"I avoid predicting political winners, because the birth data is usually unreliable or missing. That's the case with John Kerry - in 2 minutes of searching the internet, I found birth times of 8:03 a.m. and 7:10 a.m. I wrote here two months ago that September could bring a step up for Kerry, and he might ride this into a November victory. The September 30 debate brought that step up. On Kerry's last birthday, Jupiter was in his solar career sign, sometimes an indicator of political victory. But neither of Kerry's "birth times" confirm this indicator. On the negative side, Pluto is now in the same spot in the heavens as Kerry's Sun - the very aspect that defeated Michael Dukakis. Nor is Bush slouching on election day - the Moon will be in Cancer, signalling a 1-in-28-day peak in popularity for Bush. This, too, is a strong indicator of political victory. I will say this: if Bush is elected, he faces a downfall in 2005. There is some indication between Bush and Kerry's charts that Kerry inherits "a karmic task" from Bush. I'll go with this and call Kerry the winner, but with trepidation."
from
http://www.astralreflections.com/html/this.html
Joanna
Thomas Seay wrote:
>http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20041020/ap_on_el_pr/bush_robertson_2
>
>In January, Robertson told viewers during his "700
>Club" television program that God had told him Bush
>would win re-election in a blowout." In the CNN
>interview, Robertson said he believes Bush will win by
>a "razor-thin" margin but a substantial Electoral
>College victory.
>
>
>___
>
>
>
>=====
>The real world gives the subset of what is; the product space represents the uncertainty of the observer. The product space may therefore change if the observer changes; and two observers may legitimately use different product spaces within which to record the same subset of actual events in some actual thing. The "constraint" is thus a relation between observer and thing; the properties of any particular constraint will depend on both the real thing and on the observer. It follows that a substantial part of the theory of organization will be concerned with properties that are not intrinsice to the thing but are relational between observer and thing.
>
>W. Ross Ashby
>
>
>
>_______________________________
>Do you Yahoo!?
>Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today!
>http://vote.yahoo.com
>___________________________________
>http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>
>.
>
>
>