<?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: Going From Class To Crass &#8211; The Tiger Woods Story</title>
	<atom:link href="http://donstorch.com/2009/12/07/going-from-class-to-crass-the-tiger-woods-story/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://donstorch.com/2009/12/07/going-from-class-to-crass-the-tiger-woods-story/</link>
	<description>Columns/Opinion/Satire</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 04 Feb 2012 12:28:05 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: walt</title>
		<link>http://donstorch.com/2009/12/07/going-from-class-to-crass-the-tiger-woods-story/comment-page-1/#comment-3933</link>
		<dc:creator>walt</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Dec 2009 22:57:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donstorch.com/?p=7798#comment-3933</guid>
		<description>No worries, transparency or not we still have an unscathed idol in Derek Jeter.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>No worries, transparency or not we still have an unscathed idol in Derek Jeter.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Don Storch</title>
		<link>http://donstorch.com/2009/12/07/going-from-class-to-crass-the-tiger-woods-story/comment-page-1/#comment-3932</link>
		<dc:creator>Don Storch</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Dec 2009 19:09:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donstorch.com/?p=7798#comment-3932</guid>
		<description>The reference to being as &#039;transparent as you can afford to be&#039; has to do with Woods  relationship with his wife, assuming that relationship is salvageable.  I distinguish  between Woods the husband/father and Woods the brand -- admittedly this is a fine line to walk.  He can be transparent about the issue, his transgressions and admitting that he has a problem that he is attempting to work out.  He can stop at that point without further involving his family - especially if they are attempting to salvage the marriage.  If this is not the case then everything else could be fair game, unless they have a pre-nup and then the parties would have to live up to the contract as agreed upon.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The reference to being as &#8216;transparent as you can afford to be&#8217; has to do with Woods  relationship with his wife, assuming that relationship is salvageable.  I distinguish  between Woods the husband/father and Woods the brand &#8212; admittedly this is a fine line to walk.  He can be transparent about the issue, his transgressions and admitting that he has a problem that he is attempting to work out.  He can stop at that point without further involving his family &#8211; especially if they are attempting to salvage the marriage.  If this is not the case then everything else could be fair game, unless they have a pre-nup and then the parties would have to live up to the contract as agreed upon.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: norman</title>
		<link>http://donstorch.com/2009/12/07/going-from-class-to-crass-the-tiger-woods-story/comment-page-1/#comment-3931</link>
		<dc:creator>norman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Dec 2009 18:17:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donstorch.com/?p=7798#comment-3931</guid>
		<description>You seem to be more rational when the topic is removed from politics. I am in general agreement with your thoughts about Woods but felt let down near the end of the article. You advise Tiger to &quot;be as transparent as you can afford to be.&quot; I hate to be picky but one is either transparent or not. It&#039;s like advising a woman to be as pregnant as you can afford to be. Either you are or you&#039;re not. 
If what you mean is for Woods to appear to be transparent than that&#039;s stonewalling and would contradict your earlier advice.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You seem to be more rational when the topic is removed from politics. I am in general agreement with your thoughts about Woods but felt let down near the end of the article. You advise Tiger to &#8220;be as transparent as you can afford to be.&#8221; I hate to be picky but one is either transparent or not. It&#8217;s like advising a woman to be as pregnant as you can afford to be. Either you are or you&#8217;re not.<br />
If what you mean is for Woods to appear to be transparent than that&#8217;s stonewalling and would contradict your earlier advice.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

