<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="http://www.slate.com/blogs/utility/FeedStylesheets/rss.xsl" media="screen"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"><channel><title>Fundamentally Speaking</title><link>http://www.slate.com/blogs/blogs/convictions/archive/2008/03/21/fundamentally-speaking.aspx</link><description>So here's where I think our arguments are passing in the ether, Jack. First, I've always understood there to be an at least doctrinal (perish the thought) distinction between "fundamental rights" and "everything in the Bill of Rights." (So when, for example,</description><dc:language>en</dc:language><generator>CommunityServer 2.1 SP2 (Build: 61129.2)</generator></channel></rss>