And other dirt.  I figured it would be interesting to have a thread to record all dirt that's going to come out of Shillary's closet full of skeletons.

We'll start with fraud at the Clinton Foundation and lots of missing money.

http://www.breitbart.com/video/2016/05/1...oundation/

Video is by Fox Business.

1. Move thread here.  I think it makes more sense.
2. From Finland:





Album · 2010
Filed under Hard Rock

more
Tracklist
01 Intro (0:48)
02 The Trip (3:25)
03 I'm Free (3:31)
04 Fever (4:43)
05 Bad Year (2:35)
06 Sound Of Green (3:46)
07 Hail (3:58)
08 Burnin' Up (3:32)
09 Catfish (3:39)
10 Psychedelia (6:34)

Total time: 36:31
Line-up/Musicians
- Otu / vocals,guitars
- Kride / guitars, backing vocals
- Andy / drums
- Frasse / bass
About this release
Self-Released

I'll probably also be adding some other Illustrated Philosophy videos around here.

The National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC) hadn’t updated its near-real time daily chart of Arctic sea ice levels in more than a month. A satellite that monitors the ice malfunctioned, forcing the center to suspend the service.
Researchers missed a lot during those dark weeks.
Using information from a different satellite, the NSIDC provisionally updated its Arctic sea ice data on May 6 — and the findings were alarming.



Comment from me: 2 standard deviations means less than a 5% chance of an event being random.

According to the data, the Arctic sea ice melt season is running as much as one month earlier than average. Unless weather patterns change dramatically, that could mean a record year for summer melting of Arctic ice.

The ice already appears to be disappearing at a pace far faster than in 2012, when Arctic ice extent hit a record low.  
Mark Serreze, the director of the NSIDC, told Mashable that there is evidence of fractures in the ice cover north of Greenland, which is “quite unusual” for this time of year.
“To me, it suggests a thinner, weaker ice cover,” he said.
In 2013, the U.S. Navy predicted an ice-free Arctic this summer. Now some reports show this prediction may indeed be realized. 
This spring, the European Space Agency’s CryoSat 2 satellite revealed that ice cover across the Arctic Ocean was, on average, 15 percent thinner than it was at the same time last year. In March, the NSIDC announced that Arctic sea ice had reached a record minimum for winter maximum extent. If Arctic sea ice levels plummet below 2012 levels this summer, it will be the second historic low of the year.

“I’ve never seen such a warm, crazy winter in the Arctic,” Serreze said in a statement earlier this year. “The heat was relentless.”

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/arct...d4d6f22b14

Link

Quote:Truly, Donald Trump knows nothing. He is more ignorant about policy than you can possibly imagine, even when you take into account the fact that he is more ignorant than you can possibly imagine. But his ignorance isn’t as unique as it may seem: In many ways, he’s just doing a clumsy job of channeling nonsense widely popular in his party, and to some extent in the chattering classes more generally.

Last week the presumptive Republican presidential nominee — hard to believe, but there it is — finally revealed his plan to make America great again. Basically, it involves running the country like a failing casino: he could, he asserted, “make a deal” with creditors that would reduce the debt burden if his outlandish promises of economic growth don’t work out.

The reaction from everyone who knows anything about finance or economics was a mix of amazed horror and horrified amazement. One does not casually suggest throwing away America’s carefully cultivated reputation as the world’s most scrupulous debtor — a reputation that dates all the way back to Alexander Hamilton.

The Trump solution would, among other things, deprive the world economy of its most crucial safe asset, U.S. debt, at a time when safe assets are already in short supply.

Of course, we can be sure that Mr. Trump knows none of this, and nobody in his entourage is likely to tell him. But before we simply ridicule him — or, actually, at the same time that we’re ridiculing him — let’s ask where his bad ideas really come from.

First of all, Mr. Trump obviously believes that America could easily find itself facing a debt crisis. But why? After all, investors, who are willing to lend to America at incredibly low interest rates, are evidently not worried by our debt. And there’s good reason for their calmness: federal interest payments are only 1.3 percent of G.D.P., or 6 percent of total outlays.

These numbers mean both that the burden of the debt is fairly small and that even complete repudiation of that debt would have only a minor impact on the government’s cash flow.

So why is Mr. Trump even talking about this subject? Well, one possible answer is that lots of supposedly serious people have been hyping the alleged threat posed by federal debt for years. For example, Paul Ryan, the speaker of the House, has warned repeatedly about a “looming debt crisis.” Indeed, until not long ago the whole Beltway elite seemed to be in the grip of BowlesSimpsonism, with its assertion that debt was the greatest threat facing the nation.

A lot of this debt hysteria was really about trying to bully us into cutting Social Security and Medicare, which is why so many self-proclaimed fiscal hawks were also eager to cut taxes on the rich. But Mr. Trump apparently wasn’t in on that particular con, and takes the phony debt scare seriously. Sad!

Still, even if he misunderstands the fiscal situation, how can he imagine that it would be O.K. for America to default? One answer is that he’s extrapolating from his own business career, in which he has done very well by running up debts, then walking away from them.

But it’s also true that much of the Republican Party shares his insouciance about default. Remember, the party’s congressional wing deliberately set about extracting concessions from President Obama, using the threat of gratuitous default via a refusal to raise the debt ceiling.

And quite a few Republican lawmakers defended that strategy of extortion by arguing that default wouldn’t be that bad, that even with its access to funds cut off the U.S. government could “prioritize” payments, and that the financial disruption would be no big deal.

Given that history, it’s not too hard to understand why candidate Trump thinks not paying debts in full makes sense.

The important thing to realize, then, is that when Mr. Trump talks nonsense, he’s usually just offering a bombastic version of a position that’s widespread in his party. In fact, it’s remarkable how many ridiculous Trumpisms were previously espoused by Mitt Romney in 2012, from his claim that the true unemployment rate vastly exceeds official figures to his claim that he can bring prosperity by starting a trade war with China.

None of this should be taken as an excuse for Mr. Trump. He really is frighteningly uninformed; worse, he doesn’t appear to know what he doesn’t know. The point, instead, is that his blithe lack of knowledge largely follows from the know-nothing attitudes of the party he now leads.

Oh, and just for the record: No, it’s not the same on the other side of the aisle. You may dislike Hillary Clinton, you may disagree sharply with her policies, but she and the people around her do know their facts. Nobody has a monopoly on wisdom, but in this election, one party has largely cornered the market in raw ignorance.

The name is real, and Ken Ham really is a ham.



Ken Ham, the creationist behind the giant Noah’s Ark replica nearing completion in Kentucky, received some pointed questions on Twitter from those who have a problem with the central message in the biblical story.

The Noah tale, which is in the Genesis, involves a massive global flood that wipes out the entire human race save for eight people — and that doesn’t sit right with some(.)

(Basically, God is a murderer if you believe the story of the Great Flood).

Many responded to Ham as he sent out his tweets — with some mocking the ark and the very unbiblical way in which it’s being built(.)

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/...b01a5ebde3fa04

[/url]
Originally Posted by Taramarie [url=http://www.fourthturning.com/forum/showthread.php?p=556520#post556520]

Quote:That is just one of the many reasons i do not understand why people worship a god who sounds completely evil.

I know you are all waiting anxiously for my revised horoscope scoring system for the USA presidents and candidates. I've about finished and have some interesting news items.

It's true that Bernie loses his perfect 10-0 score in the new system. But now he's at 14-5, and still has a higher score than all the candidates of the 2016 race except, believe it or not, George Pataki at 14-4, who never had a chance in his Republican Party. I never really understood how George Pataki could have a good score, but then, I am not a Republican from New York.

3 new aspects that score negative for Bernie were added that basically say that he gets stuck in a rut with his ideas, and gets carried away with his thoughts of transforming things. But, such is as we expect. Most of the potential Democratic candidates today don't look that great; none match Bernie's score. So I'm not sure whom the Democrats can field in the future. Almost all modern presidents (since FDR) have had astronomically high scores in the new system. Obama, for example, now scores 18-3! So did Dubya, and Bill scored 19-2. Even Lincoln only had 16-2, and he and James K Polk had the best scores in the old days.

My new system is much more consistent, with almost all presidents having positive scores and beating their opponent's score. With the Saturn Return factor added, only four of the 57 contests were anomalous. Even in those 4 cases, 3 of the losers went on to become president later. 

The Saturn Return factor is that (since 1824) if Saturn returns to its position in a candidate's horoscope during the election or in the next 4 years (when the candidate is about 55-59 years old), that candidate loses, refuses to run again, dies, or suffers a calamitous presidency that ruins him. All current candidates are clear of this factor. If Andrew Cuomo had run this year, he would have faced a Saturn Return. His score is better now than it was, by the way. He may be one of the few options the Democrats have in the near future. My hopes for Corey Booker just went kaput.

Meanwhile, Hillary Clinton now has a positive score, if still a weak one: 12-9. But, the other news is that Donald Trump is not as strong in the new scoring system. Now 8-4, it's still higher percentage-wise than most of the Republican field in 2016. Only Pataki and Carly Fiorina have higher scores. Jeb Bush's score went down to 9-11, and Cruz and Kasich have even more dismal scores than they had before. But Hillary can almost catch up with Trump in her scoring percentage with the added, unofficial points for Jupiter, Mercury and Venus rising on her ascendant. Most candidates with Jupiter rising in their charts (including her husband) have won their elections. And no candidate with so low a score (8) on the positive side of the equation has been elected since Herbert Hoover (who had 8-12, now the lowest % score ever to win).

I will post the new revised article soon. Best wishes, and keep the star currents flowing. As above, so below!

(05-11-2016, 01:27 PM)Dan Wrote:

g	g	g	g
d	c	h	g
c	x	n	m
v	z	y	v

t	t
u	y

 

(05-11-2016, 01:27 PM)Dan Wrote:

g	g	g	g
d	c	h	g
c	x	n	m
v	z	y	v

 

---

(05-11-2016, 01:27 PM)Dan Wrote:

g	g	g	g
d	c	h	g
c	x	n	m
v	z	y	v

t	t
u	y

 

f	g
g	f

Is the Generations forum just about generations in general and not how they apply to the turnings? I'm just wondering if they would be put in the Turnings forum instead.

In Who are you voting in 2016, Kinser and I were talking about the situation in the Middle East, and I decided to post it to this thread so it doesn't completely go off-topic. How will we solve the situation with Syria and ISIS? If we fight the Assad regime in Syria and ally with the rebels (for lack of a better word), then ISIS might take over, and might be a threat to the US and the rest of the Middle East. However, if we fight ISIS instead, then Syrian government might win, leaving us between a rock and a hard place. What would the best course of action be? How would any of this play out militarily? And would any of this lead to World War III?