Friday, May 23, 2008

Andrew Sullivan - is Aries Moon to blame?

The declarations of my fellow-countryman Andrew Sullivan often make me squirm. If I accidentally stumble across him in a TV show my stomach starts to churn. I do so wish he wasn't an Englishman, he lets the side down badly.
We English are supposed to be phlegmatic, fair-minded, mellowed by centuries of history. I guess that's why he took himself off to the USA then! Perhaps that's a factor in why I'm here myself - we didn't quite fit in.

A blog entry by "Pagan Power" at No Quarter reminded me how little respect I have for this man. The piece is titled "Is Andrew Sullivan a Sociopathetic Hack?" the writer quotes Sullivan several times, but the following quote from him really fired me up:

"I think she (Hillary Clinton) has now made it very important that Obama not ask her to be the veep. The way she is losing is so ugly, so feckless, so riddled with narcissism and pathology that this kind of person should never be a heartbeat away from the presidency."

This man is so incredibly arrogant. Narcissism? He wrote the book! What right has he to make pronoucements such as this about a national figure who deserves respect - he's not even a US citizen! He doesn't have to like Senator Clinton, nor agree with her on anything at all, but he has no right to publicly disparage her. Yes, I'm aware of freedom of speech, but there's also a matter of taste and courtesy to be considered.

Let's see if his natal chart gives a clue why I should find him so objectionable. Born 10 August 1963 in Godstone, Surrey, UK. No time of birth available - 12 noon chart below:

Mercury conjunct Pluto and Uranus - together in critical Virgo - ouch, and double ouch! The lad can't help being ultra-critical(Virgo), at times outrageously so (Uranus), and sometimes hurtful(Pluto). His Leo Sun endows him with kingly arrogance, Saturn in Aquarius opposes his natal Sun bringing a push-pull effect between the brightness of Leo and dull strait-laced conservatism of Saturn, with a hint of rebellious nature coming into play.

Unless he was born in the last few minutes of 10 August his natal Moon would have been in Aries, along with Jupiter. Mars, ruler of Aries lies opposite in Libra (but perhaps not tightly opposing), here's another, weaker, push-pull effect between an Aries Moon (impetuous, impatient) and a Libra Mars(passive-aggressive procrastinator). I understand an Aries Moon - I have one of 'em, and can see where part of his attitude comes from ( only have to read this to understand).

By a weird coincidence, today I found myself looking at the chart of someone I know, who happened to have been born just 3 days away from Mr. Sullivan, in a different country, and (I'm pretty sure)at different time of day. Planets, except the Moon, are in very similar positions. The difference in personality, and in how the two come across, is quite stark. This brought it home to me, once again, how extremely important it is to know the accurate time and place of birth when considering a birth chart in any depth. Sullivan's Moon in Aries is one key to the contrast in these two people's personalities, his ascendant remains an unknown factor and is the other placement which would account for vast differences in the way these two people come across.

It pains me to post the following YouTube video featuring not one, but two Englishmen, Sullivan and Christopher Hitchens, both high on my list of those to avoid like the plague. I'm posting it to illustrate attitudes. Passing readers may or may not agree with what they say about Senator Clinton (please note, it's Senator to you, not "Mrs" Clinton, Mr Sullivan!) Personally I strongly disagree with their comments, I see no attitude of self-pity in Senator Clinton - the opposite in fact. Sullivan admits here that he idolised Margaret Thatcher - for me, that says it all.

PS - an article by another Andrew, Andrew Stephen, in the UK's 'New Statesman' acts as an antidote to the above "Hating Hillary". Thank you, Mr. Stephen !


R J Adams said...

I'm afraid I never read or watch the likes of Sullivan or Hitchins. I prefer the words of 'ordinary folk', rather than the elite and wealthy whose position in life allow them access to Oxford or Harvard, while others with more between their ears, have to make do with Reigate Tech.

Come the revolution, sister!

Twilight said...

You're very wise, RJ - I avoid them too, whenever I see 'em coming!

I'm firmly on the side of "the great unwashed", even when I've just stepped out of the bath. I'll have no truck at all with the elite of academia - or anywhere else.

I liked a remark the governor of(I think it was) Kentucky made on TV - he said "the people I represent have PhDs in life". That's the best university of all!

Wisewebwoman said...

I also avoid these two like the plague, T. Buffoons we would call them in another time.
As to the misogyny, it leaves me breathless. All the attributes they assign to HRC could be attributed to the others.
Makes my brain bleed.....

Anonymous said...

don't care for Sullivan's views either, but love reading Hitchens, as he writes so well, whether I agree or not.

Twilight said...

Buffoon is such a good descriptive word for guys like these - we should bring it back into common use again. :-)

Hi Anonymous
I haven't read any of Hitchens' books, so can't comment, maybe "a certain style" he has when writing makes up for a lot of other deficiencies. :-)

Amy Shapiro said...

His Eris 15 Aries, trine his Sun, fans his ego also.

Twilight said...

Amy Shapiro ~ thank you for the additional insight! :-)