posted August 29, 2008 10:33 PM         

That said, I'm extremely uncomfortable with McCain's long history of verbal abuse. And even though having a temper flare with a spouse happens, and is forgivable IMO, the word chosen still doesn't speak well of him. Remember, these are words they use for GUYS they don't like to say they're not real men, ie not real people, and can do anything they want with them.

I first learned of McCain years ago over a joke of his he made at Chelsea's expense (who was still in high school at the time). I was so ticked off that he'd do that so that it left a major first impression on me, and when I heard McCain was one of the nominees for 2008, the first thing I thought, "Wasn't he that jerk that made a public statement about Chelsea being ugly?" That's how strong an impression it left on me (keep in mind that I was of high school age at the time and I saw that from Chelsea's PoV much more easier than many others could've, and high school is rough enough without cheap shots being aimed at you indiscriminately from high level officials). The whole thing speaks not only of a problem with his temper, but also a lack of compassion for others (at least extreme thoughtlessness). Here, I found the bit about his "joke" about Chelsea:
http://www.salon.com/news/1998/06/25newsb.html

Still, most people don't have a long term memory for politics: just look at how many think Al Gore is about saving the planet because they don't recall his voting record, just that he starred in a documentary. Or that Hillary was going to undo all that Bush did and forgetting that Hillary had voted in support of Bush for almost everything (or that Obama is against the FBI peeking into our affairs without a warrant because he said so while voting in favor of the new FISA bill). So I'm sure the things you and I recall won't be remembered by most everyone else.

Btw, I'd be very interested in seeing the natal charts of both McCain & Obama, along with their veeps, examined here. I've heard from someone that her friend into astrology examined Obama's chart and it suggested that he was shady and dishonest ('course I say he's a politician, so that's like coming up with there's going to be conflict in the Middle East, but anyway...)

posted August 30, 2008 12:43 AM         

quote:

---

Actually, there are enough women (and not just PUMAs) who feel betrayed and put upon, and feel that if they vote for Obama that they'll be saying that they're doormats that can be walked over any time the Democratic Party chooses, just as they do with other groups.

---

And any woman who doesn't vote for Obama, or worse yet, votes for McCain out of spite, must not be interested in her own rights.

Does their anger over their candidate's loss run so deep that they will look past McCain's pitiful record on the rights of women in this country? Or is there appeal in his 0% NARAL rating? His opposition to the Ledbetter legislation? His preposterous statement that women don't need laws that will help ensure their rights to equal pay, they simply need more training and education?

And putting a woman on his ticket to brunt the impact of this shameful record doesn't mean a thing. A woman who doesn't even support the rights to govern her own body.

posted August 30, 2008 01:38 AM         

quote:

---

Does their anger over their candidate's loss run so deep that they will look past McCain's pitiful record on the rights of women in this country?

---

You can't put a proverbial cigarette-paper between the professed policies of McCain and Obama. The choice is in the candidates other qualities or lack thereof.

quote:

---

Or is there appeal in his 0% NARAL rating? His opposition to the Ledbetter legislation? His preposterous statement that women don't need laws that will help ensure their rights to equal pay, they simply need more training and education?

---

I'm absolutely certain, considering your first statements about women voting against "their interests" and "out of spite", that you are twisting the truth here.

quote:

---

And putting a woman on his ticket to brunt the impact of this shameful record doesn't mean a thing. A woman who doesn't even support the rights to govern her own body.

---

She supports the right to life for the unborn child above a woman's right to choose. Neither political position should bar a woman's candidacy for governance.

One who wishes women be used as political identity groups or as weapons against their enemies, is no friend of women or of thinking politics. But then there are plenty underhanders in the real world of politics right.

quote:

---

I liked both democratic candidates, but the bitterness from some Clinton supporters is approaching levels I can barely stomach, especially considering Clinton ran a campaign that took some brutal shots at Obama when she was down. If they want to vote against their own self-interest, so be it.

---

Stop being devious. You're an Obama supporter, so what? It doesn't wash that you liked both him and Hillary because you're even bitter towards Hillary supporters – ie. "does their anger over their candidate's loss run so deep that.." paraphrasing they will not vote for MY candidate?

Let me give you something real for a minute: If you assume the worst about someone, you injure them, in turn you ruin that relationship. That's what happened in the delicate alliance of interests that formed the democratic outgroups during the campaign for the democratic nomination.

posted August 30, 2008 02:46 AM         

quote:

---

I'm absolutely certain, considering your first statements about women voting against "their interests" and "out of spite", that you are twisting the truth here.

---

Generally when someone is "absolutely certain" of something they prove their point.

quote:

---

She supports the right to life for the unborn child above a woman's right to choose. Neither political position should bar a woman's candidacy for governance.

---

She didn't say that it should. She merely implied that Palin is no friend of Pro-choice women (no Hillary Clinton).

quote:

---

One who wishes women be used as political identity groups or as weapons against their enemies, is no friend of women or of thinking politics.

---

The first impression McCain gave to everyone with this choice is that he picked her based on her gender. She has a mere 20 months experience governing a state with a population smaller than San Francisco. She's barely had opportunity to develop credentials that would qualify her to be picked, so it's difficult to look at it any other way.

quote:

---

Stop being devious. You're an Obama supporter, so what? It doesn't wash that you liked both him and Hillary because you're even bitter towards Hillary supporters – ie. "does their anger over their candidate's loss run so deep that.." paraphrasing they will not vote for MY candidate?

---

posted August 30, 2008 03:46 AM         

I was on the ropes until the last days of my state's primary (which was one of the last), when I voted for Obama, at the time partially due to offensive comments Geraldine Ferraro had made only weeks prior, and not in small part as a response to the ridiculousness of the Rev. Wright fiasco with which the media was having a field day. I still admire both candidates, and my faith in Hillary was restored after she mended bridges at the convention this week. To say she took some low blows in the primaries is undeniable.

For the bolding work you did on "their," I was referring specifically to a group of Clinton supporters who are so bitter she lost they will not support their party's candidate. Some of which stood outside of the convention hall with "Hillary Voters for McCain" signs, spewing lies about Barack Obama, mainly that he listed himself as a Muslim while studying in Indonesia, or some such bizarre story. They want McCain instead? Let them have him.

And your pseudo psychology has fallen flat. There is no deviousness here.

Re: my claims on McCain's record, Google is not a difficult engine to search.

quote:

---

Today, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) skipped the vote on the Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, which “restores the longstanding interpretation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act,” overturned last year by a 5-4 Supreme Court ruling. In New Orleans today, McCain explained his opposition to the bill by claiming it “opens us up to lawsuits for all kinds of problems.” Later in Kentucky, he added that instead of legislation allowing women to fight for equal pay, they simply need “education and training“:

“They need the education and training, particularly since more and more women are heads of their households, as much or more than anybody else,” McCain said. “And it’s hard for them to leave their families when they don’t have somebody to take care of them.

“It’s a vicious cycle that’s affecting women, particularly in a part of the country like this, where mining is the mainstay; traditionally, women have not gone into that line of work, to say the least,” he said.

---

posted August 30, 2008 03:13 PM         

also....

McCain lost his experience trump card
against Obama by selecting Palin.

I roll my eyes about some people saying that she has more executive
experience than Obama,Biden,and McCain. My response is..."Well...Bush
has executive experience as the governor of the 2nd largest
state,Texas....look at how the experience has helped us.....Yeah,,it
hasn't helped us" I made that rebuttal to somebody.

I think that McCain's running mate pick has not only thrown out his
most effective argument against Obama but has handed him the election.

a lot of independents aren't going to go for that. Independents are
the ones that tend to make the difference.

They are not going to want a 44 year old woman with no foreign policy
experience to be second in command, knowing that a 72 yr old president
with history of health problems can likely die in office which result
in her being president.

At least with Obama if something bad happens to him, Joe Biden has the
foreign policy experience to take over. I realize more and more that
Joe Biden was the perfect pick for Obama because it helps solve the
foreign policy experience problem. Biden would serve as strong 2nd in
command and can be a highly effective advisor for Obama on foreign
policy matters. Now with McCain's pick of Palin, the inexperience
argument is neutralized. McCain comes off looking like a hypocrite
with bad judgment as well as pandering to women voters(especially the
disgruntled Hillary supporters) and the religious right.

also...if Obama had a problem with racism in the Democratic Party,
then McCain has evened that out with his pick of Palin because there
could be sexism in the Republican Party. If there are white voters
that are are racist that decide to vote for McCain because Obama is
half black, then there will be male voters that decide to vote for
Obama because Palin is a woman.

Also...my first impression about McCain's pick is that he's targeting women voters including especially disgruntled Hillary supporters. However, her strong pro-life record won't sit well with the women that are prochoice. Her strong conservatism won't sit right with liberals. Therefore, his pick might actually backfire. His pick can be seen as insulting womens' intelligence too.

YES WE CAN!

Raymond

posted August 30, 2008 08:35 PM         

However, there's a more subtle, diabolical point that I'm sure McCain was thinking of, and many Obama supporters are probably too clueless to pick up on: McCain is baiting them to make a bunch more sexist remarks and misogynist statements about Palin as they did Hillary and her supporters, which I'm sure some of them won't be able to help themselves, because the bumper sticker slogan sounds so funny to their ears, not realizing that they're driving people to Palin with their misogyny, or at least disgusting enough women who'd otherwise vote for Obama into staying home. Gods, I don't support Hillary, I'm not putting up signs for Palin, but Obama supporter words of **** and worse--and far, far more recent & numerous than McCain's use of it--only adds sympathy for her and contempt for Obama's supporters. I bet even with the few of us like me that can see this tactic in McCain's brain and publicly pointing it out, I'm sure at least some of them are going to fall into his trap, and that will translate into losing votes for their side, be those votes lost in abstaining or even voting for the Palin ticket.

Btw, if Obama supporters keep harping on her inexperience, that's ALSO going to backfire on them. After all, she's going to be the veep, Obama is going after the presidency itself. Just another trap McCain has obviously (to me) set for them. I really dislike McCain, but I have to admire his cleverness (even as I fear it).

posted August 30, 2008 11:44 PM         

Hillary had all the advantages coming into the Democratic primaries including money,name,fame,political connections. There was like an entitlement thing going in regards to Hillary getting the democratic nomination and being president. That's how many Hillary supporters seem to approach Hillary's run for president. However,Obama got in the way and so they were angry. Many Hillary supporters were angry that a half black man defeated Hillary just like women were angry that black men got the vote before white women though even though black men didn't really get to exercise that vote because of disenfranchisement. That's why they came up with Civil Rights Voting Act 1965.

I really hated the negative judgmental attitudes that that many whites had against Reverend Wright for speaking the truth that racism is a problem and calling out USA on its bad foreign policy. That's not Anti-American. I did disagree with the AIDS stuff. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr said similar things back in his last years. He wasn't all about the I HAVE A DREAM speech. Reverend Wright said these things in church. Martin Luther King Jr. Left his harshest comments in the church. The black church was a place where black people can vent about race relations issues. It was the black church preachers that were the civil rights leaders back in the 1960's. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr was a preacher.

Obama made an excellent speech about race relations. I don't think that he could have written and said a much better speech.

as long as Obama is half black, he will always be target for assassination.
Lets not forget how Hillary mentioned about Robert Kennedy's assassination during the Democratic primaries at the time where the delegate math was totally against her. It was one of the most irresponsible things that a politician can say.
Obama had secret service protection earlier than everybody in the race except for Hillary Clinton(she has hers because she's a former first lady) because of racist death threats like black politicians who ran for president in the past. Jesse Jackson had early secret service protection too when he ran for president.

I don't read all these complaints about sexism. She was crying and she got votes for that. Would Obama had votes if he cried. No...I don't think so because he's a male.

Hillary underestimated caucases too. Obama didn't. Obama actually took the time to campaign a lot in caucases and that paid off for him. Hillary thought she would get all the delegates in the big states,and so she would win easily. She didn't know about the the proportionate delegate distribution, but Obama did. He took advantage of that knowledge. Another thing too...predominantly black districts tend to have more delegates because blacks are the ones that are most likely to be democrat. 90 percent of blacks are democrats. The black vote definitely helped Obama win, but he had a good amount of white vote too. Hillary dismissed Obama's wins in caucuses and the so-called red states. She was saying that she was a better candidate because she was winning the big states and the blue states. This was when she was well behind in delegates and popular vote. She expected super delegates to put her over the top. Hillary supporters wanted that. But when super delegates were flocking to Obama, they complained that Obama got so many super delegates even though Hillary won more of the later primaries. It was okay for Hillary to get super delegates flocking to her even though she lost a string of primaries, but it wasn't okay for Obama to get them after losing a string of primaries. That's a double standard. They say that it was sexism too.

Oh yeah...what about the circulating of picture of Obama in Somalian garb insinuating that he's muslim. WTF with that.

It's okay to wear European clothes, but it's not okay to wear African clothes?
Do you see a problem there? I do

all Obama has to do is just be careful with Palin so he doesn't get accused of
being sexist. Also...if McCain uses the inexperience card against
Obama, he can use McCain's pick as rebuttal. Let him go on the defense
only and not on the offense. Of course even if he goes on the defense,
he will be accused of attacking. The same stuff that he had to put up
with Hillary in the Democratic primaries. I think that he will be more
careful with Palin. I think McCain's pick pretty much nullifies the
inexperience argument about Obama though.
The vice presidential debate between Palin and Biden will be very
interesting. Of course, he will have to be careful not to be too
aggressive or else he will be seen as beating up on the woman and so
appears sexist.

but yeah...I don't think Obama wouldn't highlight Palin's
inexperience. After all,he didn't like it when his opponents
highlighted his. If he does the same to Palin, then he would be seen
as a hypocrite. If the McCain/Palin ticket has the nerve to highlight
his inexperience, then it's only fair that he uses Palin's own
inexperience as a rebuttal.

There has already been one Obama assassination plot discovered. 4 people were arrested. There was a plot to shoot Obama at the night of his DNC speech.

posted August 31, 2008 04:19 AM         

quote:

---

Btw, if Obama supporters keep harping on her inexperience, that's ALSO going to backfire on them. After all, she's going to be the veep, Obama is going after the presidency itself. Just another trap McCain has obviously (to me) set for them. I really dislike McCain, but I have to admire his cleverness (even as I fear it).

---

I disagree with your assessment. After all Obama got to his position in the campaign on his own, which is not an easy thing to do, especially against a brand like Clinton. By contrast, Palin hasn't had a hand in coordinating her ascension to the Presidential ticket. How long have these Presidential candidates been campaining? Subtract that amount of months from 20 months (the amount of time she's been governor), and you'll realize how little experience she'd have had if she started the race with the rest of the field.

posted August 31, 2008 06:36 AM         

Btw, any thoughts on Obama being about change but choosing a DC insider as his veep, and McCain choosing someone not an insider? (I realize that McCain is definitely an Insider, but Obama is practically one himself anyway, as close as you can get without actually having experience that high up.)

posted August 31, 2008 07:29 AM         

It was always vacuous to attack Obama on the basis of lack of experience rather than substance.

If you are voting Obama it's because you like him, if you're not it's because you don't like him. No experience or lack of it was ever going to change anyone's mind about him.

Now the Republicans find themselves in the unprincipled position of having to champion a VP candidate with the very failing that they've made their chief weapon against Obama. They should have brought him to heel on principle way before now, problem is they don't have any themselves.

Azul – don't be petulant. The problem with having political argument on a hobby forum is that the sort of graciousness and consensus normally found on a hobby forum cannot be guaranteed when you venture into politics.

posted August 31, 2008 08:32 AM         

quote:

---

Hillary had all the advantages coming into the Democratic primaries including money,name,fame,political connections.

---

Got to disagree. Obama's campaign was loaded with money and media support from the beginning. He's their creation.

quote:

---

I really hated the negative judgmental attitudes that that many whites had against Reverend Wright...

...The black church was a place where black people can vent about race relations issues.

---

posted August 31, 2008 10:20 AM         

This seems like the self-righteousness that I pointed out earlier. I disagree with it being hate-filled frenzies. A lot of other people of color would agree with me. Even MamaMia who is a member of Wright's church would agree. She is a member of this forum. A lot of white people just think race relations is all hunky dory when it's not. It makes no sense for many white people to get all angry and cast judgment on a preacher for speaking out against racism and American foreign policy just like Dr. King Jr in his last days. They did it after watching a few minute soundbites of his sermons instead of watching the whole entire sermon. He even made a point that violence begets violence, and that we have to cease violence so violence doesn't get done to us. Even in the bible, Jesus said.."he who lives by the sword shall die by the sword" He was also doing a sermon and quoting words from Admiral Peck too. Wright was pretty much preaching that we should be nonviolent and treat others like we want to be treated - with respect and dignity. In the bible, Jesus said do unto others as you would have them do unto you. A lot of Christians don't even practice that.

As a person born of an interracial relationship between a black man and white woman like Barack Obama (who has already dealt with racist death threats including one assassination plot uncovered), I hate racism no matter if it's black or white or any other ethnicity. It's just wrong. It's not wrong to point out the racism and call people on it. People of other countries can see that race relations is a major problem in American society. We are country of diversity,and all of us should be allowed to feel safe and secure no matter what our ethnic background is.

I am an anti-racist. The thing is Dr. Martin Luther King Jr was an anti-racist, and so is Jeremiah Wright.

Can you deny that we have hundreds of hate groups in our country including Klu Klux Klan and Aryan Nations? That's a fact! Why are these groups allowed to exist in our country? They shouldn't be tolerated just like muslim terrorist groups shouldn't be tolerated.

Why is it so many people think Obama is a muslim,and many won't support him because of that.

Last time I checked, we live in a multi-faith country that's supposed to be about freedom of religion and the separation of church and state. Not everybody here is a Christian. I am definitely not. I don't have a religious preference. I am a free-spirit when it comes to religion and tolerate religious differences without condemning others nor saying that they are wrong nor stupid for believing in what I don't believe in. But a lot of people aren't like that. There are so many people that are self righteous hypocrites that hide their bigotry with a religious covering.

the intolerance of diversity is the biggest problem on our planet. It fits with that newly discovered dwarf planet,Eris. In Mythology, Eris,The Goddess of Discord made people quarrel by getting people to think that their views are right and others are wrong. Many people on our planet have this issue. Ideology is a major issue for us humans. Racism stems from Ideology. Racism is the belief that you're better than another ethnic group and/or hate or discriminate against another ethnic group.

posted August 31, 2008 10:35 AM         

ON THE 40TH ANNIVERSARY of Martin Luther King Jr.’s death, few truths ring louder than this: Barack Obama and Jeremiah A. Wright Jr. express in part the fallen leader’s split mind on race, a division marked by chronology and color.

Before 1965, King was upbeat and bright, his belief in white America’s ability to change by moral suasion resilient and durable. That is the leader we have come to know during annual King commemorations. After 1965, King was darker and angrier; he grew more skeptical about the willingness of America to change without great social coercion.

King’s skepticism and anger were often muted when he spoke to white America, but they routinely resonated in black sanctuaries and meeting halls across the land. Nothing highlights that split -- or white America’s ignorance of it and the prophetic black church King inspired -- more than recalling King’s post-1965 odyssey, as he grappled bravely with poverty, war and entrenched racism. That is the King who emerges as we recall the meaning of his death. After the grand victories of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the 1965 Voting Rights Act, King turned his attention to poverty, economic injustice and class inequality. King argued that those "legislative and judicial victories did very little to improve" Northern ghettos or to "penetrate the lower depths of Negro deprivation." In a frank assessment of the civil rights movement, King said the changes that came about from 1955 to 1965 "were at best surface changes" that were "limited mainly to the Negro middle class." In seeking to end black poverty, King told his staff in 1966 that blacks "are now making demands that will cost the nation something. ... You’re really tampering and getting on dangerous ground because you are messing with folk then."

King’s conclusion? "There must be a better distribution of wealth, and maybe America must move toward a democratic socialism." He didn’t say this in the mainstream but to his black colleagues.

Similarly, although King spoke famously against the Vietnam War before a largely white audience at Riverside Church in New York in 1967, exactly a year before he died, he reserved some of his strongest antiwar language for his sermons before black congregations. In his own pulpit at Ebenezer Baptist Church in Atlanta, two months before his death, King raged against America’s "bitter, colossal contest for supremacy." He argued that God "didn’t call America to do what she’s doing in the world today, " preaching that "we are criminals in that war" and that we "have committed more war crimes almost than any nation in the world." King insisted that God "has a way of saying, as the God of the Old Testament used to say to the Hebrews, ’Don’t play with me, Israel. Don’t play with me, Babylon. Be still and know that I’m God. And if you don’t stop your reckless course, I’ll rise up and break the backbone of your power.’ "

Perhaps nothing might surprise -- or shock -- white Americans more than to discover that King said in 1967: "I am sorry to have to say that the vast majority of white Americans are racist, either consciously or unconsciously." In a sermon to his congregation in 1968, King openly questioned whether blacks should celebrate the nation’s 1976 bicentennial. "You know why?" King asked. "Because it [the Declaration of Independence] has never had any real meaning in terms of implementation in our lives."

In the same year, King bitterly suggested that black folk couldn’t trust America, comparing blacks to the Japanese who had been interred in concentration camps during World War II. "And you know what, a nation that put as many Japanese in a concentration camp as they did in the ’40s ... will put black people in a concentration camp. And I’m not interested in being in any concentration camp. I been on the reservation too long now." Earlier, King had written that America "was born in genocide when it embraced the doctrine that the original American, the Indian, was an inferior race."

posted August 31, 2008 10:38 AM         

The black prophetic church was born because of the racist politics of the white church. Only when the white church rejected its own theology of love and embraced white supremacy did black folk leave to praise God in their own sanctuaries, on their own terms. Insurgent slave ministers such as Gabriel Prosser, Denmark Vesey and Nat Turner hatched revolts against slave masters. Harriet Tubman was inspired by black religious belief to lead hundreds of black souls out of slavery. For many blacks, religion and social rebellion went hand in hand. They still do.

For most of our history, the black pulpit has been the freest place for black people. It is in the black church that blacks gathered to enhance social networks, gain education, wage social struggle -- and express the grief and glory of black existence. The preacher was one of the few black figures not captive to white interests or bound by white money. Because black folk paid his salary, he was free to speak his mind and that of his congregation. The preacher often said things that most black folk believed but were afraid to say. He used his eloquence and erudition to defend the vulnerable and assail the powerful.

King extended that prophetic tradition, which includes vigorous self-criticism as well -- especially sharp words against the otherworldliness that grips some churches. In 1967, King said that too many black churches were "so absorbed in a future good ’over yonder’ that they condition their members to adjust to the present evils ’over here.’ " Two months before his death, King chided black preachers for standing "in the midst of the poverty of our own members" and mouthing "pious irrelevancies and sanctimonious trivialities." King struck fiercely at the ugly, self-serving practices of some black ministers when he claimed that they were "more concerned about the size of the wheelbase on our automobiles, and the amount of money we get in our anniversaries, than ... about the problems of the people who made it possible for us to get these things."

Obama has seized on the early King to remind Americans about what we can achieve when we allow our imaginations to soar high as we dream big. Wright has taken after the later King, who uttered prophetic truths that are easily caricatured when snatched from their religious and racial context. What united King in his early and later periods is the incurable love that fueled his hopefulness and rage. As King’s example proves, as we dream, we must remember the poor and vulnerable who live a nightmare. And as we strike out in prophetic anger against injustice, love must cushion even our hardest blows.

Michael Eric Dyson is a professor of sociology at Georgetown University and the author of 16 books, including the just-published "April 4, 1968: Martin Luther King Jr.’s Death and How It Changed America."
http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/suncommentary/la-oe-dyson4apr04, 1, 1626213.story

Jeremiah Wright is viewed as being racist and Anti-American???? Man.....Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. said similar things. Does that make him racist and Anti-American?
I don’t think so.

posted August 31, 2008 10:54 AM         

and even said
"Their questions hit home, and I knew that I could never again raise my voice against the violence of the oppressed in the ghettos without having first spoken clearly to the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today: my own government. "

Jeremiah Wright is no Dr. King, but he did speak out against foreign policy and the violence that US govt is all about.
In that way, he was similar to Dr. King.

Of course, Jeremiah Wright was no match for him.

"Beyond Vietnam"
Address delivered to the Clergy and Laymen
Concerned about Vietnam, at Riverside Church
4 April 1967
New York City http://www.ratical.org/ratville/JFK/MLKapr67.html http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b80Bsw0UG-U

I checked out Eris because his speech was controversial as he spoke out against the status quo and said things that many didn’t want to hear. It definitely stir things up. He was diverged from the political norms. King was disowned by many of his supporters, was denounced as a traitor to the nation. Dr. King questioned the legitimacy of America’s Cold War policies and assumptions. That led him to be viewed as a Communist sympathizer and put under surveillance by his own government. Obviously, Dr. King was viewed as Anti-American.

I also believe that Eris which I feel is connected to ideology and the believing that one’s views are right but others are wrong has to do with exposing the selfrighteousness,hypocrisy that people have. It’s like pointing out people’s crap stink even though they act like it doesn’t.

using noon time because of unknown time

Direct Midpoints (both near and far)

Eris conjunct Mercury/Node midpoint - ’36 applying
Ceres conjunct Eris/Node midpoint - ’41 separating
Saturn oppose Chiron/Eris midpoint - ’09 applying

Here is some interesting stuff:

Commentary: Race, faith and politics

(CNN) -- The revelation of controversial comments made by the longtime pastor of Sen. Barack Obama, and the equally hot aftermath from the general public that led to the junior senator from Illinois delivering a strong speech/sermon on race in America, has opened anew the explosive connection between three of the most volatile issues today.
If a poll were taken, there is no doubt that race, faith and politics would be the most emotional, passionate and divisive topics. Why? Because all three are so deeply personal. What one person sees as a negative, another would determine as a strength. http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/03/21/roland.martin/index.html?imw=Y&iref=mpstoryemail

Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. had a t-square of Moon in Pisces in 12th square the opposition of Mars in Gemini in 3rd and Saturn in Sagittarius in 9th which seems to fit with not only his idealism,religious,spiritual nature/views, passionate oratory, but also his fight against racism as well as his anger and frustration in regards to those matters as well as the violence that he suffered including his being shot to death.

I rest my case.

I am done with this thread

posted September 01, 2008 12:53 PM         

Mundane: I love it when I am wrong! I was quite worried about Bill Clinton’s convention speech last week with the difficult aspects in the sky. But he done good! As my friend Mary wrote: BIG BILL ~ WOW It was great to see Bill Clinton come from his big Leo heart and his big Libra brain and not the petty sh!t we are all so capable of! I find it inspiring when anyone triumphs over their lower self and takes the high ground I was so happy for him and for us!

Hillary preceded and amplified Bill’s speech with her bold and gallant proclamation gesture from the convention floor, dispensing with the counting of the ballots as Mercury squared Pluto.

And we have a new female contender in the Presidential Ring, Sarah Palin (February 11, 1964, 8:24 am [Anne guess], Sandpoint, Idaho), the Governor of Alaska. Unfortunately, Sarah fits better, than any other candidate thus far, into the requirements I’ve been watching for ~ a mix of Aquarian, Capricorn and Virgo energy. My brother lived in Alaska for many years. He wrote “She revoked gay benefits for employees of the state that had been in effect for many years prior to her governorship. She wants drilling in ANWR and is anti-native. Native ownership of land is a large issue in the state of Alaska as only the Federal government has more land and control. My personal fear, if she makes it in, is how it will it affect the native corporations and rights of native people who live over the oil fields.”

She’s against choice, even in the case of rape and incest. We have up to three Supreme Court appointments on the line for the next President with Roe versus Wade resting on a single vote. Energetically, her chart reminds me of Dolores Umbridge in the Harry Potter series. (I always try to imagine character’s charts when I read books). Dolores Umbridge was the woman who enforced the Muggle Registration at the Ministry of Magic and who wrote on Harry’s knuckles with a magic pen that made him bleed. She’s more Dick Cheney than Dick Cheney ever thought of being! That Mars/ Saturn/ Sun conjunction aspect in Aquarius ruling her Aries planets makes her a fearsome, strong, bold, brave and feral competitor. Her nickname was “Sarah Barracuda” when she played basketball in high school. With Mercury in Aquarius, she’s no dummy. And her Capricorn Moon makes her fearless, a worker, very fertile (5 children and counting) as well as very conservative or cautious in her outlook. Cold. Cold. Cold.

Her entire chart answers back to the Uranus/ Pluto conjunction in Virgo. The Aquarian planets, Sun, Mars, Saturn directly report to it. The Capricorn Moon and Midheaven go back to Saturn in Aquarius. The Aries Ascendant, Venus and Jupiter answer to the Aquarian Saturn. The Nodes answer to the Capricorn Moon and Aquarian Saturn respectively. Neptune in Scorpio answers to Mars in Aquarius. Cold. Cold. Cold.

Sarah does have transiting Saturn coming to her Pluto at 15 Virgo mid-September so if McCain didn’t vet her properly, something might arise then to sink her candidacy and remove her from the ticket. But I am probably being a starry-eyed astrologer, grasping at Saturn as a solution to my problem with her and the fact that her chart fits what I‘ve been waiting for as a candidate. In my quick research, she seems to have a tendency to fire folks who don’t agree with her and appoint people who DO agree with her. Cold. Cold. Cold. She even fired the guy who wouldn’t fire her soon-to-be ex-brother-in-law. Guess her sister didn’t need any child support payments.

It is always helpful to look at the aspects in the sky around the time of birth to see what energy the person incarnated under. From the internet: In the spring of 1963, President John F. Kennedy submitted a draft civil rights bill to Congress. While the Senate Judiciary Committee delayed in acting on the measure, the House moved ahead, finally passing the bill in February 1964, less than three months after the assassination of the president. Even though the Senate eventually managed to bypass the conservative Judiciary Committee by placing the bill directly on the calendar for action, intransigent southern senators, primarily Democrats, were determined to filibuster. Under a provision designed to protect the rights of the minority, the Senate, unlike the House, allows a determined group of senators to block legislation by carrying on extended debate. In 1964, the Senate's cloture rule required the votes of sixty-seven senators to close off debate and bring a measure to a vote. The support of a substantial number of Republicans was essential in order to achieve such a "supermajority" on the civil rights bill. Representative Martha Griffiths address got civil rights protection for women added to the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

Additionally, the Beatles played on Ed Sullivan. Remember the screaming, crying, wailing girls ~ fainting and going absolutely crazy? My sister was lying on our living room floor screaming and kicking her feet while watching the television! The Winter Olympics were taking place. And Sonny Liston fought Cassius Clay ~ Sonny lost, reinvigorating Cassius Clay’s fight career ~ we know him now as Muhammad Ali. Like I said, Sarah Palin, born in February, will be a fearsome competitor (Olympics), with the ability to inspire mania in people (like the Beatles did), take a stand as a reformer (pass the 1964 Civil Rights bill) and reinvigorate a fighter‘s career (Sonny versus Cassius Clay). I am NOT happy that she is on the ticket.

From: http://www.astroanne.com/

GOP VP candidate Palin's daughter is pregnant
17-year-old Bristol to keep the child and marry the father

From: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26496189/

Palin confirms daughter's pregnancy
By Steve Holland
Monday, 1 September 2008

The Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin has announced that her 17-year-old daughter is pregnant, in an announcement intended to knock down rumors by liberal bloggers that Palin faked her own pregnancy to cover up for her child.

Bristol Palin, one of Palin's five children with her husband, Todd, is about five months pregnant and is going to keep the child and marry the father, the Palins said in a statement released by the campaign of Republican presidential candidate John McCain.

Bristol Palin made the decision on her own to keep the baby, McCain aides said.