Who'd Replace the Republicans?

From a report at Salon by Josh Eidelson of an interview with congressman Alan Grayson (Dem. Florida):

On the first day of the government shutdown, firebrand Democratic Congressman Alan Grayson told Salon that Republicans’ on-the-job drinking was partially to blame. Now he says the current showdown will end the party – for good.

Snip from Tuesday's interview - still relevant even though the shutdown is over - in the nick of time too eh? Oh my, they do know how to milk a drama!

Are you suggesting the voters will prevent it from happening again?

The voters will prevent this from happening again. Even a dog knows when it’s being kicked.

How will they do that?

By voting the Republicans out of power and relegating the Republican Party to the ash heap of history.

Does that mean a new era of liberal legislation out of Washington?

I don’t know. You know, eventually the Whig Party was replaced to some degree by the Republican Party. I don’t know what’s going to replace the Republican Party. I just hope that it’s more benign and less malignant.

What about if there’s a deal in the next couple days?

It’s irrelevant. They keep dragging America into heavy traffic. They’ve done this over and over again. The fact that there’s some kind of temporary deal until December or January doesn’t change the fact that they are anarchists. To the extent that responsible people want to continue having our society function, the Republicans will have to be rejected. They’ll have to be expelled from the body politic.

Re my highlighted & underlined portion:

The Democrats should replace the Republicans and a proper left wing party should replace the Democrats.

There y'are: done and dusted!

Next Exit 2016?

The outlook is dull, no silver linings can be seen behind the clouds, so far. To brighten things, how about looking further ahead than the next government shutdown (if this one ever ends).

2016? Whenever I have to face something I don't enjoy ( major dental or medical treatment for example) I send my mind well ahead to when it'll all be over, and concentrate on that. Perhaps concentrating on future possibilities now would serve to lighten our darkening skies a little.

I read a decent piece by Sean McElwee in this vein yesterday at Salon, with some interesting comments attached:
"To defeat the Tea Party, the left needs bolder leader than Hillary
The right's tactics won't change. Democrats need a 2016 candidate who fights differently than Clinton and Obama."

Whether Hillary Clinton will run for the presidency in 2016 isn't clear, but let's say she will. Would she be the best way forward for the "left"? I use the word "left" with caution, because really and truly there is no representative of the true left in the USA - such a person is not allowed to rise. If one were to appear on the scene he/she would be put down rapidly, either by ridicule or something more destructive. I shall have to curb my enthusiasm for true leftists and third parties in 2016, while still scanning the horizon anxiously for the rise of one of them. Bearing all that in mind then, would Hillary be the best we could hope for as next President? I must not forget that the president is only one piece of the picture. More truly left-leaning and outspoken congress people would be an even more important step to take at election time - but where are such people? Perhaps a few more of them will appear in 2014 and 2016, emboldened by the currently wretched job incumbents are doing.

One commenter to the linked piece pointed out that progress towards the left, however much many of us wish for it, has to be very, very gradual, in order to avoid dangerous backlash from the extreme rightist and/or dominionist factions. I agree, reluctantly. Hillary does fill that requirement. From what I've read about her early years, she did seem, then, to be of the true left. Her experiences with "the guys behind the curtain" must have dampened her leftist ardour in maturity. She does know how to play the game, must have learned many lessons from Bill. How to play the game is a valuable skill to have, in the circumstances. The skill: an ability to please "the guys behind the curtain" while still helping the rest of us, and the nation, as much as possible. Maybe this would be further lesser evilism, but if, for the time being, it's all we can have....what else is there, other than to keep scanning the horizon for signs of change?

The argument I see often, that "the US isn't really a leftist country at heart", doesn't ring true. Look what happened when candidate Barack Obama presented his original promises of hope and change, leftist proposals all the way from him - then: fighting Wall Street, making government more open and transparent, healthcare legislation with a public option, closing Gitmo, and more. You remember all those good promises? The people ate them up, ravenously, and voted him in. Then what happened? His devoted followers still insist that he has been thwarted at every turn by an intransigent congress. Others consider he was a centrist or mild conservative from the start, someone wily enough to know how to play the base sufficiently well to get into the White House. History will decide which was the true face of Barack Obama. What his original triumphant win did prove is that the USA truly wants to be the more left-leaning nation it is not presently allowed to be.

Names such as Elizabeth Warren, are being thrown around as an alternative to Hillary Clinton for the Democrats in 2016. I think Ms Warren is too new to the game, but in time she could prove to be the nation's saviour. 2020? 2024? I'd like to see Alan Grayson and Bernie Sanders in positions of some power, if not president, with considerably more national influence - and Dennis Kucinich of course. It's not likely to happen in my lifetime though, maybe not even in theirs.

Well....that didn't turn out to be a particularly sky-lightening exercise after all. Hmmmm. I shall have to take the following to heart:

“Be like water making its way through cracks. Do not be assertive, but adjust to the object, and you shall find a way around or through it. If nothing within you stays rigid, outward things will disclose themselves.

Empty your mind, be formless. Shapeless, like water. If you put water into a cup, it becomes the cup. You put water into a bottle and it becomes the bottle. You put it in a teapot, it becomes the teapot. Now, water can flow or it can crash. Be water, my friend.”
~ Bruce Lee

Alan Grayson is Speaking Out

It's good to note that Rep. Alan Grayson is speaking up against the US taking military action in Syria. See HERE for one example; and a link to his online petition appears on THIS blog.

I looked at his natal chart in 2010 in a post titled Election Go-round when preparations for the 2012 General election were gearing up.





Now's a good time to look again. It's a 12 noon chart so Moon and ascendant positions are not reliable.



His gentle Pisces Sun belies the forceful and outspoken politician we've come to know and admire. Neptune, ruler of Pisces, now resides in its home sign, but will not conjoin his natal Sun until around 2022. We still cannot be 100% certain what a transit of Neptune might have in store. Neptune has the reputation of illusion, delusion and general fogginess, so can present a bit of mystery in transit history.

Natal Mercury (communication)is in the first degree of Aries, known as The Aries Point, thought to be a strong position. Perhaps this is the source of the forthright communication style we recognise as Grayson's. His Mercury was right in the path of transiting Uranus, planet of unexpected change a couple of years ago. Alan Grayson lost his seat to the opposition in the 2010 mid-terms - one unexpected event! He regained his seat in 2012. If Alan Grayson were born before or around noon, transiting Pluto was within range of his natal Moon during the run-up to the 2012 election. It almost seems (tongue in cheek) that Uranus ousted him and Pluto reinstated him.

Long may his raised voice be heard ! I wish we had a Representative like him in our district of Oklahoma.

Election-Go-Round

The USA is one big election-go-round isn't it? As always, at root of it all: the $$$$$$$$$!

No sooner than the 2010 mid-terms are done with, we start on 2012 and the presidential. Sarah Palin's name is being tossed around as a possible outsider for the Republicans, but what could really set the cat among the pigeons would be a Democratic challenger from the left of Obama. Mind you, left of Obama wouldn't be hard to do, he's slightly to the right of some Republicans already.




Two names come to mind as possible contenders from the left: Russ Feingold (left) and Alan Grayson (below). Whether it'd be as Democrats, or heading a new leftist, populist party is hard to guess - though there's hardly time to build a new party from scratch between now and 2012.






Of this pair, from what I've seen and read so far, I think Alan Grayson is the most likely to oppose President Obama. Russ Feingold seems like one of the Party "in-crowd", while still supporting underdogs. Any sign of him going in the direction of a challenge could see President Obama offering him some kind of position within the current set-up. I might be way off-mark there though.




Below, Feingold's and Grayson's natal charts set for 12 noon, as I can't find birth times. Is there anything in coming transits which might indicate a rise to higher profile, or a great change in path or circumstance?





Both men have Sun in Pisces - not what I'd expected - but remember that Neptune, ruling planet of Pisces is due to change signs in the next year or so. It will move out of Aquarius into its home sign, Pisces. We cannot be 100% certain what a transit of Neptune might throw up. Neptune, having the reputation of illusion, delusion and general fogginess can present a bit of mystery in its transit history. It's not as clearly a planet of unexpected change as Uranus, but changing signs = a change in itself, and in the general astrological "atmosphere" for those with Neptune or its home sign prominent in their natal charts.

The two men have natal Mercury (communication) within a degree of one another, at the end of Pisces/beginning of Aries, and, as it happens right in the path of transiting Uranus, planet of unexpected change. Both lost their seats to the opposition in the mid-terms - an unexpected event (in the case of these two) for starters! I doubt change will stop there though.

If Alan Grayson were born before or around noon, transiting Pluto will be within range of his natal Moon in the coming couple of years. Pluto = transformation.

Those are some significant factors I see. Any more?

Of course, how successful either would be if they chose to present a challenge is a moot point, and depends a lot on what happens in the next 12 months or so. Still, it'll be interesting to watch how things play out, keeping one eye the astrology.