<?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"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Limiting Federal Power</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/2008/03/25/limiting-federal-power/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/2008/03/25/limiting-federal-power/</link>
	<description>Where There's Snow, There's Firepower</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2008 14:17:33 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Sebastian</title>
		<link>http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/2008/03/25/limiting-federal-power/#comment-20843</link>
		<dc:creator>Sebastian</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Mar 2008 21:20:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/2008/03/25/limiting-federal-power/#comment-20843</guid>
		<description>In the traditional sense, yes.  These days, federalism is generally regarded as being those who wish to restore a balance between the division between what is federal, and what is local, that is more aligned with the original constitutional understanding.

I'm not sure it's inappropriate either.  Few federalists really argue for a weak federal government, just one that is more limited to its enumerated powers than is currently the case.  Even the federalists of old would have hardly argued that the constitution should be construed as to allow the federal government carte blanch control of pretty much any commercial activity.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In the traditional sense, yes.  These days, federalism is generally regarded as being those who wish to restore a balance between the division between what is federal, and what is local, that is more aligned with the original constitutional understanding.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m not sure it&#8217;s inappropriate either.  Few federalists really argue for a weak federal government, just one that is more limited to its enumerated powers than is currently the case.  Even the federalists of old would have hardly argued that the constitution should be construed as to allow the federal government carte blanch control of pretty much any commercial activity.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Carl in Chicago</title>
		<link>http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/2008/03/25/limiting-federal-power/#comment-20841</link>
		<dc:creator>Carl in Chicago</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Mar 2008 21:04:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/2008/03/25/limiting-federal-power/#comment-20841</guid>
		<description>Wouldn't that be a win for anti-federalism?  And perhaps even anti-internationalism?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wouldn&#8217;t that be a win for anti-federalism?  And perhaps even anti-internationalism?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
