<?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"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: January 26 roundup</title>
	<atom:link href="http://overlawyered.com/2007/01/january-26-roundup/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://overlawyered.com/2007/01/january-26-roundup/</link>
	<description>Chronicling the high cost of our legal system</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 14 Feb 2012 06:39:32 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Amsterdamsky</title>
		<link>http://overlawyered.com/2007/01/january-26-roundup/comment-page-1/#comment-5619</link>
		<dc:creator>Amsterdamsky</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Jan 2007 01:41:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/wpblog/?p=4456#comment-5619</guid>
		<description>&quot;WASHINGTON -- An AIDS organization sued Pfizer Inc. on Monday over ads the group says encourage use of Viagra as a party drug. The group said recreational use of the drug furthers the spread of HIV and other sexually transmitted diseases.&quot;

This belongs on your best of list.  I can&#039;t stop laughing.  The US can&#039;t possibly survive with this lunacy for long.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;WASHINGTON &#8212; An AIDS organization sued Pfizer Inc. on Monday over ads the group says encourage use of Viagra as a party drug. The group said recreational use of the drug furthers the spread of HIV and other sexually transmitted diseases.&#8221;</p>
<p>This belongs on your best of list.  I can&#8217;t stop laughing.  The US can&#8217;t possibly survive with this lunacy for long.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Amsterdamsky</title>
		<link>http://overlawyered.com/2007/01/january-26-roundup/comment-page-1/#comment-5618</link>
		<dc:creator>Amsterdamsky</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Jan 2007 01:38:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/wpblog/?p=4456#comment-5618</guid>
		<description>&quot;“It is shocking that a corporation whose market is pregnant women would refuse to employ them and then retaliate against a woman who complained about the practice” . . . . &quot;


Actually, irony aside, why is an employer forced to hire someone that will only be there for 2 months?  By the time they are visably pregnant they will likely be giving birth and then be on maternity leave at company expense.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;“It is shocking that a corporation whose market is pregnant women would refuse to employ them and then retaliate against a woman who complained about the practice” . . . . &#8221;</p>
<p>Actually, irony aside, why is an employer forced to hire someone that will only be there for 2 months?  By the time they are visably pregnant they will likely be giving birth and then be on maternity leave at company expense.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

