Both the written and audio readings for the beautiful 2016 annual edition, Vision Quest, are now immediately available. Order all 12 signs at a great value or choose your individual signs. You may access written and audio excerpts from the Vision Quest main page.
by Judith Gayle
It’s been a remarkable few days in election politics, unpacking the fallout from the Iowa vote — even painful, as when Jeb Bush attempted to prop up his failing campaign by bringing out his mom to tell us what a fine, wise and disciplined man he is. And it’s hard not to consider Jeb grown desperate as he welcomes his big brother, George W., to South Carolina on his behalf.
America may not have held Dubby criminally responsible for Iraq, but both sides of the political spectrum wince at his name. Some of us might even remember that moment when his tongue tangled to utter, haltingly, “There’s an old saying in Tennessee — I know it’s in Texas, probably in Tennessee — that says, fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can’t get fooled again.”
That particular Bushism should be emblazoned on every T-shirt and billboard in America, seems to me. It would be a really productive thing to reflect on, from moment to moment, on which footprints we’re going to follow along the path. To assess, as it were, if we’ve been here before. And before. And before. (Happy Groundhog Day, citizens!)
Let’s take voter disenfranchisement, for instance. Strict voter ID laws always favor the conservative party in that minorities overwhelmingly vote with the Democrats. Worries about voter fraud have been proven, again and again, to be as realistic as finding a jihadi terrorist hiding behind your trash can or beating the multi-million-to-one odds of winning the lottery, but we are not dissuaded. Much like protecting against Sharia Law taking foothold in our state capitals, we have become expert at straining out the gnats and letting through the (big, smelly) camels.
A recent study out of U.C. San Diego indicates that Democratic turnout drops by an estimated 8.8 percentage points in general elections when strict photo identification laws are in place, compared to just 3.6 percentage points for Republicans. That surely flies in the face of the ‘one [wo]man, one vote’ philosophy of which this nation boasts, but it hasn’t stopped the conservative states from making every attempt to install repressive laws that make voting difficult, especially for our elders. And only the lefties have the balls to call that racist.
Nine states, including Texas, Georgia, and Virginia, have passed stringent ID laws; and here in the Pea Patch, our Bagger majority is pushing yet again (once passed and vetoed) to disenfranchise those without access to specific photo ID. Missouri — which used to be a blue state back in the days of a unionized workforce and healthy middle class — is at this point a purple state with red overtones. It’s divided between religiously devout elders in the country and a culturally diverse population in the cities. Like many states that have wide stretches of land between big cities, there are enough rural strongholds here to mandate the numerous gerrymandered districts creating a statewide coup on all progressive policy.
Unfortunately, it shows. Radical policy has played into dumbing down this population to the point where the Dem power structure has less and less power to protect its most vulnerable citizens. Our kids aren’t getting the kind of information they need to become engaged citizens — and that’s our white kids I’m talking about. The black and Latino kids are simply marginalized by overcrowded schools and minimal funding, not to mention poor nutrition and lack of educational and cultural opportunity.
Sadly, this cluelessness of the larger picture extends to the very top of our leadership, Democratic Governor Jay Nixon and Senator Claire McCaskill, who have declared Missouri hands-off for Bernie supporters because residents of the Heartland won’t support a socialist.
Michael Moore expertly parodies Dubya’s infamous reaction to 9/11. Photo by Brave New Films.
Poll-driven Blue Dogs and largely afraid of the evangelicals, they’ve evidently never met a socialist or they wouldn’t be throwing the word around erroneously.
I think their hero — the feisty little president from Missouri, Harry S. Truman — would be comfortable enough with the mainstream liberal polices that Bernie Sanders — a democratic socialist — proposes, given these comments.
And let me be frank — Missouri has become the most recent ground zero for institutionalized racism. Thanks to the explosion in Ferguson, this state has become the poster child for black neglect and disdain, and that comes with a cold edge. This isn’t the south, where one expects repression; where the powers that be have a long-established familiarity with the black community that, if not respectful, is at least accepting. No, we’re much worse.
Two years after the death of Michael Brown, the police force of Ferguson, Missouri, has negotiated its way through a number of Department of Justice recommendations and will now attempt to bring that to vote at the next Ferguson City Council meeting. Once passed, the agreement is court-enforceable and is a study in give and take. Here’s a bit of it:
“To that end, the agreement could provide a salary boost for officers in Ferguson, as the city would agree to work to make the Ferguson Police Department ‘among the most competitive’ of agencies of similar sizes in St. Louis County. The agreement also emphasizes support for officers and their families.
“The agreement also requires integrity from Ferguson police officers and sets up an actual disciplinary process, which never really existed. It would make failing to report misconduct an action that can result in discipline. Officers who lie would be fired.
“If implemented, the agreement would forbid Ferguson from holding anyone arrested on a municipal warrant for more than 12 hours, and any detention beyond 12 hours would require the authorization of the chief of police. Under the proposed agreement, Ferguson would be forced to repeal municipal codes that had been abused by police officers, such as “Manner of Walking Along Roadway” and “Crossing at Right Angles.”
“The agreement would force the municipal court to operate independently from Ferguson’s prosecutor (currently Stephanie Karr) in a way that “eliminates existing and potential unlawful conflicts of interest.” Ferguson’s municipal judge would also have to act like an actual judge.”
That information, incomplete as it is, should announce a clear and present danger in all it seeks to remedy. Similar outrages are happening in little bergs all over this nation, even the ones we think are well above such nonsense. And here in Missouri, any new process instituted may change the particulars but will take time to shake out in attitude, thanks to the constant drumbeat against ‘slackers’ and ‘takers,’ ‘pushers’ and ‘thugs’ spewed by generations of conservative scaremongers.
The simmering resentment of the aging white lower class citizens against those they’ve been taught to fear will not give easily. Essentially, the very politics represented in Trump’s xenophobia and white privilege narrative drive much of the political process in Missouri, and that’s just one state in the Heartland.
The debate between the Democratic candidates gets serious. Image: Democracy Now! video still
In Michigan, there can be no doubt that racism played heavily into the decision to allow tainted water to decimate Flint for generations to come. If you want more information on that scandal, Flint native Mike Moore is the go-to guy; see here and here.
Bernie has asked for the Michigan governor to step down due to his blatant disregard for these lives; Hillary would rather he attempt to fix the problem and the governor, himself, has asked for everyone to stop pointing fingers because, umm, capitalism or something, and let’s just get back to doing something, even if it’s wrong. As well, we should probably watch how this goes as legal advocate Erin Brockovich says Flint is just the tip of the old proverbial iceberg.
OK, due diligence on the racial hostility which went underground for several generations as white folks tried to establish, as did the nation’s High Court, a post-racial era in name only. Writing about racism and sexism and ageism in the United States of America is like taking the pulse of a chronic patient. We know what we’ll find, don’t we? We suffer an epidemic classism in this country that, like it or not, we did not leave behind when we crossed the pond so long ago; and it remains the elephant in the cross-hairs of our national conversation.
I’ve distanced in this offering from the Clinton/Sanders contest as a bit of a time-out, but there’s much more to say in this critical election season and that’s because the Dem race IS the only relevant contest.
As Bernie often says (and he’s the only one who asks me to do this for myself, mind you), “Think about it.” What are the actual odds that any Republican — radical to the point of nihilism, arrogantly marginalizing people of color and pledging to cut away at programs that even their own constituency refuse to do without — will win the White House in 2016?
The zeitgeist of this moment is not about the Republicans, Trump’s expected and entertaining tantrums notwithstanding. The challenge of this nation is whetherit will continue as it has for the last several decades, or begin to defy the oligarchy that has purchased the democratic process. Anything else is simply monitoring the meds of the nation’s sedation.
There are those who call Sanders followers “puritopians” — those who refuse to be moved by a policy of incremental success proposed by moderate Liberals, who include Barack Obama. Me? I was an avid John Edwards fan until he let his nether-parts get in the way of his populist message. And although I supported Obama and still believe in his essential liberalism, there was never any doubt in my mind that he was an establishment candidate.
I give him props for all he accomplished (and will) during his tenure, but I’d have preferred him to have spent all eight of his years as, suggests Rolling Stone, the “I don’t give a fuck” president he’s become in these last months.
And, as before, if Clinton takes the candidacy, she has my vote. Indeed, I once caught hell for suggesting that the ‘perfect is the enemy of good’ aphorism was a legitimate meme for supporting Obama’s less-than-progressive tendencies. I’m pragmatist enough to believe that you maximize what you’ve got, and realist enough to understand that if establishment money drives the result, then, as Chomsky said, “There will be dire consequences to a GOP victory. What they are saying is, let’s destroy the world. Is that worth voting against? Yeah.”
But more of the same is not enough. The kind of revolution we’re all dreaming of is not an incremental thing; it never was. Go back and read that Truman quote from the 1940s. Sound like much has changed since then? FDR was only able to morph American politics because he was backed by a movement of citizens who forced change. Once in place — with fears abated — his policies became not just accepted but appreciated, even loved, as the contemporary fabric of democracy.
What Sanders is suggesting isn’t even particularly revolutionary; we’ve just become so complacent and removed from our own history we think he’s radical and unelectable. Well, fool me once, establishment politics, corporate press and privatized capitalists, but not this time!
Written just about the same time that, per Eric, “Venus is about to make a conjunction to Pluto… This is passionate, lusty and defiant,” allow me to take advantage of that energy blast and channel Joan Crawford in one of her more memorable roles: “Don’t fuck with me, fellas. This ain’t my first time at the rodeo.”
I’ve got to agree with your argument here about perfect vs. good (or lesser of two evils, in some cases). I’d take Clinton if I couldn’t have Sanders. She may have a lot of dubious alliances, but she’s so much better than the walking nightmares from the other party.
And – while I loathe the memory of Thatcher with all my lefty soul – a female president would still be a welcome milestone, and long overdue.
I will confess paying little attention to your Thatcher years, Amy, tasked as I was as a working mom to keep multiple balls in the air. I did take notice of St. Ronnie the Reagan, though, growing intellectually dimmer and dimmer as he went along, quite enamored of the old girl. Looking back, I see why! They were perfect for one another. Thanks for commenting today.
Some really interesting electoral news out of North Carolina where three federal judges ruled that two districts were gerrymandered along racial lines.
“There is strong evidence that race was the only nonnegotiable criterion and that traditional redistricting principles were subordinated to race,” 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Roger Gregory wrote for the court.
This will toss caucus voting, scheduled for March 15th, into the air, and likely take a while to resolve.
http://www.digbysblog.blogspot.com/2016/02/unexpected-turbulence-elections-ruling.html
And then there’s the white supremicists making robocalls for the Donald:
As CNN first reported Friday, the robocalls are bankrolled by William Johnson, a California attorney, through the American National Super PAC. Johnson is chairman of the American Freedom Party, a group designed to “represent the interests and issues of European-Americans,” according to its website.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/donald-trump-robocalls-white-nationalists_us_56b528e1e4b01d80b2467122
European-Americans? Good Gawd! Aren’t they all socialists?
Also of note, Huffington has put this disclaimer on all Trump articles for awhile now: Editor’s note: Donald Trump is a serial liar, rampant xenophobe, racist, misogynist, birther and bully who has repeatedly pledged to ban all Muslims — 1.6 billion members of an entire religion — from entering the U.S.
A neurologist who finds himself unsettled by (the face everyone wants to punch) Ted Cruz explained that he has “atypical expressions” which left him “uneasy.” This prompted the following on a Tumblir account:
Ted Cruz is smiling! Every time Ted Cruz smiles a baby cheetah gets its spots…and is slaughtered and eaten by poachers from Boko Haram who use their paws as key chains.
A Bloomberg editorial calling Bernie a menace and his followers Sandernista’s has this to say about his campaign:
He is also a grave threat to the Democratic Party. Because the Democratic Party is currently the only major U.S. party devoted to moderation and rational empiricism, Sanders’s robust campaign for president is consequently a threat to the U.S. as well.
We are to take pride in being rational empiricists — now there’s a happy thought [sic] but at least it’s being articulated at long last, loud and proud, so we can get a feel for our ‘exceptionalism.’
http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2016-02-05/bernie-sanders-is-a-menace-to-the-democrats?cmpid=yhoo.headline
I am invariably amused by the creativity of my fellows. For those who are white-knuckled over it all, ACIM asks THE most important question: what is it you want?
Pare that down to its essential form and LIVE the answer, INHABIT the answer, BE the answer. Our experience follows our expectation. And if you need some ideas, here’s your daily moment of zen:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=120&v=auSo1MyWf8g
Hey Jude, there’s no denying that carnival-like excitement that the U.S. experiences every 4 years; “the circus is coming, the circus is coming” is heard everywhere and we who seem to thrive on the sport of politics during Presidential elections start comparing notes. That part hasn’t changed. I dare say that we, now-a-days, know a lot more, or at least have access to a lot more information than our parents did in the 40’s and 50’s.
Back then Harry Truman could be a hero to grownups without them receiving hate mail from their neighbors. Of course, back then we low-information folks didn’t have to know the sexual persuasion of candidates or movie stars or even our neighbors for that matter. Times have changed and rules have too. We were allowed, even encouraged to be patriotic without being defiant back then. Everybody flew an American flag. Now not so much. Now everything is exaggerated; the Left has gotten more left, and the Right, more right, the poor more poor, the rich much richer and the despondent are even more despondent now.
While there is the info access glut available, there is also that dumbing-down effect to contend with now. We may have lost a couple of generations in the process but that could end with the right leadership. We, all us humans, must learn all over again how to be brave. To be brave on a sustained level one needs to care about something beyond one’s self, to believe in something beyond just survival. Something that inspires courage as in If I Support This Maybe Things Could Get Better.
There are those who don’t want to be brave but would rather have someone else who acts brave do the hard part; someone they can feel protected by. I believe that’s a big part of Trump’s appeal. Some want to make the real world just go away and have that brave hero protect them and insulate their own concept of the world which is what I imagine Cruz’ followers are looking for. Hillary’s followers are open to the existence of multiple lifestyles but don’t want to risk what they have for a dream that seems impractical. They would much rather keep the status quo and be satisfied with making history by voting for the 1st woman as U.S. President. That would be prudent.
But the excitement in the air isn’t about prudence in my estimation. It’s about doing what is brave, what is far-reaching in possibility. It’s about being in on the ground floor of something historical, even more-so than electing the 1st lady president of this country. It is not just a do-it-for-me and mine but do-it-for-all-of-us kind of feeling. Two years ago I would never have dreamed Bernie Sanders would be my Prince Charming. I liked the guy, but now I see he’s got courage coming out the wazoo I never would have guessed he had. The man knows what his role is and that he must have the nation’s people behind him to succeed. What’s he got to lose, other than his life? He’s 74 years old. When he was born Saturn and Uranus were conjunct and that spells breakthroughs in status-quo.
Actually, Uranus stationed retro a day or so before Bernie’s birthdate and Saturn stationed retrograde a few days after his birthday. The actual 1st conjunction of this cycle didn’t come until 8 months later, but Saturn and Uranus were only 2 degrees apart when Bernie was born; enough to feel the tension. That exact conjunction in May 1942 was at 29+ Taurus, trine transiting Neptune at 27+ Virgo, trine the U.S. natal Sibly Pluto at 27+ Capricorn and square the U.S. natal Sibly Moon at 27+ Aquarius. It was World War II for the U.S.
The Saturn-Uranus cycle we are in now has a different imperative. All 3 of their conjunctions were in the late degrees of Sagittarius, and in their 3rd conjunction in 1988 they were at 27+ Sagittarius which is where the Galactic Center is, the Moon (the masses) was at 27+ Capricorn where the U.S. Pluto (power) is and it was square the Sun at 25+ Libra which trines the U.S. Moon in Aquarius. Bernie was too young to influence that last Saturn-Uranus cycle in the 40’s but not this one. This one seems more about integrating the conscious (Sun) with the unconscious (Moon). Bernie’s natal Ceres is conjunct this 1988 Saturn-Uranus cycle degree and Ceres is a nurturer. She brings things to fruition.
Those who believe in Ascendance and Disclosure and beings of higher intelligence like I believe, find the timing right for breaking free from tyranny of all kinds in all places on Earth. IMO, behind the mask of a modest white-haired curmudgeon is the heart of a hero ready to give his all to a cause greater than himself. Why, it’s the greatest show on Earth!
Thanks again Jude for once again stimulating our minds and providing the Big Picture of what we are dealing with in our neck of the woods.
be
All of the above is valid if you accept that we are living in a true democracy. But are we? It seems to me that the puppet-masters have convinced us that we are in control of your destiny whereas, in reality, we are not. Do you really believe that you could elect a Communist without the powers behind the throne taking some action to preserve their concept of capitalism?
Presidents are like wallpaper. They determine the colour and tone of the nation but their primary function is to cover the walls and hide the nation’s structural deficiencies – the activities which it needs to initiate and engage in in order to compete economically with similarly corrupt political organisations elsewhere in the world. America is not God’s gift to global democracy. It is at least as corrupt as the rest of the players on the planet; it wouldn’t be a winner if it were otherwise.
I’ve said before on PW that the ideal ticket for the next election is Clinton-Sanders. Clinton has the advantage that she has been closer to being president than any woman before her, and it’s way past time for the greatest democracy on earth to elect a woman leader. Sanders, per se, is probably unelectable as a leader simply because he appears to be too Socialist. The mere whiff of the word is enough to distance at least half of the electorate, including many who would benefit from his policies. But he would give Hillary terrific back-up in support of the lesser-advantaged.
My feeling is that only a genuine revolution will achieve the aim we all aspire to. Such a revolution was not achieved in the Uranus-Pluto conjunction period of the mid-60s and now we feel the backlash of that failed upheaval. Nothing really changed. Nothing will change until we say “Enough! Do you want these people to rule the world for eternity?”
Aquarius is about continual revolution where we must expect our ideas to be seen as outmoded long before we are dead. And, although I wish it were not so, I suspect that continuous revolution is the means by which the ruling elite will maintain their position. Their policies will be determined by their antagonism towards us, their opponents. But that’s no reason to give up the fight.
All points well taken, be — I’ve read a couple of pieces today from anti-establishment sources, which of course have a completely different take on who Hillary is (the blend of neo-liberal monetary policy and neo-conservative foreign policy known as Clintonism, and those who think that’s silly should remember that Obama only had two kinds of political types to select from for his cabinet — New Deal Dems like Bob Reich and Joe Stiglitz on the left, or Clintonista’s, like Geithner and Rubin from the middle, whom he chose instead. Honestly, I think Rahm Emmanuel knows where Hoffa’s bones are buried, but then that’s another story, isn’t it.)
Those interested in why Hillary isn’t a progressive choice, no matter what she says, can at least consider appropriate questions over the next months, because this wrestling match is not going to go quietly into the night. It’s proposed as a contest between head (Hil) and heart (Bernie) — and frankly, that feels right. Or, as was also mentioned, Hillary’s in it for herself and Bernie, who considers himself a foot soldier in the arena of public service and is worth somewhere in the neighborhood of $500,000 total? He’s in it for us. Hero, indeed!
http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/02/05/when-chivalry-fails-st-bernard-and-the-machine/
http://www.truth-out.org/buzzflash/commentary/jimmy-carter-built-houses-for-the-poor-as-ex-president-bill-and-hillary-got-rich
http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/02/05/smash-clintonism-why-democrats-not-republicans-are-the-problem/
Turns out, here in the US of A, socialism is no longer a dirty word, Geoff. Our younger generations aren’t even impressed with democracy any more, given what they know of it. Communism? That might scare the bejesus out of the geriatric set, although the Chinese are giving Obama fits as capitalists and nobody’s blocking them from participating in the Gawd-inspired free market. Besides, our Bernie isn’t nearly as left as your Corbyn. He’s really just a pretty mild mannered FDR Democrat (and certainly running a painfully polite campaign.)
The idea of a Clinton/Sanders ticket sounds reasonable but they’re as homogeneous as oil and water, as we’re about to see. Remember how establishment Pubs complained, a few years back,”I didn’t leave the party, the party left me”? Ditto for the progressives, left holding the bag of a diminished middle class and out of control oligarchy.
If Elizabeth Warren had run I doubt that we’d be having this conversation — nobody thinks she’s too old or too left and she’s the angel on Bernie’s shoulder, spurring him on. When she speaks of revolution, as Bernie does, nobody thinks of Russia — they think, “About damned time!” Bernie’s got the kids, the independents … and likely, when they hear him … the minorities who wouldn’t vote red if their lives depended on it (and they do.) Hil’s got the older generation women.
I too want to see a woman in the White House, and Hil’s done her best for women over the years. But this woman is predictable as is her inclination to break the rules, hide her baggage and remain opaque, her cards clutched protectively to her chest. We’ve had enough of secrets and misdirection, haven’t we? And if we don’t say so, loud and long, and push HARD for politics that make sense for main street instead of (oh, you know) then what good are we?
I can project myself NOT feeling swell about a shattered glass gender ceiling when the war drums are beating again and there’s some new reason for President Clinton to call for American boots on the ground!
Hillary won’t release the transcripts of her speeches to the Too Big To Fail banking conglomerate? And our desire to know what she told them is not a reasonable request because every Secretary of State’s old war stories are worth six figures, and they all cash in on that option? More smoke up the ass, seems to me. Art Garfunkel commented to CNN that he and Paul Simon allowed Bernie Sanders to use their song “America” in his campaign commercial thanks to reports of Hillary’s speaking fees.
These reads also make clear my one worry — that it isn’t the right who can beat Bernie back, it’s the left … committed to the current status quo and power structure. The very real Clinton machine, representing the Dem establishment, at work, planting seeds of doubt. We know that doubt is the enemy, and with friends like these … yadda ad infinitum.
So. Let’s say that Bernie wins the election and still hasn’t got a reasonable congress — will obstruction look any different with ANY Democrat in place? We should contemplate making some congressional changes pronto, because there will be a Dem in the Oval. Just as Trump didn’t win Iowa, a Pub won’t be Commander-in-Chief this time around, no matter how much rhetoric flies. The crazies can’t get their ducks in a row or their theocratic yearnings democratic enough to get elected. So the Prez can lead, can point the direction and stand in the way of bad legislation, much as has Obama — and Bernie has always said it’s not about him but about us. THAT’s the revolution. That’s what’s required.
Thank you, Ms. be for the cyclic information which, hopefully, straightens our spines just a bit with some logic larger than our own. There’s not much time left for ‘business as usual,’ time is growing short. That’s the Big Picture too!
And thank you, Geoff, for reminding us how difficult the climb back to rationality … and how important! I’ll think of it every time Bernie’s supporters says ‘revolution’ and Hillary tells us how she’s ‘evolved’ (from her years as a Goldwater Republican.)
As be indicated, what she believes about this time frame informs her, and me as well. I’m supposing that the Universe will conspire on every level in these next months to show us just how important it is to take control of our future! Me, I’m pretty sure the revolution’s already begun — whether we recognize it or not.
And if not now, my dears — there will come a (more difficult) transition sooner or later, because we CANNOT continue as we have. To do so is a prescription for extinction. Like Naomi Klein tells Bill Moyers, below, there just aren’t any non-radical options left to us now.
http://www.salon.com/2016/02/04/naomi_klein_there_are_no_non_radical_options_left_before_us_partner/
Thanks, dearhearts — hugs to both.
Hugs back to you Judith. Well said. Great nuggets of info, like the Simon Garfunkel reason for permission. As for your “one worry” it’s legitimate but remember, it’s our INTENT that matters. The Universe has ways of foiling the most dastardly of schemes.
be
Well Jude, it’s Tuesday and I finally got around to reading the Naomi Klein article and want to thank you for including that link in your Saturday piece. It opened my mind to how Big Thinkers operate – Sagittarius types, – on both sides of the coin. We are on the cusp of a New World, what with all the changes coming and it is so important to not fear the future but to take part in its transformative waves of energy. Makes me all the surer that Bernie must be our next President.
After reading this Salon interview l also realized why Elizabeth Warren could not be bogged down with campaigning (even if she wanted to be President, and she doesn’t.) What Warren couldn’t afford right now is the waste of energy and time fighting the attackers (Pubs, press, other Dem candidates). Rather she stays “home” (while Bernie is out on the trail), tending to the business of government shenanigans. I’m sure they are in constant contact, Bernie and Elizabeth; they are connected by her Leo Pallas and his Pluto conjunct the U.S. Sibly North Node, and her Aries North Node and his Aries Mars and transiting Uranus and Eris in Aries. What a team (Uranus and Eris of course!)
be