<?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: The Conservative Underground: Day 2</title>
	<atom:link href="http://rabidconservative.ws/2008/11/06/the-conservative-underground-day-2/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://rabidconservative.ws/2008/11/06/the-conservative-underground-day-2/</link>
	<description>Think Right, Act Right, Be Right.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 15 Jun 2013 19:06:16 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rick</title>
		<link>http://rabidconservative.ws/2008/11/06/the-conservative-underground-day-2/#comment-6</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Rick]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 07 Nov 2008 17:04:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tzonarin.wordpress.com/2008/11/06/the-conservative-underground-day-2/#comment-6</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[However, for some strange reason, the liberals in Cali seem to think that the process was hijacked and the initiative process on the issue was illegal - that&#039;s why they are suing. It&#039;s the classic we-didn&#039;t-lose-you-cheated mantra that is classic from the left.

What still gets me is the fact that they did not challenge the amendment during the campaign and polling periods. If such an amendment was illegal or unconstitutional in of itself, it should have been addressed long before it&#039;s passage by the people. I suspect the issue there is the No-On-Prop-8 people didn&#039;t want to spend the money because they felt that the petition would fail and they wouldn&#039;t have to raise the suit.

-R]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>However, for some strange reason, the liberals in Cali seem to think that the process was hijacked and the initiative process on the issue was illegal &#8211; that&#8217;s why they are suing. It&#8217;s the classic we-didn&#8217;t-lose-you-cheated mantra that is classic from the left.</p>
<p>What still gets me is the fact that they did not challenge the amendment during the campaign and polling periods. If such an amendment was illegal or unconstitutional in of itself, it should have been addressed long before it&#8217;s passage by the people. I suspect the issue there is the No-On-Prop-8 people didn&#8217;t want to spend the money because they felt that the petition would fail and they wouldn&#8217;t have to raise the suit.</p>
<p>-R</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jim Leonard</title>
		<link>http://rabidconservative.ws/2008/11/06/the-conservative-underground-day-2/#comment-5</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jim Leonard]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 07 Nov 2008 11:53:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tzonarin.wordpress.com/2008/11/06/the-conservative-underground-day-2/#comment-5</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The court cannot strike down ANy constitutional amendment. The constitution is the standard against which they are to test legislation.
Once an article is ratified it passes from the power of the court to change.
The US constitution and most state constitutions are bounds set for government not the governed. If we allow those bound by rules to change those rules, they are no longer bound. What will ensue is what we see in &quot;Animal Farm&quot; and the additions to the laws &quot;except for pigs&quot;!]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The court cannot strike down ANy constitutional amendment. The constitution is the standard against which they are to test legislation.<br />
Once an article is ratified it passes from the power of the court to change.<br />
The US constitution and most state constitutions are bounds set for government not the governed. If we allow those bound by rules to change those rules, they are no longer bound. What will ensue is what we see in &#8220;Animal Farm&#8221; and the additions to the laws &#8220;except for pigs&#8221;!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
