Chickenhawk

mike larkin mike_larkin2001 at yahoo.com
Fri Jan 10 15:53:41 PST 2003


I lead a sheltered life here in Connecticut, and i was surprised when someone just told me the term "chicken hawks" originally referred to older men who prey sexually on young boys. Is this true? If so, it makes the term as applied to Bush, et al, even more appropriate.

--- lbo-talk-digest <owner-lbo-talk-digest at lists.panix.com> wrote:
>
> lbo-talk-digest Friday, January 10 2003
> Volume 01 : Number 7226
>
>
>
> In this issue:
> ==============
>
> RE: The Texas populist take on the tax cut
> RE: The Texas populist take on the tax cut
> Re: The Texas populist take on the tax cut
> Re: Helen Thomas vs. Ari Fleischer
> Re: The Texas populist take on the tax cut
> Re: Helen Thomas vs. Ari Fleischer
> Re: "Empire as a Way of Life"
> Re: Popular culture
> RE: The Texas populist take on the tax cut
> RE: The Texas populist take on the tax cut
> Re: Popular culture
> Re: The Texas populist take on the tax cut
> Re: Popular culture
> Re: Popular culture
> Re: Popular culture
> Re: More on Hardt & Negri from Brennan
> Re: Helen Thomas vs. Ari Fleischer
> Re: The Texas populist take on the tax cut
> Fwd: [Upstream] Symposium on white nationalism
> the New York Press's new owners
> Re: goodnews in today's Guardian
> Re: Deleuze & Guattari, Zizek on Arendt (More
> from Brennan)
> Re: Popular culture
> Re: The Texas populist take on the tax cut
> Re: Popular culture
> Re: Popular culture
> Re: A Wall of money?
> Re: "Empire as a Way of Life"
> Re: The Texas populist take on the tax cut
> Re: The Texas populist take on the tax cut
> Re: Popular culture
> Market Failure
> vows
>
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 14:35:43 -0500 (EST)
> From: Michael Pollak <mpollak at panix.com>
> Subject: RE: The Texas populist take on the tax cut
>
> On Fri, 10 Jan 2003, Max B. Sawicky wrote:
>
> > Molly is wrong on two counts.
>
> I think I follow what you're saying. But if I do,
> Molly is only wrong in
> her details of how 401ks work. She still right on
> her substantial point
> that 401k owners -- the vast bulk of the 70% who are
> counted as holding
> stock -- get nothing out of this proposal. Because
> their capital
> appreciation in 401k's is already untaxed. No?
>
> I think that's all that matters for her argument
> here.
>
> Michael
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 14:40:09 -0500 (EST)
> From: Michael Pollak <mpollak at panix.com>
> Subject: RE: The Texas populist take on the tax cut
>
> On Fri, 10 Jan 2003, Michael Pollak wrote:
>
> > I think I follow what you're saying. But if I do,
> Molly is only wrong in
> > her details of how 401ks work. She still right on
> her substantial point
> > that 401k owners -- the vast bulk of the 70% who
> are counted as holding
> > stock -- get nothing out of this proposal.
> Because their capital
> > appreciation in 401k's is already untaxed. No?
>
> Note re: an old discussion on using apostrophes to
> indicate the plural
> with abbreviations. In the above, 401ks looks
> weird, like a new category.
> With 401k's, on the other hand, it's immediately
> apparent that you've
> pluralized.
>
> The no-apostrophe method works fine when
> abbreviations are capitalized.
> But lots of them aren't.
>
> Michael
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 11:40:17 -0800
> From: "Jordan Hayes" <jmhayes at j-o-r-d-a-n.com>
> Subject: Re: The Texas populist take on the tax cut
>
> > She still right on her substantial point that 401k
> owners --
> > the vast bulk of the 70% who are counted as
> holding stock --
> > get nothing out of this proposal. Because their
> capital
> > appreciation in 401k's is already untaxed. No?
>
> Maybe. I know I'm probably atypical on this list
> for actively managing
> my finances (what can I say? I write programs to
> trade financial
> instruments from time to time, I'm interested in the
> general problem).
> When I come across a stock I want to own that's
> dividend-heavy, I shrug
> and put it into a tax-deferred account. So when it
> "works" and I'm
> "right" I'll see the benefit in 25 years. If this
> change goes through,
> I'm just as likely to do it in a taxable account and
> spend the winnings
> on a big screen TV or food.
>
> I bet I'm not alone in that.
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 14:41:12 -0800
> From: "Luke Weiger" <lweiger at umich.edu>
> Subject: Re: Helen Thomas vs. Ari Fleischer
>
> Yoshie wrote:
> > Justifiable if the Arab masses think it
> justifiable, unjustifiable if
> > the Arab masses don't think it justifiable. I
> leave it up to them to
> > determine.
>
> This is absurd. Was the Earth flat when the masses
> believed it to be so?
>
> - -- Luke
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 13:46:43 -0600
> From: Carrol Cox <cbcox at ilstu.edu>
> Subject: Re: The Texas populist take on the tax cut
>
> Chip Berlet wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > Woj is correct, centrist/liberal foundation
> funding outwieghs rightist
> > funding, and rightist funding is aimed far more
> strategically.
> >
>
> In other words the right is more successful in
> purifying its ranks of
> those who pretend to be conservative while
> expounding liberal policy,
> while liberals being more open take become a conduit
> for conservative
> rather than liberal viewpoints?
>
> It looks like the Right adheres to a strong version
> of Leninism: Better
> fewer but better.
>
> Carrol
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 11:48:59 -0800 (PST)
> From: andie nachgeborenen
> <andie_nachgeborenen at yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: Helen Thomas vs. Ari Fleischer
>
> - -- Luke Weiger <lweiger at umich.edu> wrote:
> > Yoshie wrote:
> > > Justifiable if the Arab masses think it
> > justifiable, unjustifiable if
> > > the Arab masses don't think it justifiable. I
> > leave it up to them to
> > > determine.
> >
> > This is absurd. Was the Earth flat when the
> masses
> > believed it to be so?
> >
>
=== message truncated ===

__________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list