Saturday, October 24, 2009

Mackenzie Phillips: FRAUD

By now I’m sure you all have seen or at least heard of former child/teenstar actress Mackenzie Phillips’ account of drug addiction and more importantly, her multi-year incestuous relationship with her father, one of the founders of the 60s music group Mamas & Papas. Among the many places she’s hawking her book, have been Larry King andof course, Oprah.

Phillips asserts that she was first raped by her father after a night of boozing and taking drugs with him, and after that continued an ongoin sexual relationship for years until, as a married woman, she had reason to believe she was pregnant by him, and aborted the baby. According to her, this effectively ended their incestuous affair.

Of course, the big problem about all this, is that her father is not able to refute or even speak to any of this, as he’s DEAD, and curiously enough, only her younger sister seems to support her; all the other family members don’t or are standoffish on the matter.

So-could astrology give us some clues as to whether Phillips’ claims are indeed legit? Afterall, given that Oprah seems to have problems getting guests who’s stories are straight, and given that Phillips herself has had a long record of drug addiction (read, NOT the most reliable source of information), it makes sense to check in with the horoscope to see if it tallies with the party line.

According to Astro Databank, Mackenize Phillips was born on Nov 10 1959 9.35PM EST Alexandria VA; Placidus 26 Can 54.

Our eye is drawn immediately to two major areas of Phillips’ chart-the Cancer Asc, and the 4 house. In both cases, it is an indication that familial themes loom large in Phillips life one way or another, and upon further inspection we see that Neptune in 4 does indeed speak to Phillips’ "strange family ways"-for example, she was exposed to drugs, by her father, at a very early age. This Neptune placement, also reflects the artistic nature of the family; moreover, study has consistently shown that Neptune angular or in some other way prominent in the horoscope almost always correlates with those who windup working on stage or in movies, in music or in some other way the arts.

But does any of this speak to "incest"? From what I’ve seen over the years, I don’t think so, and here’s why: I have found that womn and youn girls who were sexually assaulted almost always tend to have Mars and Pluto very active in the chart, usually in terms of hard aspect, and often connected to the following houses: 1-7, 5-11, or 4-10. In Phillips’ case, we note that Mars is indeed the ruler of the 10 house (father) and in the 4 in Scorpio-however, it doesn’t make any aspect to Pluto, who just happens to be in he 2 house (money???). Pluto however, does aspect Phillips’ Mercury-Jupiter conjunction in Sagittarius in the 5 house, squaring both.

As any first year astrology student knows well, Mercury-Jupiter aspects are usually known for its tendency to over-exaggerate things. And here, with this conjunction in the 5 house (sex), we can see the possibility of Phillips stretching the truth or even outright making stuff up outta wholecloth, to SELL BOOKS. Why do I say that?

Well, aside from the aforementioned 2 house Pluto squaring the 5 house Mercury-Jupiter conjunction, we also note that Phillips’ Moon is in Aries and in the 9 house-and at the Aries Point to boot. This is a promoter like nobody’s business, and Phillips has been doing just that of late. The 9 house of course, represents publishing of all kinds, hence the appearance of her book, just in time for the recent transit of Pluto squaring this all-important position.

BUT, with transit Saturn about to head into Libra, and opposing her Arian Moon, some hard questioning (3 house) is sure to come, and indeed we’re starting to hear murmers already as to the veracity of Phillips’ statements.

So, as Saturn dips its toe into Libra for the rest of this year, and the early part of next year, and then return for good in the early fall of next year as well, it will be very, very interesting to see how Phillips holds up under the mounting pressure with regard to her allegations of sexual abuse at the hands of her father. Saturn and Pluto acting in tandem on a central point in the horoscope is usally not a very pleasant thing. And it doesn’t augur well for making money either.
Talk about reaping what you’ve sown...whew...

Mackenzie Phillips: FRAUD

You heard it here.


Labels: , ,

Wednesday, October 07, 2009

Prediction On Violence In Chicago Fulfilled

Last April, I wrote an article taking up the matter of rising violence in the City of Chicago, which appeared on this blog and other astrological venues of interest. The basis of my piece was the incorporation date of the Windy City, sourced by Wikipedia, and in the absence of accurate clocktime data, I used the astrologically customary noontime mark. That yielded an Asc of 4 degrees in Cancer.

Seeking to test the veracity of this Asc Sign, I then sought out other key times in Chicago's history where crime waves were prevelant, and found that in each instance, the Cancer Asc came through quite forcefully. Satisfied that my researches were indeed valid and working, I then wrote the following:

"Prediction: Chicago’s Crime Wave Escalates Over Next Two Years
With an established astro-pattern of crime and violence for Chicago, the short term future for the city does not look bright. Beginning in the Fall of 2009 we can expect the crime rate to rise, yet again in the Windy City, as transit Mars enters Cancer yet again, conjuncting the Chicago noontime Asc, at the same time that transit Pluto has been moving in and out of orb range in opposition to that same all-important Asc Sign and degree. SA Mars=MC Dec 2009, while transit Mars in Leo, slowing down to prepare to go Rx, squares Chicago’s Saturn.

Then, beginning in Jan of 2010 and continuing throughout the first half of the year, we note that transit Saturn will square, and transit Pluto will oppose, the Chicago Asc, while transit Mars, now Rx in Leo, moves to square the city’s Saturn and oppose the city’s Moon, in Jan and again in May of that year. The key period may very well be Apr-Jun 2010, when SA Pluto=Saturn comes into focus. The city administration will be stretched to its limits in its efforts to stem the tide of murder and mayhem on the Windy City’s streets."

'Nuff said, indeed.

However, what I didn't say in my original article, was that the source of the current problems in Chi-Town are easily seen in its chart...

In our astrology, the Moon and Saturn represents the parents - mom and dad, respectively. In the Chicago chart, we note that the Moon is in Aquarius - the eptiome of the "singlemom" - and is in tight square to Saturn (and applying to boot!), which is itself Rx, in Scorpio. And, as if to yet again validate the noontime mark chosen for this chart, note how Saturn is placed in the 5 house (kids, youth), while the Moon occupies the 8 house (death).

We astrologers know and understand very well, that whenever we see either the Lights, or in this case, Luna and Saturn, in hard aspect to each other, that the native's chances of experiencing strained relations between his/her parents are quite high. Furthermore, we also know, that when Saturn is Rx in the horoscope, the chances of the native experiencing the painful absence of his/her father in some major way, is quite high indeed.

All manner of sociological study have shown what happens when there are no fathers in the home - the kids left behind are almost always are significantly highly risk for all manner of social pathologies, including running afoul of the law, teenage pregnancy and promiscuity, and involvement in crime. Simply put, as Larry Elder says so well, more Dads, less crime.


As local and national authorities attempt to grapple with Chicago's crippling crimewave, it remains to be seen whether any of them are willing to skewer the Sacred Cows of Political Correctness and say that we need to restore Patriarchy back to its proper place in Society. Matriarchal-based families, by and large, dont work - not only that, they are often deadly, as recent events in Chi-Town have shown. How many more young people - particularly young Black Males - will we need to loose before we see that the PC Emperors have no clothes?


Wednesday, August 26, 2009

Mu'Min Debates A "Feminist" Astrologer

Mu’Min Debates A "Feminist" Astrologer

Readers of my humble missives know well that unlike far too many astrologers in our time, I like to deal with that which is actually relevant in our times, taking up themes and issues that are ripped right from the headlines, and are part of the cultural zeitgeist. One of them, has been the ever-increasing Feminization of our Craft, Astrology. I have written extensively on these matters, and have more to say in the coming weeks ahead; but for now, the following realtime dialogue, will serve as yet another prima facia example of that which I mean.

On Sun Aug 23 2009, at 12.53PM, I decided to write and send blog comments to one "Lucy", a self-styled feminist astrologer out of New York City, and who writes a blog, Lucy Watch The Sky, hosted by Wordpress. Her post, which I present in full on the recent George Sodini tragedy, prompted me to write a piece of my own on the affair. The following exchange between us clearly shows the serious lapses in thinking most feminist possess, and is becoming an increasingly large area of concern for astrology, since it harbors so many who adhere to its views.

I’ll post up the astrological representation of the "debate" in due course; for now though, as you read the exchange, ask yourself why you’re hardpressed to ever see any feminist of any reknown, ever going head to head with a William H. Buckley type (who was a man after my own hear - a Sag)? Well, now you know the answer.

Lucy’s post about Sodini himself will appear in my Sodini thread.

Comment and reply, as always, invited!



Thanks for visiting and for your comments. I definitely appreciate your perspective, and your analysis on Sodini’s chart, especially the consideration of the outer planets. It’s true that expectations for what each gender desires in a partner have radically changed, in that working women don’t necessarily require a traditional “provider” anymore, which is probably very different from what Sodini’s generation grew up with. Indeed, since the family model is often a subconscious guide to what we want in a partner, it’s probably additionally confusing for people of his generation still seeking relationships. Not only is the traditional patriarchal model not really the norm anymore, but the current economy just does not support it.

What I take issue with is 1) the assumption that feminism is not concerned with the male perspective, and further, your seeming perplexity as to why most female astrologers would be understandably rattled by such a cold-blooded and specific tragedy and 2) the fact that you, like many men blogging on the subject, seem to view this as a further sign of how WOMEN AT LARGE need to modify their behavior to better accommodate men.

I’m shocked that you buy into this whole “nice guy/bad boy” fallacy. I want to point you to two brilliant articles on this exact subject as it relates to Sodini. Basically, he was not really a “nice guy.” He was someone who was seriously disturbed, and who was perfect bait for these R. Don Steele types who pitch the snake oil that men are entitled to anything and anyone they want, and if they’re not getting it, it’s the fault of women as a whole. Furthermore, twelve women who had nothing to do with Sodini suffered as a result of his sense of entitlement. No one knows if those women preferred “bad boys” or “playas.” It doesn’t matter. Some of them are dead now.

I am terrified that you really believe there will be more “rage killings” like this one. (Personally, I don’t think the term “hate crime” is that far off the mark.) And if they continue to happen such as this one did (that is, innocent women being gunned down in a public place by a lunatic), that will say even less about how Women As A Whole (you know, because we all regularly convene and plot how we’re going to continue to mess with men’s heads) need to modify their choices. What it really ought to address is this exact kind of entitlement shown pretty exclusively by men, and how one man’s personal rejection does not justify globalized venom towards all women, just as much as one woman’s violent experience of men (such as the one I had) does not necessarily justify globalized hatred towards all men.

From what I read on your blog, particularly your analysis of “alpha,” “beta,” and “omega” men, I would imagine that you buy into evolutionary psychology, which I personally think is fundamentally flawed because, in addition to being based on extremely ethnocentric and sexist assumptions, it implies in not so many words that people will never really change. I find those kind of absolute statements about gender to be limiting as far as psychological growth goes. It also makes me wonder- to really, intellectually excuse someone like Sodini and mean it, which one do you believe you are?

by lucywatchthesky August 23, 2009 at 5:28 pm

MU’MIN BEY: Hi Lucy,
Yes, I’m quite familiar w/both the Salon piece and the Alas, A Blog post, which also dealt w/an alternative perspective from another blog that I read from time to time, and to which I might refer you: Roissy in DC has taken up the Sodini issue and offers a compelling analysis that, no surprise, raised a rather violent reaction from corners familiar to you. You might want to checkout what he and other commenters have to say about Sodini. Its worth a read.

As for evo-psych, for my money it makes far and away more sense than the grave misnomer known as “evolutionary astrology” which you might be familiar with and may even be cool with. If so, what a case of the pot calling the kettle black that would be.

Finally, let’s be clear. I did not excuse Sodini’s actions, indeed I went out of my way to speak to this. And as for what I said about what Women Really Want, only a grossly naive or perniciously disengenuous individual would attempt to explain away what we all can easily see w/our own eyes. History is replete with the simple fact that rakes, cads and badboys get far and away more Women than meek, mild guys like Sodini, presumed mental illnesses or not. To even have to entertain such a discussion among obstensible adults, is kind of laughable on its face, really.

Lastly-in no way do I wish Women to have to change anything about themselves. I don’t want them to do anything they don’t want to do, etc. All I’m saying is that for every action there is an opposite and equal reaction, that even minute changes to the social-ecosystem can radically alter the way human beings do business, and that we all, Men and Women alike, would do well to think about this moving forward.

I think it’s very unfair of you to give Steele short shrift. Though I’m not particularly familiar with him, I applaud him and other Men who in their own way, have attempted to help Men like Sodini-who are legion, make no mistake about it-in a make or break area of their lives. For all the talk of compassion in other things, even animals, some of whom can be dangerous to human beings, just a bit of compassion for the plight of Men like Sodini from us astrologers would be a nice thing to see.

August 24, 2009 at 8:21 am

MU: Oh, and I meant to speak bout your assertion that I do not think feminism isn’t concerned w/Men, etc. Well-for the most part, they aren’t, lol. Nor am I saying that they should be. I’m only pointing out a fact-that astrology has within its ranks, a heck of a lot more folk like you, than of me, and its up to folk like me to raise up. And so, in my own small way, I do.

August 24, 2009 at 8:37 am

MU: Lucy,
I thought you might find this interesting. Sueng-Hui Cho, who killed more than 30 people and wounded upwards of 50 before commiting suicide, was born on Jan 18 1984 in Seoul, South Korea. No birthtime, but we see some similarities btw his chart and Sodini’s:

First, note that both Men had Mars in Water Signs. Second, both have their Mars in aspect to both Neptune and Pluto, the latter being very important, because of the fact that it forms a formidable Sexual Aspect-and because Pluto disposes of key planets in Scorpio. In Sodini’s case, Venus and Neptune are in Scorpio; in Cho’s, Mars, Saturn and Pluto are in Scorpio.

We see in Sodini’s case that the Sun is square a Mars-Saturn axis, a clear indication for the potential for violence. In Cho’s case, we note that while not technically in conjunction, we can see that Saturn being in the same Sign as his Mars and Pluto play a powerful role in explaining his frustration sexually.

As we both know, Scorpio is among the most powerful sexually-inclined Signs. Had both these Men had help-and Sodini was closer to that help than Cho-things might have turned out differently. A lil Nookie goes a long way toward soothing the savage beast.

Think on it.

August 24, 2009 at 8:47 am

L: You know, I have to say- I was listening with full attention until this: “Had both these Men had help-and Sodini was closer to that help than Cho-things might have turned out differently. A lil Nookie goes a long way toward soothing the savage beast.”

What a nauseating thing to say. Really. You write that you don’t think women need to modify their behavior, but a statement like this implies that Sodini and Cho (and all men, really) are ENTITLED to sex, and if only some women had put out, this could have been avoided. No individual is entitled to sex, regardless of gender, nor is it women’s responsibility to be sexually available, for any reason, but especially not to be vessels for seriously mentally disturbed men’s aggression. I’m not at all surprised that you read Roissy in D.C., which I have no desire to revisit. He and R. Don Steele and countless others only think they are helping men, but in fact they are worsening the problem. They are driving men and women further apart by convincing vulnerable men that women are less than their inferiors, that they’re pure commodity.

I do have compassion for Sodini; clearly he was mentally ill. But I’m also not going to excuse that his killing spree was deliberately planned to target women, and the fact that he did, in the truest sense of the word, hate women. Because I have met men like him before, and when something like this happens, it reminds you that you really can never know how deep someone’s hatred goes, and what kind of things they might do if in their megalomaniacal minds they believe they have had enough. As a woman, it worries me. And just like Kate Harding wrote in her Salon piece, I will not concede that he was “really a nice guy,” because he WAS NOT. There WAS something wrong with him. Same with Cho. Same with more guys than I even have room to list that I’ve personally dealt with. And that’s exactly the problem- no one is telling these guys that there is something wrong with them, which would solve far more of their difficulties than trying to make them into Pick-Up Artists.

by lucywatchthesky August 24, 2009 at 10:24 am

MU: Lucy,
Just got finished reading Kanazawa’s piece, and while you made it clear you disagreed with him, you didn’t layout specifically WHY. I would like for you to do so, we can have a more informed discussion on the matter, as I’ve found Kanazawa’s work to be an interesting read.

As for Sodini, again, I am not excusing what he, or Cho, did. But let’s be frank. Please name me a Sodini or Cho-like figure, say, 40 years ago? And no, Charlie Manson wouldn’t cut it, because he had far and away more access, sexually and otherwise, than either of these men did.

The truth of the matter is that there have ALWAYS been guys running around w/a screw or two loose, Lucy. What is different in our time, are guys like Cho and Sodini who decide to take their pain out on those whom they believe are their tormentors-women. I don’t agree w/them, but that doesn’t change the fact that, as I’ve said before, times have changed, and with it, both the good and bad.

And finally, if I may-if you have such a long list of men in your life that you can instantly recall off the top of your head that are in your view psychotic, perhaps they aren’t the only ones who need to be told about themselves.

Please don’t hate on the PUAs or Game; they’re doing a serious Public Service.

August 24, 2009 at 1:03 pm

L: Thanks very much- you’re banned.

Your sexism is disgusting, and personally attacking me is uncalled for.

Get out of my blog.

*Back To Mu*

As we can see, such tactics are commonly employed by feminists, with the ultimate trump ca(na)rd being banning - and censoring (which is preceeded by all manner of shaming tactics, namecalling and goalpost shifting-again, common amongst the feminist ilk). Lucy, greate advocate of Free Speech that she is, has since "erased" our exchange. But, being the all wise, all knowing guy that I am, I had the foresight to save the record, knowing what to expect from such types.

My friends, make no mistake - Uranus in Pisces has been a horrible time for our Astrology - and its Feminization has brought it to an all time low. When we can see folk like Lucy out there, saying the kinds of stuff you see here and on her blog, it makes one wonder how astrology ever dug itself out of the Dark Ages to begin with.

Come on, Uranus in Aries!


Labels: , , , , , , , ,

A Few Thoughts On George Sodini

A Few Thoughts On George Sodini

Sunday Aug 23 2009

Earlier this month, George Sodini, a suburban Pittsburgh PA native, walked into a local gym and proceeded to shootup the place, kiling three outright and wounding nearly a dozen others, before turning the guns on himself. His grisly acts of violence immediately hit the news.

I’ve been a bit busy of late tending to other business, but closely followed the blogosphere in the days and weeks to follow, and no surprise, the usual suspects were quick to condemn and vilify.

But this time said usual suspects were met w/a clear, present and growing voice coming from the Male side of the Internet, who makes a very convincing case that Sodini’s travails, and ultimate demise, requires just a bit more examination than he’s currently getting.However, sad to say I might add, the astrolosphere, if I may call it such, is still woefully behind-packed to the gills w/practitioners who are female and thus have little understanding or real interest in life from a male point of view, much of their offerings on the affair are little more than mere astrological sprinkles on warmed over feminist boilerplate; one astrologer even includes the word “misogyny” in her subject title on Sodini.

Sigh. What else is new.

Readers here at Sasstology (I'll have more to say about *them* very soon) and elsewhere know and understand well that my key interest is in assisting Today’s Man on the astrological path and, when the spirit moves, to astrologically opine on the state of our times from an unabashedly male point of view. So, on this lazy afternoon-after respects to the deceased have been paid and laid to rest, and after all the sound and fury from the usual suspects, astrological and otherwise, have had their say and have died down-I thought now would be a good time to offer some thoughts on the very sad life of George Sodini.

According to various sources online, Sodini was born on Sep 30 1960, no birthime as yet known, and presumably in or around Pittsburgh PA. Several astrologers have noted his Lights being in Air Signs (Sun in Libra, Moon in Aquarius), his Venus-Neptune conjunction in Scorpio, and the t-square involving his Sun, Mars and Saturn (among other things), and have rightly noted the inherent challenges indicated therein with regard to these astrological configurations.But what I noted w/keen interest, was the utter lack of commentary on the role the Outer Planets played, not only on Sodini’s life, but for us all. We astrologers know well that the Outer Planets-Uranus, Neptune and Pluto-have tremendous importance, because they represent not only the Modern Era for Humanity, but also the ways in which our world will continue to change. One of the biggest ways it has changed, has been respect to Dating and Mating.

Of particular note here is Neptune, on Sodini’s birthdate, at about 8 Scorpio; as mentioned above, its conjunct Venus and, at 6AM (the time I use for setting Solarscopes), is also square the Moon. Astrologers have noted the “personal” implications for these aspects, and they are largely accurate-often it can speak to unrealistic or even irrational ideas or notions concerning Women-but it can also represent being deeply disappointed, “letdown” by Women as well.

Clearly, this too was the case wrt Sodini, per his very lucidly written blog, since taken down, but can still be seen in excerpts thanks to the efforts of various bloggers online to save them. They are easily Googled.Neptune represents the “dream” or ideals that a society aspires toward, which can often incorporate spiritual/religious themes as well. In a modern, democratic society, it represents the idea or belief, that said system can work for anyone, if they apply themselves.

However, in Sodini’s case, we see that Neptune’s aspects to the two foremost “female” planets we have in astrology-the Moon and Venus-that he felt betrayed, or letdown in love.And because an Outer Planet is involved here, and is seen making a prominent appearance at the moment of the shootings themselves, rising in the Aquarian Asc and square the MC, it gives us astrologers cause to consider in what way Neptune, and quite possibly the remaining Outers, have played a big role here.The simple truth is, that the dating and mating landscape has greatly changed. A Man like Sodini-law-abiding (up until the shootings), successful (net worth of 250K at the time of his death), and very well gainfully employed as in a law firm-simply doesn’t have the kind of cache’ he once did even a quarter of a century ago. The idea that being on the straight and narrow, “nice” and so on, is becoming more and more, something that is not only no longer relevant, but something that is actively eschewed by Women enmasse, because Women in our time no longer need to temper their mating choices due to financial considerations, since they are fully self-supporting, and since social censure is at an all-time minimum. In short, this means that Women can choose mates on criteria that they really want-and the evidence is in-often those “wants” are NOT what Sodini, and so many Men, were taught all their lives.

If we consider Sodini’s birthdate from the point of view that it represents a “bigger” chart than merely his natal, and instead gives commentary on the state of Women in our time, this makes sense, both on the macro level, and as well on Sodini’s “micro” level. Again, we’ve noted how Neptune is conjunct Venus, both in Scorpio. Keen astrology students know well, that Venus isn’t at its best in Scorpio; techinically, its what is known as being in its Detriment. It suggests that Venus is kinda “brought low” in some way or another-in this case, that it will tend to be attracted to the rakes, badboys and ne’er do wells that Sodini, and millions of other American Men were drilled not to be like. The Neptune part of this then, represents the “rude awakening” Sodini got, and again he explains very clearly on his blog, with regard to Women and what they really want.Also, consider that Sodini’s Moon is in Aquarius-which is very, very interesting when we note that this same Moon Sign shows itself again on the night he went on his shooting spree, and, matching the same Moon Sign as that found in the chart for the United States(!)-a very powerful commentary, astrologically speaking, about the very changed world in which we live along these lines, especially for Women.

Since we’re on the national level in this discussion, it is also interesting to note that, in the American horoscope, we see that its Moon, at 27 Aquarius, is getting “primed” by transiting Neptune’s imminent conjunction, to come very soon. In the 3rd house, we can expect to hear more and more about American Women being “letdown” in someway with regard to their lovelives-and of course, blaming Men for it. Not ever considering the role they themselves might have played in the way things are, right now.

This is the lesson of Neptune, both collectively and individually-to have an ideal, live up to it, but not to deify it, and when human beings fall short, not to grow embittered, blame others or in some other way, rationalize their failures on someone else. For all his pain and real insights shared on his blog, in the end, Sodini’s actions are his own, and he must be held accountable-not his mother, not his brother or father, not even the Women who spurned him, real or imagined.That said, American Women must now understand, that in all things, there not only must be tradeoffs, but there also must be accountability-the badboy, the cad, and the playa may indeed be “hotter” and just not “boring” than the Sodini types (again-good looking, gainfully employed for years, and considerable net assets), but these kinds of Men come at a price.

Postmodern, postfeminist America has afforded you the chance to choose who you really want-but all choices carry with them, consequences. Some good, others, not so good. One of them, will be the occasional “flipping out” of the Sodinis, Chos, and others of the world, who after being shown the truth for themselves, can’t or won’t handle it, and decide to go make right via violent means. With transiting Uranus and Pluto due to square each other very soon, I suspect we’ll see quite a few more “rage killings” centered on the very themes of this post. It will be the “tax” Women in our time will have to pay, because clearly, they don’t want to “go back”, nor do I think they should. Instead of merely condemning the Damned, they instead might want to consider what their New Grrl Order will really look like.

Comment and reply, invited.

Holla back


Labels: , , , , ,

Ryan Jenkins: The Flipside Of George Sodini

Ryan Jenkins: The Flipside Of George Sodini

Tue Aug 25 2009 8.40AM EDT

With the ink barely dry on Sunday’s missive with regard to George Sodini, new details have emerged in what now appears to be a murder-suicide case of former “reality tv” contestants Jasmine Fiore and her hubbie, Ryan Jenkins. Their case is a powerful study into astrology and the vastly changed nature of our times, themes already raised in my previous Sodini piece.
But, before we get to the astrology, please allow me to share with you some razor sharp insights from one of my personal favorite minds-blogger Ferdinand Bardamu, of In Mala Fide, writes the following about the Fiore-Jenkins affair; notice the clear linkages to my thoughts on Sodini:

“Jasmine Fiore and the feminist blood tithe

Posted on August 25, 2009 by Ferdinand Bardamu

I was going to post on this yesterday (hat tip: Lawrence Auster ), but I got sidetracked with outside concerns. We have another Scott Peterson on our hands :

Authorities were able to identify a slain swimsuit model’s body through her breast implants, after her former reality-star ex-hubby allegedly chopped off her fingers and knocked out her teeth to slow down investigators, it was reported yesterday.

Once cops were able to identify Jasmine Fiore’s body after finding it stuffed in a trash bin in a Los Angeles suburb, they immediately focused on her wealthy ex-husband, Ryan Jenkins, who had reported her missing and then disappeared.

Jenkins and Fiore, 28, were briefly married in a quickie Las Vegas wedding this year — months after he appeared on the low-rent VH1 reality program “Megan Wants a Millionaire,” about a woman seeking a wealthy bachelor.

Also via View from the Right , it was reported that Ryan Jenkins killed himself yesterday :
In what seems to be the final macabre twist to the bizarre and brutal murder case of Los Angeles model Jasmine Fiore, her fugitive husband, Ryan Jenkins, has been found hanged. Jenkins’ body was discovered in a Hope, British Columbia motel room, according to Royal Canadian Mounted Police. The L.A. Times reports that U.S. authorities had traced the former reality TV show contestant’s escape into Canada via a speedboat.

Here’s a picture of the couple in happier times:

We know all about the sexual dystopia’s effects on beta males, but what about the other side of the coin? To quote Whiskey :

For women, and particularly younger women, something has been lost. Good judgment about men, including the natural trade-off between intelligence and testosterone. It’s true, that there is a correlation between higher IQ and lower levels of testosterone and aggression. Making smarter men who are less aggressive less sexually and romantically desireable for women. But women far too often, in our politically correct society, overestimate their ability to exert control over men with high levels of testosterone and aggression. Writer “Theodore Dalrymple” (his pen name) in “Life at the Bottom” recounts a conversation with one of his patients, in the hospital in London where he worked. A girl of 17, who had her arm broken by her boyfriend. He questioned her, and she admitted she knew the boyfriend was violent and prone to abuse when she started dating him. That was the attraction, the danger, and the excitement. Dalrymple’s question was what if that aggression was turned on herself? Her response was that she could look after herself. Dalrymple’s reply that men are stronger than women (as her broken arm indicated) produced the retort that such words were “sexist.”

This pattern persisted even with Dalrymple’s educated, professional nurses. Who chose men who abused them, even at work. They confessed to Dalrymple that they knew the men were violent, they could see it at a glance from the scars from fighting, the tattoos proclaiming a love of violence, and their behavior, dress, and friends. Still they chose them, because ordinary, decent men were in their words, “boring.”

With economic emanicipation, women are free to chase men who make their p*ss*es wet. The problem is that a disproportionate number of these men are inclined to violent and sociopathic behavior. For men like Ryan Jenkins, killing a woman and stuffing her mutilated corpse into a garbage bin is as second-nature as inhaling and exhaling. Because their thought processes are dominated by their crotches, women wander into relationships with these men without consideration of the consequences. The exact same qualities that make these men attractive to women is what makes them capable of abusing and murdering them. An additional part of women’s attraction to these brutes is the delusional belief that they can change them, that their vaginas have the magic power to turn a sociopath into a normal human being. When you tangle with a rattlesnake, you risk getting bit. Jasmine Fiore wandered into the rattlesnake’s lair, and it cost her her life.

Some of you are probably thinking, “how DARE you blame the victim? No woman deserves to be murdered by her husband!” Please, take your thought-terminating cliches and shove them where the cheese is cut. It’s this “don’t blame the victim” bullsh*t that resulted in Fiore’s death.

Every other month, there’s a story in the news about a young woman getting killed, and the unmentionable thread connecting all of these stories is that every single one of these girls engaged in behavior that lead directly to their deaths. Natalee Holloway died because she climbed in the back of a car with three strange men. Imette St. Guillen died because she was wandering around New York City drunk at five in the morning. Jasmine Fiore died because she married a psycho because he got her hot and dripping. None of these women deserved to die, but none of them would have died had they exercised proper judgment instead of letting their genitalia lead them around. Shouting “DON’T BLAME THE VICTIM!” allows people to avoid any introspection about why these killings happen, and as far as I’m concerned, anyone who uses that phrase is an apologist for evil.

The media labels these murders “tragedies,” which is an insulting misuse of the word. The true tragedy is the dystopian configuration of society that makes these murders happen. Per Spengler’s Universal Law of Gender Parity , the counterpart of the angry, sexually frustrated beta male rage shooter is the ignorant, clit-led young lady killed at the hands of her abusive lover. Both George Sodini and Jasmine Fiore are products of the same sick system – the system that deprives beta males of romantic companionship also fails to educate young women as to why they shouldn’t follow their loins into the arms of dangerous men like Ryan Jenkins.

Much like there will be more Sodinis in the future, there will be more Fiores. Akin to how the Aztecs demanded daily human sacrifices to appease their cruel gods, women like Jasmine Fiore are sacrifices to the false idol of sexual egalitarianism. And when the next girl dies, the chattering classes will wring their hands about how horrible it is, not stopping to consider the social structures that result in these women being fed to the meat grinder. Men like myself are misogynists according to the feminists, yet they adhere to an ideology that has killed and will continue to kill countless women. Who are the true misogynists?

If Jenkins had lived long enough to be tried and convicted, I would have bet a wheelbarrow of Canadian loonies that within an hour of being jailed, he would’ve been besieged with dozens of calls from women begging him to marry them. Poor things. They know not what they do.”

Indeed, brother. Indeed.

OK-now for the astrology.

Ladies first…

Jasmine Fiore Feb 18 1981 Orange County CA, no time as yet known, Wikipedia.

Yes, she’s an Aquarian w/the Moon in what appears to beLeo, which definitely fits, given her chosen profession (drama, acting, modelling, “being on stage”, etc.), and in possible opposition to her Venus in Aquarius, again highlighting her chosen career interests. If indeed she was born with these “shiny” planets in aspect to each other, it then brings to bear the potential for self-indulgence and even narcissicism, and a desire to live the good life-she did meet and marry her husband as the result of a reality tv show that focused on “catching” a millionaire, afterall.

And now, its Jenkins’ turn:

Feb 8 1977 Victoria, British Columbia, Canada, no time known, Wikipedia.

Yes, they’re both Water Bearers, and while some may think that couples born under the same Sign is cute, I’ve found that it isn’t a good idea if a couple hooks up that have too many planets in the same Signs. It becomes a case of what I call “planetary overload” a kind of “celestial inbreeding” that isn’t good for the Zodiacal gene pool, if you will. I’ve found the best combos tend to be opposites, because they then compliment each other. But I digress.

Going back to Ryan’s chart, several key features leap right out at us. First, note that his Moon, as of 6AM on his birthdate, is about 16 Libra, a mere two degrees away from exact conjunction with Pluto. This is a strong signal that Ryan may have deepseated power struggle stuff going on with the female figures in his life-and indeed, we’ve already learned, that not only did he have such struggles, literally, with Fiore, but that he had them in the past up in Canada as well.

The second standout feature in Ryan’s chart is again, his Venus placement-like Sodini’s, notice that its in Detriment, this time in Aries. This again suggests that Venus is “brought low” somehow, either directly via the native himself, and/or via the women he chooses to surround himself with. I think in Ryan’s case, we can safely say that it was a bit of both-he clearly was attracted to “hot babes” who had all the outer pomp and flash, but not a heck of a lot else going for them. Moreover, as Venus is the dispositor of his all-but certain Moon-Pluto conjunction in Libra, we can say that Ryan himself used this very same Venus to present himself as silver-tongued devil, a, as one of the reality shows called him, “Smooth Operator”. Which brings us to the third most important feature of his Solarscope…

Neptune. Notice how its in aspect to BOTH his Lights-sextile both the Sun and Moon. Whenever an Outer planet comes into contact with both Lights, the native often is kind of a living embodiment of said planet, for better or worse-even Jenkins’ “final act” was Neptunian-he commited suicide. In this case, Neptune played itself out as the classic “other than what it seems” vibe. With Neptune plugged into the heart and soul of Ryan’s chart, along w/a runaway Venus and a Libran Moon, he was Smoothness Personified…until the inner demons were unleashed, as they invariably are, when the prospect of an LTR rears its head.

Before I go back to Jasmine’s chart in light of my “guest’s” comments, I’d like to briefly compare and contrast Ryan’s chart to that of Sodini’s, whom I wrote about the other day. When I first looked at Ryan’s chart, the first thing that came to mind was Bizarro, Superman’s mirror-image and one of his toughest enemies. In many ways, Ryan is the “Bizarro” mirror-image of Sodini.

Let’s count the ways:

Both have Venus in Detriment-Sodini in Scorpio, Jenkins in Aries

Both have Neptune in aspect to the Moon-Sodini, Neptune square the Moon, Jenkins Neptune sextile the Moon

Both have a highlighted Mars-Sodini’s Mars is in Fall (Cancer), while Jenkins’ Mars is Exalted (Capricorn)

And finally, if you haven’t noticed already, their Sun-Moon placements are the opposite from each other-Sodini’s a Libran Sun w/the Moon in Aquarius; Jenkins is an Aquarian Sun w/the Moon in Libra.

Clearly, we can see where Jenkins excelled over Sodini-the Venus and Mars placements in his chart versus Sodini’s says it all. Jenkins exuded a kind of masculine charm that Sodini desperately tried to acquire via self-help Game-style seminars and books. Jenkins had naturally what Sodini did not. Venus in Aries/Mars in Capricorn, meet Venus in Scorpio/Mars in Cancer. Among other things.

And yet, both men ended up killing women. We’ve already examined the “why” in Sodini’s case-now let’s consider the “why” in Jenkins’.

As our guest blogger Ferdinand Bardamu suggests above, the vastly changed social environment is such that young women in our time no longer have to consider other qualities in a man, for the simple reason that they are now fully self-supporting; in addition, the Pill, Abortion on Demand, and muscular legal protections, from the workplace to the bedroom, have all worked to free up a woman’s sexual choices to the maximum-the sky’s the limit. Under this rubric then, only one real factor remains: what some have referred to as “Gina Tingle”.

If we go back to Jasmine’s Solarscope, we note that Mars is in Pisces, a usually benign Sign, and for Mars a “diffusing” of its more wayward energies. However, the keen astrological eye notices something-Mars makes no standard aspect to any other planet. When such an occurance is noted, the planet is said to be “Peregrine”, per astrologer Noel Tyl’s research; said planet is akin to a bucking bronco in a corral, a live wire, the lone guy shouting to the top of his voice on the other side of the room from all the other folks in attendance. Such a planet will greatly “color” the life of the native in nearly everyway-for example, we already know that Fiore was planning to open a gym, and her body was discovered mutilated. Two very Martian “themes”.

And, as Mars represents men, literally, in a female chart, its condition must be carefully considered. In Fiore’s case, it wouldn’t surprise me one bit if she went for guys who had a certan charm but their “beastly” ways were lurking just beneath the surface. It makes for steamy romance novel reading, but living w/a “beast” day to day can get a bit old to say the least-if not out and out life threatening. Without any restraints to keep things in check, such guys can really be dangerous-as Bardamu points out above, and as, unfortunately, Fiore found out, first hand. Finally, note how her Mars in Pisces comports so well to Jenkins’ Neptunian persona. Deep.

A final word on someting I raised in my piece on Sodini, and that’s the role that the Outer Planets-Uranus, Neptune and Pluto, play with regard to our ever-changing world. Each was discovered at a crucial time of development, particularly in the Western world, and represents concepts and ideas that weren’t around, or if they were, weren’t fully developed prior to said planet’s discovery. For example, democratic ideas did exist prior to Uranus’ discovery, but it took full shape after it was sighted. Currency exchanges and economic models existed before the discovery of Pluto, but these systems really got a “boost” after 1930.

In the case we’re examining, the greatly changed dating/mating sphere, badboys never went lacking for female company-but in the modern era, as Bardamu rightly notes above, they are now swimming in “vaj”. Why?

The answer to that question lies in a celestial event that occurs every few centuries or so, the conjunction of Uranus and Pluto. Its last “hookup” was back in 1966 or so, in the Sign of Virgo, the Virgin. And what immediately happened after this conjunction?

Yup, that’s right, you guessed it, The Pill was born. Scientifically proven, medically safe, and highly reliable birth control was now available for women everywhere-and the best part? It didn’t have to rely on men to use it.

This “seed” conjunction then followed through the mundane transits of Uranus, then Pluto, into Libra in the late 60s and early 70s, when the landmark Roe v Wade decision came down. Now women countrywide, had access to an abortion whenever she wanted it, and again, without the consent or even knowledge, of her lover-even if it was her husband. The “right to choose” was hers, and hers alone.

Then, in 1993, “The Year of The Woman” happened-more women were elected to key positions in the US govt at all levels, than ever before in American history, and with it, corresponding advances in the social, work and legal spheres. This occured as Uranus and Neptune were in conjunction in Capricorn, the “patriarchy” itself, and while Mars, planet of men and males, was at its lowest ebb in Cancer, AND Retrograde. This was a dramatic and heady time for women, particularly the young, while for men and boys, the results were devasting (the “slacker”, Grunge Rock like Nirvana/Kurt Cobain and Pearljam/Eddie Vedder were born, among a great many things). In so many ways, Women’s Lib was embodied in America’s first Metrosexual President, Bill Clinton (who himself, had a long history of being the very cad and rake feminists professed to rail against; more on him and another famous cad feminists just can’t get enough of, in due course; stay tuned…), who pandered to women to such an extent that they swooned whenever he walked into a room.

The keen astrological reader will note that in the aforementioned epic conjunctions cited, Earth Signs were prominent. And with the involvement of Uranus each time, a “disruption” was in play. Earth represents structures, the ideas and concepts that undergirds a society, its traditions and mores. Here, we can clearly see the breaking down of said traditions, mores, values, with regard to contemporary American life, and its direct impact on dating and mating.Which brings us to the present, where women like Jasmine Fiore, are free to reject George Sodini and instead pick Ryan Jenkins. Sure, wag your finger if you must, be keep in mind one thing-in Nature, the male displays, and the female chooses.

And choices, always have consequences.

Comment and reply, invited.

Holla back


Labels: , , , , , ,

Sunday, November 02, 2008

Steve Sailer's New Book On Barack Obama An Interesting Case Study For Astrologers

Steve Sailer's New Book On Barack Obama An Interesting Case Study For Astrologers,

With only a day or so to go before the big elections, online blogger and journalist Steve Sailer has come out with a book on Obama. Based on Obama’s own Dreams Of My Father: A Story Of Race and Inheritance, Sailer gives a guided tour of Obama’s inner landscape in his own words, borrowing large tracts of Obama’s first book, written when he was just 33 years old.

Astrologers are greatly helped when they can get access to such biographical works. Sailer has done a good job of breaking down an otherwise arduous read in the over 400 page journey that is Obama’s "Dreams".

The "official" data for Obama is Aug 4 1961 Honolulu HI with a clocktime set for 7.26PM ASHT. This gives an Asc of 18 Aqr 42, and an early Gemini Moon in the 4 house, at 3 degrees, 23 minutes. I’ve always been very skeptical of this birthtime option, and have chosen to stick with my trial rectification time of 3AM ASHT, giving an Asc of 29 Gem 49 and a Taurus Moon at 24 degrees, 37 minutes.

In this option, the Moon squares Uranus, ruler of the 9 house; in the "official" version, the Moon squares Pluto, ruler of the 9. Both chart options speak undeniably to Obama’s racial focus and obsessions. In the "official" account, Aquarius on the Asc and a Gemini Moon account in large part for it, both being Signs that are caught up with racial and interracial themes; in my own test chart, Gemini on the Asc, and the Moon square Uranus ruling the 9, again speaks to the same themes (plus the Gemini Asc, representing the point of entry into the world, the identity and literally, the body of a person, is as about "biracial" as it can get!).

In the "official" version, we have to note that Uranus is angular, in the 7 house, and ruling the Asc. In either chart option, the Leo Sun squares Neptune in Scorpio. Nuff said, insofar as astrologers are concerned. Sailer, for his part, is no stranger to controversey. Eversince his brush with death in a fight with cancer in the 1990s, he turned his attention to his true loves, writing about, among other things, Race. His efforts would gain him scorn in some quarters and acclaim in others, such is the way of anyone born under the Sign of the Archer (Dec 20 1958, Los Angeles CA).

What follows below is an introduction to Sailer’s book. Comment and reply, including any astrological commentary, invited!


The Introduction to my book: "America’s Half-Blood Prince: Barack Obama’s Story of Race and Inheritance" We’ve posted online my entire 264 page book, America’s Half-Blood Prince: Barack Obama’s Story of Race and Inheritance. You’ll be able soon to order a paperback copy for $29.95, but in the meantime, you can start reading it online here: give you a taste, here’s the first chapter. (The killer chapter, though, is the second, which tells why Obama’s mother indoctrinated him in the dreams from his father.)

1. Introduction
I am new enough on the national political scene that I serve as a blank screen on which people of vastly different political stripes project their own views. As such, I am bound to disappoint some, if not all, of them. Which perhaps indicates a second, more intimate theme to this book–namely, how I, or anybody in public office, can avoid the pitfalls of fame, the hunger to please, the fear of loss, and thereby retain that kernel of truth, that singular voice within each of us that reminds us of our deepest commitments.

Barack Obama
The Audacity of Hope, 2006
The fundamental irony of Sen. Barack Obama’s Presidential candidacy is that no nominee in living memory has been so misunderstood by the press and public, and yet no other candidate has ever written so intimately or eloquently (or, to be frank, endlessly) about his “deepest commitments.”While journalists have swarmed to Alaska with admirable alacrity to ferret out every detail of Sarah Palin‘s energetic life, the media have drawn a curtain of admiring incomprehension in front of Obama’s own exquisitely written autobiography, Dreams from My Father. Because few have taken the trouble to appreciate Obama on his own terms, the politician functions as our national blank slate upon which we sketch out our social fantasies.Although many have supported Obama in 2008 because he seems to them better than the alternatives, he has also famously electrified throngs of voters. Yet, the reasons for their enthusiasm are often contradictory.For example, many Americans, whether for Obama, McCain, or None of the Above, appreciate the patriotic, anti-racialist sentiment in the most famous sentence of Obama’s keynote address to the 2004 Democratic Convention: “There is not a Black America and a White America and Latino America and Asian America—there’s the United States of America.”

Yet, Obama’s white enthusiasts are often excited by the candidate’s race, and for diverse motivations. More than a few white people, for instance, wish to demonstrate their moral and cultural superiority over more backward members of their own race. As Christian Lander’s popular website Stuff White People Like acerbically documents, white people strive endlessly for prestige relative to other whites, scanning constantly for methods to claw their way to the top of the heap. In this status struggle, nonwhites seldom register on white people’s radar screens as rivals. Instead, white people see minorities more as useful props in the eternal scuffle to gain the upper hand over other whites. High on Lander’s list of stuff white people like is:8 Barack ObamaBecause white people are afraid that if they don’t like him that they will be called racist.As one of Hillary Clinton’s advisers explained to The Guardian:If you have a social need, you’re with Hillary. If you want Obama to be your imaginary hip black friend and you’re young and you have no social needs, then he’s cool.

Other white Obama devotees have very different rationales in mind. Some are eager to put white guilt behind them, assuming that Obama’s election will prove there is no more need for affirmative action. Stuart Taylor Jr. exulted in The Atlantic in an article called “The Great Black-White Hope:”

The ascent of Obama is the best hope for focusing the attention of black Americans on the opportunities that await them instead of on the oppression of their ancestors.

And some white Obamaniacs wish to enthrone the princely Obama to serve as a more suitable exemplar for young African-Americans than the gangsta rappers they presently idolize. (Don’t be so black. Act more Ba-rack!) Jonathan Alter rhapsodized in Newsweek:[Obama’s] most exciting potential for moral leadership could be in the African-American community.

Remember the 1998 movie Bulworth, where Warren Beatty … tells astonished black Democrats that it’s time for them to “put down the chicken and the malt liquor…”That the candidate is black offers the country a potential advantage: it makes his intellectual facility and verbal adeptness more acceptable to the bulk of voters, many of whom found Al Gore and his 1355 SAT score too inhumanly cerebral to trust. If Obama, a superb prose stylist, were white, he’d be written off as an effete intellectual. But white voters are hungry for a well-educated role model for blacks. And blacks hope that his wife Michelle and his long membership in Rev. Dr. Jeremiah A. Wright, Jr.’s Trinity United Church of Christ are evidence that he is, as Michelle says, keeping it real.

Whatever their reasons, conscious or unconscious, white Obama zealots are prone to assume that Obama is the Tiger Woods of politics: as the postracial product of a happy mixed race family, he must be the anti-Jesse Jackson. His election will enable America to put all that tiresome tumult over ethnicity behind us.

Since 2004, Obama has himself stoked the popular hope among whites that his admixture of black and white genes means that “trying to promote mutual understanding” is “in my DNA,” as he asserted at the April 29, 2008 press conference in which he finally disowned his longtime pastor.

Obama’s 2004 keynote address tapped into an omnipresent theme in our popular culture, which is currently dominated by fantasy and science fiction epics largely about orphans predestined by their unique heredity and/or upbringing to save the world, such as Harry Potter, Star Wars, Superman, Terminator, Lord of the Rings, and Batman.

Likewise, in politics, a fascination with breeding is both very old (going back to the days of hereditary monarchy) and very contemporary. The main qualifications for the Presidency of the current Chief Executive, Mr. Bush, and the Democratic runner-up in 2008, Mrs. Clinton, consist of being, respectively, the scion and consort of ex-Presidents.

More subtly, Obama launched himself on the national stage at the 2004 convention by devoting the first 380 words of his speech to detailing the two stocks, black and white, from which he was crossbred. He implied that, like the mutual heir to a dynastic merger of yore—think of England’s King Henry VIII, offspring of the Lancaster-York marriage that ended the War of the Roses—he is the one we’ve been waiting for to end the War of the Races.

In Richard III, Shakespeare concludes his cycle of history plays with the victorious Lancastrian Richmond (Henry Tudor, now to become King Henry VII) proclaiming his dynastic marriage to Elizabeth of York:

We will unite the white rose and the red …
All this divided York and Lancaster,
Divided in their dire division,
O, now, let Richmond and Elizabeth,
The true succeeders of each royal house,
By God’s fair ordinance conjoin together!
And let their heirs—God, if Thy will be so—
Enrich the time to come with smooth-faced peace,
With smiling plenty and fair prosperous days!

Correspondingly, America’s half-blood prince reassures us that, as the son of what he called his parents’ “improbable love,” he will unite the white race and the black.

In contrast, many African Americans, after an initial period of uncertainty about a man sequestered throughout his childhood thousands of miles from any black community, have come to view Obama as their racial champion. They hope he will do in the White House what he tried to accomplish in his earlier careers on the left margin of Chicago‘s one-party Democratic political system as a community organizer, discrimination lawyer, foundation grant dispenser, and inner city politician: namely (to put it crassly), to get money for blacks from whites.

That Senator and Mrs. Obama donated $53,770 to Rev. Wright‘s church as recently as 2005 through 2007 suggests that this hope is not wholly delusionary.

Nonetheless, judging by his predominantly white campaign staff, the circumspect Obama would likely field an Administration in which minority appointees would not hold all that much more power than in the Bush Administration of Condoleezza Rice, Colin Powell, and Albert Gonzales.Which one is the real Barack Obama? How can we decipher The Obama Code? What is the Rosebud that reveals the inner Obama?

The overarching thesis of my book is extremely simple: that there’s no secret about Obama’s big secret. He spelled out exactly what he considers the central mandates of his existence in the subtitle of his graceful 1995 memoir Dreams from My Father. To Obama, his autobiography is most definitely not a postracial parable. Instead, it is A Story of Race and Inheritance.

The then 33-year-old Obama who wrote Dreams from My Father is obsessed with ethnicity and ancestry, as he relentlessly documents across nearly each of the book’s 460 pages. For 150,000 words, nothing diverts Obama from the subject of his racial identity.

What is the precise concern about race and inheritance that galvanizes Obama’s innermost emotions?Once again, it’s not exactly a mystery.Obama’s 1995 memoir reveals a genetically biracial young man raised by his white relatives who incessantly interrogates himself with the same question that the 139,000 mostly turgid articles and web postings catalogued by Google have asked about him: Is he black enough?

In particular, is Obama black enough to fulfill the dreams from his father and become a leader of the black race? Or will his half-blood nature and nonblack nurture leave him forever outside the racial community he treasures?

Doubts over whether he is black enough have tormented Obama since his youth. His psychological trauma helps make him a more captivating personality to contemplate than, say, his vanquished rival for the Democratic nomination, Bill Richardson, the New Mexico governor. Richardson‘s unusual life story (raised among the elite of Mexico City, the descendent of one WASP and three Mexican grandparents) would seem at least as relevant to contemporary American politics as Obama’s famously exotic background. Yet, nobody paid Richardson any attention. That’s partly because Americans evidently find Hispanics less interesting than blacks, even though Latinos now significantly outnumber African Americans—and partly because Richardson is a hack, while Obama is something more refined and intriguing.

Despite Obama’s aesthetic talents, his actual politics aren’t terribly innovative. As conservative literary critic Shelby Steele, who is also the son of a black father and white mother, points out in A Bound Man, “For Obama, liberalism is blackness.” To be black enough is tied up in Obama’s mind with being left enough. As someone brought up by whites far from the black mainstream, Obama lacks the freedom to be politically unorthodox enjoyed by men of such iconic blackness as boxing promoter Don King, or funk singer James Brown and basketball giant Wilt Chamberlain, both of whom endorsed Richard Nixon in 1972.

(Why Obama being “black enough” would be in the interest of the 7/8ths of the electorate that isn’t black has never been answered. That’s hardly surprising, because the press has barely even thought to ask why Obama’s 460 pages about his feelings of race loyalty might concern any nonblack. It’s a question that wouldn’t occur to the typical 21st Century reporter. That’s the kind of thing that just isn’t written about in polite society.)

Remarkably, much of Obama’s campaign image—the transcender of race, the redeemed Christian, the bipartisan moderate, etc.—is debunked in Obama’s own 1995 memoir. Obama’s potential Achilles heel has always been that he has such a gift for self-expression combined with so much introspective self-absorption that he can’t help revealing himself to the few who invest the effort to read carefully his polished and subtle (but fussy and enervating) prose.

For example, Obama has spent millions in 2008 to advertise his mother’s race in order to ingratiate himself to whites. Obama supporter Matthew Yglesias blogged that one of the candidate’s June 2008 TV spots laden with pictures of the white side of his family should have been entitled “My Mom’s White! And I‘m from America!” Yet, Obama boasted in the Introduction to Dreams (p. xv) that he had “ceased to advertise my mother’s race at the age of twelve or thirteen, when I began to suspect that by doing so I was ingratiating myself to whites.”Similarly, around Obama’s 27th birthday in 1988, between his three years as a racial activist in Chicago and his three years at Harvard Law School, he traveled to his father’s Kenya for the first time.

On his way to Africa, he spent three weeks touring Europe. But his racial resentments made his European vacation a nightmare. He found sightseeing amidst the beautiful ancestral monuments of the white race to be wounding to his racial team pride:And by the end of the first week or so, I realized that I‘d made a mistake. It wasn’t that Europe wasn’t beautiful; everything was just as I‘d imagined it. It just wasn’t mine. [pp. 301-302]Obama in Europe was like a Boston Red Sox fan in Yankee Stadium in New York. Sure, the House that Ruth Built was magnificently large and echoing with glorious baseball history, but that just makes it more hateful to a Red Sox rooter.

In Europe, I felt as if I were living out someone else’s romance; the incompleteness of my own history stood between me and the sites I saw like a hard pane of glass. I began to suspect that my European stop was just one more means of delay, one more attempt to avoid coming to terms with the Old Man. Stripped of language, stripped of work and routine—stripped even of the racial obsessions to which I‘d become so accustomed and which I had taken (perversely) as a sign of my own maturation—I had been forced to look inside myself and had found only a great emptiness there. [pp. 301-302]

On the other hand, Obama may be home free, because it can take a lot of effort to follow his Story of Race and Inheritance.The main happy ending in Dreams, for instance, occurs in Kenya when a friend of his father points out to him that even Kenyan culture isn’t purely authentically black African (the tea they love to drink was introduced by the British, and so forth). That even Africans aren’t wholly black by culture means to Obama, that, despite his background, he can be black enough to be a leader of the black race. He summarizes this revelation in his memoir’s brief but almost impenetrable Introduction.

So far, I‘ve minimized the number of lengthy quotes from Dreams from My Father because large dollops of Obama’s calculatedly perplexing prose can be daunting and disconcerting to the unprepared reader. Obama, who was already planning his Chicago political career when he published Dreams, eschews any sentence that could be turned into a soundbite. He has little desire to assist those readers and voters with merely normal attention spans grasp who he feels he is.

In his Introduction, Obama uncoils two serpentine sentences of importance. The first explains what his book is about, while the second reveals a primary lesson learned.

"At some point, then, in spite of a stubborn desire to protect myself from scrutiny, in spite of the periodic impulse to abandon the entire project, what has found its way onto these pages is a record of a personal, interior journey—a boy’s search for his father, and through that search a workable meaning for his life as a black American." [p. xvi]

Okay, that sentence wasn’t too hard to follow: Obama, like one of those questing orphan-heroes elucidated by Joseph Campbell (the professor of comparative mythology who influenced George Lucas’s Star Wars), goes on a semi-metaphorical journey in which he learns how to be “a black American.” Not, bear in mind, “a postracial American” or “a mixed race American” or “a black and white American” or just “an American American.” He wasn’t looking for “a workable meaning” for any of the identities that a citizen whose knowledge of Obama doesn’t go back farther than the reinvented image debuted during his first statewide campaign in 2004 might assume. No, Obama’s accomplishment was becoming “a black American.”

Next, after some literary pedantry about whether or not Dreams could be considered an autobiography, Obama delivers this doozy of a sentence in which he unveils, wedged between dashes and obscured by lawyerly stipulations, something crucial he’s discovered about himself:

"I can’t even hold up my experience as being somehow representative of the black American experience (“After all, you don’t come from an underprivileged background,” a Manhattan publisher helpfully points out to me); indeed, learning to accept that particular truth—that I can embrace my black brothers and sisters, whether in this country or in Africa, and affirm a common destiny without pretending to speak to, or for, all our various struggles—is part of what this book’s about." [p. xvi]

That’s the kind of sentence that Sister Elizabeth, my 8th grade English grammar teacher, would force kids who shot spitballs in class to diagram on the blackboard.

Let’s unpack it slowly. Obama says that “part of what this book’s about” is “learning to accept that particular truth.” And what’s that truth? That, even though his life is not at all “representative of the black American experience,” he still “can embrace my black brothers and sisters, whether in this country or in Africa.”

What then does he want to do with his racial brethren and sistren in America and Africa? “Affirm a common destiny.” And what does our Nietzsche-reading Man of Destiny mean by that? That’s where Sister Elizabeth can’t help us anymore. With Sen. Obama leading in the polls as I write this in mid-October 2008, it looks like we’ll just have to wait and see.

Obama’s most primal emotions are stirred by race and inheritance, as this overwrought paragraph from Dreams’ Introduction about how the “tragedy” of his life is also the tragedy of us all illustrates:

"Privately, they guess at my troubled heart, I suppose—the mixed blood, the divided soul, the ghostly image of the tragic mulatto trapped between two worlds. And if I were to explain that no, the tragedy is not mine, or at least not mine alone, it is yours, sons and daughters of Plymouth Rock and Ellis Island, it is yours, children of Africa, it is the tragedy of both my wife’s six-year-old cousin and his white first grade classmates, so that you need not guess at what troubles me, it’s on the nightly news for all to see, and that if we could acknowledge at least that much then the tragic cycle begins to break down…well, I suspect that I sound incurably naive, wedded to lost hopes, like those Communists who peddle their newspapers on the fringes of various college towns." [p. xv]

Of course, it is possible that since Obama published Dreams while preparing to run for the State Senate in 1996, he has transformed himself ideologically and shed his racialism.

After all, he suffered a soul-crushing rejection by black voters in his early 2000 primary challenge against Rep. Bobby Rush (who had been trounced by Mayor Richard M. Daley in 1999). In emulation of Obama’s hero, the late Harold Washington, the first black mayor of Washington, who had progressed from the Illinois state senate to the U.S. House to the mayor’s office, Obama tried to wrestle the Democratic nomination from the aging Rush, a former Black Panther, in a district that was 65 percent black.

Rush scoffed at Obama in the Chicago Reader, “He went to Harvard and became an educated fool. …Barack is a person who read about the civil-rights protests and thinks he knows all about it.” The third candidate in that race, state senator Donne Trotter, laughed, “Barack is viewed in part to be the white man in blackface in our community.”

Obama carried the white minority, but the Panther thumped the Professor among blacks.

Overall, Obama lost 61 percent to 30 percent.Obama reacted to this racial rejection with “denial, anger, bargaining, despair,” as he described his long post-defeat grief in The Audacity of Hope. Obama apparently realized then that he would never have quite the right pedigree to appeal more to black voters than other black politicians do. (Moreover, Obama’s dream of using a House seat as a stepping stone to reclaiming for the black race Harold Washington‘s old post as mayor of Chicago seemed increasingly implausible for a second reason. It was becoming evident that local voters considered Richie Daley to be the trueborn rightful heir to his famous father’s throne of Mayor-for-Life.)

Eventually, Obama snapped out of his depression. He seems to have decided that even if he weren’t black enough to best Bobby Rush in the hearts of black voters, he is white enough to be the black candidate whom white voters love to like. In 2001, Obama gerrymandered his South Side state senate district to make it, as Ryan Lizza wrote in The New Yorker, “wealthier, whiter, more Jewish, less blue-collar, and better educated,” snaking it all the way up from his base in Hyde Park to include the affluent whites of Chicago‘s North Side Gold Coast.

So, maybe Obama has changed what he called in Audacity his “deepest commitments.”

Or maybe he’s just learned to keep quiet about them …In his 2004 Preface to the reissue of Dreams, the older Obama denies that he has gained much wisdom in subsequent years:

"I cannot honestly say, however, that the voice in this book is not mine—that I would tell the story much differently today than I did ten years ago, even if certain passages have proven to be inconvenient politically, the grist for pundit commentary and opposition research." [p. ix]

Perhaps one of the hundreds of journalists who have followed Obama around for the last two years should have asked the Presidential candidate about the gaping discrepancy in worldview between his two books. When there’s a dispute between a man and his memoir, shouldn’t the burden of proof be on the man who wants to become the most powerful in the world?

Why hasn’t Dreams proven “inconvenient politically?” Why have so few in public life noticed that Dreams from My Father is (as it says right there in the subtitle) A Story of Race and Inheritance?

Besides the sheer intricacy of the prose style, racial condescension plays a major role in the conventional misinterpretations of Dreams. Middle-aged white liberals in the media tend to assume that being an authentic black male is a terrible burden for which nobody would aspire. Yet, around the world, hundreds of millions of young hip-hop and basketball fans struggle to reach African-American levels of coolness.

In 2000, without much insight into the real George W. Bush, America elected a pig in a poke to be President. How has that worked out for us? Putting partisan divisions aside, wouldn’t it seem like a good idea, on general principles, to try to understand clearly what a Presidential nominee has written about his innermost identity?

Obama spent the first four decades of his life trying to prove to blacks that he’s black enough. If the public were finally to become well-enough informed about Obama’s own autobiography to compel him to spend the four or eight years of his Presidency trying to prove to the nation as a whole that his “deepest commitments” are to his country rather than to his race, America would be better off.

This book serves as a reader’s guide to Obama’s Dreams from My Father. The would-be President has written a long, luxuriant, and almost incomprehensible book, so I have penned a (relatively) short and brusque book that explains who Obama thinks he is. I mostly follow his life as it unfolds in Dreams, up through his marriage to Michelle in 1992.

I especially emphasize the little-understood but critical four years he spent in Indonesia from age six to ten, during which his white mother, for surprising reasons of her own, set about systematically inculcating in him the racial grievances, insecurities, and ambitions that make up the pages of Dreams.I had once thought of tracking Obama all the way to the present, but I finally realized that book would wind up even longer than Dreams. Like Zeno’s arrow, it would never arrive at its destination. I respect Obama’s 2006 bestseller The Audacity of Hope as an above-average example of the traditional testing-the-waters campaign book. The test-marketed themes he ran by his strategist David Axelrod and dozens of others in the draft stage of the unaudacious Audacity, however, don’t hold my attention the way his lonelier first book does.You may be wondering by what authority I presume to challenge the Presidential candidate. Yet, this isn’t a debate between Barack Obama and some guy named Steve.

Fundamentally, this book consists of a debate between Obama and Obama’s own autobiography. I’m emceeing that debate. In what follows, I‘ve included big slabs of Obama’s prose for two reasons. First, if I just summarized what he wrote in my own words, you wouldn’t believe me. You’d think I was making it up. Second, I enjoy Obama’s writing style. As a professional writer, I envy the sonorous flow of his prose and his eye for novelistic details. I can’t write that mellifluously.

Of course, I don’t want to, either. By personality, I‘m a reductionist, constantly trying to state complex truths as bluntly as possible. Dreams, in contrast, is allusive, elusive, and inconclusive. Together, between my predilection for Occam’s Razor and Obama’s for Occam’s Butterknife, we make a pretty good team at explaining who Obama is. (I justify borrowing thousands of words of Obama’s copyrighted prose under the legal doctrine of “fair use.” If he doesn’t like it, he can sue me. Just make sure to spell my name right—it’s “Sailer,” with an “e,” not an “o.” I do urge you to buy your own copy of Dreams from My Father to read along with this book, so you can see if I‘m leading you astray. It’s quite lovely in its own self-absorbed artiste way.) Moreover, both Obama and I have written for many years on the knotty questions of race and ethnicity, of nature and nurture. Most people just think and talk about them, whereas Obama and I have written about them at vast length. Nevertheless, as Obama’s rise, jet-propelled by his race and inheritance, in four years from the Illinois legislature to the threshold of the White House suggests, everybody, deep down, is engrossed by these matters.

I spent many years in the market research industry, to which I was attracted because I have a certain knack for pattern recognition. During a sick leave for chemotherapy in the 1990s, I realized that I wanted to spend the rest of my life, however long that might be, as a writer. Looking around for a market niche to specialize in, I noticed that among topics of great importance, the weakest journalism, in terms of quality of evidence and logic, was found in discussions of race. I set out to become the most intellectually sophisticated writer in that field. (I soon learned, however, why there is so little competition at writing honestly about race: it doesn’t pay.)

My approach is that of an empirical realist. I suspect that that by this point in our lives, Obama and I wouldn’t disagree much on the facts about race. We would likely differ on what to do about them. Unlike Obama, I advocate colorblind government policies. Of course, ever since he left community organizing in the slums of Chicago for Harvard Law School, Obama’s solution to his failing to solve racial challenges he has set himself has been to get himself promoted.

I don’t spend much time banging the drum for my political philosophy because factual matters are so much more engaging, but in case you are wondering, I advocate what I call “citizenism“ as a functional, yet idealistic, alternative to the special-interest abuses of multiculturalism.

Citizenism calls upon Americans to favor the well-being, even at some cost to ourselves, of our current fellow citizens over that of foreigners and internal factions. Among American citizens, it calls for individuals to be treated equally by the state, no matter what their race.

The citizenist sees little need for politically correct browbeating. Today’s omnipresent demand to lie about social realities in the name of “celebrating diversity” becomes ethically irrelevant under citizenism, where the duty toward patriotic solidarity means that the old saying “he’s a son of a bitch, but he’s our son of a bitch” turns into a moral precept.

As I finish my portrait of the politician as a young artist, it’s a few weeks before the election and the financial markets are tottering, likely ensuring Obama’s election. John McCain doesn’t seem to have noticed that the Grand Strategy of the Bush Administration—Invade the World, Invite the World, In Hock to the World (or as blogger Daniel Larison put it, “Imperialism, Immigration, and Insolvency")—has driven us into the ditch.

In the event that Obama manages to lose the 2008 election, rendering this book less immediately relevant, I can console my bank account with the knowledge that Obama will be younger on Election Day in 2032, six elections from now, than McCain is in 2008. So, I suspect this book will remain electorally pertinent. Moreover, if Obama somehow loses in 2008, we will hear forever that white racism was the reason, so it would be helpful to have a handy record of Obama’s own feelings on race.

This is not a book about who to vote for in 2008. In case you are wondering, in 2004, I couldn’t bring myself to vote for either George W. Bush or John Kerry, so I wrote in the name of my friend Ward Connerly, the campaigner against racial preferences.

In any event, the significance of Obama extends far beyond politics. Win or lose, Obama’s life will continue to illuminate much about modern America.Nonetheless, the question remains. Would he make a good President?There is still one secret about Obama. We know how cautious and capacious his head is. Those of us who have read him faithfully know how fervent and unreasoning his heart can be. What we don’t know is which will win: head or heart.Obama may not know that yet, either.

Fortunately, politics never ends. Much to the disappointment of Obama cultists, January 20, 2009 would not mark Day One of the Year Zero. Obama’s inauguration honeymoon would merely provide a brief lull before mundane struggles begin over seeming minutia such as appointments to federal agencies, maneuvers in which Obama’s more racial and radical impulses can be tied up … if enough of the public understands his story of race and inheritance.

You can find my whole 264-page book at:

My published articles are archived at -- Steve Sailer

By Steve Sailer on 10/30/2008 Cited by 27 comments Labels: Obama

Labels: , , , , ,

Saturday, September 27, 2008

The Rise & Fall Of WaMu

The Rise & Fall Of WaMu
*From The University Of Astrology Forum on MySpace*:

10:11 AM 09/27/2008 Sat

Last week's reports of yet another financial behemoth biting the dust, this time the nation's sixth largest bank, Washington Mutual, gives us astrologers yet another chance to watch the stars at work on the Markets. I've been spending the better part of the morning so far astrologically tracking the rise and fall of WaMu, and I must say, the results have been striking to the eye.

So far in this tutorial thread, we have been mainly focusing on the ongoing movements of the planets thru their Signs and in terms of the aspects they make to one another, to give us cues as to the ebb and flow of the Markets. On certain occasions, we've also made use of particular horoscopes, such as that of nations, or institutions, such as the NYSE and DJIA. And, we've seen a bit of how Incorporation and First Trade charts work as well, often as a compliment to the aforementioned transit movements.

The WaMu chart is no exception. It both ties in nicely to the current transit scheme, and as well, works perfectly as a diagnostic and timing tool in its own right:
Washington Mutual Sep 25 1889 Seattle WA 12PM LMT; Placidus 10 Sag 12, Wikipedia. No time is known, so "12PM" is used.

Right off the bat, we can see why WaMu was so big, and its size contributing to its eventual downfall; Jupiter both rises in and rules the Sagittarius Asc, and is the Final Dispositor of the horoscope. Jupiter represents banking and credit. Note the close trine between Jupiter and Saturn in this map it mirrors that of the ongoing trine between Jupiter and Saturn in the skies as we speak. One line of thought in astrology circles is that one can expect major events to take place when natal configurations are "repeated" in the skies after one's birth. Known as "recurrance transits" these events are carefully watched for by some astrologers. I've been quietly observing this for myself, and I have to say, that it is indeed something to lookout for, as the WaMu meltdown shows.

Saturn in the WaMu chart rules the Noontime 2nd house of finances and banking, and its position in detriment in Leo, combined with its trine to Jupiter in Sag, speaks to its overdoing it in the acquisition and more importantly, *subprime* areas. Saturn in turn conjuncts Venus, ruler of the Noontime 10th house - the CEO - and is in Mutual Reception with the WaMu Sun, itself fallen in Libra. Another signal of bad decisions made at the top.

Venus is dispositor of no less than four planets in the WaMu chart - including the Sun, we also have the Moon, Mercury and Uranus all in Libra. This extreme emphasis on the Sign Libra brings our attention to that area of the Zodiac; in more recent years, WaMu was dedicated to lending to *everybody*, a classic Libran focus insofar as fundamental fairness is concerned. Yet, a major tenet of good banking is to assess risk properly; lending to those who have little ability to repay loans or credit, is a cardinal sin in the banking world. In short, it doesn't pay to "be nice" in the world of Finance, as WaMu has clearly learned.

Another key feature of this map is the rare Neptune-Pluto conjunction in Gemini, something that happens only once in some three centuries or so. Note how this conjunction is trine the Sun, and Pluto also trines the Moon. Neptune, as has been observed before, is not friendly to the World of the Markets, and almost always promises scandals, cooking of the books and other nefarious dealings, layoffs and downsizing, takeovers, mergers, and so on. And interestingly enough, a quick look to WaMu's Solar Arcs reveal an applying SA Neptune=MC!!!, to be exact only a few short months from now. The handwriting was on the wall for this bank. It was only a matter of time before it was going under. JP Morgan Chase ended up buying the bank for little or nothing, at $1.9B. Only a few years ago, WaMu posted up assets of more than $300B. My, my, what a difference a year makes.

We've observed that Venus, Jupiter and Pluto are the Money Planets, and their condition in a chart gives very strong clues as to said chart's fiscal health. For example, in the chart of the United States, it is telling that Venus and Jupiter are in conjunction, with the latter exalted and also ruling the Asc, while Pluto is in Capricorn, which for this astrologer, may suggest an exaltation placement, on the basis of the "higher octave" theory of the Outer Planets. It would certainly help to explain how the USA is among, if not the, richest nation on Earth.

In the WaMu chart, please note the following with regard to its Money Planets:
Jupiter, while angular, ruling the Noontime Asc and dignified, nevertheless is in tight aspect to a planet who both rules the 2nd house and is also in detriment, Saturn.

Venus, although also in tight aspect to Jupiter, is conjunct the same 2nd house ruler who is "hurt" by being in detriment, Saturn.

Pluto, is conjunct Neptune, and what's worse about this is that both planets are Rx.

Therefore, it was easy to see that the fiscal health of this institution was in question, on the basis of a simple assessment of its Money Planets.

Casting a tri-wheel chart that features the natal, Solar Arc and current transits, we see the following for Sep 2008:

Transit Pluto conjunct WaMu Jupiter
SA Saturn=Jupiter(!!!)
SA Neptune=MC(!!!)

Later I'll post up an astrological timeline of the history of WaMu; in the meantime, here's what journalist Steve Sailer had to say about WaMu's demise earlier this week:

"Washington Mutual's Last - Press Release - Ever By commenter demand, here's a commercial from the late, not-so-great Washington Mutual bank:
Thanks to a commenter, here's the last press release from the nation's 6th largest bank on the day before it finally went under:

WaMu Recognized as Top Diverse Employer—Again Company ranks in top ten of Hispanic Business’ Diversity Elite and earns perfect score on the Human Rights Campaign’s Corporate Equality Index SEATTLE, WA (September 24, 2008) – Washington Mutual, Inc. (NYSE:WM), one of the nation’s leading banks for consumers and small businesses, has once again been recognized as a top employer by Hispanic Business magazine and the Human Rights Campaign.

Hispanic Business magazine recently ranked WaMu sixth in its annual Diversity Elite list, which names the top 60 companies for Hispanics. The company was honored specifically for its efforts to recruit Hispanic employees, reach out to Hispanic consumers and support Hispanic communities and organizations.

The Human Rights Campaign, the largest national gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender (GLBT) civil rights organization, also awarded WaMu its second consecutive 100 percent score in the organization’s 2009 Corporate Equality Index (CEI), which measures progress in attaining equal rights for GLBT employees and consumers. WaMu joins the ranks of 259 other major U.S. businesses that also received top marks in the annual survey. The CEI rated a total of 583 businesses on GLBT-related policies and practices, including non-discrimination policies and domestic partner benefits.

In both surveys, WaMu earned points for competitive diversity policies and programs, including the recently established Latino, African American and GLBT employee network groups, all of which have a corporate executive sponsor and champion.

“Diversity is an integral part of cultivating a welcoming, innovative and dynamic workplace here at WaMu. We are proud to be recognized for the opportunities and benefits we offer to all of our employees, including the specific efforts we have made to engage Hispanics and the GLBT community,” said Steve Rotella, WaMu president and COO. “We are committed to diversity at WaMu and pledge to listen to our customers and work closely with our employees to continue to make progress.”

These two recent honors build upon diversity recognitions WaMu received earlier in 2008. WaMu was named one of 25 Noteworthy Companies by Diversity Inc magazine and one of the Top 50 Corporations for Supplier Diversity by Hispanic Enterprise magazine.

About WaMu

WaMu, through its subsidiaries, is one of the nation's leading consumer and small business banks. At June 30, 2008, WaMu and its subsidiaries had assets of $309.73 billion. The company has a history dating back to 1889 and its subsidiary banks currently operate approximately 2,300 consumer and small business banking stores throughout the nation. WaMu’s press releases are available at

Rex May has a cartoon take on WaMu.

The NYT reports:
Until recently, Washington Mutual was one of Wall Street’s strongest performers. It reaped big profits quarter after quarter as its then chief executive, Kerry K. Killinger, enlarged its presence by buying banks on both coasts and ramping up mortgage lending.

His goal was to transform what was once a sleepy Seattle thrift into the “Wal-Mart of Banking,” which would cater to lower- and middle-class consumers that other banks deemed too risky. It offered complex mortgages and credit cards whose terms made it easy for the least creditworthy borrowers to get financing, a strategy the bank extended in big cities, including Chicago, New York and Los Angeles. With this grand plan, Mr. Killinger built Washington Mutual into the sixth-largest bank in the United States.

Okay, Mr. Killinger, but perhaps by now you've noticed the fundamental difference between Wal-Mart and WaMu: Wal-Mart takes money from lower- and middle-class customers, while you gave money to them.

While our increasingly diverse lower- and middle-class American residents have been spending a lot in recent years in our vibrant, globalized economy, they haven't been making a lot. (You may have noticed that our elites were united in their horror of "wage inflation" and did their best to combat it through encouraging massive immigration, outsourcing, cutting tariffs, and the like.) In the long run, that's a problem. To cover the difference between what the bottom 2/3rds or whatever of society was spending and making, they've been going more in debt to, say, WaMu.

You were able to mark that up as profits, which Wall Street celebrated, but eventually the clock struck twelve and the carriage turned back into a pumpkin.

To broaden the subject slightly, it's interesting that we don't yet have a name for this decade yet, even though it's almost over. All other decades for the last 80 years were named directly from the third digit (e.g., The Sixties), but nobody has agreed upon a quantitative title for this decade.

Therefore, we should feel free to recommend a qualitative name. Pardon the vulgarity, but at this point I can't come up with anything more descriptive and accurate than The Bullshit Years.

My published articles are archived at -- Steve SailerBy Steve Sailer on 9/26/2008 Cited by 52 comments Labels: political economy"


Sunday, September 21, 2008

Alpha, Beta & Omega Males: An Evolutionary (Astrology) Look

Alpha, Beta & Omega Males: An Evolutionary (Astrology) Look

Posted: 20 Aug 2008, 06:45 AM on The Evolutionary Astrology forum on MySpace:

One of my usual haunts on the Web is a blog called Half Sigma, which I got turned on to while checking in w/another haunt of mine, Steve Sailer’s blog. Half Sigma often takes us themes and issues that greatly interest me, and I suspect, interests others but would never openly so say in public, such as Race, Class & Sex, to name just a few. Yesterday while "thumbing" through his archive, I ran accross something that seems perfectly fitted for a forum entitled "Evolutionary Astrology".

HS posits that instead of usual dichotomy of males, ie, Alpha and Beta, that there was a third catergory, Omega. He suggests that these three catergory of human males are an interesting study in how the human race gets on w/the business of reproducing itself. I agree.

As we all know, the Alpha Male catergory is pretty straightforward, even though we’ve live in an Industrial age now for a little more than a century, and the Alpha Male’s heyday was back during the Hunter/Gatherer and early Agricultural eras. Alpha Males are, simply put, usually bigger, strong, and/or had access to maximum resources so as to be more appealing to and thus, have the most access to femles, especially the choice females.

Beta Males, those second tier guys who weren’t blessed w/such great genes, nevertheless were good guys, reliable, dependable and so forth. Back in the day their only chance of sending their genes off into the future was to hope for the Alpha Male to go off on the hunt or something like that, sneak into the harem and get a quickie before the Big Man came back. Other than that, it was the end of the genetic line for most Betas, until the Industrial Age, when male resources (wages) were more or less equalized and more guys had the chance to get a bride. Although she may not be the cat’s meow, it sure beat beating off for the rest of one’s life.

Oh, btw, Alpha Males make up roughly 10 to 15% of any population; Betas, roughly 70%. And another thing-Alphas do have one drawback, they tend not to be great nuturers, dads, and providers, whereas the opposite is true largely for Betas. This has given rise to what some Evo-types call the "Beta Strategy" where females would hookup w/the Alpha Male to get his genes and then get w/a Beta Male because he can provide better for the Alpha’s seed. In other words, Cuckoldry. But that’s another topic for another time.

Then we have what HS terms Omega Males. Again, these guys makeup about 15% of any given population, and are both lacking in sufficient genetic material AND material resources/social skills and thus are completely out of contention for copulating with females. These are generally the guys who live at home in Mom’s basement doing all kinds of geeky stuff, and looks it. Women wouldn’t give these guys the time of day, and that includes women who hangout in places like this one.

OK, so since we’ve briefly outlined the three types of males, the question becomes-how do we see this astrologically? I have a few theories, but I invite those reading alone (especially the ladies!) to chime in w/their thoughts. It seems pretty clear to me that Sexual Aspects play a huge role here. A male w/a lot of such aspects usually has the corresponding "animal magnetism" to attract females and get them to say "yes" moreso than Betas and definitely more than Omegas. So, when it comes to Alphas in general, that’s what I would expect to see, lots of Sexual Aspects, perhaps w/an additional refinement of said aspects occuring in Beastial Signs: Aries, Taurus, Sagittarius (at least the first half of the Sign anyway LOL), Capricorn, Leo.

Because Betas don’t have the raw Sexual power that Alphas have, I would expect to find an average amount of Sexual aspects at work here, along w/more "nuturing" astro markers-perhaps a strong Moon, or Jupiter, maybe a strong Neptune, something like that.

W/Omegas, hmm. That’s a good one. I suppose I would be looking for "outcaste" signals astrologically, but I’d need a bit more time as to how to formulate a postualte here. This is where we all can really jump in and toss the ball around.

So there you have it, the Three Male Types per Evolutionary Theory as set forth by Half Sigma. I think its a lot more valid than we may want to admit. And, there’s one more thing:

We have to remember that we Humans are only at the top of the foodchain, not apart from it. The Zodiac means literally, Circle of Animals, and we’re a lot closer to the Animal Kingdom than we think. This is especially true when it comes to things like "Synastry" which in so many ways, is a proxy for saying that we want astrology to help us get laid, and/or get laid more often.

Just keepin’ it real, y’all.

OK, that’s it. Discuss, and Holla Back!


Labels: , , ,