<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	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:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>SaddleBrooke Republican Club &#187; public opinion</title>
	<atom:link href="http://sbrc1.net/tag/public-opinion/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://sbrc1.net</link>
	<description>Western United States Largest Republican Club</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 24 May 2012 12:43:45 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Romney’s National Security Problem</title>
		<link>http://feeds.cato.org/~r/Cato-at-liberty/~3/L8Oh7SIyG-g/</link>
		<comments>http://feeds.cato.org/~r/Cato-at-liberty/~3/L8Oh7SIyG-g/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Apr 2012 16:30:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Christopher Preble</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2012 presidental election]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Afghanistan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Foreign Policy and National Security]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[George W. Bush]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GOP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hawks]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[military spending]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mitt romney]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[public opinion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ronald reagan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. grand strategy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/?p=46923</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>By Christopher Preble</p>It appears some Republicans want to return to their familiar national security play book in their pursuit of the White House, accusing a Democratic president of gutting defense spending and undermining national security. An Associated Press story predicts that Mitt Romney&#8217;s presidential campaign may feature the “hawkish and often unilateral foreign policy prescriptions that guided [...]<p><a href="http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/romneys-national-security-problem/">Romney’s National Security Problem</a> is a post from <a href="http://www.cato-at-liberty.org">Cato @ Liberty - Cato Institute Blog</a></p>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/romneys-national-security-problem/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Red Team, Blue Team, and Gas Prices</title>
		<link>http://feeds.cato.org/~r/Cato-at-liberty/~3/D2YFMVSQ2u4/</link>
		<comments>http://feeds.cato.org/~r/Cato-at-liberty/~3/D2YFMVSQ2u4/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Mar 2012 14:23:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>David Boaz</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Energy and Environment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[gas prices]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Government and Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[polls]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[public opinion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[red team]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/?p=45807</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>By David Boaz</p>The Washington Post puts public opinion on gas prices in stark red and blue: Pretty clear Red Team/Blue Team answers. Republicans in 2006 accepted that there wasn&#8217;t much the president could do to reduce gas prices, but most of them think Obama could. Democrats show an even sharper shift; they overwhelmingly said that Bush could [...]<p><a href="http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/red-team-blue-team-and-gas-prices/">Red Team, Blue Team, and Gas Prices</a> is a post from <a href="http://www.cato-at-liberty.org">Cato @ Liberty - Cato Institute Blog</a></p>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/red-team-blue-team-and-gas-prices/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Americans Favor Accelerated Withdrawal from Afghanistan</title>
		<link>http://feeds.cato.org/~r/Cato-at-liberty/~3/iK0CwD2Db6w/</link>
		<comments>http://feeds.cato.org/~r/Cato-at-liberty/~3/iK0CwD2Db6w/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Mar 2012 16:01:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Malou Innocent</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Afghanistan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[COIN]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[counterinsurgency]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Foreign Policy and National Security]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[leon panetta]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[president hamid karzai]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[public opinion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[war]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/?p=45480</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>By Malou Innocent</p>In case you haven’t heard, the war in Afghanistan is in a tailspin. Following the turbulent events of the past two weeks—including yesterday’s incident on a Helmand runway and the disarming of U.S. Marines before Defense Secretary Leon Panetta—Afghan president Hamid Karzai has demanded U.S. troops withdraw from villages and operate only from large NATO [...]<p><a href="http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/americans-favor-accelerated-withdrawal-from-afghanistan/">Americans Favor Accelerated Withdrawal from Afghanistan</a> is a post from <a href="http://www.cato-at-liberty.org">Cato @ Liberty - Cato Institute Blog</a></p>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/americans-favor-accelerated-withdrawal-from-afghanistan/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Will Obama’s Libya ‘Victory’ Aid Re-Election Bid?</title>
		<link>http://feeds.cato.org/~r/Cato-at-liberty/~3/mYfl4jdO2e8/</link>
		<comments>http://feeds.cato.org/~r/Cato-at-liberty/~3/mYfl4jdO2e8/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Dec 2011 16:27:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>John Mueller</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2012 presidential election]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Foreign Policy and National Security]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Government and Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[intervention]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Libya]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[President Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[public opinion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the presidency]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. foreign policy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/?p=40996</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>By John Mueller</p>It is well established that presidents do not gain much of anything when they launch unsuccessful military ventures. However, they generally don’t gain much from successful ones either. The public does not seem to be interested in rewarding&#8212;or even remembering&#8212;foreign policy success. The data are now in on the most recent such military venture: the [...]<p><a href="http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/will-obamas-libya-victory-aid-re-election-bid/">Will Obama&#8217;s Libya &#8216;Victory&#8217; Aid Re-Election Bid?</a> is a post from <a href="http://www.cato-at-liberty.org">Cato @ Liberty - Cato Institute Blog</a></p>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/will-obamas-libya-victory-aid-re-election-bid/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

