<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>Mail.com: David Rohde</title>
    <link>http://www.mail.com/people/142912-david-rohde.html</link>
    <description>Mail.com - the best personalized free web-based Email</description>
    <language>en</language>
    <dc:language>en</dc:language>
    
    <item>
      <title>Big spending cuts mark tea party success, and risk</title>
      <link>http://www.mail.com/business/economy/1922734-big-spending-cuts-mark-tea-party-success-risk.html</link>
      <description>WASHINGTON (AP) — The pending $85 billion in federal spending cuts would seem like a tea partyer's dream. Why, then, are tea party activists and other conservatives so wary on the eve of the big reductions, which Congress and the White House seem unable or unwilling to stop? 
                   It's because even ardent cost-cutters see the so-called "sequester" as a ham-hand...</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 28 Feb 2013 19:42:33 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mail.com/business/economy/1922734-big-spending-cuts-mark-tea-party-success-risk.html</guid>
      <dc:date>2013-02-28T19:42:33Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

