Author Archives: Fe Bongolan

About Fe Bongolan

Planet Waves writer Fe Bongolan lives in Oakland, California. Her column, "Fe-911," has been featured on Planet Waves since 2008. As an actor and dramaturge, Fe is a core member of Cultural Odyssey's "The Medea Project -- Theater for Incarcerated Women," producing work that empowers the voices of all women in trouble, from ex-offenders, women with HIV-AIDS, to young girls and women at risk. A Planet Waves fan from almost the beginning of Eric's astrology career, Fe is a public sector employee who describes herself as a "mystical public servant." When it comes to art, culture and politics, she loves reading between the lines.

Season of the Witch

4 Replies

I followed last Thursday’s Congressional hearing on Benghazi, courtesy of live blogging coverage on Daily Kos. I avoided televised coverage of it as I do with most news. My blood pressure tends to erupt whenever I watch the insanely stupid in action; and as expected, the House Select Committee on Benghazi delivered.

In a grueling 11-hour marathon of questions, most of which concerned a variation on the theme of Mrs. Clinton’s use of her private email account for State Department business, the Committee concluded that it learned nothing new — because, in fact, there was nothing new to learn from the previous testimony given by Mrs. Clinton while she was Secretary of State. Her account of Ambassador Chris Stevens’ death was already there for the record.

Rep. Kevin McCarthy recently said out loud what had been suspected all along: that last week’s hearings were designed to bring Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign numbers down; the story of what really happened at the U.S. embassy compound in Benghazi on Sept. 11, 2012 — and why — was never the point. The point was to try to find a suspicious motive in Mrs. Clinton’s use of a personal email account in order to stir up public distrust of her as she campaigns for the Presidency.

Hillary is now in good company. A new congressional hearing has been scheduled by outgoing Speaker John Boehner for Planned Parenthood’s Chief Executive Cecile Richards. Richards was grilled late in September by the House Oversight Committee on allegations Planned Parenthood profited from illegal sale of fetal tissue, based on a heavily doctored videotape.

The hearing was Boehner’s parting gift to the Republican “Freedom Caucus.” It was a means to placate them in exchange for a sane (non-Tea Party) Speaker: Paul Ryan. By providing them the theatrics of yet another House Committee hearing, they could cook up public outcry to deny further federal funding for Planned Parenthood — or else they will shut down the government.

For those who weren’t following, Mrs. Clinton endured her marathon ‘trial’ well. Ms. Richards also performed well in her first testimony before the House Committee at the end of September. But it appears that is not enough for Republicans, particularly those representatives answerable to the Tea Party factions around the country interested in dismantling government and stopping you from getting an abortion. Since we are approaching Halloween in a few days, are we getting the feeling of a new (shhhhhhh!) witch hunt?

Arthur Miller’s play The Crucible comes to mind. Written in 1953, The Crucible used the Salem witch trials as an analogy for the House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC) hearings led by Wisconsin Senator Joseph McCarthy. HUAC began in 1947, convening hearings that lasted until McCarthy’s death in 1957. The purpose of the hearings was to ferret out Communist infiltrators in the U.S., particularly in Hollywood.

For ten harrowing years in American life, people were persecuted, lost their jobs, or imprisoned for refusing to testify against others or name them as Communists or Communist sympathizers. The purpose of this hearing was clear: send out a chilling message instilling distrust, doubt and uncertainty. By doing so, those behind the hearings could take advantage of the chaos and hysteria that ensued. The Cold War was born and the military industrial complex prospered.

Sixty years later and the end of the Cold War, the U.S. is in a different state, though politically, sometimes its hard to tell the difference between then and now. Instead of looking for the evil Communist under the bed, we’re looking for the witch in every mouse click and Frankenstein’s abortion mill using human baby parts for scientific experiments.

But maybe we have learned something as we see the familiar parade of torches and pitchforks coming our way, as Jezebel reports:

There are lots of good reasons why neither the #Benghazi squad yelling at Hillary Clinton nor the House Oversight Committee yelling at Planned Parenthood CEO Cecile Richards worked out particularly well for Congress. Some of it stems from the fact that both hearings were show trials, a purely partisan effort to show the folks back home how erectly principled their conservative principles are. But there’s also a visual, theatrical reason: watching a body composed predominantly of white men shout at, interrupt, and harangue a dignified, composed woman has always been a bad look, and in 2015, it’s one the public will no longer accept.

For her next hearing, I am certain Cecile Richards will be as ready as Hillary was last week. In fact, many are certain Mrs. Clinton took her cue from Ms. Richards’ September performance. They both commanded respect, stayed calm and confident, and provided facts in the face of blind rage, false accusations and even Rep. Jason Chaffetz’s tears. Understanding the past, leading in the present and facing the future, these women are sending us a message: they are not for burning, and neither are we.

Happy Halloween! See you in the comments.

The Magic of Baking

22 Replies

Harvest. The fall has a special place in my heart for what it brings — the reward for hard work put into the land, its trees, flowers and fruit. This weekend I was at my sister’s house baking pies and cakes, using the sugary-sweet Bartlett pears harvested from trees growing on their land. On the menu for me were a dark-chocolate pear tort and a pear-fig tart.

The kitchen is the alchemical lab: tending the flame under the pot, watching ingredients meld together in the bowl and then in the oven. I get a sensual joy in molding cold butter into flour, water and egg to make a dough, and then rolling the dough to the right thickness.

There is pleasure in working dough around a fruit that benefits from cooking, softening and ripening from the heat of the oven. I love experimenting with the already natural sweetness of the fruit by adding spices and condiments that never overwhelm, but frame the flavors already there naturally. These experiences are magic to me.

Yes, my Aquarian Sun, Gemini Moon and Venus in Sagittarius compel me to write about politics. Yet, my Jupiter and Uranus conjunct in Cancer in the 5th house reverberate all the way into my 11th house of community — where my Ceres is governed by Capricorn, close to my North Node. It is there where my family and friends gather in anticipation of a meal cooked by me.

The kitchen is a place where I utilize my art degree to the fullest, embodying everything I’ve learned from my family and friends in my 60 years on this planet. Along with theater, the kitchen is a place where my personal history and creative proclivity collide to benefit an always appreciative audience on a very substantive level.

It wasn’t always like that. There were lessons I needed to learn. Seven years ago, while visiting Eric in upstate New York, we were preparing dinner while working together on the Planet Waves annual series. Cooking as I always do, I mentioned in passing — almost resignedly — “Yes, I can cook. I cook too well, in fact. Everybody wants me to cook for them. I feel so much like a Mom, even though I’ll never have kids!” Eric responded by turning that around on me saying, “Never abandon that maternal, nurturing side of yours. It’s a huge source of power — own it!”

Even though Eric knew my chart, his comment confused me. Confused by my own maternal inclinations, I was struggling with a part of me that still needed to define freedom for myself. How could I celebrate something I was so conflicted about? A talent to nurture that brought me so much grief because I felt so under-appreciated for it? How could Eric suggest that I relish and celebrate a side of me that, at the time, I perceived as servitude?

My perceptions then were based on carrying baggage from a history of giving away too much nurturing energy in my relationships. I mistook my proclivity to give as something I had to do all the time. I gave too much, most of the time doing so without being receptive to receiving back. I felt myself a victim of my own gifts. I was carrying a subservient mindset — always tending to the needs of others first, with little idea how to be receptive to reciprocation, or how to communicate my own needs to others. I gave too much so I wouldn’t receive.

Some of that mindset was cultural. Filipino women of my mother’s generation were taught to be the quiet, giving force behind their man, submerging their needs and strength for the needs of their mate. And my mother’s example was the imprint of femininity that I carried into early adulthood, and subsequently into my relationships.

Using that example in relationships, it was as if I was constantly carrying two large baskets of fruit: one for others, and the other for myself. Habitually, it was the basket for others that was fuller, heavier and laden with luscious fruit, while my own was meager. Needless to say, carrying more weight for others on one side eventually does “tip you over.” A bout with deep depression and months of therapy put me on that long road to find out what I wanted.

I needed to embrace that overwhelming need of mine to nurture — the quality Eric found as a strength in my chart, but back then I never thought that it was. I struggled with recognizing and appreciating my own power, wants and needs. That had to become primary practice — the yoga of self. To employ the plane flight metaphor: I had to place the oxygen mask on myself first, to break myself out of the over-nurturing rut I experienced in my relationships.

My talent for nurturing had to evolve to a level where I could do it with enjoyment, creating something for the plate that was a full embodiment of personal energy and spirit, not servitude. This for me was my journey to my 11th house, where my Capricornian Ceres and North Node co-exist.

Cooking and baking are now my passions, which I pursue like a dance, preferably when I have the physical energy and the time to make it truly enjoyable for myself and others. These talents to nurture and sustain others had to mature to a level where I would get something back for giving — not only monetarily, but energetically. The kitchen had to become a place of magic and joy for me. I think, by and large, by accepting my power and energy flow as a constant and equal exchange — going out and coming back in — I have succeeded.

As a friend of mine once said recently, “Fe, cooking — for you — is a form of meditation.” Another said, “Fe, you are a magician with food.” I’d like to think that I am. As I walked the road of this life leading to the fields of Ceres, I came to accept a natural part of myself I once denied. I’ve given myself the chance to sustain and enrich myself and others, on the plate and in spirit.

Leaning in, I lift out a freshly baked pear pie from a hot oven. I can feel the harvest goddess’ breath on me while the smell of a golden, butter crust and bubbling fruit comes from what I made with my hands. The experience is a gift from Ceres, leaving me full of thanks for her help in re-claiming a large part of me.

Dilemma

9 Replies

Typical of the season of the scales, we must weigh and balance the political decisions of our lives as the evidence is placed before us. Looking at the next series of debates by the Democratic candidates for the 2016 Presidential nomination, which begin tomorrow night, we are in for a bit of a dilemma.

My friend Harris posted an interesting comment on Facebook this morning, which sums up for me what I’ve been feeling since the campaigns began this summer:

“I have not made any comments about the Democratic presidential nomination for several months, mostly because I am genuinely undecided and partly because the conversation[s] I’ve initiated have not ended well.

Here goes: I need some help and hope I can get some serious and not some “talking point” kind of responses. I dread having to vote for Hillary Clinton but will gladly do so if she is the nominee.

I am completely agnostic about Bernie Sanders though I support most of his positions. I am agnostic because I have a very difficult time supporting a candidate for the Democratic nomination who, as of late July, was supported by 2% of African-Americans and 9% non-white voters (versus 61% for Clinton.)

I am troubled by this for core ideological reasons that need no explanation but also because it is impossible for me to understand how a Democrat can win a general election if those numbers are not closer to 70% (though to be fair, I should pose this as a “relative electability” issue since i’ts not all clear to me at this point that Hillary would win next year, especially if one of the slightly credible Republicans is nominated.)

1) Yes, Sanders’ non-white support may have increased since July; 2) Yes, Sanders, if the nominee, would inherit much stronger non-white support (but I doubt at the levels needed to win an election); 3) No I don’t believe the polls are “skewed” or somehow don’t pick up a much larger level of support among non-white voters.”

At the end of Harris’ comment, he made an interesting plea: “do you have anything helpful to tell me that could get me more comfortable voting for Bernie Sanders?”

Harris’ comment solidified what I’ve been feeling all summer. That Bernie Sanders has been a very good populist on the issues. Hillary Clinton raises some big concerns amongst those who remember the 1990s, and her support among the 1% is worrisome. But, is Bernie’s populism enough to get elected, especially in these days of Black Lives Matter, the growing police state war against the poor and minorities? Would Bernie Sanders end up as polarizing a President as Barack Obama has been amongst the extreme ends of the American political spectrum?

Watching the commentary on the political blogs, it seems Sanders supporters have had to take these issues to heart. For some, that is a hard pill to swallow. Mr. Sanders’ populism has generated serious and growing crowds for his appearances, but given that a large segment of the American population — people of color, specifically African-Americans — are under extreme duress, Mr. Sanders’ position on income inequality does not resonate completely. It does not provide a safety shield for the African Americans and other people of color who are in extreme peril at the hands of police today as we speak.

I have regard for Hillary Clinton. I think as Secretary of State she has taken steps to assure her foreign policy credibility, and appears to take absolutely no guff from Republicans and their bullshit thrown at her for the last twenty-odd years. But Hillary is supported by a swath of people who have taken advantage of closeness to the Clintons to benefit financially– big corporations who have run the agenda of the country to our detriment and threaten to do so even more now that money has become speech under Citizens United.

Vice-President Biden, as much as I love old lovable “Uncle Joe,” seems to be dabbling in pursuit of the primaries, but has not yet formally announced. He has admitted openly that the grief he feels for losing his son Beau Biden to cancer this year has taken an emotional toll that makes a political campaign even harder. Campaigns are already an emotional trial for anyone in good shape. He could do it, but does he have the heart to endure the rigors of what would be a rough campaign against his Democratic challengers, and again against a rabid Republican nominee?

These are the questions we ask ourselves as we listen to the frontrunners who face the cameras tomorrow night. Even though we are fortunate to not have to choose which candidate generates the most hatred against gays and lesbians, women seeking abortion, Muslims, immigrants and gun control, we still have a thoughtful process to undergo. Who is right for the country at this point in its history? What do we need to keep the U.S. moving towards being a place that is just, equal and peaceful?

We have not answered those questions yet with our current leadership. Most of us have been and continue to be “pocketbook voters,” as in, “How does this candidate affect my personal bottom line?” But lives are at stake, now more than ever. As some people in America express concern over the ability to pay a mortgage, others are figuring out how to teach their children to not get picked up and killed by police.

The soul of the country is at stake now more than ever. Our national facade suggests we are doing fine as a nation, but we are a nation with a troubled past and present, a nation of increasing “have-nots” versus “haves.” We’re a nation of people who must decide whether or not to accept our changing role in a world that is poised and challenging us to meet it halfway; we can no longer insist on “my way or the highway.” As a nation, we still must address our past crimes against humanity.

We are a nation of people who are other than white, middle class, Christian and straight. And more and more, because of our actions and inaction in the past, we are facing karma in the form of immigrants who have had to leave their own countries for safety in ours, due to the mess we created in theirs.

It’s a much smaller, more interconnected world. We have seen the price paid for our mistakes across many nations. This price will come up again and again until we rectify our actions and re-define our national interests. We can no longer afford to think only of our comfort, but regard and address the pressure we have put on the world and each other. Our dilemma remains: who and what will put us on the right path to meet the challenges of a future we need to share with the rest of the Earth?

See you below in the comments.

My Year in Retrogrades

16 Replies

Here at Planet Waves we do our best to demystify the movements of the planets. Eric and all the wonderful writers work to break down and dissect everything that could happen to you during all phases of the big and the personal planets, especially Mercury retrogrades.

In our fast-moving days of ever-expanding technology and even faster moving social and cultural change, giving sage words of advice to calm our otherwise well-earned anxiousness whenever a retrograde approaches is a necessary public service by Planet Waves.

With that in mind, as a 12th-house Aquarian with a 3rd-house Gemini Moon and an 8th-house Neptune in Libra, I am not just happy, but ecstatic (no make that FREAKING ecstatic) to say that this year — 2015, the year of Mercury retrogrades in air signs — a.k.a. my year in retrograde Inferno (as in, the Dante kind) is almost o-v-e-r.

2015 began calmly enough. I started rehearsals on our new work the 24th of January during the storm after the Mercury station. We were working on a piece of choreography involving chairs. The move was to do a series of three light lunges while sitting on a chair with our hips squared towards the front of the stage.

Simple enough the first time. Nailed it, in fact. Then came the second time. The third time. The fifth, sixth, seventh and eighth time. By around the tenth time, standing up for a break, my knee was so out of joint I had to favor my other leg to walk off the stage.

Waking the next morning in excruciating pain that ice and arnica treatments could not abate, I stayed in from work, physically unable to take the 20 stairs down from my apartment to leave the house. By around the third day of limping around in agony, I managed to get to Kaiser Hospital where my doctor gave my knee a cortisone shot. It made the inflammation go down enough so that by my birthday on Feb. 1, I could walk with my family as planned from the restaurant in Chinatown where we had my birthday dinner to a small nightclub in North Beach.

But Mercury retrograde (with the help of Mars) was not through with my body yet. Oh no. After three weeks of rehearsal, in late February, the post-retrograde shadow phase in Aquarius, I noticed a deep stinging pain in the back of my head and a throbbing in my forehead, which I incorrectly diagnosed as hay fever. Three advice calls, two doctors and four days later, I developed a rash on the right side of my forehead which grew increasingly worse. “Please,” I thought, “don’t let it be shingles.”

“It’s shingles.” The Kaiser doctor said, as she looked not only at my head but at my eyelid, which was starting to swell. “Luckily, it doesn’t look like it’s in the eye. But I’m scheduling you for an eye exam just in case.”

I sat down to make a few phone calls. The first to my director, asking for a week off to recover and not infect anyone. The next call was to my acupuncturist, whose advice (and this journey) I covered in an earlier article.

With that first retro in Aquarius behind me, I was working hard on taking better care of myself. Getting enough sleep was a priority, as well as taking better care of my knee. All spring and the approaching summer was kind and full of promise as I returned to health. Our NBA team, the Warriors, were in the playoffs. My city was happy. My neighborhood was happy. I woke up the morning of June 5 to find that, despite Mercury in retro phase in Gemini, we had clinched our spot in the NBA finals. I was almost skipping to my car parked a few doors down from the house when I noticed my car’s curbside wheels were on the sidewalk.

Slowly approaching the car, I walked around to its other side. The entire front fender had been totally smashed. My car was totaled. And not only my car, but two other cars parked behind mine were completely crunched. All three of our cars had small white envelopes from Oakland Police. Inside was a notice of accident and an accident report number.

Some neighbors gathered around me. “Is this your car? Oh my God, there was a BIG sound of a crash at 6:00 this morning! It was so loud we woke up and went downstairs to look. There were ten police cars here this morning. The driver of the car that hit yours was going so fast his car completely flipped over.”

Apparently someone else had also enjoyed the Warriors win quite well the night before. By a miracle, he came out alive. But I don’t think his parents were all too pleased to have their insurance pay for my new car.

Are you with me still? I am writing all of this to get to our current week with Mercury retrograde in Libra, which I will call “My Struggle with Passwords” — or its actual working title: “How to Manage iOs Upgrades on Your Devices and Not Screw Yourself Out of Your Primary Email Account.”

If that doesn’t state the problem I am having during this Mercury storm phase, then completely mixing up the date of the first Democratic debate — and telling everyone to check them out Oct. 6 when they are on Oct. 13 — should tell you what part of my life is currently getting Merc-jacked.

If it were me and I had control over the galaxy, I would postpone 2015 and its three retrogrades in air signs altogether and wait for a better time for planet Earth to make its re-appearance back on its orbit around the Sun. Why not? The BBC postpones new episodes of “Sherlock” for long, endless years to accommodate Mr. Cumberbatch’s schedule — maddening for the rest of us, but great for him.

I know. Having control over the galaxy and our orbiting planets is above my pay grade. And really, these retrogrades have schooled me in slowing down, being careful, staying flexible in the midst of shocking reverses and, well, just paying closer attention.

But still I am elated the finish line is near. The end of this current retrograde in Libra and this year of retrogrades in air signs is in sight. With all homage to the great Dante, its been a helluva year. So far. What’s that you say, Len? There’s another retrograde in Aquarius in January 2016?

Lord love a duck.

Autumn’s Fallout

15 Replies

Speaker of the House John Boehner will resign congress and his speakership on Oct. 31.

Today’s column will be brief. I say this with some caution, partly because I don’t know what to expect, but I think something big has begun in Washington.

Outgoing Speaker John Boehner is clearing his to-do list after last Friday’s surprising announcement of his resignation. He began by appearing on Face the Nation, and without naming names, identified his bete noir (which, by the way, is Ted Cruz) by the biblical epithet “false prophet.”

Parting shots and old scores are par for the course in halls of power. Congress is no exception. Yet, what Boehner did was more than an exit interview. He was waving a red flag to anyone who can see it.

Boehner isn’t the only Congressional leader in trouble. The traditional party leadership is as well, with Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell in line as the next target to walk the plank. Today, Senator Lindsay Graham had to quell absurd rumors from the Teapublicans that President Obama coerced Boehner to quit. We’re watching the current leadership of the Republican Party call for help from a life boat.

Continue reading →

The Speaker of the House Resigns

8 Replies

“Lord, make me an instrument of Your peace. Where there is hatred, let me sow love; where there is injury, pardon; where there is doubt, faith; where there is despair, hope; where there is darkness, light; where there is sadness, joy. O, Divine Master, grant that I may not so much seek to be consoled as to console; to be understood as to understand; to be loved as to love. For it is in giving that we receive; it is in pardoning that we are pardoned; it is in dying that we are born again to eternal life.” —“The Prayer of St. Francis,” read to the Republican Congressional Caucus by Speaker John Boehner after announcing his resignation from Congress.

In a stunning and historic move, coming on the eve of the eclipse on the Aries Point, Ohio Republican John Boehner — Speaker of the House of Representatives — has resigned. His resignation will be effective as of Oct. 30.

If I had a hammer — John Boehner, the ‘tan man’, is now the outgoing Speaker of the House of Representatives.

Throughout his tenure, it appears Speaker Boehner was interested in the novel thought of retaining his power by making the House of Representatives a functional, working body of the federal government. Extreme members of his own party wanted otherwise. They have threatened to close down the government and brought the world economy to the brink while under his leadership.

In August, a minority of 28 conservative members within his own party placed a “Vacate Chair” motion to remove the Speaker from his post on the docket of the House floor for discussion, but it never came up for a vote. Even though Speaker Boehner had a majority of moderate party members on his side — representatives willing to work with Democrats to come up with a deal for votes, he had lost the confidence of the extreme right within his own party. They wanted to shut down the government by not voting on a spending bill without first defunding Planned Parenthood.

In the mid-1990s a government shutdown cost the Republicans dearly at election time during the Clinton Administration. Shutdowns are highly disruptive. The last one, in 2013, closed off government services including national parks, prevented approval of travel visas into and out of the country, and cut off food stamps and federal paychecks. You could see why they’re wildly unpopular among most Americans, and why Boehner did not want it to happen again while under his watch. Not so close to next year’s elections.

This divide between far-right members and party leadership means a civil war is brewing within his own party when a modicum of party unity was needed to keep the Republican “brand” intact during a Presidential election year. This, perhaps with a little Papal push, ultimately led to shortening his stay.

Instead of resigning at the end of 2016 after the elections as originally planned, he will be leaving this year. This leaves a leadership gap that will be interesting to watch these next few days during the eclipse cycle. Especially given the way the Republicans bend rules to make sure they stay in power.

Speaking of which, the Hastert Rule, also known as the “majority of the majority” rule, has been an informal governing principle used by Republican Speakers of the House of Representatives since the mid-1990s. Its aim is to limit the power of the minority party to bring bills up for a vote on the floor of the House. Under the Hastert Rule, the Speaker of the House would not allow a floor vote on a bill unless a majority of the majority party supports the bill. In December 2012 Boehner told his caucus in a conference call, “I’m not interested in passing something with mostly Democrat votes” and that did not have the support of the majority of the Republican caucus.

Yet Speaker Boehner actually did want a Congress that was functioning, despite the behavior of the more extreme factions of his own party. He allowed a vote on the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 (also known as the “fiscal cliff bill”) with only 85 out of 241 Republicans in favor (a support level of only 35%), and the bill passed with the support of 90% of Democrats.

He allowed a vote on aid to victims of Hurricane Sandy to take place without the support of a majority of the Republican caucus. Boehner brought a bill extending the Violence Against Women Act for a vote. He brought a bill for vote on federal acquisition of historic sites, and he allowed a floor vote to reopen the government and raise the debt ceiling — twice. He allowed a floor vote on a “clean” bill funding the Department of Homeland Security. The man resigned because he wanted to make his branch of government work. But the less sane members of his own party didn’t.

We cast a noon chart for Boehner two ways: one in Koch houses and one in Natural houses, the latter of which puts the ascendant of any chart at 00 Aries. (We have no birth time to determine his exact Ascendant). Off the cuff, in his South Node, there is a Neptune-Pallas conjunction in Libra. The Libra conjunction is a good 12-14 degrees from the eclipse degrees, but still — it’s an interesting image of karma, delusion and political strategy in the sign of justice, isn’t it?

His Scorpio Sun and Mercury show a guy who deals in secrets; secret agendas and secret communication and thinking. And like we don’t already know: he’s an emotional expresser.

Also in his chart, there’s a Pholus-Jupiter conjunction in Capricorn, and Cap’s resonance with political institutions and structures is exemplified in his years of public service and leadership. Jupiter and Pholus are both expansive energies, but in Capricorn, ruled by Saturn, they’re likely restricted.

Isabel Hickey says of Jupiter in Cap that these people are concerned with factual matters and getting ahead in the world; that it is “Necessary to learn giving-out-ness for there is a tendency to be miserly with the expression of loving feelings, as well as with money and with material possessions.”

Perhaps too, some Capricorn common sense in the midst of political extremism made him a man out of time with his current, less stable, polarized compatriots. If I were in his position, I would have left, too.

So was his decision a sudden change of heart or a defining conclusion to a decision made long before? There is probably a little of both involved. The news reports suggest that the process leading up to his resignation was under way as early as 2013. This is backed up if we cast a progressed version of his noon birth chart for the date and time of his resignation announcement. That chart shows that his Sun and Mercury have changed sign, and the half-return of his lunar nodes.

However, the eclipse and transiting Mercury are suggestive of the actual decision being sudden. The involvement of Neptune and Vesta imply the spirituality concerned in this matter.

Astrologically, he was already working up to resigning — but the Pope’s visit was like a “road to Damascus” moment. The Pope must have touched a lot of the right strings. Without that he might have delayed the decision indefinitely. The direction of the Republican party has long chafed against his better nature.

Regardless of his birth time, his natal Moon will is in Libra and close to Neptune — that signifies a lot. His natal Moon ruler is Venus — currently being transited for the umpteenth time in the past 5 years or so by Pluto. This man has been undergoing some big changes.

We look forward to comments on the blog. See you there!

(Special thanks to Amanda Painter and Amy Elliot for their astrological contributions to this article! — FB)

The Vicar of Christ Visits The Christian Nation

19 Replies

Pope Francis I is coming to town this week. As we open the doors of Congress and the United Nations to welcome him, the theme of the questions we ask inevitably is: “How are the Papacy and the Catholic Church responding to the world as it now exists?”

Pope Francis will be arriving in an America, which some here call a “Christian” nation — but ironically, right now we’re a country in midst of ramping up its presidential campaigns on platforms that would make Jesus facepalm.

Donald Trump’s candidacy minted itself on Day One as anti-Hispanic immigrant, and it has grown its base of right-wing racists because of it. We’re still not certain of Hillary Clinton’s veracity when it comes to emails, but what concerns us more is her connection to big money lobbying interests in Washington DC, which have a Kraken’s tentacle-hold on US politics.

Whenever Jeb Bush says his brother “kept us safe,” we cough out “ISIS” as a direct result of the chaos that ensued when Dick Cheney’s Halliburton and other military corporations profited in billions of government money, while under contract purportedly to rebuild Iraq, but not doing a damn thing other than making Iraq a worse mess.

Trump’s racism is not new. It’s ongoing in this country, and its current upswing has had years of build-up and acceptance from the recent past. The vehement anti-Muslim rhetoric grew in the media in the wake of 9-11. The birther movement –- questioning Barack Obama’s “otherness” — arose just before President Obama first took office; and the outright racism against African Americans was sanctioned through speech, practice and policy, starting with the halls of Congress.

We call ourselves a Christian nation, going so far as to re-write the history of America’s Deist Founding Fathers who were children of the Enlightenment and who believed in the separation of Church and State. Yet, as a result, we have become far less tolerant –- less Christ-like –- in the process.

We’ve recently seen displayed some very un-Christ-like behavior by clerk Kim Davis of Rowan County, Kentucky. Her Christian beliefs not only prevented her from allowing gay couples to marry, but also stopped her staff from issuing licenses as well.

Then there’s the arrest of Ahmed Mohamed, a 14-year-old high school student in Irving, Texas, for bringing his science project –- a home-made clock –- to school. This prompted school authorities to call the police to arrest Ahmed because: 1) he’s a Muslim and 2) there is no number two.

Ahhhhmerica: what would the Pontiff say?

Thursday’s address by Pope Francis to a joint session of Congress should be an interesting political and spiritual marker, but not of the Papacy’s evolution; rather, ours. The Christianists and Intolerati are getting blowback from recent events — in response to Ahmed’s arrest in Irving, Texas; and eye-rolling impatience that Kim Davis just DO-HER-JOB-ALREADY after serving time in jail for contempt of court. I may or may not be the only person feeling a shift taking place, but I get the feeling that perhaps our intolerance threshold is at peak and the only way next is a downward slope. Digging out my old school-girl rosary beads, I pray this is so.

With the Pope’s arrival, the Democrats may wince at the Republicans timing their vote to defund Planned Parenthood around the time of the Pontiff’s speech, yet the Republicans will most likely feel the sting of the Pope’s concern over the “economy of exclusion”, also known as global income inequality, as well as his climate change activism. Both parties should take a back seat when it comes to the “pay to play” politics that is killing democracy here and in poorer countries wholesale across the planet.

Remember that it was Pope Francis who instigated talks between Cuba and the US, defrosting 60 years of cold relations between two countries, and leading to the US re-opening its embassy in Havana earlier this summer. It’s the Pope whose liberation theology beliefs were forged from being a priest in Latin America during a time of intense and painful revolutionary struggle. It is this Pope who is questioning the closing of borders in Europe during the Syrian refugee crisis — a crisis caused in large part by our Western wars for profit. It is the Pope who leads and concerns himself with a global flock of 1.3 billion people, world-wide.

Maybe the question we should really ask when Pope Francis I touches down in America is: “How is the United States responding to the world as it now exists?” Who is more in touch with this turning world and all its people? The Pope or us? What are we doing about it? Perhaps Congress and the rest of the country should brace itself not for a pat on the back but for a sermon that needs to be heard by an errant flock — Christian and otherwise.

Morituri te salutamus

8 Replies

Morituri te salutamus — “We who are about to die salute you” — is chanted by gladiators before the Emperor as they enter into battle, to fight until the last one is standing in the pits. Which brings me to the Republican Party’s presidential debate last night at the Reagan Library.

I am somewhat of a political junkie. I get worked up when the wheels start rolling on the American political process. American Presidential campaigns can be an exciting and aggravating process to watch as we try to winnow down our choices for who is going to sit in the Oval Office. But if you know what you’re watching out for, it can be quite fun.

It was especially fun for me in 2008. We were at long-last about to say goodbye and good riddance to the Bush-Cheney regime, and elect the new: new party and new face in the White House. And truth be told, even with all their faults, mistakes, broken promises, and all the baggage of the awful office that is the American Presidency, we didn’t do too badly.

Yet today I feel helpless watching the Republican Party presidential debates. I started by covering the first one last month sponsored by Fox News as a joke, which it was. Continuing with last night’s debates sponsored by CNN at the Reagan Library in Simi Valley — except for some minor team additions — not much has changed.

When we look back to assess what really happened at last night’s Republican debates at the Reagan Library, we shouldn’t focus too long on the “gotcha” remarks that score points over a 24-hour news cycle; or analyze how much blood CNN news personality Jake Tapper was drawing between Carly Fiorina and Donald Trump — or for that matter everyone else on stage and Donald Trump, since his remarks insult and demean anyone in America he thinks of.

We know there’s nothing there in the substance of the show. And it is a show. The debates are elimination duels. With 16 contenders you can imagine why. Yet the way we’re conducting the elimination process didn’t help much.

Last night reminded me of gladiatorial spectacle: words are swords and spears to throw; candidates attack and try to eliminate each other; beating their chests to show their cred on controlling women; running corporations; scapegoating Muslims and Mexicans; hating the gays, the Supreme Court, Planned Parenthood and Obama. All the convenient bugaboos that trigger amygdala (lizard brain) reaction by Republicans in America, which is unfortunately a measure of success for a Republican presidential wanna-be. So far, the only casualty remains former Texas Governor Rick Perry.

This candidate ‘refining’ through debate is equivalent to the imperial ‘thumbs down’, only this time the thumb is by the people in the debate hall and the network applause meter. On top of that, each candidate has staffed the seats of the debate hall with as many of their supporters as possible — to give the audience applause more boost for their chosen politician while on camera. I’ve watched this happen first-hand. The cards are already stacked for the show. It’s been that way for years.

Do we know anything else about these people that would make you envision them tackling the weighty problems that go through the doors to the Oval Office every day? No? Thought so. Entertainment value now weighs more than the future.

Which is probably another reason why Donald Trump remains in the race. His outrageous remarks on the campaign trail are just the right amount of mass distraction. It’s the political equivalent of CNN’s ongoing coverage of Malaysian Airlines flight 370. Furthermore, why would we give a shit as to what your Secret Service nickname would be when we’re not sure you wouldn’t shit yourself when given the red button to push, or if you’d have the intelligence not to use it? Why do we even ask these things?

The way that news networks conduct campaign coverage like it’s “Dancing With the Stars” is costing us democracy. And whoever came up with the ‘candidate we most likely want to have a beer with’ criteria — the criteria used to help elect George W. Bush and Dick Cheney, one of the worst administrations in the 21st century — should be ostracized on a deserted island, forever.

That Vice President Joe Biden was able to get a more human picture himself out there in an interview with Stephen Colbert than in a CNN debate (though he didn’t do too badly there, either, in 2012) should say volumes on the circus American news coverage of politics has become. Why aren’t the news cameras interested in looking more closely?

I am sick of the polarization of our politics. Even as a Democrat, I am interested in hearing what the Republican side has to say. I recall conservatives having some sensible ideas when it came to government. I guess those people are gone, or drowned out.

We have incredibly high-end technology to monitor and scrutinize the movements and words of every last candidate, yet we have failed in making sure the audience these candidates are wooing are informed enough to make wise decisions as to whether they should lead us. That is mostly intentional, and we have discussed why that is here and elsewhere many times before.

I guess the rest belongs to us in demanding more than what we’re getting in the news networks’ coverage and their efforts on behalf of the public’s interest, like with these debates this next year. Given the state of the planet and its people, this is no time for games or game shows. The future, should we choose to accept it or even care to know about it, begins now.