|
Incoming and Outgoing
I'm going to look at a couple of charts, progressed and transiting, for two persons that are likely to be impacting the news sometime early next year. On February 1th, Howard Dean looks likely to win the DNC Chair. I'll show why the aspects favor Dean's star shining at that time. Also early next year, Supreme Court Justice Rehnquist is expected to retire, and the Republicans will want to nominate an ultra-conservative to replace his position in the court. I'll look at Brett Kavanaugh's chart, who has been mentioned as a possibility, and from his chart, looks like he's entering into just such a radical sphere. I'm not going to delve in a ton into the reading, but rather start the conversation. Here are links to their charts, with major progressions and transits set at 2.12.05 for Howard Dean and Brett Kavanaugh For Howard Dean, I don't see how he could lose the 2.12.04 race. I also never could see him losing the Presidential race either, to bad the Democratic Party didn't nominate him, as he's just got power written all over him at this time. Here's what I see for Dean. First, more lasting and transforming of his holding of power, transiting Pluto is moving over Dean's natal Mars in Sag., and then, 5 degrees later, will be transiting over Dean's natal Jupiter in Sag. This is a multi-year aspect just getting underway, first, through 2006, Pluto conjuncting Dean's Mars multiple times, and then, through 2008, Pluto conjuncting Dean's Jupiter multiple times. This transit is powerful for transforming Dean's position in the Democratic party, being a fighter and a leader that becomes the voice of the Democratic Party. While Pluto pulls away from the Democratic Party's progressed Sun, the later trails behind transiting Pluto as the Democratic Party's progressed Sun first conjuncts Dean's natal Mars and then Jupiter. Dean as the forerunner, here showing the path to transformation for the Democratic Party that follows his lead. Second, more to the 2.12.05 point, Jupiter is Sta. Rx conjunct Dean's natal Venus. This transit duo is further highlighted by Dean's progressed Venus conjuncting his natal Jupiter near the DSC. Dean's got a natal quintile aspect between Jupiter and Venus, which is somewhat of a fame aspect. It's certainly beneficial. Third, Dean's progressed Moon is in exact conjuntion with his natal Uranus, which is opposite that Natal Jupiter being conjuncted by his natal Venus; and the moon is ingressing into Cancer to crossover the ASC. I really like this, as it signals that Dean is going to get a new look by the people, and the "Dean Scream" is no longer going to be his tar baby. To sum it up for Dean, in this period, he's likely to have an extended honeymoon with people of this nation, many of whom will love his shockingingly straightforward and powerful demeanor. I suppose there are some negative aspects in his chart, but I get the sense that the aspects I mentioned above are so powerful that Howard gets the DNC Chair if that's what he desires. The second chart is that of Brett Kavanaugh., briefly mentioned in this Hill article, which mentions the possibility of choosing a conservative such as Brett Kavanaugh, whom many Republicans highly respect. This would be a disturbing choice. You'll notice in his bio that he was born in DC, and lives in DC --he's just 39 years old-- and his main work has been in the Office of Independent Counsel Kenneth W. Starr, before becoming a Senior Associate Counsel to President Bush. Basically, a partisan hack that has no life experience, other than inside the Republican machine. In his chart, you'll notice it's fairly cut and dry. He's an Aquarius, ruled by Uranus, which is oppossed by Saturn, and transiting Uranus will oppose the natal Uranus while conjuncting the natal Saturn. Uranus in Pisces conjuncted with Saturn, where breaking the law and remaking the law becomes sorta dicey depending upon the perspective. Through 2008, Uranus would conjunt his natal Pisces Chiron, while Saturn would transit over the natal Uranus. Kavanaugh certainly carries the cards of a potential reactionary radical. Just a hunch though, as to whether he is the replacement of Rehnquist. What's interesting in both of these charts is the prominance of Uranus in both these charts. This isn't shocking, but reflective of the wider political situation. As Nancy noted in an earlier article: ...it will be Uranus, with its sudden, unexpected awakenings, rebellions, and lightning-like strokes, that will intermittently clamor for our attention in the next four... In 2005, Uranus will oppose Bush’s Mars, square US Uranus, and square Inaugural Moon, almost simultaneously. Historically, Uranus’ hard aspects to the US Uranus have brought revolutionary movements (the pre-Civil War secession of southern states), as well as policies and cultural shifts that have broken with tradition (Reagan’s Star Wars, the Martin Luther King holiday, LBJ’s War on Poverty, and the beginning of the Beatles phenomenon). The first phase of this coming transit will be in late March and early April 2005. It is possible there will be some kind of rebellion among the people of the US, possibly aided by a newly awakened press. The third house Saturn in the Inaugural chart suggests that there could be an increasingly tense relationship between the Bush administration and the press during this term, with the press being critical of and at the same time feeling repressed and stifled by those in power. The Uranus transit to US Uranus, ruler of the 3rd house which covers the media, could awaken a rebellious spirit in the press. The Uranus square to Uranus this coming spring might also signal the “revolutionary” choice of a majority anti-abortion Supreme Court or the battle over this issue. In any event, it is likely to bring something that breaks sharply with recent tradition.
Vis Numar on Dec 2 | Link
Comments
Vis, Vis, really good talking points all over this new piece. Will have to study it. But something leaped out where you wrote "It is possible there will be some kind of rebellion among the people of the US, possibly aided by a newly awakened press." Also I wanted everyone to take note of the event I found on the real Clinton site. Vis Numar, Thanks for the analysis. I have one comment about Dean. And please don't take this the wrong way. Howard Dean is not very effective at organization building. Just look at what happened in his campaign: he ended up $25 million in debt. His people engaged in tactics which didn't work. Fir example he bussed thousands of young workers into Iowa for free only to have them stand around in the streets waving signs. Signs don't vote people do. Moreover, the people that did do voter contact alienated more voters than they attracted. Howard Dean himself is a polarizing figure (much the same way that Hillary Clinton is) and I would argue that he polarizes people within the party. Not only that, but he scares the bejeesus out of swing and independent voters and voters in the south (Dems and Repugs alike) hate him. Howard Dean and his supporters demonstrated during the campaign that they were alot of "sound and fury" but lacked the substance or experience for building an organization. I do not think that Howard Dean would be a good candidate for the DNC chair. I like Howard Dean and think he is a capable leader, but for all of the reasons mentioned above, I do not think he is a good choice for DNC leader. But as you indicated, he may get the job anyway. To all of the Dean lovers: Before you respond, please take note that these comments are not about Dean's politics or his positions, but about his appeal and his organization building abilities. If you are going to argue that Dean is a good choice for the DNC leaderhsip position, you need to tell me why I should overlook the $25 million of debt he incurred. If you can't justify this, you are not going to change my mind. Posted by: Dave on December 2, 2004 10:36 PMDave, I'd never heard that before, I think you wound up along the way with some bad info... look it up, show me the link. But anyway, it's beside the astrological point. His chart just looks good for the time, regardless of anything else. Posted by: Vis on December 2, 2004 10:43 PMFYI By charlie smith Publish Date: 2-Dec-2004 A Vancouver lawyer has filed torture-related criminal charges against U.S. President George W. Bush in Vancouver Provincial Court. Gail Davidson, cochair of an international legal group called Lawyers Against the War, told the Straight that she charged Bush on November 30 with seven counts of counselling, aiding, and abetting the commission of torture in connection with the actions of U.S. armed forces at the notorious Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq and at a U.S. naval base at Guantánamo Bay. If the case goes to trial and Bush is found guilty, he would be liable to imprisonment for up to 14 years." "I went about it in a very organized and solemn way," Davidson said. "It wasn't every day that someone was going to walk in and try to lay a charge against a visiting president." A justice of the peace accepted the charges, which means there will be a hearing to decide whether or not Bush will be required to appear. Davidson said that within eight days of her laying the charges, the Attorney General of Canada, Irwin Cotler, must give his consent for the case to continue. http://www.straight.com/content.cfm?id=6745 Trudy Posted by: on December 2, 2004 10:44 PMVis, My bad. Dean only had $500,000 of debt at the end of the campaign. I can't figure out how to post links on this board or on any other board. But if you just google the words "Dean" and "debt" you'll get about a dozen articles. Sorry. I should do better research next time. However, the search I just did led me to another fact that I forgot about. On January 28th, shortly after the New Hampshire primary, Dean's campaign implemented a pay freeze for a few weeks and refused to pay their staff to save money for what they still believed were going to be competitive primary fights. This is not the kind of behavior one would expect from an effective organization builder. Sorry again about the factual mistake. Posted by: Dave on December 2, 2004 11:16 PM$500K debt for a Presidential campaign? There must be something more, that's par for the course, and besides they easily raised that amount. Had a pay freeze? So did Kerry's and Edwards campaigns, par for the course, and those on Dean's did get paid. Dave, these are trivial issues. Posted by: Vis on December 3, 2004 12:26 AMSomeone at DailyKos mentioned that John Edwards would be a good pick for DNC chair. http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/12/2/195459/277 I absolutely adore Howard Dean and I think he is very good at grassroots-type stuff. But consider John Edwards, although I don't believe he would fight for it, he has other things in mind probably. Vis, thank you so much for your analysis. For sure Brett Kavanaugh is rather scary??!! Oh me, please USA, bring us back to truth and honesty and progressive thinking!! Posted by: Laurie on December 3, 2004 01:41 AMTrudy, thank you for the info. on the Canadian criminal charges. I got this back from a Canadian working on the case: http://www.lawyersagainstthewar.org/legalaction/Page1.pdf http://www.lawyersagainstthewar.org/legalaction/Information.Page2.pdf Posted by: Peg on December 3, 2004 02:21 AMVis, thank you for the look at Howard Dean. Posted by: Peg on December 3, 2004 03:36 AMGreat article Vis. Dave, It is my private theory that Joe Trippi was too involved with the Internet thing to watch the funds & thats why he was terminated. How could Dean be traveling on the campaign trail, & sit there in the office checking the books? Ohio electtion fraud investigation, a post from William Pitt found at DU... Contains a link to the document sent to Ohio Secretary of State Blackwell on Dec. 2 ------- good stuff here: Posted by: KM on December 3, 2004 05:34 AMVis- Now, about Trudy's article: Trudy, that's interesting and all, but what is the jurisdiction of this group? Since I assume they're not under the UN umbrella, I'm afraid that even if they convict him(which admittedly should be a cakewalk, should the atty. gen not be threatened by Gonzales or any other * goon squadder) would be akin to getting a speeding ticket in another state---ie, he couldn't go to Canada, but after four years he's only been there once and he could just laugh it off--plus, since the media here is Didn't mean to belittle anyone or anything, but I've nver heard of this lawyers' group and we've all seen how much of a free pass that * has gotten when it comers to breaking the laws of this country and the world...... Please, someone, anyone (of the brilliant minds on here) prove me wrong or give me reason to hope? Namaste and white light all---truth!!! Posted by: Garry on December 3, 2004 06:18 AMof course I meant payroll and chance in the article above...I'm a champion speller, but an average (at best) typist.....(sigh) Posted by: Garry on December 3, 2004 06:20 AMIf Dean had such great organization, I never saw it on the campaign trail. And that's before the scream as well as after. I agree that the media blew the scream way out of proportion. However, he still lost Iowa and New Hampshire and did not pick up many other states. The point isn't how many people were involved. He lost the primaries, so you're going to lose that argument no matter how you spin it. The question is "How were the people used?" This is where my real concern is. The Dean Campaign did alot of things, but how many of those things were effective in terms of mobilizing voters and generating support for his candidacy. Everything I heard during the campaign from former Deaniacs, from people who were in Iowa and New Hampshire, and from people who had been in competition with the Dean campaign suggests that the organization was immature in the sense that they spent alot of time doing things that didn't really move the campaign forward. Now I'm not saying that he was totally disorganized or that he is completely without merit, but I would argue that his campaign had more hype than it did organization in terms of how people were mobilized. And this is the point that I am trying to make. We should think carefully before we all jump on the Dean bandwagon again. Dean is a very inspiring and charismatic leader (and maybe that's just what the Democratic Party needs at this point), but before we leap onto the bandwagon again, we ought to look at Dean's record first. Now there is still the problem of appeal. Dean's appeal seems to have a ceiling. And that ceiling is lower than some possible alternatives for the position. Southern Democrats on balance don't find him particularly appealing. Independents and swing voters run the opposite direction. And Republicans hate him. I think Dean would do an excellent job of energizing the base, but the people that he energizes are mostly people that we can already count on to vote for, contribute to, and work for liberal candidates. Racial minorities don't find him particularly appealing, and he is not going o help at all with outreach towards religious voters. So think twice before you jump on the bandwagon again. ----
Vis, very interesting article. I do like Dean for that position. He is a good man and he has the backbone for the position. Looks like John Danforth (Missouri?) is also mentioned as a potential for the same position as Brett Kavanaugh. Have you taken a look at him yet? He just resigned from his position at the UN. http://bioguide.congress.gov/scripts/biodisplay.pl?index=D000030 DANFORTH, John Claggett, a Senator from Missouri; born in St. Louis, St. Louis County, Mo., September 5, 1936; graduated, St. Louis County Day (High) School 1954; graduated from Princeton University 1958, Yale University Law School and Yale Divinity School 1963; admitted to the New York bar in 1963, and commenced practice in New York City; ordained clergy, Episcopal Church 1963; attorney general of Missouri 1969-1976; unsuccessful Republican candidate for nomination to the United States Senate 1970; elected as a Republican to the United States Senate in 1976 for the term commencing January 3, 1977; subsequently appointed on December 27, 1976, to fill the vacancy caused by the resignation of Stuart Symington for the term ending January 3, 1977; reelected in 1982 and again in 1988, and served from December 27, 1976, to January 3, 1995; was not a candidate for reelection in 1994; chairman, Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation (Ninety-ninth Congress); resumed the practice of law; U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations 2004-; is a resident of St. Louis, Mo. Posted by: Pat C on December 3, 2004 11:46 AMDave, Garry, on Trudy's behalf, regarding your question on the lawyer's group: LAW is an international group of jurists and others based in Canada with members in 14 countries. Thanks Peg!!! Dave, I disagree with your notion that minority voters dislike Dean. As an African-American I really, really liked Dean. Most other African-Americans I knew liked him too. Iowa, Vermont and New Hampshire have a very small percentage of blacks so a large AA base of support in those early primaries would have been pretty much insignificant. However, if the campaign had stayed course and not gotten derailed by the DNC as well as the media I think you might have been surprised by his reception in the black community. Most of us voted Kerry reluctantly as he didn't connect well with blacks at all. His AA support came as a result of ministers and labor leader urging congregations and members to get on board to oust *ush. Frankly, the Dems need to forget the 'swing voter'. There was a 41% voter participation which means there are another 59% who are uninspired heretofore to get out and support either candidate. Kerry, may well have won the popular vote if fraud is uncovered. I feel, however, with *ush as his opponent he should have been able to rouse that 59% to enough fury against *ush/enthusiasm for him to have made any fraud irrelevant due to MASSIVE voter turnout and support for him. He didn'/couldn' do it. I think ultimately you're 'just not into him'(Dean). I understand cause I'm 'just not into him'(Kerry). I'm really pissed at his AWOL performance since the election, especially after he made such a show of 'REPORTING FOR DUTY' at the democratic convention. Posted by: soulchild on December 3, 2004 02:46 PMBernard Kerik was officially announced by you know who, as head of Homeland Security at 9:53 am EST in Washington, DC Posted by: Pat C on December 3, 2004 02:55 PMDave, I've not heard of minorities not liking Dean, I have heard of Democrats disliking him but that would he hearsay. The one thing that is the most disturbing but I don't know the impact on his being given the position, is the Democratic leadership in Colorado don't like him and don't want him. The Democrats here want to take the party more to the right, that's how they think they won in Colorado and they don't think Dean can or will do it. We cannot "out right" the right. Dean seems to be the only person so far, who has some kind of touch with the base and who the Democrats are. However the only way I see Howard Dean getting this would be if the decision is made 1st to middle of January, that's the DECISION not the announcement. The problem here would be unless Dean gets a great deal of grassroots support he isn't going to get it and the Feb. announcement date make it even more ominous due to a number of squares to Dean's chart (taking the opportunities from him) Shehan is on the radio right now announcing that she is running for the DNC Chair. The powerbrokers in the party do not want Dean and I personally think because of that they can look forward to another loss in 2006 Posted by: Sally on December 3, 2004 03:10 PMJanuary 20, 2005 .. National Day of Mourning: http://www.irregulartimes.com/creepingtheocracy.html In just one instance of this trend, the principal of Cedar Shoals High School in Athens, Georgia used the school's intercom system to preach an angry religious sermon to the entire school during instructional time. The principal, Tommy Craft, read an evangelical Christian poem he had found on the Internet and praised the Ten Commandments and "the word of God". As part of the announcement, the principal attacked non-Christian spiritual practices, including Native American beliefs and Wicca. The announcement went on to condemn birth control, then took the paradoxical twist of lashing out against pregnant students. From there, the principal characterized non-Christian students as "freaks", and demanded that mandatory prayers be recited by all students. What I find so disturbing about the above is that here in Alabama where I live a lawmaker who sought to ban gay marriage now wants to ban state funds from being used to purchase books with gay themes - there is a current rush of churches here to support this man! Getting really scarey by the day! From an Alabama newspaper: An Alabama lawmaker who sought to ban gay marriages now wants to ban novels with gay characters from public libraries, including university libraries. A bill by Rep. Gerald Allen, R-Cottondale, would prohibit the use of public funds for "the purchase of textbooks or library materials that recognize or promote homosexuality as an acceptable lifestyle." Allen said he filed the bill to protect children from the "homosexual agenda.". . . When asked about Tennessee Williams' southern classic "Cat On A Hot Tin Roof," Allen said the play probably couldn't be performed by university theater groups. Allen said no state funds should be used to pay for materials that foster homosexuality. He said that would include nonfiction books that suggest homosexuality is acceptable and fiction novels with gay characters. While that would ban books like "Heather has Two Mommies," it could also include classic and popular novels with gay characters such as "The Color Purple," "The Picture of Dorian Gray" and "Brideshead Revisted." Posted by: Siobhan on December 3, 2004 03:39 PMVis, a wonderful article, thanks for taking the time to do it. Sorry, for not acknowleging it in my earlier post. Posted by: soulchild on December 3, 2004 03:42 PMSorry, it wasn't Shehan, it was Harris announcing for the second position of Vice Chair. I don't know her and don't know if she is any kind of visionary but the Dems are in bad need of a visionary and so far I haven't seen one except Dean, who comes closer than the others. Wonder about Willie Brown, the mayor of San Francisco (well ex mayor) Maybe he doesn't want it, they do keep throwing Wellington Webb (ex mayor of Denver) name out there but he had some problems with the Unions here so I don't know if he would get that support. I did think Webb did a good job in Denver and he presided over massive growth for the city and did a pretty good job, but I don't think he can shake the party out of their ruts and fears. Posted by: Sally on December 3, 2004 04:02 PMCaptain Sally, P-l-e-a-s-e not Willie Brown. He's too much into power and he uses it ruthlessly when it suits him. Shhhhhhhh. Posted by: shylurker on December 3, 2004 04:53 PMGarry, concerning your comment about Bush's karma: the way I see it is that Bush's dharma hasn't been fulfilled. He is still a necessary cog in the structural changes that need to occur. Remember also that karma is not a system of punishment, but a mechanism for learning. I have become very interested in what's going on with the whole U.N. situation that Bush is becoming embroiled in. Will there be a collapse? How is this a power play between the forces? For anyone interested, here are some articles that might shed some light on different aspects of possible maneuverings in that area: http://www.newswithviews.com/Stubbs/rodney3.htm "The question of how and why the United Nations is the crux of the great conspiracy to destroy the sovereignty of the United States and the enslavement of the American people within a U.N. one-world dictatorship is a complete and unknown mystery to the vast majority of the American people. The reason for this unawareness of the frightening danger to our country and to the entire free world is simple. The masterminds behind this great conspiracy have absolute control of all of our mass-communications media, especially television, the radio, the press, and Hollywood. We all know that our State Department, the Pentagon, and the White House have brazenly proclaimed that they have the right and the power to manage the news, to tell us not the truth but what they want us to believe. They have seized that power on orders from their masters of the great conspiracy and the objective is to brainwash the people into accepting the phony peace bait to transform the United States into an enslaved unit of the United Nations' one-world government........link: http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/illuminati. I am fascinated by it all, and there is so much to learn that we were never taught in school, ya know? This is why I think that Kerry wasn't the right person at this time. He wasn't going to address the U.N. situation, and I think this is the battlefield that has been chosen in this time frame. Posted by: Peg on December 3, 2004 05:12 PMMy 2 cents: Dean is wonderful. Although I would hope he is chosen, I don't think he will be (See: "Democratic Governors want outsider to lead;" http://www.lasvegassun.com/sunbin/stories/nat-gen/2004/...) (Also, many Dem. factions are now pitching for anti-Gay marriage and Pro-life stances.) Howard Dean is a true national treasure. He is strong, principled, courageous, outraged (when needed), very focused and respectful, and, as Sally says, just the right person to inspire us. Problem is the same as it was 6 mo. ago: how he is perceived, his credibility, and his degree of experience/inexperience. Although he is fiscally centrist and moderate in many ways, he supported gay unions and he is from the "liberal" Northeast. And, of course, the Republicans (probably backed by the Democratic Party) were able to make him a laughing stock and spread lies about him on the internet. There was one in particular that linked him to Arafat and put a large ? in the minds of Jews (an important voting block in FL). I think he needs to continue where he for now, in a steady, public service niche, until his reputation is so strong that it will largely overcome negative perception and he can receive the support he richly deserves. Who says it has to be from the Democratic Party? A viable Third Party can arise. The combination of the Bush administration's incompetence, and the truth about the corruption that eventually comes out, will shift things in the public's eye. That, coupled with the matured Baby Boomers and their maturing adult children finally finding their power and their voice, will reverse the current trends. I strongly believe this will happen. The current bigotry we now see will just plain be overpowered by the resurgance of a peace, love, and civil/human rights generation. The public will see that we do have values: tolerance, love, and acceptance. Just as in the 60's, we will overcome. Bide your time, store your water and food and gold/silver/Euros, etc.; Uranus may just shock that into happening faster than we think. Posted by: Sharon on December 3, 2004 06:55 PMPlease, someone, anyone (of the brilliant minds on here) prove me wrong or give me reason to hope? Namaste and white light all---truth!!! http://www.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4057,11572863%255E421,00.html One of the first acts Georgie took upon entering office in 2001 was to pull the U.S. out of the International Criminal Court. Since them he has been pressuring countries participating in the ICC to give American war criminals a get-out-of-jail-free card. **** The success of the US push has been mixed, with the nation so far winning signatures from 96 mostly small and poor developing countries. No members of the European Union have signed the immunity pacts. I don't think * is totally out of the woods on this. Don't forget Germany is bring charges against Rummy and others. Again, I would be interested if any of the astrologers think any of this could stick. Does anyone know the exact date that Social Security was created (and the time although that is probably too much to ask)? Posted by: Teresa on December 3, 2004 10:02 PMTeresa, over at StarIQ is the noon chart for the Social Security Act itself. I've looked at Starcats but can't find the chart for the date and time the Social Security Administration opened for business. I think I have seen it there. I'll keep looking. More on the election fraud...this time from Montana! http://www.missoulanews.com/News/News.asp?no=4508 Also, Washington State is looking for assistance to raise $1 million for recount....check at DU for further info. Posted by: KM on December 3, 2004 10:25 PMThank you, shylurker. Posted by: Teresa on December 3, 2004 10:36 PMI just checked out the chart. StarIQ has the wrong year on it. SSA Online lists it as August 14, 1935 not 1936. Posted by: Teresa on December 3, 2004 10:39 PMShylurker, SSA was signed into law on 8/14/1935 but the first payment didn't go out until January 1937 (for 17 cents, oh my!). I ran a quick noon chart for the 1935 date and the first thing that hit was the Aquarius moon. It is in opposition to the Sun and Mercury. Also a Mars, Jupiter conjunction in Scorpio. Transiting Pluto is currently squaring SSA's Venus at 22 Virgo, transiting Saturn is conjunct Pluto and transiting Uranus will conjunct Saturn next spring. I really wish I had a good time for it. Initial impression is that Social Security will survive the assault on it planned by the Bush administration, at least at first, although changes will be made, some quite drastic. I think a more troublesome period is in a few years when Neptune moves to a conjunction of the SSA's moon but without a correct time it is impossible to pinpoint that. Posted by: Teresa on December 3, 2004 10:58 PMSorry to hog the board today but just heard about the Navy being involved in prisoner abuse (on the same day that Rummy announces he's staying on as Sec. of Defense). http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=301354 Posted by: Teresa on December 3, 2004 11:17 PMSome alternatives for DNC Chair: Martin Frost Each of these options has many pros and cons, but as I said previously, be careful about jumping on the bandwagon. I've said pretty much all I have to say on this issue, and I don't have anything new to add. Of course, astrological conditions may favor Dean anyway. And I don't think it's as if it would be a disaster if he wins the position. Right now, the disaster would be keeping Terry McAuliffe. Any of the names mentioned above, including Dean, would do a better job than he has. Posted by: Dave on December 3, 2004 11:31 PM
As to the UN. Noel posted the chart on the board and just doing some glances, I see blow back written all over it. Note that Uranus trians the 4th house when it hits 11 Pices and I bet they decide to move out of the US. Lots of challanges for sure for the next few years. a few mid points. Neptune/Pluto 9 Virgo 18 to Bush Mars 9 Virgo 17. So now all that needs to be done is watch the transits hit these spots and houses. It will tell story. Hoping that one of you great astrologers will pick this up and run with it. Jean Posted by: Jean on December 3, 2004 11:35 PMHere is a good site for information on the history of Social Security. http://www.ssa.gov/history/ Posted by: Pat C on December 3, 2004 11:44 PMClinton as head of the DNC...Wow Just want to say something about Kerry. Some didn't connect with him but I did. I felt he was and is a very high level human being. I also think I intuitively understand why he did not come out swinging after Nov. 2. First of all, I think he put at least 100% into the race...for a very long time, way back into the Iowa primaries and before. Not only did it take so much endurance, it took a great deal of guts and passion and that's what I saw him express when he spoke. I think that when the election went against him, in spite of the possible fraud, something must have gone out inside of him, a kind of light went out after all he did to sustain his effort. As a human being, he was probably hurt and disappointed and needed a good emotional and physical rest. However, I think he is totally abreast of what is going on and is allowing his team to pursue this. Thankfully, there are many others involved, but even if they weren't, I believe the Kerry legal team would have conducted a good investigation. Posted by: Sharon on December 4, 2004 12:01 AMAdditionally, as the encumbent president, George Bush had all the resources of the government at his disposal. Kerry had to really stuggle. It may not always show but he did. And, as was said here, maybe his health and energy is not 100%. After reading about all the Uranian aspects he still has to contend with, maybe it's better that he not go through these as president of the U.S. at this time. As I said, I do think things will turn around from the way they now seem. Posted by: Sharon on December 4, 2004 12:05 AMSharon, I have to agree with you. I too think things will turn out to be quite different than they seem right now. Posted by: Pat C on December 4, 2004 12:13 AMDave, why would you want Clinton? McAwfully was Clinton's boy? So's Ickes, and that's who they're pushing. Posted by: shylurker on December 4, 2004 12:43 AMClinton has broad appeal and would energize the party base. I'm not advocating Clinton over Dean or over anyone else. I'm just trying to acknowledge that there are alternatives to consider. Posted by: Dave on December 4, 2004 12:59 AMThanks, Dave. I'll be thinking about what you said. In the meantime, there is a lively, timely discussion going on over at DU that you might find of interest. http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x2784312 Posted by: shylurker on December 4, 2004 01:01 AMTeresa--The Social Security chart is on starcats. I had a feeling that's where I'd seen it before, but I couldn't find it. I had to write Claudia Dikinis and ask and she kindly provided the connection: She added, " Posted by: shylurker on December 4, 2004 02:12 AMhttp://www.insightmeditation.org/transforming.htm Transforming our Terror snip... While our political leaders feed us selective information to communicate a certain position, the original mind is able to realise a deep intimacy with what lies behind all the slogans, labels, and images; and it feels a depth of love for all those who suffer and the need for commitment to constructive engagement to resolve great problems. Not surprisingly, this spiritually informed attitude is not something most heads of state care for in their concern to win over their citizens with their political rhetoric. Yet, there is a place for wise authority in life. We need to be clear about its features so that we can distinguish it from an abusive form of authority driven by the need for power. A true authority expresses a wise and compassionate approach to human problems. It shows a genuinely sustainable, non-divisive view and it understands the deeper viewpoints of those who disagree violently with its position. A true authority is willing to be constructive with adversaries and speak openly about past and present misunderstandings, exploitation, and suffering; and it reveals a wise and mature response to events rather than a retaliatory one. If we can recognize those qualities in an authority, we have the grounds to place our faith in it. Wise leadership has the inner power to acknowledge mistakes of the past in matters of policy and perception as well as in the determination not to repeat history. In spiritual terms, this means ending the old “karma” and creating causes and conditions for healing and wholeness. This chapter examines the use and abuse of authority. It explores the ways in which authority manifests itself, primarily in the arenas of religion, war, and politics, and also how abuse operates in us at a personal level. And it suggests ways in which we can respond to abusive authority from a spiritual perspective. Injustice in the name of religion Going to war in the belief that it is the will of God is something common to most, if not all, religions and cultures in history. And it is easy to see that present-day conflicts and suffering clearly have parallels with those of the past. It has been said that if we do not learn from history we are doomed to repeat it. By studying the past we can see how war tends to arise in similar ways. For example, Jerusalem has seethed with conflict off and on for around a hundred generations, with claims and counterclaims by various peoples for control over the city. Today, there seems to be little hope in sight for reconciliation, because of the belligerence and demands of the opposing sides. In fact we are left wondering whether any people in the region (or in more recent times the international community) has made any progress toward resolving these religious and political disputes, which have rumbled on since the Middle Ages and before. During the 11th century CE, the principal rulers in Europe no longer perceived the Vikings as a threat to their security and moved toward seeing the Muslims as the new force to be feared. This perception contributed to the Crusading movement, which lasted for about 200 years. To encourage the Christian soldiers and knights to undertake these military expeditions to the Holy Land against the Muslims, the Church promised them that penance due to sin would be remitted. Also, if they died in battle they would be rewarded with a martyr’s crown, allowing them to go straight to heaven. So the Christian armies who set out for the Holy Land were bolstered by religious authority and the prospect of divine reward, just as Muslim suicide attackers are today. But using God as an excuse to kill enemies cannot be justified whatever the religion. God demands love, compassion, and justice from us, not slaughter. snip... Posted by: Pat C on December 4, 2004 03:11 AMhttp://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5478,11579577%255E663,00.html Allies back Annan amid fraud claim UNITED NATIONS - European and other nations are supporting UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan despite a US senator's demand he quit over the deepening Iraq oil-for-food corruption scandal. US President George Bush, though, is refusing show his hand. The American leader - who has clashed with Mr Annan repeatedly over the conflict in Iraq - yesterday declined to say whether Mr Annan should stay or go. Russia, China, Britain, France, Germany, China and dozens of other countries openly backed the UN chief. "Mr Annan is doing an excellent job as secretary-general," said British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw, perhaps America's closest ally. In contrast, Mr Bush demanded a full and fair and open accounting of the oil-for-food program, saying this was essential for US taxpayers to continue supporting the UN and "for the integrity of the organisation". US Senator Norm Coleman, who is investigating the oil-for-food program, called on Mr Annan to resign over "the UN's utter failure to detect or stop Saddam's abuses". The program began in 1996 to help Iraqis cope with UN sanctions imposed after Saddam Hussein's 1990 invasion of Kuwait. Two weeks ago, Mr Coleman's Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations said it had uncovered evidence Saddam's government raised more than $27.5 billion in illegal revenue by subverting UN sanctions and rorting the oil-for-food program. Mr Coleman has said Mr Annan - whose son has been implicated in the scandal - must go because the most extensive fraud in the history of the UN occurred on his watch. But in Europe and elsewhere, critics accuse the US media, and some US politicians, of overblowing the row. French President Jacques Chirac and German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder were among the latest to back Mr Annan. Posted by: Pat C on December 4, 2004 03:32 AMAbeline, that is an interesting question regarding the war crimes charge Germany has brought agains Rumsfeld. The Nuremberg Trials bagan at 10:00am on Nov. 20, 1945 in Nuremberg, Germany. The cream of Germany's military and top officers of Germany's Government were paraded in front of the world in a most humilitating fashion and the humilation lasted for over 50 years. Families and fortunes were destroyed and people changed their names due to an association with a charged family member. America pushed those trials and reminded Germany over and over in the last 50 plus years, that they were war criminals and all the while Germany knew there were war criminals in this country. Consciously or sub-consciously Germany would like to pay back this country (government) in-kind. Mercury is at 19 Sagittarius, and the Moon is, wait for it, at 9 degrees Gemini, right on the US Uranus and squaring the Mars in the *ush, Jr. Chart and the progressed Sun of his father and grandfather. Jupiter in the Nuremberg chart conjuncts GWB's Jupiter and sextiles the above Sag Mercury. Saturn in the '45 chart is conj the US Mercury at 24 Cancer, Saturn there indicates patience in getting even, the Trials Progressed Sun conj. the US Pluto and they think they can get even and maybe they can. T Pluto conjuncts the Trials Mercury, they are experiencing their 2nd Saturn return to 24 Cancer, T Uranus will square the 9 Gemini Moon (same Moon that will be on the Inaugual Chart. It isn't that other Presidents haven't committed War Crimes, but this is the first time that the climate is right for Germany to pay back a little of that humiliation and it looks like they will try to take that chance now and they will have support. Some of today's German leaders are still 1st generation family members of those put on trial. Posted by: Sally on December 4, 2004 04:12 AMBush needs the U.N. to disband because the EU is getting too much power, and switching all their Opec dollars to euro; the same reason they took out Saddam: http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=2539 Posted by: Peg on December 4, 2004 04:19 AMI would also like to point out for you astrologers out there that the Trials Mercury is in the 12th house and conjuncts * South Node and opposes his Uranus. There was alot covered up in those trials and a lot we don't know, just like the JFK murder. The US has those trial papers and have never released all of them, Israel has them and never released all of them and they hunted war criminals for decades. But, the other countries with those secret papers are the UK and Germany. Germany is now healing from their black spot, even have museums to honor the dead that they killed. When you heal and have nothing more to hide of your dark past you release tons of stuff. I don't know what aces Germany might hold but by their recent actions in the last 4 years, my guess is they have some aces and they know it. Posted by: Sally on December 4, 2004 04:22 AMWell, Captain Sally, I do hope these aces being laid down are part and parcel of the April conjunction of all Smirky's, Smirk Sr.'s & Prescottsmirk's suns. And it may not happen in my lifetime, but I want Geronimo's skull with the rest of his remains. Posted by: shylurker on December 4, 2004 05:21 AMAll branches of government are now tied up, the press is tied down, and the UN is under attack. Chances of investigating situations such as these two (related) are becoming awfully slim: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6621523 No accountability. Not any more. But, hey, there is a shining example across the Atlantic of what we once had:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/print/0,3858,5077328-110878,00.html Posted by: wv on December 4, 2004 03:23 PMfyi: WHY HAVEN'T THEY COUNTED A QUARTER MILLION VOTES IN OHIO? Live nationwide on Pacifica radio and at KPFT.org On Saturday, from 6pm-9pm EST ............................... http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1366349,00.html Latest from the incomparable Naomi Klein: You asked for my evidence, Mr Ambassador. Here it is Naomi Klein David T Johnson, Dear Mr Johnson, On November 26, your press counsellor sent a letter to the Guardian taking strong exception to a sentence in my column of the same day. The sentence read: "In Iraq, US forces and their Iraqi surrogates are no longer bothering to conceal attacks on civilian targets and are openly eliminating anyone - doctors, clerics, journalists - who dares to count the bodies." Of particular concern was the word "eliminating". The letter suggested that my charge was "baseless" and asked the Guardian either to withdraw it, or provide "evidence of this extremely grave accusation". It is quite rare for US embassy officials to openly involve themselves in the free press of a foreign country, so I took the letter extremely seriously. But while I agree that the accusation is grave, I have no intention of withdrawing it. Here, instead, is the evidence you requested..... More... Posted by: Pat C on December 4, 2004 03:42 PMwell folks, nice "knowin" ya: There are fully-prepared orders on this, just waiting for the Imperial signature and the media blitz is gearing up. The media will leap with joy over this because the internet is ruining their business so you will see all kinds of the Asccroft-Ridge type of bleatings about Saving Our People from the Evil Ones (for this read the Bush Administration) This is tentatively called “Operation Clarity” but the only clear thing is that the Fuehrer has been reading Mein Kampf again. This will probably never happen but it will if they have their way, believe me.” link:http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=2542 Article also describes Arafat's poison: November 26, 2004: “Bits of news for you…Arafat was indeed poisoned. The doer was one of his aides (now in a safe place and soon to be very dead) and he was supplied with money and a special drug.by one of Sharon’s hatchet men. This is known as Thanatox, developed by a Swiss subsidiary of Merck specially for the CIA. This causes a fatal blood problem resembling leukemia. The drug is administered orally and is not detectable in a post mortem. A quantity (20 doses) was given to the Israeli Mossad on June 10th, 2003. This product is colorless and odorless but must be administered over a period of time, not to exceed thirty days. The first symptoms will appear in about five days after the final dosage and this is always fatal. The progress is slow and can mimic a number of blood disorders...... Posted by: Peg on December 4, 2004 04:00 PM
http://bellaciao.org/en/article.php3?id_article=4534 Posted by: wv on December 4, 2004 05:03 PMSept. 4, 1955, in Newark, N.J Birth info for Bernard Kerik (a real winner!!! be sure to check out DU on him). I realize the time is crucial, but I didn't find that. Anybody want to try a little interpretation? Posted by: shyurker on December 4, 2004 07:06 PMcheck this out: Voter Fraud in Florida and Ohio: http://globalresearch.ca/articles/MEN412A.html Posted by: on December 4, 2004 07:51 PM
Wow! That new moon coming up in Sag in a week or so looks like a real hum-dinger. Sun/Moon/Pluto conj with Mercury just a tad outside it. I trust (as some are saying) this does mean more secrets out--ones big enough to put a stop to the juggernaut. Posted by: shylurker on December 4, 2004 10:51 PMShylurker, thank you for finding the chart for me. I'll take a look at it. Posted by: Teresa on December 4, 2004 10:58 PMFrom your mouth to G-d's ears, Shylurker. I really like what I read at globalresearch.ca, posted a few messages upthread. It's supposed to be written by an RNC informant who is relaying the Republican strategy used for the election fraud. May it be true and it be too powerful to surpress. Posted by: Sharon on December 5, 2004 12:30 AM Please forgive me if this has already been covered, but has there been an article yet or any in-depth comments on the Sag New Moon that Shylurker mentioned above? Posted by: Jonathan on December 5, 2004 12:39 AMJust did a cursory review of some of our most-watched characters. The upcoming new Moon in Sag would have some interesting impacts on: Smirky (natal Uranus at 19 Gem, SNode at 20 Sag, Venus at 21 Leo); John Kerry (natal Moon 17 Gem, Saturn 23 Gem, Sun 18 Sag); John Edwards (natal Sun 19 Gem, Pluto 21 Leo), Howard Dean (natal Mars 23 Sag); USA (natal Mars 20 Gem, Neptune 22 Virgo). Meanwhile, things are certainly percolating over in Ohio, as Sally so clearly pointed out for us recently. So whaddya think? I'm definitely going back under the bed next weekend. Posted by: shylurker on December 5, 2004 01:25 AMGreed An essay concerning the origins, nature, extent and morality of this destructive force in free market economies. Definitions. Paradoxes and omissions in Adam Smith's original theory permit - encourage - greed without restraint so that in a very large society over two centuries it has become an undemocratic force creating precipitous inequalities; divisions in this society now approach a kind of wealth apartheid, and our values are quite unlike Smith's: this is an immensely wealthy society but it is not a humane society. Wealth and poverty are connected, in fact recent sociological theory shows our institutions routinely design inequality in, but this connection is largely avoided in texts and in the media, as is the notion that greed is a moral wrong. Problems created by greed cannot be solved by technology. We are also distracted by already-outdated environmental rhetoric, arguments that scarcities and human suffering follow from abuse of our ecology. Rather, these scarcities are the result of what people do to people. This focus opens practical solutions. http://www.g-r-e-e-d.com/GREED.htm Well, I would just like to apologize for being so testy the last few days, particularly with some of my comments about Dean. I do not retract anything I said, but I should have appraoched the issue with more of a "lets discuss the pros and cons" mentality. Although that was what I intended, it was not how it came out, and I apologize for sounding like an obnoxious little sh*t. What's really been going on is that I've been freaking out about the LSATs which I took this morning. (I think I did okay, but won't find out until early January.) I am feeling much better now and no longer feel the need to project my unconscious anxieties onto Howard Dean, the posters of this board, my mother, or anyone else. Me so sorry. And Shylurker, thank you for the link to the DU discussion. Very lively indeed. Posted by: Dave on December 5, 2004 07:02 AMEverywhere but here at home! http://www.guardian.co.uk/ukraine/story/0,15569,1360236,00.html The exit polls are seen as critical because they seize the initiative in the propaganda battle with the regime, invariably appearing first, receiving wide media coverage and putting the onus on the authorities to respond. The final stage in the US template concerns how to react when the incumbent tries to steal a lost election. Congratulations, Dave! The test is over and I expect you did quite well. Most importantly, wanted to say that, by your self-awareness and unabashed apology, you've demonstrated a healthy ego and deep-seated concern for others. Not that I'm surprised. Just wanted to express my appreciation and delight. Posted by: shylurker on December 5, 2004 03:27 PMSally, Thank you for responding to my questions concerning war crimes. I'm sure it's a real dilemma for many countries because it's execution would be real dicey. I also think it's interesting that Senator Norm Coleman wants Kofi Annan to resign. I see the start of another smear campaign. Project onto others what you yourself are guilty of. My vote for the DNC chair would be Clinton for two reasons. First, he is the only person the repugs are afraid of (with good reason) and the second is his star power. Why would we not want the one with best track record? Just my two cents. Posted by: abilene on December 5, 2004 03:52 PMAbilene -- Here are a couple of things to be really worried about--and these two just happened to make the press. From an email I sent yesterday: They've got all three branches of government tied up, the press tied down and they're going after the UN. Guess that certainly greatly lessens the chances of any investigation of such extremely smelly situations as these two (related).
http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/printer_120504X.shtml Posted by: wv on December 5, 2004 04:28 PMHere's a bombing campaign we can all support: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6653449/ Just one more among the millions of reasons to appreciate Buddhism. Posted by: shylurker on December 5, 2004 04:53 PMAbilene, I agree with you totally that this thing about Annan resigning is projection and it's also a preemtive diversion. I guess no one has heard that the US is being accused of misspending Iraqi oil money. Coleman is just a Bush toady who is doing the White House's bidding to go after Annan because he told the truth when he called the Iraq war illegal!! Dave, I have to disagree with you about Dean. After the Dean scream, my bud from NYC told me that Dean was unelectable. I told him whoever the Democrats chose to run for President the Rethugs and more importantly the Press was going rip him to shreds.Was I wrong? I don't think so!!!!! I think that Dean would have really given Bush and the American a serious dose of the truth. The problem with the Democrats is they are afraid to lose and that is why we've lost the last two Presidental elections and the Rethugs are just like animals who can smell fear and pounce on us like rabid hyenas. Now the Democratic governors are saying that we need a Democratic chairman who is a centrist aka more Rethug lite. We need someone who is willing to stand up for reality and challenge those red-staters who vote against their own economic interests just so they can fly their Confederate flags----oppppps one guy did that during the primary--- Dean and of course pretty boy Edwards smacked him down with that 'we don't need any Northerners coming down here telling us what to do' speech. The disorganization in his campaign was Trippi, who was better at internet work than at actual ground game campaign strategy. And Trippi was a poor manager of funds and people at times, fostering alienation between the staff and some of the grassroots. Not only that, but I read stories about his "cult of personality" and arrogance that may have turned off a lot of backers. Plus he never created a strategy for dealing with the heavy blows that came from being the front-runner. Dean's Vermont was very steady and well-run. He left his state in the black and steered it, as he says himself, through two recessions. He created jobs, equalized education funding, and preserved hundreds of thousands of acres of pristine Vermont land. All that anti-Gay, "let's get back to religious talk" comes from only one entity: the DLC, or "Democrats Losing Consistently". Their hold on the party was due to their access to corporate cash. But with corps now giving to the Republicans 10-1, and no longer even hedging their bets, Democrats Losing Consistently no longer have the power they once had. As for minorities not liking him, that was all Al Sharpton. I am, and I know a number of Black Deaniacs who are proud of him because of his stances. And he had no problem getting Black Congressional people and Jesse Jackson Jr. to endorse him in the primaries. And a lot of the union base is black, and the unions definetly supported him. Posted by: Carol on December 5, 2004 05:17 PMRoderick, I agree with you 100% about Coleman. Unfortunately, he's my senator. I'm real tempted to write him and ask exactly how much money we Minnesotans need to give him in order for him to represent us again (or perhaps for once). Posted by: abilene on December 5, 2004 07:11 PMClinton is the LAST person we need to head the And the work of building the party needs someone who can quietly slip into town sometimes and sit with officals for a few days. It needs someone who could simply drop in for meetings, who could spend weeks on the phone quietly talking to various people. President Clinton couldn't do that, even if he had the steadfast patience to do this work. No President, current or former can travel all that quietly without a retinue. And would Clinton want to do it anyway? He's having a blast talking to people and setting his own schedule and traveling around the world. He couldn't do that and take care of party business so closely. Add the suspicion about Hillary's ambitions, and it's a no-go from the start. If you want to reach back, Gore would be a better bet. He has the meticulousness and patience necessary. The grassroots love him, and he is articulate and sincere. Posted by: Carol on December 5, 2004 09:32 PMPat C. and Raj: I left you both messages on the previous thread "Boomerrang". Please go read them at the bottom of the page. I didn't want to post them here because they were off topic. If I could check in more often I wouldn't have to do this. Sorry and Thanks! Posted by: Beverly on December 5, 2004 09:34 PMwv, Unsubstantiated rants like the one about Clinton are one reason I find myself visiting this Board less and less. After awhile, watching Liberal Democrats (and I've been one my entire life and will be 'till the day I die!) eat each other up in the most disgustingly carnivorous way is one of the reasons we Liberals lose and, quite honestly, the whole cannabalistic spectacle becomes fairly boring after awhile. I believe Clinton would make a fine head of the DNC, but I doubt he'd take the job. He's not stupid and recognizes that the organization needs to go through an overhaul much as the Repugs did to themselves in the 70s or 80s maybe? And I trust he has other things he'd rather do than corral a bunch of Democrats into anything resembling "agreement". To call Clinton a Republican is not only childish, but hopelessly inaccurate. I won't list his accomplishments and all he did for our country during his 8 years in Office, but, on a board like this, would it really matter if I did? I'm sure someone would grow red in the face and spew out a stream of invective about how Clinton's a Republican and hasn't done anything for anyone since getting a blowjob by Monica. Why waste my time? Jonathan Posted by: Jonathan on December 5, 2004 09:38 PMDave, here's another interesting thread that's underway over at DU: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x1408844 I find it very interesting to see what "grass roots" folks are thinking and doing. Posted by: shylurker on December 5, 2004 11:56 PMI agree, Shylurker, that DU is really rockin' these days! Very intelligent conversations backed up with facts and links. A sense of people working together and encouraging each other to keep their spirits up and not give up. During the last month or so, it's been a lifesaver for me. Nice to know that attorneys are hard at work behind the scenes allegedly gathering evidence and filing the appropriate lawsuits. I'll have to look through the archived articles here on AstroWorld to see what the Stars may say about the next month or so. :-) Posted by: Jonathan on December 6, 2004 12:18 AMThis time I agree with Jonathan! Clinton was one of the best presidents this country ever had. And liberals, including myself, owe him an apology. We did nothing while the repugs did their best to drag him down. He gave us some very good years and this is how we repay him. Posted by: abilene on December 6, 2004 12:25 AMThank you, abilene. I guess this means I can take off my flame-retardant body suit now? LOL Posted by: Jonathan on December 6, 2004 12:35 AMhttp://www.holoam.com/ http://smsfilm.blogs.eurosport.com/files/chengrenltan.htm Post a comment
|