An honest, though partisan, question
 

Well, the clarity of it, which is to say - and I'm not saying that this is the only issue, or even an issue, which may or may not - some people may disagree, with me and I understand that's a healthy thing, I understand that - which for example I think the good people of Iraq will also come to understand, is a driver for democracy that others will no doubt - and let me be perfectly clear on this, because you hear things in the media and read things in the papers, things that the good people of America and these boards have said that I think are just misrepresenting the point of the President's point on this issue, which I think has been somewhat better expressed by others.

An honest, though partisan, question
 

Why should Roths be limited based on current income? You pay the tax at the relevant rate now, so it's the same for everyone. I'm offended that they're not available to everyone regardless of income. IRAs are, why not Roths too?

Wow.
 

"WASHINGTON (CSM) - Something remarkable is happening in the Middle East - a grass-roots movement against autocracy without any significant 'Great Satan' anti-American component. . . . The movements for democratic change in Egypt and Lebanon have happened since the successful Iraqi election on Jan. 30. And one can speculate on whether Iraq has served as a beacon for democratic change in the Middle East. During the run-up to the invasion of Iraq, President Bush said that 'a liberated Iraq can show the power of freedom to transform that vital region.' He may have had it right."

Daniel Schorr, NPR host, in Christian Science Monitor.

An honest, though partisan, question
 

Huge tax revenue hit. Just stick the money in a savings account. Recall that I'm not in favor of a flat tax -- this is an area of progressivity.

An honest, though partisan, question
 

It's always fun to catch people screwing up their log-ins. You forgot to enable your Ghost of John Kerry i.d.! Ha!

An honest, though partisan, question
 

Wouldn't that be a huge current revenue jump?

An honest, though partisan, question
 

Only in the out years. The hit is 40 years on, when people start withdrawing. In fact, Roths are revenue positive, because they accelerate the tax revenue to today.

BTW, http://www.roth401k.com/

An honest, though partisan, question
 

Yes, that was also the genius of the Roth under the then-applicable paygo budget rules. The revenue increases (or is neutral) currently, and the revenue hit doesn't happen for years.

An honest, though partisan, question
 

I'm not reading it. Seriously, it disgusts me, because I know who will be pushing for it and using it the most, and they fucking have enough money already -- they don't need even more tax incentives to save for retirement. Let me know what it says. I think it will be popular with executives 40 and up.

Form 180?
 

If the Security Council passes a resolution against Israel and we don't veto it, we should see that it is enforced. And we can see that they are enforced. The fact that we have not followed that policy is totally screwed our credibility in the world.

Form 180?
 

Not to benefit the UN but to benefit us. As long as we are part of the UN (And a permanent member of the security council) the UNs actions reflect on us.

An honest, though partisan, question
 

OK, I'm an idiot. Sorry. I still don't like them.

Form 180?
 

Thanks. For a minute there, I thought my point was more opaque than I intended.

An honest, though partisan, question
 

Watch. By the time the major withdrawals start, the law will change, and there will be a tax imposed.

Form 180?
 

I don't give a rats ass what the General Assembly does or says.