wrote in message
...
On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 22:02:51 -0800, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

Please show me where I said it was one side.

Stop blaming Clinton and the democrats for something that's obviously
been
supported far longer and with more fervor by the right wing."


Both accurate statements. Your point?

--
Nom=de=Plume

wrote in message
...
On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 22:08:00 -0800, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

"Roth" is a lot better way to go.


You can't always convert to Roths, although I did that with much of my
former 401Ks. I'm certainly glad I did, but it wasn't cheap.

--

That advantage of a Roth is you know how much Sammy will let you keep.
I really think that when the boomers get serious about drawing down
their 401k the tax rate will be draconian. It is already "ordinary
income" not capital gains.


Maybe... unless they change the rules.

--
Nom=de=Plume

"CalifBill" wrote in message
...

"bpuharic" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 18:43:42 -0800, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

"CalifBill" wrote in message
news:gpudnR6F_LQuacHWnZ2dnUVZ_vCdnZ2d@earthlink .com...



35k is not dire straights.



With four kids???? You're cracked.

--
Nom=de=Plume


And you are clueless to the real world.



Really. Please show us where in the US that $35K/year for a family with
four
kids is doing well... go for it.

for the right wing, $35K is 35K too much for a family of 4.


Blow it out your ass, idiot. It is not easy street, but it is a hell of
along ways from dire straights.



Right... four kids... and that's gross salary.

--
Nom=de=Plume

On Mon, 25 Jan 2010 00:32:11 -0500, wrote:

On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 19:51:07 -0500, Harry
wrote:

You righties seem to have no understanding whatsoever about the purpose
of a labor union.
I know all about unions, remember my mom worked for the Teamster's
international for 20 years.
Unfortunately the UAW and the big 3 management companies were all
creating an unsustainable bubble in what they were giving the
employees. It wasn't about "fair" or "enough", it was always about
"more".
They simply jacked up the prices of the cars, everybody was making a
lot of money and we paid it.
That bubble popped.

except, of course, wages are less than 10% of the price of a car...

On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 22:05:32 -0800, "CalifBill"
wrote:


"bpuharic" wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 17:01:55 -0800, "CalifBill"
wrote:



i never said it did. i said being white, male and educated means
you'll probably make more money than being black, male and educated



Not what you stated at all.

yeah. just like you think slavery didnt exist

On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 22:00:19 -0800, "CalifBill"
wrote:


"bpuharic" wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 16:04:26 -0800, "CalifBill"
wrote:


ROFLMAO!! yes, i knew that. both of them. and it's the exception that
proves the rule.

you right wingers just love your little myths, don't you?



Only 26% of North Carolina people owned slaves. Ignorant twit.

why? that not enough for you?

On Mon, 25 Jan 2010 12:23:18 -0500, wrote:

On Mon, 25 Jan 2010 06:33:32 -0500, bpuharic wrote:

On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 23:22:57 -0500, wrote:

On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 15:51:04 -0800, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

Stop blaming Clinton and the democrats for something that's obviously been
supported far longer and with more fervor by the right wing.

Why? You have seen the votes by now. It was 51 GOP representatives and
9 democrats that opposed the deregulation of CDOs.

it was actually gramm who wouldn't let the bill pass with the original
regulations of CDO's intact. he forced amendments that stripped govt
regulations out of the bill

How does Gramm make 99 other senators go along?

the same way 40 republicans can hold up healthcare for 300M americans

bpuharic wrote:
On Sat, 23 Jan 2010 20:00:59 -0500, wrote:


bpuharic wrote:

On Fri, 22 Jan 2010 19:42:10 -0500, John H
wrote:





It's OK for Democrats to bribe each other with taxpayer money, but not
OK for both Democrats and Republicans to recieve corporate money.

Liberal thinking is quite strange.


now let's see...which justices voted to allow even MORE corruption in
the system?

oh...the conservative ones



Cite?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34822247...supreme_court/


"The censorship we now confront is vast in its reach," Justice Anthony
Kennedy said in his majority opinion, joined by his four more
conservative colleagues.

Strongly disagreeing, Justice John Paul Stevens said in his dissent,
"The court's ruling threatens to undermine the integrity of elected
institutions around the nation."

Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer and Sonia Sotomayor
joined Stevens' dissent, parts of which he read aloud in the
courtroom.

You did say corruption, right? Where was that in your cite?

bpuharic wrote:
On Sat, 23 Jan 2010 20:00:24 -0500, wrote:


bpuharic wrote:

On Fri, 22 Jan 2010 18:26:38 -0600,
wrote:



On Fri, 22 Jan 2010 18:55:46 -0500, bpuharic wrote:



you have a point. i hope folks dont forget bush. but it looks like
mebbe they are.



Disband the Senate? Your normally post a lot of weird **** but this is
just dumb.

uh why? what function does the senate serve? and, yes, there are
plenty of democracies without a 'higher' chamber.

so, other than your assertion that it's dumb, do you have any
evidence? history is on my side, it seems


I'd like to see shorter terms and term limits, but the senate is part of
our constitution.

Bruce wrote:
bpuharic wrote:
On Sat, 23 Jan 2010 20:00:59 -0500, wrote:


bpuharic wrote:

On Fri, 22 Jan 2010 19:42:10 -0500, John H
wrote:





It's OK for Democrats to bribe each other with taxpayer money, but not
OK for both Democrats and Republicans to recieve corporate money.

Liberal thinking is quite strange.


now let's see...which justices voted to allow even MORE corruption in
the system?

oh...the conservative ones



Cite?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34822247...supreme_court/


"The censorship we now confront is vast in its reach," Justice Anthony
Kennedy said in his majority opinion, joined by his four more
conservative colleagues.

Strongly disagreeing, Justice John Paul Stevens said in his dissent,
"The court's ruling threatens to undermine the integrity of elected
institutions around the nation."

Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer and Sonia Sotomayor
joined Stevens' dissent, parts of which he read aloud in the
courtroom.

You did say corruption, right? Where was that in your cite?


Bruce, apparently, is another right-winger who cannot think in the
abstract.

Figures.