As everybody already know, Obama already took a second oath, because of a minor technicality.
So, we have two oaths, a great hit for the modern astrologers, which disregard the noon as the beginning of the presidential term, and think that the oath is the only important moment.
I said in my previous post about Obama´s Inauguration:
The difference is minimal, as the oath was taken at 12:05. But I believe that astrology should be grounded on solid principles, not in “I always did this way” or “it works for me”. The constitution of US says that the term of the president begin at noon. What if the constitution have said that the term begin at midnight, we would have an 12 hour difference, what to do in that case ?
This is no longer the case, as the difference is now of more than 30 hours. As I said, first principles. To the ones who hold the very “interesting” theory that Obama´s term begins at noon, but he only is president after 12:05, now have to defend that the United States was without a president for more than 30 hours.
This is obviously not true, from any legal point. No one is asking Obama to “redo” anyting other than the oath. Whatever he did between noon of the inauguration day to 5pm of the next day is not under discussion. Only in the heads of astrologers there is such a problem (*sigh*).
The good side is that other traditional astrologers get out to defend the noon chart, Lee Lehman, author of “the martial art or horary astrology”. Much more important than this, she is one of the only people who are really trying to get something out of this chart, instead of blindly putting their own prejudices into the chart.
But before commenting on Lehman´s work (that I will on the next post), I guess we are entitled to some fun stuff about how modern astrology is looking into the second oath. Christopher Warnock said the same that is in the heads of all traditional astrologers “Damn, now we are going to have hear arguments about the “REAL” Obama chart till doomsday!”
Yes, we are, but I thought that we can have fun while watching the discussions and the flame wars.
Void, of course ?
Was the moon void ? Really. In traditional astrology the moon cannot be void when she is in signs like cancer, Sagittarius or Pisces. Besides that, most traditional astrologers will consider an aspect when it is in moiety of orbs, even if the moon has to change signs. And the moon is less than 1 degree to a sextile with mercury.
But, what really got me thinking is that, why modern astrologers are so worried with the Moon void ? If you think about it, in modern astrology aspects out of sign are the rule, not the exception. The important is the degrees, not the signs on which the planets are. I don´t have a good answer to that, but it seems to me that this really show that the personal prejudices are stronger than the astrology.
Other thing that is spectacular, is that instead of reflecting about what is the real time of the inauguration, astrologers are commenting things like “nothing can happen during an void of course moon”, and so Obama needed to take an second oath. These astrologers need to shut down their computers and go out more, to see that the moon doesn´t stop in the void periods. There are a lot of things that happen during void periods. Yes, many of them don´t have good results, but they are happening.
Venus in pisces ?
If the dear reader remember my last article on the subject, I discussed how saying that “venus is in pisces in the 11th house”, lack meaning, as venus will be in this position every 8 years. So, in Bush´s inauguration, or in Clinton´s, we had a venus in pisces moon. Also the degrees of the cusps were almost equal.
So, someone explain to me pearls like this:
The ASC in in taurus, and the ruler is venus in pisces, symbolizing that the actions of the government will be full of forward and backward movement, besides that there will be a strong commitment with humanitary actions. Pisces is also a persona of unprotected, even of victim, in an government with strong purposes of leadership and which is also very controlling and manipulative. The Key words will be humility and sacrifice.
God, if the “astrologer” would only have taken 5 minutes, he would see that in Bush´s inauguration, venus was also in pisces. And in Clinton´s ! And in every president in an 8 years cycle ! Talking about astrologers who don´t know their craft !
My point is exactly this: let astrologers fight and the throlls scream. The fact is that most astrologers don´t have the faintest idea how to judge an event chart ! So, they can only see what they want to see.
Our example above is really clear… the astrologer was reading things that was according his prejudices about Obama (some good, some bad) nothing more than that.
So, read my words and you will see that in the years to come:
Astrologer who like Obama or want to explain good things about his term:
- Will see that lovely sextile to mars (forgetting that Bush had a trine between venus and mars)
- Will see that “venus is exalted in pisces” (as was with Bush)
- Will use the second oath chart because it is not “void of course”
Astrologers who do not like Obama or want to explain bad things about his term:
- Will see that awful moon void of course (even though the moon is making aspects to mercury, Jupiter and the Sun)
- Will notice that venus is opposing Saturn (even though in Bush venus was sextiling Saturn in the first house)
- Will notice that the moon was in scorpio
Again, everyone will see what everyone wants to see. Well, at least everyone will be happy this way.
So, everyone, patience. We will hear things about this chart for AT LEAST 4 years.