|
|
| |
| SUBJECT: |
Bullseye on your Predictions! |
| DATE POSTED: |
7/7/2004 |
| NAME: |
Jill Thorins |
| EMAIL: |
thorinberry@aol.com |
| |
I was searching StarIQ for John Edwards' chart and found this article. Just wanted to say congratulations on your bullseye predictions on both the primary and Kerry's choice of Edwards! I've been following your predictions for many years, and I've got to say you are right on target! I'm a certified fan. |
|
| SUBJECT: |
Professionalism in Astrology |
| DATE POSTED: |
3/15/2004 |
| NAME: |
Jeff Jawer |
| EMAIL: |
jjawer@stariq.com |
| |
I appreciate Jennifer's point, but heartily disagree. The Wall Street Journal is far from objective, but it's still a good place to learn about financial markets. StarIQ isn't objective either (we're human), but we are serious about astrology and try to respect other political points of view, even if we don't choose to promote them. |
|
| SUBJECT: |
Not all astrologers are left, liberal, and Democrat |
| DATE POSTED: |
3/12/2004 |
| NAME: |
Jennifer S. |
| EMAIL: |
JenniferSShelton@yahoo.com |
| |
Dear StarIQ,
I continue to appreciate StarIQ's wide selection of free and thoughtful content. However, it has become a growing concern that all of your articles that even lightly touch on American politics are 110% anti-Bush. There is no balance or objectivity whatsoever in your political "analysis". Your political commentaries would not grant any reader an intelligent, enlightened perspective, because your slant and bias is so obvious. It would be more professional of you to balance your anti-Bush articles with pro-Bush ones. Not all astrologers are left, liberal, and democrat. A growing number are right, conservative, and republican. Democrats do not have a monopoly on the truth. It would be nice if your website reflected an awareness of this fact. |
|
| SUBJECT: |
excellent alliteration |
| DATE POSTED: |
2/26/2004 |
| NAME: |
Parold J Rainwater |
| EMAIL: |
rainey@capecod.net |
| |
Dear Ken:
Great food-for-thought article on the political polarity. I loved the "proverbial poop" part. Keep up the great writing !!
Parold J.Rainwater, Cape Cod, MA |
|
| SUBJECT: |
presidential election |
| DATE POSTED: |
2/26/2004 |
| NAME: |
Raj |
| |
You had correctly said another war
or terrorist incident should not determine who gets elected in 2004. But then, that is exactly what the corrupt, arrogant bush/cheny/rove axis of evil is trying to do.With
the help of musharaf of pakistan, trio is trying for an october surprise like getting osama or a look alike or a look alike body of osama is on the works. After all father bush(41) with reagan bribed the iranians with arms and weapons and money to hold on to the hostages till 1980 elections were over and synchronised their release with their inauguration.Nader will not be a factor this year, as the saying goes 'once bitten twice shy',
nader may at the most get less than
0.5% of the votes if at all he runs,
since I think he may abruptly withdraw in Aug-Sept period!
|
|
|
return to article
|
|
|
