<?xml version="1.0" ?>
	<rss version="2.0">
	<channel>
		<title>firsttube.com</title>
		<link>http://firsttube.com/</link>
		<description>crunchy nuggets served semi-daily</description>
		<language>en-us</language>
		<generator>Small Axe, 0.6</generator>
		<webMaster>noreply@firsttube.com</webMaster>		
		
		<ttl>720</ttl>

		<item>
			<title>I was just thinking about this...</title>
			<link>http://firsttube.com/read/A-whole-nother/#1204950468</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://firsttube.com/read/A-whole-nother/#1204950468</guid>
			<description>Funny coincidence.  What I realized is that "a whole nother" is actually just like when we put an interjection into any other word, like "un effin beliveable."  You take the word "another", and you cram the word "whole" inside it.  I consider it a perfectly legitimate linguistic innovation.  You're not creating the word "nother," you're just breaking the word "another" apart, and putting it together funny.</description>
			<pubDate>Sat, 08 Mar 2008 04:27:48 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>David Adams</author>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>nother?</title>
			<link>http://firsttube.com/read/A-whole-nother/#1207065049</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://firsttube.com/read/A-whole-nother/#1207065049</guid>
			<description>On a related note, there is certain academic evidence to suggest that oranges used to be noranges [spanish: naranja or something] then people started saying 'a norange', which settled into 'an orange'.</description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 01 Apr 2008 16:50:49 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>Stephen Stagg</author>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>