Monday, January 14, 2008

Three Talking Heads and their Planets

Watching TV coverage of the New Hampshire primary election last week, I couldn't help but notice the difference in approach between commentators engaged in analysis. We had Chris Matthews, Tom Brokaw, Keith Olbermann, and several others, bombarding us with their views. Differences in approach, of the three named, came over very clearly. Let's see how their astrology shapes up.

Time of birth for just one of the three is available (via Astrotheme)other charts are set up for 12 noon.

Chris Matthews 17 December 1945, Philadelphi, PA

Chris Matthews' Sun, Mercury and Venus are all in outspoken, mutable sign Sagittarius, Uranus (and quite possibly Moon) in mutable, communicative Gemini opposes the three Sagittarius planets, producing some dynamic energy between chatty, mentally driven Gemini and exaggeratedly outspoken Saggitarius, which may manifest in some rather memorable, but not necessarily reliable commentary. Mars in Leo trines Mercury in Sagittarius, possibly an argumentative trait there? Polarity is very heavily weighted to positive, and there are no "grounding" planets in Earth signs. It's a pity I can't find a birth time, I'd guess at a Water sign rising - Pisces ? Chris tends to jabber and waffle, unlike the other two commentators whose style is more deliberate and incisive.

Tom Brokaw 6 February 1950, Webster, South Dakota @ 3.40am

Tom Brokaw - Sun and Mercury in Aquarius, Moon in Capricorn - one of those "Saturn hybrids" I mentioned HERE. But Mr Brokaw is a Saturn Hybrid with a good dollop of Aries in his nature with Jupiter, Mars and Saturn all in that sign, and Jupiter just 2 degrees from the IC (angle opposite midheaven - the nadir). If Astrotheme has the correct time of birth, Mr Brokaw had Sagittarius rising, Sagittarius is Jupiter's rulership, so with Jupiter's added strength, being on an angle, and with its ruling sign rising, it gives Mr Brokaw some of the same qualities as Chris Matthews. However, in Brokaw's chart there's a grounding Grand Trine in Earth signs, linking Moon/Neptune/Uranus. Tom Brokaw comes over as a solid and reliable individual - careful, steady and grounded. He'd be much less likely than Chris Matthews to veer wildly off point. Both have a certain warmth about them, however. Mr. Brokaw's Sun is square its modern ruler Uranus. I think this aspect modifies the more revolutionary and rebellious traits of Aquarius, calming them down to a more reasoned, well-argued approach. (Coincidentally, I have an Earth Grand Trine, and Uranus square Aquarius Sun, so hope I've interpreted these factors objectively.)

Keith Olberman 27 January 1959, New York City, NY. (Hmmmm - same birthday as me - different year though).

Keith Olbermann's chart has been interpreted recently by professional astrologer Lynn Hayes HERE
I'll concentrate only on comparison with the others, but mention that he is another Saturn Hybrid, like Tom Brokaw, with personal planets in both Aquarius and Capricorn. The Grand Cross formation in his chart which links the fixed signs - Mars in Taurus, Venus in Aquarius, Jupiter in Scorpio and Uranus in Leo seems highly significant. Astrologers see this formation as indicating a constant state of tension and challenge - it's certainly not a relaxed and harmonious indication as is the Grand Trine in Tom Brokaw's chart. Neither does Keith have the warm Sagittarian element found in the charts of the other two commentators. Whenever I've seen Keith Olbermann on TV or video he has looked and sounded very angry, and quite cold (rightly so, considering the subject matter - often President G.W. Bush's adminstration). Perhaps the Grand Cross fuels these passionate diatribes, especially as Mars is involved.

So, these are three very different characters, doing similar work. I honestly wasn't aware when I started preparing this post that two of the three individuals I'd chosen were Aquarians, with a few similarities to my own natal chart. I'm conscious that all three lean left, towards the Democrats, but can't bring myself to watch right-leaning pundits for long enough to get a useful impression. Any bias on my part is admitted, and inevitable.

No comments: