<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1" ?><rss version="2.0"><channel><title>washingtonpost.com - The Choice</title><link>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/opinion/thechoice?nav=rss_opinion/thechoice</link><description>The Choice</description><language>en-us</language><ttl>15</ttl><item><title><![CDATA[The Choice on Courts]]></title><link>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A55767-2004Oct22.html?nav=rss_opinion/thechoice</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A55767-2004Oct22.html?nav=rss_opinion/thechoice</guid><pubDate>Sat, 23 Apr 2005 12:25:42 GMT</pubDate><description><![CDATA[EVERY FOUR YEARS, partisans at both ends of the political spectrum wring their hands at the devastation the other side will wreak if its presidential candidate gets to nominate the next four years' worth of federal judges. Conservatives warn that the courts will impose a liberal social agenda. Liberals fret about a "rollback" of basic rights.]]></description><author></author></item><item><title><![CDATA[The Choice on Iraq]]></title><link>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A52985-2004Oct21.html?nav=rss_opinion/thechoice</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A52985-2004Oct21.html?nav=rss_opinion/thechoice</guid><pubDate>Sat, 23 Apr 2005 12:25:42 GMT</pubDate><description><![CDATA[DESPITE THEIR dramatic debate over whether the invasion of Iraq was a necessity or a mistake, President Bush and Sen. John F. Kerry essentially agree on what U.S. goals and strategy there should be in the coming year or two. That is less of a contradiction than it might seem: Regardless of whether the war was right, the situation it produced offers few if any responsible options other than those endorsed by both candidates.]]></description><author></author></item><item><title><![CDATA[The Choice on Immigration]]></title><link>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A46566-2004Oct19.html?nav=rss_opinion/thechoice</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A46566-2004Oct19.html?nav=rss_opinion/thechoice</guid><pubDate>Sat, 23 Apr 2005 12:25:42 GMT</pubDate><description><![CDATA[BOB SCHIEFFER, moderator of the third presidential debate, noted that he had received more e-mail on immigration than on any other topic. The issue evokes strong opinions and emotions -- which may explain why neither candidate wants to talk about it much.]]></description><author></author></item><item><title><![CDATA[The Choice on Liberty]]></title><link>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A40640-2004Oct17.html?nav=rss_opinion/thechoice</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A40640-2004Oct17.html?nav=rss_opinion/thechoice</guid><pubDate>Sat, 23 Apr 2005 12:25:42 GMT</pubDate><description><![CDATA[AFTER SEPT. 11, 2001, the legal tools at President Bush's disposal were out of date and did not address the new realities of this different kind of war. He had to confront some difficult choices in the balance between civil liberties and the need to root out terrorist cells at home and abroad. The criticism those choices have sparked has not always been fair. But too often Mr. Bush has overstepped, both in his policy changes and in the way he has pursued them.]]></description><author></author></item><item><title><![CDATA[The Choice: Homeland Security]]></title><link>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A38854-2004Oct16.html?nav=rss_opinion/thechoice</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A38854-2004Oct16.html?nav=rss_opinion/thechoice</guid><pubDate>Sat, 23 Apr 2005 12:25:42 GMT</pubDate><description><![CDATA[IT WILL BE a central theme of the next four years, affecting everyone from firefighters to travelers to chief executives. Yet the presidential debate on homeland security has been shockingly anemic.]]></description><author></author></item><item><title><![CDATA[The Choice on Health Care]]></title><link>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A23028-2004Oct10.html?nav=rss_opinion/thechoice</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A23028-2004Oct10.html?nav=rss_opinion/thechoice</guid><pubDate>Sat, 23 Apr 2005 12:25:42 GMT</pubDate><description><![CDATA[AT THE MOMENT, the precise numbers and costs of the health care reforms proposed by President  Bush and Sen. John F. Kerry are the subject of angry campaign rhetoric. But the principles of the reforms are not in dispute, nor is there much doubt that the proposals are very different.]]></description><author></author></item><item><title><![CDATA[The Choice on North Korea]]></title><link>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A4713-2004Oct3.html?nav=rss_opinion/thechoice</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A4713-2004Oct3.html?nav=rss_opinion/thechoice</guid><pubDate>Sat, 23 Apr 2005 12:25:42 GMT</pubDate><description><![CDATA[ONE OF THE substantive surprises of Thursday's presidential debate was the detailed exchange between President Bush and Sen. John F. Kerry on the critical but neglected subject of North Korea. Prodded by moderator Jim Lehrer, Mr. Bush touted and Mr. Kerry attacked the current U.S. diplomatic strategy for preventing North Korea from becoming a nuclear weapons power. Somewhat esoteric references to "six party" vs. "bilateral" talks and plutonium vs. uranium processing soon were flying back and forth, probably leaving a lot of viewers wondering what the difference was. Here's how we'd sum it up: Mr. Kerry faults Mr. Bush for undoing the diplomacy of the Clinton administration with respect to North Korea and intends to respond by undoing, in turn, what has been accomplished by President Bush.]]></description><author></author></item><item><title><![CDATA[The Choice on the Environment]]></title><link>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A52614-2004Sep26.html?nav=rss_opinion/thechoice</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A52614-2004Sep26.html?nav=rss_opinion/thechoice</guid><pubDate>Sat, 23 Apr 2005 12:25:42 GMT</pubDate><description><![CDATA[   ALTHOUGH POLITICIANS tend to talk about "the environment" as if it were a single, easily defined topic, environmental issues range quite widely, from climate change to nuclear waste disposal to forest management. Nevertheless, it is possible to speak of environmental philosophies, and the two presidential candidates have, over long careers, shown that theirs are very different.]]></description><author></author></item><item><title><![CDATA[The Choice on Energy]]></title><link>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A48907-2004Sep24.html?nav=rss_opinion/thechoice</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A48907-2004Sep24.html?nav=rss_opinion/thechoice</guid><pubDate>Sat, 23 Apr 2005 12:25:42 GMT</pubDate><description><![CDATA[   ENERGY POLICY stands out as an issue on which the presidential candidates have distinct philosophies. The president has said that his energy goals are to promote conservation and "make America less dependent on foreign sources of energy." Yet while it is not fair to hold President  Bush entirely responsible for the pork-stuffed energy bill that Congress failed to pass last year, it is fair to say that the bill reflected his administration's minimal concern for conservation, coupled with its deep-seated belief that the best way to make the United States less dependent on foreign oil is to drill for more of it in this country -- particularly in Alaska. This was a status quo bill, and this, as far as energy is concerned, is a status quo administration.]]></description><author></author></item><item><title><![CDATA[The Choice on Schooling]]></title><link>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A43359-2004Sep22.html?nav=rss_opinion/thechoice</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A43359-2004Sep22.html?nav=rss_opinion/thechoice</guid><pubDate>Sat, 23 Apr 2005 12:25:42 GMT</pubDate><description><![CDATA[PRESIDENT BUSH'S No Child Left Behind legislation was an aggressive federal intervention into a traditionally state and local matter. We support the principle of that law, which requires school systems to use testing and other assessments to determine whether children are reading and doing math at grade level. The law requires systems to publicly disclose this information  and forces them to provide tutoring, or another school, for children in "failing" schools. It holds school districts accountable for everyone, including the non-English-speaking and minority children whose failures have often been ignored.]]></description><author></author></item><item><title><![CDATA[The Choice on Iran]]></title><link>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A34325-2004Sep19.html?nav=rss_opinion/thechoice</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A34325-2004Sep19.html?nav=rss_opinion/thechoice</guid><pubDate>Sat, 23 Apr 2005 12:25:42 GMT</pubDate><description><![CDATA[HIGH ON THE list of issues so far absent from this year's presidential campaign debate is Iran, home to a militant Islamic regime that openly sponsors terrorism, foments anti-American resistance in Iraq and has confessed to a secret campaign to acquire the technology needed to produce nuclear weapons. The winner of November's election may well face the question, during the next four years, of whether to acquiesce in Iran's achievement of a nuclear capability or take dramatic action to prevent it. Yet it's no wonder that neither President Bush nor John F. Kerry is eager to talk about it: Neither has developed a convincing plan for avoiding that dilemma.]]></description><author></author></item><item><title><![CDATA[The Choice on the Deficit]]></title><link>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A19123-2004Sep13.html?nav=rss_opinion/thechoice</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A19123-2004Sep13.html?nav=rss_opinion/thechoice</guid><pubDate>Sat, 23 Apr 2005 12:25:42 GMT</pubDate><description><![CDATA[Both presidential candidates want you to think they have a serious plan to deal with the budget deficit. President Bush and Democratic nominee John F. Kerry each promise to cut it in half in the next several years. As the latest projections from the Congressional Budget Office show, there are two problems with  these pledges.]]></description><author></author></item></channel></rss>