<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"><channel 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/"><title>RedState</title><link>https://redstate.com/lexington_concord/2010/12/16/answering-a-false-attack/feed/</link><description>Conservative News &amp; Politics</description><language>en-us</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 15 Jun 2026 07:10:02 -0400</lastBuildDate><item><title>Answering a False Attack</title><description>&lt;![CDATA[I should note at the outset of this post that I do not have very strong feelings one way or the other about Reince Priebus, who is currently seeking to replace Michael Steele as RNC chairman. This post is not really intended to be an argument that Priebus is the best candidate for the job. It is merely intended to set the record straight on a spurious attack on Priebus that is making the rounds in the blogosphere, typified by this post at National Review. The argument goes that since Priebus&amp;#8217; law firm (where Priebus is, unsurprisingly, in the government affairs practice group) advertised that it was willing and able to help clients understand the implications of Obama&amp;#8217;s stimulus bill and take advantage of it, this somehow constitutes an endorsement of the stimulus bill itself on Priebus&amp;#8217; part.]]&gt;</description><pubDate>Thu, 16 Dec 2010 14:00:45 -0500</pubDate><creator xmlns="dc">&lt;![CDATA[lexington_concord]]&gt;</creator><enclosure url="" type="image/jpeg" length="123" /><link>https://redstate.com/lexington_concord/2010/12/16/answering-a-false-attack-n37345</link></item></channel></rss>