.JPG)
Things are feeling more and more like the Twilight Zone as the days go by. It's not particularly unpleasant, just peculiar. From what I've read, in comments on several blogs, it's affecting others too.
I'll explain.
I wrote recently about Pat Buchanan, how I preferred his views regarding the the US presidential race (sympathetic to Clinton) to those of most other TV pundits. I was quickly put right about Buchanan's background and history by husband and friends, and afterwards approached the subject with caution. Other conservative pundits and talkshow hosts such as Hannity and O'Reilly are persona non grata on the TV screen at Chez Twilight. I haven't had opportunity to sample their recent views on these matters, but comments around the net have led me to believe that they have been similarly sympathetic to the cause of Clinton supporters. This week I've read an article by none other than conservative journalist Ann Coulter, whose chart I perused in October 2007 (HERE) without much grace, I might add.
This week's article by Ms Coulter has appeared in various blogs around the internet - I picked it up at HillBuzz (4 June post). "Obama Was Selected, Not Elected" It's well worth reading, I promise.
I ignored the obvious sarcastic references to "our plucky Hillary" and the like and found what she had to say about the matter very informative and more or less in agreement with how things have appeared to me.
The author of blog HillBuzz adds a footnote to Coulter's article. Two extracts from the footnote below:
"Does the DNC realize the enormity of the fact lifelong, dyed in the wool Democrats are so alienated and disgusted by the treatment Hillary Clinton has received from both the DNC and the Obama campaign that we are not only reading Ann Coulter, but agreeing with her? Talk about unity and change -- and 1984 --
..........................But, really, ignore the snark in both this article and what we wrote: this is an enormous cultural phenonemon no one in the DNC understands ---- people who would NEVER be able to read more than the first sentence of anything Ann Coulter writes are not only laughing and cheering as they finish her column, they are sending it to all their Democratic friends. Something like this is a canary in the coal mine for the strength of support the DNC has from its traditional and natural base."
Canary singing in the Twilight Zone !
What is going on here? Are conservative writers and pundits hoping to ensnare Democratic voters who feel angry and disenchanted, let down by both party and media this election season ? Is it all a crafty ploy to lure disaffected voters to their side of the divide? Or are we, or some of us, living in a peculiar astrological atmosphere where left is right and up is down and nothing makes much sense any more?
What astro indicators would be the usual suspects in a case such as this? Neptune - for sure. I've blogged about Neptunitis on three occasions recently. Uranus may be connected, too. These two slow-movers are presently in what astrologers call mutual reception. They each lie in the other's domain, or planetary rulership. Neptune rules Pisces and lies in Aquarius. Uranus rules Aquarius and lies in Pisces. What is more they are in similar degrees of each sign at present 22 Pisces, 24 Aquarius which puts them in aspect known as semi-sextile (within around 30* of each other) . Most astrologers look on the semi-sextile as mildly harmonious. So as well as mutual reception blending and strengthening the two planets, there's this fairly close aspect to be considered.
Neptune - imagination, illusion, delusion, fog, deception
Uranus - rebellion, unexpected change, avant garde, invention.
That mixture could possibly represent a Twilight Zone effect, recognisable to some of us, depending upon our own natal chart positions. In my own natal chart the Sun and Jupiter lie semi-sextile in Aquarius/Pisces, so perhaps I'm receptive to the current mutual reception atmosphere.
.JPG)
I haven't yet decided how I'll vote in November (always supposing my citizenship debacle is done with in time to register to vote). I'm thinking of registering Independent however, after what I've witnessed over past months. I may be feeling topsy-turvy, but I still know how many beans make five. Registering Independent would be in tune with my Sun Aquarius anyway, independent to the bone!
I'll explain.
I wrote recently about Pat Buchanan, how I preferred his views regarding the the US presidential race (sympathetic to Clinton) to those of most other TV pundits. I was quickly put right about Buchanan's background and history by husband and friends, and afterwards approached the subject with caution. Other conservative pundits and talkshow hosts such as Hannity and O'Reilly are persona non grata on the TV screen at Chez Twilight. I haven't had opportunity to sample their recent views on these matters, but comments around the net have led me to believe that they have been similarly sympathetic to the cause of Clinton supporters. This week I've read an article by none other than conservative journalist Ann Coulter, whose chart I perused in October 2007 (HERE) without much grace, I might add.
This week's article by Ms Coulter has appeared in various blogs around the internet - I picked it up at HillBuzz (4 June post). "Obama Was Selected, Not Elected" It's well worth reading, I promise.
I ignored the obvious sarcastic references to "our plucky Hillary" and the like and found what she had to say about the matter very informative and more or less in agreement with how things have appeared to me.
The author of blog HillBuzz adds a footnote to Coulter's article. Two extracts from the footnote below:
"Does the DNC realize the enormity of the fact lifelong, dyed in the wool Democrats are so alienated and disgusted by the treatment Hillary Clinton has received from both the DNC and the Obama campaign that we are not only reading Ann Coulter, but agreeing with her? Talk about unity and change -- and 1984 --
..........................But, really, ignore the snark in both this article and what we wrote: this is an enormous cultural phenonemon no one in the DNC understands ---- people who would NEVER be able to read more than the first sentence of anything Ann Coulter writes are not only laughing and cheering as they finish her column, they are sending it to all their Democratic friends. Something like this is a canary in the coal mine for the strength of support the DNC has from its traditional and natural base."
Canary singing in the Twilight Zone !
What is going on here? Are conservative writers and pundits hoping to ensnare Democratic voters who feel angry and disenchanted, let down by both party and media this election season ? Is it all a crafty ploy to lure disaffected voters to their side of the divide? Or are we, or some of us, living in a peculiar astrological atmosphere where left is right and up is down and nothing makes much sense any more?
What astro indicators would be the usual suspects in a case such as this? Neptune - for sure. I've blogged about Neptunitis on three occasions recently. Uranus may be connected, too. These two slow-movers are presently in what astrologers call mutual reception. They each lie in the other's domain, or planetary rulership. Neptune rules Pisces and lies in Aquarius. Uranus rules Aquarius and lies in Pisces. What is more they are in similar degrees of each sign at present 22 Pisces, 24 Aquarius which puts them in aspect known as semi-sextile (within around 30* of each other) . Most astrologers look on the semi-sextile as mildly harmonious. So as well as mutual reception blending and strengthening the two planets, there's this fairly close aspect to be considered.
Neptune - imagination, illusion, delusion, fog, deception
Uranus - rebellion, unexpected change, avant garde, invention.
That mixture could possibly represent a Twilight Zone effect, recognisable to some of us, depending upon our own natal chart positions. In my own natal chart the Sun and Jupiter lie semi-sextile in Aquarius/Pisces, so perhaps I'm receptive to the current mutual reception atmosphere.
.JPG)
I haven't yet decided how I'll vote in November (always supposing my citizenship debacle is done with in time to register to vote). I'm thinking of registering Independent however, after what I've witnessed over past months. I may be feeling topsy-turvy, but I still know how many beans make five. Registering Independent would be in tune with my Sun Aquarius anyway, independent to the bone!
Something rotten in the state of Denmark, methinks, T!
ReplyDeleteAnn Coulter??!!
Ouch!!
XO
WWW
It's interesting that Republicans feel that they can woo ex Clinton supporters now she has lost but could never have dreamed of subverting Obama's democrats if he'd lost.
ReplyDeleteWhat does that say for the bitterness and vengfulness that Hilary's campaign has engendered - you'd rather see your country run into the ground fighting '100 year' oil wars for the oligarchy than Obama as president?
Maybe you don't have kids in the military or old enough for the DRAFT that will surely be implemented to fight the planned longterm wars in the middle east.
I'll just have to assume you care nothing for the young people who would inherit this horror. But they care about their own future, that's why young democrats overwhelming support Obama - they can see in the way that you can't, despite your Tarot and astrological scrying where their best hope for the future lies.
Hi WWW
ReplyDeleteYes, there's a definite stink of something rotten - from several directions! ;-)
Hello Anonymous commenter.
ReplyDeleteThank you for voicing your opinion.
It's quite opposite to my own, but it's only fair that it has a place on the page.
You are free to assume whatever you like about me, my situation, and my views, but that doesn't mean you are correct.
I have always tried to be polite about Obama - if not his supporters, many of whom do not deserve respect.
I happen to support the Clinton view of democracy, as outlined in her speech yestgerday. I do not admire Obama's style or his associates and this election is too important to the USA and the world to be taking needless risks.
I do not, however, feel it necessary to take Hillary Clinton's advice or instruction to support Obama - I shall use my own judgement wheter to do so or not - party lines do not appeal to me.
I suppose the young have their reasons for following Obama, who they see as "one of their own" - but have they looked closely enough? I doubt it.
The country (or more accurately the DNC and the media) have chosen who they wish to carry the Democratic banner. We shall see how that turns out.
Thank you for your comment. I'll just say that you would have appeared less meanminded had you left out the comment about tarot and astrology (astrology has nothing to do with scrying by the way). I write an astrology blog, if you don't find the subject of interest, it would be sensible to avoid reading this type of blog in future.
And, T:
ReplyDeleteI think the vital info being lost in the shuffle here is the fact that HRC had the majority of the popular vote.
What on earth does this say about the US electoral system?
Democracy?
I don't think so.
It's a shame the anony-mouses don't acknowledge the factoids....
XO
WWW
Yes, WWW, the system has a lot to answer for. yo my mind the delegate thing is hard to justify, but easy to manipulate - and I suppose in the end it IS the party elite who get to choose the nominee. That's the way it is in the UK without all the expense and hassle of primaries. The party chooses their candidate, the people vote in a general election.
ReplyDeleteIt might be better if that applied here - look at the money they'd save. Think of the good that could have been done with the millions of $$$$$ thrown away during the past 2 years -for what?
A divided Democratic electorate, which could mean they lose in November.
Not going to get into the Hillary-Obama argument, because I could have and can live comfortably with either in the White House. (Although either of them would have to pay rent to The Next President of the United States, because I've already got dibs on the Lincoln Bedroom, Oval Office and White House kitchen!)
ReplyDeleteWhat is disturbing is that supporters of either candidate are finding any value whatsoever in the rantings of Coulter, Hannity, Limbaugh, Billy O, Patty Buchanan or any of the talking heads of the Far Right. None of them "feel sorry" or have sympathy or empathy with Hillary, this is nothing but their way of stirring the s--t among Democrats. These people are the ARMY OF HATE - always have been and will continue to be.
One of the conservative voices I do put some credence in is David Frum, who's take on the election is this: The presidency is the Democrats to lose, not the Republicans to win. Urging and encouraging angst and anger among Dems is a way to erode that reality.
Hi TNPOTUS
ReplyDeleteIt's good to have your level-headed and knowledgable opinion. Thank you for commenting.
Stirring the s..t sounds like a probable aim of these conservative talking heads. If the Obama supporters (on-line) hadn't themselves shown such hatred for HRC and denigrated the intelligence of her supporters it would never have felt so necessary to lean towards anyone who uttered a kindly word in our direction.
The term "Army of Hate" really does also apply to Obama's on-line supporters. Maybe they are infiltrators - trolls paid by the Republican machine - who knows.
But how can we be sure?
Three (or maybe more) popular pro-Clinton bloggers have received death threats by e-mail. Nice.
Even now, with HRC out of the way they are still at it! Huffington Post and Daily Kos, previous good sources for liberal reading matter quickly became cess pits of hatred, and remained so. The blog owners didn't object, one can only assum they encouraged it all. Are they Republican-paid infiltrators though?
I can see the sense in what you say, TNPOTUS, but I'm pretty level-headed myself, and I can see how and why things got the way they did. Had Obama's supporters and pundits acted more reasonably Clinton supporters wouldn't have felt so happy and relieved to hear and read the words of known enemies.
Not everyone reads blogs or internet articles of course, those of us who do tend to overlook that fact. I have asked myself whether, if I didn't have a computer, but watched TV and listened to radio, read the odd newspaper, would I still feel as I do? I don't know.
I was having lunch with a longtime Democratic state representative Thursday and the chat turned to the national primary. He told this story:
ReplyDelete"My father-in-law is a staunch Democrat who's never voted for a Republican in his life. But now that Hillary's out, he said he'd probably going to vote for McCain this year. He said, 'I could make myself vote for a woman, but I can't make myself vote for a nigger!' God, why are Okies so stupid?"
Welcome to American politics, Annie. We wear our political passions on our sleeves, whether it's disagreements within the parties or between the parties.
I've felt for a long time the Dem race was unique because, for the first time in history, Americans had to decide WHICH moment of history they really wanted: The first woman to run in a presidential general election or the first black person to run? It was inevitable that things were going to get outrageous on both sides.
To their credit, I think all of the final three candidates did a good job of keeping things pretty "clean," and I think Obama and McCain will attempt to do the same for the next 5 months. But as you've been seeing, it's impossible to keep supporters and staff and the media and the public in general from turning elections into "blood baths." I can't remember one in my lifetime that didn't become that way.
I would submit that if you go to Obama Web sites and blogs, you'll read the same over-the-top diatribes, veiled (and unveiled) threats and "hate speak" from Clinton supporters that you feel Obama supporters have spewed on Hillary's sites and blogs. This is just how the game's played on this side of the pond.
Cheerio!
TNPOTUS
Hmmmm - well not all Okies are that stupid, TNPOTUS, we have a black mayor in our town - and it's something to be proud of. That mayor was our (husband and I) first choice from the line-up of one white woman and two white men. It came down to attitude and policies then - as it does now, for me, gender isn't important and skin colour is ridiculously irrelevant.
ReplyDeleteSo, then - this is American politics eh? A psychological bloodbath. If I'm still around in 2012, I'll be better prepared with some psychological armour then!