<rss version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>Slate Magazine - Dialogues</title>
    <link>http://www.slate.com/id/2076854/?from=rss</link>
    <description>
    </description>
    <copyright>2008 Washingtonpost.Newsweek Interactive Co. LLC</copyright>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>,    :: EST</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>,    :: EST</lastBuildDate>
    <ttl>120</ttl>
    
    <item>
  <title>How Sotomayor fits into Obama's definition of bipartisanship.</title>
  <link>http://www.slate.com/id/2222736/entry/0/?from=rss</link>
  <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.slate.com/id/2222736/entry/0/?from=rss</guid>
  <description><![CDATA[  Emily, I think the "new" definition of bipartisanship John explores is clearly at work in the Sotomayor spectacle, with respect not so much to vote-counting but to the extent that this hearing has shown "how many ideas from the opposition party are included" in a Democratic president's nominee. By that measure, this has to be the most bipartisan hearing in history. Sotomayor has touted the virtue of neutral umpires and thrown Obama's newly minted empathy standard under the bus. I haven't heard a word from her or much from committee Democrats that lays out a theory of liberal jurisprudence. The resounding bipartisan lesson from these hearings is that the only thing missing from the John Roberts Court is a few more John Robertses.<br /><br />[<a href="http://www.slate.com/id/2222736/entry/0/?from=rss">more ...</a>]  ]]></description>
  <category>dialogues</category>
  <author>Emily Bazelon</author>
  <comments>http://fray.slate.com/discuss</comments>
  <pubDate>Thu, 16 Jul 2009 14:23:49 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
  <title>The Sotomayor Stopwatch</title>
  <link>http://www.slate.com/id/2222859/?from=rss</link>
  <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.slate.com/id/2222859/?from=rss</guid>
  <description><![CDATA[  This chart shows how much time Sonia Sotomayor is getting to speak at her confirmation hearings, compared with the senators questioning her. Click here for the first of Slate's "Dialogue" entries on the hearings with Emily Bazelon, John Dickerson, and Dahlia Lithwick.<br /><br />[<a href="http://www.slate.com/id/2222859/?from=rss">more ...</a>]  ]]></description>
  <category>dialogues</category>
  <comments>http://fray.slate.com/discuss</comments>
  <pubDate>Tue, 14 Jul 2009 15:04:13 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
  <title>Making sense of the credit debacle.</title>
  <link>http://www.slate.com/id/2212480/entry/0/?from=rss</link>
  <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.slate.com/id/2212480/entry/0/?from=rss</guid>
  <description><![CDATA[  Thanks (I think) to Duff for noticing I am incapable of unadulterated positiveness. It's a psychological defect that suited me well in the last several years. I have to say that I was influenced, in an unadulteratedly positive fashion, by Gillian's indispensible reporting over the years.<br /><br />[<a href="http://www.slate.com/id/2212480/entry/0/?from=rss">more ...</a>]  ]]></description>
  <category>dialogues</category>
  <author>Jesse Eisinger</author>
  <comments>http://fray.slate.com/discuss</comments>
  <pubDate>Wed, 4 Mar 2009 16:52:58 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
  <title>Discussing the 2009 Oscar nominees.</title>
  <link>http://www.slate.com/id/2209501/entry/0/?from=rss</link>
  <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.slate.com/id/2209501/entry/0/?from=rss</guid>
  <description><![CDATA[  E-mail debates of newsworthy topics.<br /><br />[<a href="http://www.slate.com/id/2209501/entry/0/?from=rss">more ...</a>]<!--AD BEGIN--><br clear="all" /><a href="http://ad.doubleclick.net/jump/slate.rss/politics;pos=ad9;tile=9;ad=rss;sz=479x40;ord=8762" target="_blank"><img src="http://ad.doubleclick.net/ad/slate.rss/politics;pos=ad9;tile=9;ad=rss;sz=479x40;ord=8762" border="0" vspace="5" /></a><!--AD END-->  ]]></description>
  <category>dialogues</category>
  <author>Troy Patterson</author>
  <comments>http://fray.slate.com/discuss</comments>
  <pubDate>Thu, 22 Jan 2009 12:30:32 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
  <title>What should the GOP do now?</title>
  <link>http://www.slate.com/id/2203800/entry/0/?from=rss</link>
  <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.slate.com/id/2203800/entry/0/?from=rss</guid>
  <description><![CDATA[  Tucker, Ross, Jim, Kathleen, and Christine<br /><br />[<a href="http://www.slate.com/id/2203800/entry/0/?from=rss">more ...</a>]  ]]></description>
  <category>dialogues</category>
  <author>Tucker Carlson</author>
  <comments>http://fray.slate.com/discuss</comments>
  <pubDate>Fri, 7 Nov 2008 18:25:15 EST</pubDate>
</item>
  </channel>
</rss><!-- Total Time:6.147979ms --><!--SL-WEB06-->