I'm still fairly wet behind the ears on the subject of US politics, but from what I've gleaned over the past 8 years it seems to me that Vice Presidents can act as either a strong cattle prod to the Prez, urging him in a direction he'd naturally have veered away from (see Cheney/Bush) or a minor figure-head who doesn't get involved in much more than substitute figure-heading (see Biden/Obama) but ...more importantly whichever category they fall into, they are always first person in the presidential line of succession, and would take over the Presidency on the death, resignation, or removal of the President. VPs also hold the casting vote to break a tie in the Senate.
Mitt Romney's pick of Paul Ryan has set the chatterers chattering ten to the dozen today.
I wouldn't have voted for Romney anyway (or for Obama), but find it interesting to note that Ryan, born 29 January 1970 (natal chart at Astrodatabank here), might, in time remind us of Dick Cheney, born 30 January 1941 (chart here). Ryan's a right-wing Aquarius-type. Cheney, another right-wing Aquarius-type, from what I know of him fitted the "cattle-prod" category of VP . I believe that Ryan is a naturally stronger character than Romney, he's likely to be a prodder for his Tea Party-ish policies. Caveat emptor! The two men probably get on quite well due to their shared Aquarius bits: Ryan's Aquarius Sun/Venus are conjunct Romney's Aquarius Venus.
However, I doubt that Romney's VP pick will assist him in beating President Obama in November. My gut-feelings are that the oligarghs, who are really directing this theatre, are happy enough with the performance of the current incumbent, who has done their bidding with hardly any heckling from his supporters. As some commenters are already proposing, Romney picking Ryan as his VP is akin to a boxer "taking a dive" - that's as good a metaphor as I've seen. Boxers don't usually take a dive because they think it's a good idea, they are usually told to do it by their handlers.
Mitt Romney's pick of Paul Ryan has set the chatterers chattering ten to the dozen today.
I wouldn't have voted for Romney anyway (or for Obama), but find it interesting to note that Ryan, born 29 January 1970 (natal chart at Astrodatabank here), might, in time remind us of Dick Cheney, born 30 January 1941 (chart here). Ryan's a right-wing Aquarius-type. Cheney, another right-wing Aquarius-type, from what I know of him fitted the "cattle-prod" category of VP . I believe that Ryan is a naturally stronger character than Romney, he's likely to be a prodder for his Tea Party-ish policies. Caveat emptor! The two men probably get on quite well due to their shared Aquarius bits: Ryan's Aquarius Sun/Venus are conjunct Romney's Aquarius Venus.
However, I doubt that Romney's VP pick will assist him in beating President Obama in November. My gut-feelings are that the oligarghs, who are really directing this theatre, are happy enough with the performance of the current incumbent, who has done their bidding with hardly any heckling from his supporters. As some commenters are already proposing, Romney picking Ryan as his VP is akin to a boxer "taking a dive" - that's as good a metaphor as I've seen. Boxers don't usually take a dive because they think it's a good idea, they are usually told to do it by their handlers.
He cant take a "Dive" fast enough to suit me so I hope he dives and swims directly back to Utah and stays there.
ReplyDeleteMy first thought when I heard the news was" he's sealed his loss with this choice. I certainly hope so.
I do agree with you about them all doing as they are told by their handlers.
The huge amount of money being poured by the Mormon church into Romney's coffers is astonishing.
ReplyDeleteThey should remove all this religio-corporate cherry picking asap, but they won't. So the biggest corporation wins. :(
XO
WWW
Sonny ~ Hi! Yes, I thought the same - amost the same pattern as McCain/Palin being repeated.
ReplyDeleteWisewebwoman ~~ The waste of all the millions of dollars on election campaigns, both sides, is worse than obscene in my opinion, can't think of a word bad enough for it!
ReplyDelete