<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:thr="http://purl.org/syndication/thread/1.0">
	<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://ta-nehisicoates.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/01/clinton_dissected.php" />
	<link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://ta-nehisicoates.theatlantic.com/atom.xml" />
	<id>tag:ta-nehisicoates.theatlantic.com,2009://8/tag:ta-nehisicoates.theatlantic.com,2008://31.41856-</id>
	<updated></updated>
	<title>Comments for Clinton Dissected</title>
	
	<generator uri="http://www.sixapart.com/movabletype/">Movable Type 4.24-en</generator>
	<entry>
		<id>tag:ta-nehisicoates.theatlantic.com,2008://31.41856</id>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://ta-nehisicoates.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/01/clinton_dissected.php" />
		<link rel="service.edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://ta-nehisicoates.theatlantic.com/mt-42/mt-atom.cgi/weblog/blog_id=8/entry_id=5528" title="Clinton Dissected" />
		<published>2008-01-29T14:39:25Z</published>
		<updated>2008-08-04T16:51:38Z</updated>
		<title>Clinton Dissected</title>
		<summary>Bill, that is. Very nice piece. Not based on arm-chair theory, or bullshit psychoanalysis. The essence: Who can say what Clinton’s effect on the campaign trail really is? However much journalistic critics and Obama supporters cringed at Bill Clinton’s performances,...</summary>
		<author>
			<name></name>
			
		</author>
		
		<content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://ta-nehisicoates.theatlantic.com/">
			<![CDATA[<p>Bill, that is. Very nice <a href="http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0108/8164.html">piece.</a> Not based on arm-chair theory, or bullshit psychoanalysis. The essence:</p>

<p><blockquote>Who can say what Clinton’s effect on the campaign trail really is?
However much journalistic critics and Obama supporters cringed at Bill
Clinton’s performances, they seemed to help Hillary Clinton in New
Hampshire and Nevada. </p>

<p>
But those experiences seemed to unleash something more antic and unruly
in Clinton’s attacks on Obama and the media, making the Clinton
campaign even more about him and less about her. The effect was a bit
like a dieter who reads on the Internet that doughnuts are actually
good for you.</blockquote></p>]]>
			
		</content>
	</entry>

</feed>