.JPG)
I've been trying to recall where I read something which might link a group of theories I've come across during the past week. A search among the usual suspects led me to the article I was looking for. At Astrotabletalk, in February, Dharmaruci wrote the following in a post dealing with the next two years for Aquarius:
"The people of the USA are Aquarian (Moon of the Sibly Chart). As Pluto has entered the Aquarian Solar 12th House, so has the politician Barack Obama risen spectacularly. Many people view him as either a cult leader or the potential saviour of America, depending on their political point of view, but in each case he is Neptune. The USA is also about to have a Neptune-Moon conjunction by transit. The first rule of a Neptune transit is that in certain respects things/people will not be what they seem. Personally, I would feel a lot easier around Obama’s popularity if he were not being voted for under the early stages of this Neptune transit. "
Neptune, it seems to me, is the astrological common denominator of these three theories. They reek of Neptunian mystery, fog, illusion, and imagination
Here are the theories (not my own, I hasten to add):
1) Tactically, the Democratic National Committee doesn't want a Democrat to win the 2008 election. The DNC is content to lose, and pretty certain that they will do so with Obama as nominee. There are too many huge problems to be cleared up after Bush and Co. They may be thinking: "Let a Republican clean up, get the blame for enormous problems which will ensue, and leave the field wonderfully clear for Democrats to sweep in in 2012, reputation unsullied".
2) The Democratic National Committee really wanted Hillary Clinton to be nominee all along, but faced opposition from many of their party who dislike her due to so-called negatives. So the DNC got behind Obama, as a good "straw man", who as first potential African American presidential nominee, would look good here and abroad. All the while the elders of the Democratic party, knowing of Obama's iffy Chicago background, felt certain news of it would emerge eventually and help catapult Hillary Clinton into the lead, overcoming earlier objections from party members.
3)The Republicans (possibly Karl Rove in particular) are behind Obama's quick rise to the top - they invested money (anonymously of course) and used media, much of which they control (eg MSNBC owned by General electric) to support him and discredit Clinton on a regular basis. They know they are on a sticky wicket this time, after 8 disastrous years, but think they could easily beat Obama, due to shady, potentially dangerous, elements in his background, of which they will reveal more once he's nominated and Clinton is out of the way.
Holes can be found in each of those, of course, but Neptune's fuzzy hand is detectable in all of them. Is it entirely unthinkable, though, that when history is written and Neptune's fog has cleared, it could be discovered that one of the above theories was, in fact, fact?
There's one more avenue down which Neptune's fog has silently crept during this election time, but an investigative journalist, Evelyn Pringle is hard at work trying to blow it away. Her detailed accounts of murky goings on in Chicago politics are hard to digest. I tried and gave up. Blogger Joseph Cannon, at Cannonfire on 27 May, under the title The Obama Trail, made an initial attempt to produce a precis of Ms Pringle's accounts, rendering them more easily absorbed and suitable for the average blog reader on-the-run. Disturbing stuff. Neptune driven?
"The people of the USA are Aquarian (Moon of the Sibly Chart). As Pluto has entered the Aquarian Solar 12th House, so has the politician Barack Obama risen spectacularly. Many people view him as either a cult leader or the potential saviour of America, depending on their political point of view, but in each case he is Neptune. The USA is also about to have a Neptune-Moon conjunction by transit. The first rule of a Neptune transit is that in certain respects things/people will not be what they seem. Personally, I would feel a lot easier around Obama’s popularity if he were not being voted for under the early stages of this Neptune transit. "
Neptune, it seems to me, is the astrological common denominator of these three theories. They reek of Neptunian mystery, fog, illusion, and imagination
Here are the theories (not my own, I hasten to add):
1) Tactically, the Democratic National Committee doesn't want a Democrat to win the 2008 election. The DNC is content to lose, and pretty certain that they will do so with Obama as nominee. There are too many huge problems to be cleared up after Bush and Co. They may be thinking: "Let a Republican clean up, get the blame for enormous problems which will ensue, and leave the field wonderfully clear for Democrats to sweep in in 2012, reputation unsullied".
2) The Democratic National Committee really wanted Hillary Clinton to be nominee all along, but faced opposition from many of their party who dislike her due to so-called negatives. So the DNC got behind Obama, as a good "straw man", who as first potential African American presidential nominee, would look good here and abroad. All the while the elders of the Democratic party, knowing of Obama's iffy Chicago background, felt certain news of it would emerge eventually and help catapult Hillary Clinton into the lead, overcoming earlier objections from party members.
3)The Republicans (possibly Karl Rove in particular) are behind Obama's quick rise to the top - they invested money (anonymously of course) and used media, much of which they control (eg MSNBC owned by General electric) to support him and discredit Clinton on a regular basis. They know they are on a sticky wicket this time, after 8 disastrous years, but think they could easily beat Obama, due to shady, potentially dangerous, elements in his background, of which they will reveal more once he's nominated and Clinton is out of the way.
Holes can be found in each of those, of course, but Neptune's fuzzy hand is detectable in all of them. Is it entirely unthinkable, though, that when history is written and Neptune's fog has cleared, it could be discovered that one of the above theories was, in fact, fact?
There's one more avenue down which Neptune's fog has silently crept during this election time, but an investigative journalist, Evelyn Pringle is hard at work trying to blow it away. Her detailed accounts of murky goings on in Chicago politics are hard to digest. I tried and gave up. Blogger Joseph Cannon, at Cannonfire on 27 May, under the title The Obama Trail, made an initial attempt to produce a precis of Ms Pringle's accounts, rendering them more easily absorbed and suitable for the average blog reader on-the-run. Disturbing stuff. Neptune driven?
3 comments:
I like the bit about people not being what they seem. From over the pond in the UK, Obama reminds me so much of Tony Blair. And I remember the first rule of politics. Never believe a likeable politician.
Love your political talk! It's especially nice to see you looking at things with such a clear and perceptive eye--have you had your Neptune removed? LOL
Hiya AN - that's a very good rule!
and yes, I see the likeness too.
:-)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Hello Anonymous one
Thank you for commenting so kindly.
:-)
Just at the moment my own Neptune is behaving rather well, but it has not always been so - there are times when I've felt it ought to have been removed! LOL. But things move on, thankfully, albeit slowly.
Post a Comment