<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
    xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
     xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/"
     xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
     xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#">
	<channel>
	<title>MetaFilter posts tagged with mylife</title>
	<link>http://www.metafilter.com/tags/mylife</link>
	<description>Posts tagged with 'mylife' at MetaFilter.</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 23 Jun 2004 12:32:08 -0800</pubDate> <lastBuildDate>Wed, 23 Jun 2004 12:32:08 -0800</lastBuildDate>

	<language>en-us</language>
	<docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
	<ttl>60</ttl>
	<item>
		<title>saving a week of your life from Bill Clinton</title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/33897/saving%2Da%2Dweek%2Dof%2Dyour%2Dlife%2Dfrom%2DBill%2DClinton</link>
		<description>&lt;a href="http://slate.msn.com/id/2102786/"&gt;The Condensed Bill Clinton:&lt;/a&gt; Slate reads &lt;i&gt;My Life&lt;/i&gt; so you don&apos;t have to.  </description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">tag:metafilter.com,2004:site.33897</guid>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Jun 2004 12:32:08 -0800</pubDate>
		<category>autobiography</category>
		<category>billclinton</category>
		<category>biography</category>
		<category>clinton</category>
		<category>mylife</category>
		<category>slate</category>
		<dc:creator>reklaw</dc:creator>
	</item>
      <item>
		<title>The Pastiche of a Presidency, Imitating a Life, in 957 Pages</title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/33832/The%2DPastiche%2Dof%2Da%2DPresidency%2DImitating%2Da%2DLife%2Din%2D957%2DPages</link>
		<description>&lt;a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2004/06/20/books/20CLIN.html?ei=5006&amp;amp;en=b1de08dbc243a997&amp;amp;ex=1088308800&amp;amp;partner=ALTAVISTA1&amp;amp;pagewanted=print&amp;amp;position="&gt;The Pastiche of a Presidency, Imitating a Life, in 957 Pages&lt;/a&gt; This is a very bad review of the Clinton book, soon to be released.  My question: why has the New York Times placed a book review on its front page? Would they have done this if the book were given a good review? Is the &quot;paper of record&quot;  making a clear-cut statement about its feelings about Clinton? Has any other book review made the front page of the NY Times? I for one plan to read the book. I recall that Edmund Wilson once said: always stick to primary sources rather relying upon what some scholar or reviewer has to say about a book.

Finally, Clinton is out of office (alas). How much longer will small and jealous puppies  chase after The Big Dog?  </description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">tag:metafilter.com,2004:site.33832</guid>
		<pubDate>Sun, 20 Jun 2004 15:16:06 -0800</pubDate>
		<category>billclinton</category>
		<category>books</category>
		<category>mylife</category>
		<category>newyorktimes</category>
		<category>nyt</category>
		<category>reviews</category>
		<dc:creator>Postroad</dc:creator>
	</item>
      
	</channel>
</rss>


