<?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#"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: GOP presidential candidates, cont&#8217;d	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://www.overlawyered.com/2007/10/gop-presidential-candidates-contd/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2007/10/gop-presidential-candidates-contd/</link>
	<description>Chronicling the high cost of our legal system</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 02 Oct 2007 11:59:25 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Anonymous Attorney		</title>
		<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2007/10/gop-presidential-candidates-contd/comment-page-1/#comment-9138</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Anonymous Attorney]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Oct 2007 11:59:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/wpblog/?p=5405#comment-9138</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[The &quot;federalization&quot; of a given issue is today nothing but a vessel for competing ideologies. We&#039;re all opposed to it when it the issue won&#039;t go well for us (conservatives against federalizing gun laws, abortion laws, etc.; liberals against federalizing gay marriage, etc.). And we&#039;re for it when it will.

Principled opposition like RP&#039;s is pretty rare. The body politic just isn&#039;t mature enough to appreciate the founding fathers&#039; design -- it takes genuine maturity to restrain yourself from seeking a power. And I am not hopeful that we&#039;ll somehow turn the corner on this. &quot;Interstate commerce&quot; is, and has been, the new plenary power. Conservatives picked up on this 50 years ago and moved to Washington to be where the real action is.

Having said that, go ahead and put federal limits on lawsuits. I mean, there&#039;s one area that might actually hamper interstate commerce, it&#039;s lawsuits.
]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The &#8220;federalization&#8221; of a given issue is today nothing but a vessel for competing ideologies. We&#8217;re all opposed to it when it the issue won&#8217;t go well for us (conservatives against federalizing gun laws, abortion laws, etc.; liberals against federalizing gay marriage, etc.). And we&#8217;re for it when it will.</p>
<p>Principled opposition like RP&#8217;s is pretty rare. The body politic just isn&#8217;t mature enough to appreciate the founding fathers&#8217; design &#8212; it takes genuine maturity to restrain yourself from seeking a power. And I am not hopeful that we&#8217;ll somehow turn the corner on this. &#8220;Interstate commerce&#8221; is, and has been, the new plenary power. Conservatives picked up on this 50 years ago and moved to Washington to be where the real action is.</p>
<p>Having said that, go ahead and put federal limits on lawsuits. I mean, there&#8217;s one area that might actually hamper interstate commerce, it&#8217;s lawsuits.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
