page-2/#comment-22435</link>
		<dc:creator>Paul Dirks</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2008 15:42:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://timeswampland.wordpress.com/?p=8398#comment-22435</guid>
		<description>I guess what I&#039;m having the most trouble understanding is why all these issues over Bill&#039;s business dealings are suddenly a problem if Hillary is in the Cabinet but were a absent from consideration when she was running for President. And the point I was trying to make about journalists is the fact that they are active participants in the political discussion so that we should certainly be aware of their leanings.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I guess what I'm having the most trouble understanding is why all these issues over Bill's business dealings are suddenly a problem if Hillary is in the Cabinet but were a absent from consideration when she was running for President. And the point I was trying to make about journalists is the fact that they are active participants in the political discussion so that we should certainly be aware of their leanings.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: bitterpill8</title>
		<link>http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2008/11/20/why-obama-wants-hillary-at-state/comment-page-2/#comment-22428</link>
		<dc:creator>bitterpill8</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2008 15:34:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://timeswampland.wordpress.com/?p=8398#comment-22428</guid>
		<description>KT: what is wrong with making a speech on fp in Dubai? have you seen the text? can we be directed to it? As for Kazakhstan: how do we deal with the Saudis given their awful human rights record. TheCcarlyle Group (Bush the Elder) has access to lots of Saudi cash. Citigroup, too. That is all business. Why is Clinton the only one called to account? Last I looked making money, lots of it (and using corporate jets) seems to be SOP in the States.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>KT: what is wrong with making a speech on fp in Dubai? have you seen the text? can we be directed to it? As for Kazakhstan: how do we deal with the Saudis given their awful human rights record. TheCcarlyle Group (Bush the Elder) has access to lots of Saudi cash. Citigroup, too. That is all business. Why is Clinton the only one called to account? Last I looked making money, lots of it (and using corporate jets) seems to be SOP in the States.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: bitterpill8</title>
		<link>http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2008/11/20/why-obama-wants-hillary-at-state/comment-page-2/#comment-22421</link>
		<dc:creator>bitterpill8</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2008 15:27:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://timeswampland.wordpress.com/?p=8398#comment-22421</guid>
		<description>And it rare to disagree with you JayAck. The issue is not that any nomination needs to be reported on and due diligence undetaken. It is the fluff, the indignation, the &quot;What, not the Clintons again!&quot;, the contempt ironically from some of the most contemptible people in journalism that rankles. I have no wish to diminish KT&#039;s serious efforts, Joe Klein&#039;s change of heart or the work of a serious journalist. I just find the double standards when applied to Democrats in office somewhat disconcerting.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>And it rare to disagree with you JayAck. The issue is not that any nomination needs to be reported on and due diligence undetaken. It is the fluff, the indignation, the "What, not the Clintons again!", the contempt ironically from some of the most contemptible people in journalism that rankles. I have no wish to diminish KT's serious efforts, Joe Klein's change of heart or the work of a serious journalist. I just find the double standards when applied to Democrats in office somewhat disconcerting.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
