Excepting the members of her cult of boot-licking sycophantic followers, is there anyone left in America who does not think that every time Hillary Clinton says something there is a good chance that what issues forth from her yap is going to be a big pile of Bolshevik? Of course, there has been almost zero public accountability for Ms. Clinton’s many Bolshevik stories, this due to the American corporate media being primarily comprised of either Clinton’s friends, allies sharing the same political objectives, or the aforementioned members of her cult of boot-licking sycophantic followers. But facts are facts. A quick review: Clinton’s claims of Russian hacking and the 2016 Election? Well, recent revelations suggest Ms. Clinton as being full of Bolshevik. (Were Seth Rich alive I’m sure he’d agree!) Ms. Clinton’s down-play of the Russian Uranium One deal (involving her so-called charity)? Apparently, and in light of recent revelations, her statements that this issue has already been, “debunked,” may also prove to be pure Bolshevik. Taking a step back to before the 2016 Election, what about Hillary Clinton’s explanations regarding her alleged violations of the law in the infamous email scandal? According to tomes of data conflicting with her story (thank you, Judicial Watch), it looks like another big pile of HRC’s Bolshevik! Even her claims as to why she believes she lost the 2016 Presidential Election, detailed in her recent book, seem to suggest that, and once again, Ms. Clinton is totally full of Bolshevik!

The verdict? Hillary Rodham-Clinton is a total Bolshevik-artist!

Carpe Noctem




Utopianism: the ideological fantasy of creating the perfect society through progressivism, modern liberalism, communism, socialism, fascism, or anarchism.

The great irony of Utopian ideology is that due to the selfishness, avarice, intolerance and violent lawless nature of those who naturally gravitate towards any of the Utopian ideologies, the Utopians are inherently incapable of maintaining, or existing within, such systems, and it is only those liberty-minded men and women who oppose Utopianism that could actually make it work. And as history demonstrates, often when the Utopians come to a position of absolute power, the first thing they do is intimidate, incarcerate, torture and murder all influential non-Utopians, leaving only violent, hate-filled, selfish Utopians left to administer the system, and thereby ensuring the failure of the system (Soviet Union, China, North Korea, etc.). The irony concludes with a paradox in that the only way to make any form of Utopian ideology work is to first exile to some remote corner of the Earth all of those men and women of a Utopian mind-set, leaving only those men and women with sufficiently good character to oppose any sort of Utopian system left to administer and participate in said system, which, of course, their collective good character would forbid them from participating.


Through the millennia, and in all four quarters of the globe, men and women have faced the challenge of living under one form of tyranny or another. This state of the human condition originates in the matter of the human conscience, or lack thereof. Those men and women with a conscience seek fair and equitable relations with others, while those without a conscience see those who strive towards such things as being weak and ripe for exploitation. Thus, the human condition is such that those without conscience will always strive to subjugate those whose conscience bars them from subjugating others. That this condition places those with a conscience at a great disadvantage is incontrovertible. Ergo, from the time of ancient Sumer, men and women of conscience have been striving towards building law-based government of society for the purpose of balancing the inequity between men and women of conscience, and those without conscience, the latter whom we refer to now in this modern age as sociopaths. History teaches that none have been one-hundred-percent successful in building the perfect society. I believe that, and due to the nature of mankind, Utopia is an impossibility. But what was started in the American colonies in 1776, and what it has evolved into since that time, is, as far as my research has yielded, the best that humanity is capable of in making a civilized society.

Free your mind from the sociopaths’ deception by allowing yourself to meditate for just a moment on this notion: Based upon what we have been taught about history, give consideration to the varying states of the world over the past 5,000 years. Consider that the age of the USA (241 years) spans less than five-percent of that 5,000 year block of time, and yet, within this small fraction of humanity’s civilized experience, this nation has legally established the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness by all men and women regardless of color or religion – legally established rights that the nation’s courts uphold for everyone year after year. Consider that what has happened within America’s borders in this relatively short period of time has not only made an impression upon the whole world, but changed a large potion of the world for the better, as well as not only having exposed the forces of tyranny, but having put those tyrannical forces on the defensive. If the preceding words do not lead one to understand the importance of the USA’s constitutional form of government, in its unadulterated and undiluted form, as it relates to the positive evolution of the whole world, then I believe one is utterly unreachable. Moreover, if in regards to the nation’s courts recognizing equality among all men and women, one cites the rocky road from America’s first days to the achievements of this present day as proof of a flaw in America or the Constitution, then one is either an idiot or a liar, because society’s developing in this manner is the way of humanity.

Under a law-based system wherein the inalienable rights of the individual are both recognized and protected by government, the sociopath is given no advantage. However, under any other form of government, be it monarchy, dictatorship, communism, socialism, fascism, tribalism, etc., the sociopath is given a definite advantage. The sociopath thrives in an environment of tyranny, and thus the sociopath is always working towards, or supporting, the establishment of tyranny. And while the condition of tyranny is formally defined as oppressive rule by government, fundamentally, I regard it as being just another form of slavery, but in this case, the ‘slave owner’ is comprised of the administrators of the state. Slavery is amongst the most vile things that men and women devoid of conscience have forced upon the world, and it manifests in various forms. The oldest form of slavery is chattel slavery, and next to it, monarchy’s division by class renders the peasant a slave to the aristocracy. The vassalage of the old world, and debt-slavery created by usury, were later forms. In modernity, communism, socialism and fascism not only make slaves of the masses to the administrators of each of these systems, but strive towards even the regulation of the individual’s thoughts. In the case of any man or woman who has their right to follow a path of their own choosing to their desired life’s destination, countermanded by the tyranny of fascism, socialism, communism, etc., by this they are made just as much a slave as was any man or woman who lived in human bondage in ancient Egypt, in ancient Greece or Rome, in Arabia, under the British monarchy, or as a chattel slave or indentured servant in early America.

In every successful used car salesman there must exist some measure of sociopathy. It’s a job requirement. That is why so many men who are disliked for other reasons connected to anti-social or dishonest behavior are associated with used car salesmen. No one can sell as well as a sociopath because the sociopath’s advantage is both the ability to deceive and a lack of conscience. By adulthood, the sociopath has developed the skill of telling people what they want hear in order to achieve his or her own personal goals. Thus, the sociopaths have instilled in the minds of many women and men that systems of government such as communism, socialism and fascism are ‘kinder, gentler forms of slavery’ – forms of slavery that can be trusted. This pitch zeroes in on a frailty in the human character which gives some men and women the inclination towards, and preference for, being ruled over in exchange for being taken care of (the tranquility of servitude) versus bravely living lives of liberty and self-determination. However, there must also be some measure of sociopathy within all who acquiesce to, and support, communistic, socialistic and fascistic movements, due to the selfishness required to willingly support the state’s confiscation and redistribution of one’s neighbors property and assets (theft) as well as the selfishness required to willingly cast one’s neighbor into a state of subservience to the state (slavery). Indeed it takes a special variety of either deviate or dummy (or both) to willingly make slaves of their own family and friends, as well as their neighbors and countrymen. This last statement takes on a greater significance in regards to this present day, as there exists tomes of historical records to demonstrate beyond any doubt the heinous brutality and mass murder the sociopathic administrators of communism, socialism and fascism will engage in once in power. I find it inconceivable that anyone mentally capable of tying a pair of shoes cannot see the danger in handing over such power to those men and women with a desire to rule over others, as well as the inability to grasp the fact that under any of the Utopian systems, ultimately, the parasites will outnumber the producers, and at that time, the money will stop flowing, the food and medicine will run short, the boilers will go cold and the lights will go out.

Outrageous is the hypocrisy of the Democrats, the liberals and the progressives (as well as those actual communists, socialists, fascists, etc., operating within America) to constantly, and from one side of their mouths, denounce the obvious evils of chattel slavery in early America (something the Democratic party supported at that time) but then from the other side of their mouths, to tout the so-called benefits of the ‘kinder gentler forms of slavery’ found in communism, fascism and socialism. And beyond their hypocrisy, they lie outright. The last 100 years have proven that ‘kinder and gentler they are not, and that communism, socialism and fascism are in fact among the most brutal forms of slavery. While a large portion of those who just this past year were ‘with her’ or ‘feeling the Bern’ will prove to be unreachable (sociopaths cannot be reasoned with based upon ‘right or wrong’, but do understand the concept of consequences) it is now up to America’s conservatives to remind as many of them as is possible that slavery in any form is wrong.

Carpe Noctem,




Mass illegal immigration has been encouraged by the Federal Reserve to suppress inflation figures by lowering the cost of labor. I know this to be a fact because during the time of the G. W. Bush Administration, I watched on C-Span as now former Federal Reserve Chairman, Alan Greenspan referred to this during one of his mandated speeches to Congress. From my best memory, I believe what he said was, “In order to keep inflation figures in check it is essential that the free flow of labor continue to cross over the border unabated.” Thus, mass illegal immigration has been used by the Fed (at least since the Clinton years and maybe even earlier) to offset the Fed’s own malfeasance and economic mismanagement by lowering wages in a climate of rising costs of living. Illegal immigration was used in this way because, due to the inevitable destruction it would bring to the working and middle-classes, the American people would have never agreed to admit the same numbers of people intended for the labor market through the process of legal immigration. (Is this intentional undermining of the American work force not the definition of betrayal and brutality?)

This condition would certainly offer at least one explanation for the bizarre refusal to uphold the nation’s immigration laws exhibited by America’s four past Presidents, as well as Congressional Democrats and Republicans.

Besides the Federal Reserve, two other sectors have enjoyed the benefits of this economic influence, the first being large corporations operating in the USA, this due to the lowered cost of labor across the board, and the second sector being white liberal elitists employing nannies and gardeners, etc. on the cheap. In other words, due to mass illegal immigration and DACA, these two entities enjoy benefits similar to the owning of slaves. In the meantime, this interruption in (or manipulation of) the natural economic cycle has priced millions of American citizens out of their own labor market and into states of poverty and prolonged unemployment resulting in greater dependency upon government-funded social services. So aside from its being a form of corporate welfare and a source of slave-labor for white liberal elitists, DACA is a continuation of the injury that has been inflicted upon the American working and middle-classes since 1989 when George H. W. Bush and Al Gore Jr. worked together, rallied the votes, and granted Communist China a favored-nation trade status.

I’ll reiterate: DACA is corporate welfare. The American public bears the burden of cost, while large, America-hating corporations benefit from the lowered cost of labor. I say, “Free these unwitting slaves from their corporate bondage and servitude to vile elitists and Hollywood-types (I may have just repeated myself) and send them back to their homelands to live as free men and women.”

DACA is caca!

Carpe Noctem,




The following text regarding Stephen T. Colbert represents my opinion as an astrologer.

While it takes little more than a cursory observation of hack-comedian and CBS Late Show host, Steven T. Colbert’s poor taste and hatred of America (passed off as comedy) to recognize him for what he is, that being a demagogic propagandist, I regard it as being my duty as an astrologer to assess what the stars say about this leg-humping geek’s influence upon the USA.

Firstly, in my opinion, and as it relates to his relationship with the USA and the American people, Colbert’s nativity reveals a mule-headed and contradictory type of man with overt hostilities towards the nation’s traditional values and the people who hold such values. Add to this the suggestion of his harboring anti-social leanings on matters of authority in general, as well as the exercising of his own authority and his power to influence others. Secondly, and of even greater relevance, Colbert is a man with his Sun (in the twenty-fourth degree of Taurus) resting upon the fixed star named Capulus, a point in the heavens which the ancients determined that when an individual is thrust into the arena of politics or the public’s eye, gave said individual great influence, but proved, in time, that if that influence was not used for the sake of good, or if it was used in a brutish or egomaniacal manner, it would eventually lead the individual to a dramatic public fall (in ancient times it often meant decapitation). Coincidentally, this degree is one which opposes (within one degree of ‘orb’) a highly sensitive degree in the horoscope of the USA, one which my work has consistently proven to coincide with acts of betrayal, conspiracy, treason, sedition, espionage and sabotage.

Now mind you, I am not saying that Colbert has engaged in some sort of a conspiracy – a sneaky back room deal, for instance, to incite opposition to the party in power in the USA. I repeat, I am not saying that. But I am saying that key points in Colbert’s nativity suggest the potential for his conspiring with someone during the latter part of the year 2016 – a conspiracy to take action against the established foundations of order within United States of America – an astrological influence that would fall under what I refer to as a “Twelfth House influence.” Who might be this individual, hypothetically, that is? Well, let me first state that I am only an astrologer and not a god (nor even a good psychic). However, and oddly enough, the planetary correspondents for the theoretical co-conspirator describe an individual that might look a lot like Hillary Rodham-Clinton. I am using Clinton as an example because she is a high-profile individual who’s personal horoscopic points not only run afoul with the aforementioned sensitive point in America’s own horoscope, but correlate to the physical attributes of of the zodiacal degrees held by Colbert’s offending planets. In other words, just prior to the time that Colbert began to engage in his nightly assault against America’s duly elected President (and all who voted for him), two of his planets moved into zodiacal degrees that not only offend the USA, but cast significant aspects to key points in the horoscope of Hillary Rodham-Clinton. Kind of a funny thing, huh? (Could it be in fact that the mouth of that sad little weenie, Stephen T. Colbert, is actually HRC’s “c*** holster?”) Having analyzed hundreds of horoscopes of political and other notable figures in relation to the horoscope of the USA (we astrologers call this ‘synastry’) there is one thing that I will say about Colbert with great confidence and that is based upon the zodiacal degree held by the Sun at the time of his birth, his aforementioned ugly characteristics will rise to prominence in his relationship with the USA and the American people, and if it is only through nothing more than his potty-mouthed bashing of America and the will of We the People, his primary motivation (if even only subconscious) will be to bring injury upon the foundations and great traditions of the nation.

Colbert’s overt anti-Americanism rose to prominence coincidental to the 2016 US Presidential Election, a time when America’s ideological civil war went from a slow simmer to boiling over – the nation being divided between those who wish to discard liberty for the so-called “tranquility of servitude” afforded through the slavery that is globalist-socialism, versus those who wish to maintain America’s sovereignty, the rule of law, a state of maximum individual liberty, as well as the opportunity to live in a state of peace and prosperity. Colbert’s high-profile role in this civil war on the side that advocates human bondage is also coincidental to his horoscopic Sun, in what we call Secondary Progression (a key measurement) in conjunction (id est, the same zodiacal degree) to the USA’s horoscopic Sun. My work has revealed that such an influence will often yield to an individual in the nation’s public eye an almost hypnotic effect upon the weaker-willed portion of the population. (George W. Bush, coincidentally, enjoyed a variation of this same horoscopic influence). This influence is, however, ephemeral, and will soon come to an end (by the close of 2018), and at that point in time, it is my opinion that this shameful America-hater, Stephen T. Colbert, will suffer a slow, but irreversible, fall from popularity, and will subsequently slide into a state of embittered obscurity.

Good riddance. 

Carpe Noctem




While I’m quite fond of the nationalist perspective, based upon my observations, the majority of Americans have come to believe, and erroneously so, that the only eventual outcome of the nationalist perspective is something akin to Germany’s Third Reich. That is, of course, nonsense. But, and as ridiculously contradictory as it sounds, we do live in an age wherein many Americans have been brainwashed into believing that patriotism is somehow anti-American. However, because the majority of Americans now believe this does not make it right, nor does being part of the majority on this matter serve as a reasonable defense for holding this self-injurious belief as truth. But this majority-perspective can be explained as it is just this sort of an absurdity that is the logical cost to a society for its toleration of a decades-long propaganda campaign spearheaded by corporate media and academia, and focused upon instilling in the populace unjustified feelings of guilt, an imaginary sense of division among one’s countrymen, and an irrational sense of fear instilled by incessant baseless alarms of potential attacks from hypothetical enemies both from within and outside the country.

This same misguided majority, having succumbed to the endless attacks upon their psyches, has somehow come to believe that being an American – and promoting the ideals that made America great – somehow requires the relinquishing of not only sacred individual rights and great American traditions, but altruism to the point of self-obliteration, and worst of all, the staggering cost, both in dollars and blood, of playing police officer and moral referee to the world.

But despite the untiring efforts of corporate media and academia, not all of us have bought into the bullshit.

Those of use who have chosen to continue to think for ourselves despite the media’s constant drumbeat of guilt, envy and fear are, by my observations, in the minority. And we continue to recognize that the ideas that were born in 1776 on the land that is now called America, are the same ideas that have elevated the whole world to the awareness of the concept of the right of the individual to, “Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness,” and the primary purpose of government being to protect that right. Those of us in the political minority who believe that America’s ability to continue to influence the world as a positive role model hinges on America’s maintaining its sovereignty, identity and integrity, as well as its economic and military strength, are nationalists.

Personally, I define nationalism as: America first.

For me, ‘America first’ means We the People placing the good interests of our nation and our people above the interests of any other nation or people in the world – taking care of our own first, and then from our abundance – and without causing injury to ourselves – giving charity to foreign people as they both need and deserve, and leading them to lives of liberty, peace and prosperity through our setting an example – and not by playing world policeman or moral referee.

America first. I can say this phrase without any sense of guilt. I can say ‘America first’ without feeling as though it divides me from my countrymen, no matter their race, religion or economic class. I can say ‘America first’ without the fear of it leading me to being any more vulnerable to attack by enemies from within or outside my country.

Can you?

Carpe Noctem,



Allow yourself to imagine that you are a spectator in an enormous, roaring coliseum and awaiting the ‘big game’ – a grudge match between two legendary teams that have been rivals from the very beginning.  This is team ‘Red’ versus team ‘Blue’, and the air is filled with excitement!  Gathered about on the right side of the coliseum are big groups of fans of team Red, donning their blazing-red garb.  On the left side of the coliseum are throngs of fans of team Blue, festooned in their own brilliant blue costuming.  As is the case at any big event, the newsmen and newswomen are there, and with microphones in hand, they recite back-stories, offer opinions on the mind-sets and motives of the players, and speculate on the outcome of the game.  The cameras catch every detail!  Down below on the playing field, and to the right, bright, fresh-faced cheerleaders in red uniforms perform, cheer and wave their pompoms, while to the left, their energetic counterparts dressed in blue do the same.

But wait! Something is amiss!

“Rah, rah, rah! Red butts don’t smell!  Rah, rah, rah, Blue will burn in Hell!” shout the Red team’s cheerleaders, to which team Blue’s respond with, “Sis, boom, bah!  Blue crap doesn’t stink!  Sis, boom, bah! Red’s little brain can’t think!”

A closer examination reveals that the roaring crowd within the coliseum is not comprised of primarily happy, excited spectators of the game, but instead, they are angry, self-righteous fanatics, each side hurling irrational accusations towards the opposite side of the arena, then following up with unqualified boasts of their respective teams’ virtue, before finishing with fist-pumps and turning to give each other high-fives.  But what the fans cannot see, as they are either so caught up in the event itself, or due to their ego and emotions being so inextricably tied to the team which they find superior to the other – is that the coaches and the players from both teams are laughing their assess off at them!

That’s right! The joke is on the fans!

As the spectators are occupied with one side trying to prove to the other that their team is superior, the players from both teams are engaged in collusion and fixing the game, vandalizing the coliseum, picking the pockets of the attendees, and raping the cheerleaders.  And as the players from team Red and team Blue do their dirty deeds right in front of the spectators’ faces, as well as in front of the reporters from the news, the players’ friends are busy breaking into the cars in the coliseum parking lot, stealing the change from the ashtrays, the radios, and when possible, stripping the cars bare.

By the end of the day, and as the spectators exit the coliseum, the only thing that has been accomplished by the players is the destruction of the coliseum and a long list of criminal acts, all of which is underscored by a complete breach of trust.  But make no mistake!  By the time the footage from the game hits the morning news, the agencies supporting team Blue will have edited from their report the Blue team’s involvement in anything questionable, just as those in the media who are biased towards team Red will have edited their own footage, leaving team Red to appear to be above reproach.

So what is this sport that reduces men and women to such sophomoric behavior?  And which so successfully beguiles them all to engage in self-injurious incoherence and disgraceful willful incomprehension?

The game is American politics!

Intellectually, for those Americans who embrace the American Founders’ doctrine of continually striving towards a state of maximum individual liberty, peace and prosperity, it is difficult to understand how the fanatical supporters of either team Red – the Republican Party – or team Blue – the Democratic Party – distinguish themselves from each other, as both parties are equally, and irreversibly, corrupt.  But this is due to the fact that, and generally speaking, those Americans who pursue the doctrine of liberty, peace and prosperity, do so not from a sense of one’s feelings, or by the motivations of the ego, but as the product of the intellect!  Thus, if one is to understand the mentality of these same misguided, and often sophomoric, souls, and how they can legitimize their resting the safety of their own futures with either team Red or team Blue, as well as understand what, in their minds, individualizes the characteristics of the Democratic and Republican parties, one must first examine the matter by analysis of the emotional triggers and egotistical motivations used by the parties to manipulate their constituencies.

In this brief, three-part review, I will attempt to summarize the team Red and team Blue mind-sets, as well as informally rate them both according to the doctrine of ‘liberty, peace and prosperity’.  Let us remember that, while the majority of the two parties’ positions mentioned will seem completely irrational, they are, nonetheless, what has been clung to by the majority of the American public, that is, those who are driven to decisions by their feelings and/or their egos, as opposed to their intellects.

Firstly, both the Republicans and Democrats have their own uniquely strange, and nonintellectual, perspectives on the matter of individual liberty. For those of the Democratic persuasion, liberty is first and foremost defined in terms of sexuality, and in this, the liberty to engage in the sexual activity of one’s choosing, with a striving for special legal and societal dispensations to be granted to those activities that deviate from the norm.  The Democratic mind-set also regards ‘maximum personal liberty’ as being realized when there are no legal or societal restrictions placed upon one’s consumption of intoxicating substances, nor any sort of legal or societal compulsion to respect the property rights of anyone who holds property in a sum greater than the proletariat average.  The Democratic mindset fails most dramatically on the matter of individual liberty when it comes to the right to self-defense, and the right to free enterprise, believing government must somehow always be a ‘partner’ in one’s business.  This stunning failure is exacerbated by the Democrats’ enthusiasm towards the violation of property rights, and the right to free enterprise, through progressive taxation, though, and ironically so, the statistics suggest that Democrats are much more likely to cheat on their taxes than are Republicans.  Finally, the Democrats’ failure on the matter of liberty is recognized in their party’s overt attacks upon any form of speech or personal expression that is contrary to Democratic rhetoric – they were, after all, the coiners of the phrase ‘politically correct’!  While those of the Republican persuasion give high regard to maximum individual liberty on matters of the right to self-defense, free enterprise and property rights, they fail miserably on the matters of respecting an individual’s right to do with their physical body as they choose, whether that is in respect to the sexual activity of consenting adults, or one’s decision to self-medicate with substances categorized as illegal or controlled intoxicants, or to even use such intoxicants recreationally.  This Republican position is largely based upon adherence to religious standards that the very same Republicans frequently fall short of in their own personal lives.

Relegating the two parties to ‘ballast for dead weight’, both the Republicans and the Democrats have recently confirmed a mutual disdain towards – and a distrust for – Americans’ enjoying their Fourth Amendment right to privacy.  Thus, when held to the standards of the Founders’ original intentions, an extremely generous rating for the ideologies of either party on the matter of personal liberty yields a score of something less than 50-percent, and indicts them both for basing policies upon an irrational blend of emotional and egoistic triggers.  It has, however, so far proven to be an effective means by which to captivate the minds of a large number of Americans, and through which, has led the American people into decade after decade of self-injury.

Secondly, both the Democrats and the Republicans have their own uniquely irrational, and nonintellectual, perspectives on the matter of peace.  One could accurately simplify the matter by stating that, for the Democrats, there is no such thing as a good war – unless it is declared by a Democratic president (for then – and only then – is it a justifiable action) and for the Republicans, there is simply no such thing as a bad war.

But to offer some deeper insight as to the emotional and egotistical motivations of the Democratic and Republican mind-sets regarding war, one must first realize that, Democratic approval, or disapproval, of war, as the case may be, is always based primarily upon ideals, and has very little to do with national security.  Thus, for those of a Democratic persuasion, the peace may be sacrificed so that the social engineering that is integral to the Democratic platform may be enforced upon the people of foreign nations at the end of a gun – particularly if the policies being enforced are of a socialistic or liberal bent.  The Republicans have no such ideals when it comes to sacrificing the peace, and for this the world should be very thankful.  Though, the Republicans will always make use of some version of those same Democratic ideals when pleading a case to the American public for sacrificing the peace.  For those of the Republican persuasion, legitimizing the call for war is as simple as noticing anyone else in the world holding a gun whom has not already agreed to cede national sovereignty, relinquish all natural resources, and obey every command given to him or her by the government of the USA – or the government of Great Britain – or the government of Israel.  Equal to this aforementioned justification, is the justification for sacrificing the peace for commercial purposes, or in other words, protecting (or enforcing) the commercial interests held by individuals or corporations – even if these individuals or corporations are foreign – provided, of course, that a really good story is concocted to cover up the true motivation, and, under the veil of some false magnanimity, the right members of Congress can make a few bucks.  Religious differences are often exploited during this process.  Ironically, this willingness to violate international law in the use of military force stands in stark contrast to the Republicans’ claim that they stand as ‘the party of the rule of law’.

In the end, neither the Democrats nor the Republicans demonstrate a foreign policy that is in any way reflective of the intentions of the Founders, or one that could in any way be classified as the product of strength, character, or the ‘benevolence’ by which both parties claim guides their actions.  Both parties score a zero on the matter of ‘peace’ and are equally guilty of using emotional and egoistic triggers to manipulate the public, which, thus far, both parties have done with great success.

Thirdly, both the Republicans and the Democrats have their own uniquely corrupt, and nonintellectual, perspectives on the matter of prosperity.  Once again, those of the Democratic persuasion fail to give good regard to this right, and due in the largest part to their failures on the matters of the right to free enterprise, and in regards to the individual’s right to property.  As the Democratic mindset finds government partnership in all matters of business essential, free enterprise and property rights yield to tyranny.  No matter how kind or gentle the tyranny may appear to be, it is tyranny, nonetheless. Ergo, prosperity becomes, in effect, ‘regulated’ by the state, with the state taking an ever-increasing share from the top, and leaving a perpetually shrinking share from which a growing population must divide.  In yet another Republican irony, while those of this political persuasion insist that they are the party representing the entrepreneur and the self-reliant, as a result of their collective avarice, history convicts the Republicans as being the great enemy of capitalism and free-enterprise, this being done through their fanatically loyal support, and defense, of corporatism.  As a matter of fact, it would often appear as though that, should a large corporation – especially a foreign one – desire to crush the competition posed by an American small business owner, it is likely to be the jackboot of a Republican legislator stomping on said small businessperson’s face.

Clearly, both the Republicans and the Democrats fail miserably on the matter of prosperity, with those of the Democratic persuasion preferring for Americans a kinder, gentler form of state-regulated slavery, and those of the Republican persuasion, preferring the American people to live under the yoke of a less kind, and less gentle, form of slavery, this one being regulated by corporations.  Equally clear is the use of emotional and egoistic triggers (fear, greed and envy) by both team Red and team Blue, as well as this tactic’s so far having been another highly effective means by which to control the thoughts and actions of the majority of the American public.

In summary, it is clear that, the continued success of the Republican and Democratic parties, despite overwhelming evidence of their equal betrayal and failure, can be reduced to the parties’ preying upon the qualities of avarice, cowardice, laziness, gluttony, envy and desire to shed blood, common to those whom are drawn to the political platforms of either team Red or team Blue.  So what is that I am actually saying, one might ask? I’m saying that the vast majority of Americans, those who identify with their ‘being’ either a ‘Republican’ or a ‘Democrat’, are as stupid as they are weak, and as they are irrational. Additionally, I am saying that, both the Republican and Democratic parties discovered long ago that intellect is used by only a small portion the population when it comes to the matter of politics, and in that, found the means by which to pander to the most base, and primal instincts of the larger part of the American public, which for those of the Democratic persuasion, is primarily focused upon the genitals, and for those of the Republican persuasion, is almost entirely focused upon the wallet or purse.

During his stand up routine, comedian Lewis Black once said, “The Republicans and the Democrats are like a bowl of sh**, staring at itself in the mirror.” I don’t think Mr. Black’s metaphor was too harsh.  I would add to Lewis’ analogy that, those who, at this late stage of the game, are still supportive of either team Red or team Blue, are, and in the greater part, hopelessly nonintellectual, and of such significantly flawed character, that their potential to actually function as a truly beneficial influence in the American political process is nil, and, like the parties they support, serve as nothing other than ballast for dead weight.

Carpe Noctem,



Wednesday – In November of 2010, in the inaugural issue of Judicium Astrologica (in print) I referred to the Republicans and Democrats as the right and left buttock, respectively, of the same dirty ass that has been defecating on America for nearly 100 years, with each buttock blaming the other buttock for making the mess.  As the curtain lowered at the end of today’s Congressional performance, and, each having obtained what they truly wanted, the Republicans and Democrats took their bows, and once again, Congress’ audience, the American people, got screwed.   Is there still anyone, with the exception of the idiot or the liar, who can deny that the nation’s two predominant political parties are equally to blame for the destruction of America?  Is there still anyone, with the exception of the idiot or the liar, who can deny that both the Republican and Democratic parties are wholly corrupt and long beyond any repair?

This post is titled 2013 Fourth Quarter Blog Hiatus, and as its name suggests, it is an announcement that I will be taking the rest of the year off from writing for this blog, the time away allowing me to focus on another astrological project.  I will, however, still be providing all of my astrological services to my clients.

For the time being, I will leave my readers with two thoughts, the first of which pertains to America’s horoscope, my interpretation of which, leaves me to give the warning that, since 1993, the greater part of America’s leadership has been, is now, and will continue to be, influenced primarily by people the stars indicate as being the enemies of America.  The second thought is relative to the first, and it comes in the form of a question that I have begun frequently posing to readers:  Can free men and women be led?

Carpe Noctem.


For questions pertaining to astrological matters, readers may visit:  www.robertwilliamusher.com .  Legal professionals and investigators should first visit: www.judiciumastrologica.com .

P.S. Should enough readers protest this hiatus, and convince me that the information I provide within this blog to be of sufficient importance to them, then I will abbreviate the hiatus.


On September 28, 2013, the Daily Mail’s Marie-Louise Olson reported on highly respected journalist Seymour Hersh’s assertion that the Obama Administration’s account of the raid during which Osama bin Laden was allegedly killed is a lie.


Once again, Judicium Astrologica has been considerably ahead of the pack on this issue.

From Judicium Astrologica, Issue 06, May, 2011:  Osama bin Laden: A Retrospective, I wrote, “Sunday, May 1, 2011 (appx. 7:48 pm AZT) – An interruption in normally scheduled network television programming brought news that Osama bin Laden had been killed.  About a quarter hour after the breaking of the news, President Barack Obama addressed the American people, giving an account of a directive he said he gave to then-CIA director Leon Panetta in early 2009 regarding the dispatch of Osama bin Laden as being his number one priority as President.  The Commander in Chief’s following words painted a picture wherein American intelligence agencies coordinated with our valorous military for an audacious mission in which the Western world’s most wanted man was brought to justice at the business end of an American rifle. Upon initial receipt of the news, I was nearly inclined to celebrate that the son-of-a-bitch Osama bin Laden was dead.  But having been immersed in my work for the predictive part of this very newsletter on that same evening, I was acutely aware of the evil stellar influences under which the USA was when the news broke (as well as for several days preceding, and after) and thus, was immediately skeptical.  And when it was said that Osama bin Laden’s body was buried at sea, I became thoroughly unconvinced as to the legitimacy of the Obama Administration’s assertion.  My initial thought on the matter was the oddity that, in an environment where a considerable portion of the American people are still doubtful of the naturalized birth of President Obama – and thus have so little trust in him – that in a matter of such great importance as this, Obama himself would not have insisted on a state-side autopsy of Osama bin Laden’s remains.  I also questioned that, at a time when the President’s approval rating had fallen so low, would not clever Democratic advisors and strategists have convinced the President to make some sort of display of the trophy, if even accidentally.  Which then led me to further contemplate President Obama’s dismal approval rating, and the now-unsettling timing of this event (as well as a series of other events leading up to this point).  These thoughts, in turn, led me to remind myself of my analysis of President Obama’s nativity in relation to that of the USA, and the double-whammy of his Mercury in opposition to the USA’s Pluto – and his Pluto in semi-square to the USA’s Mercury – suggesting that he would have a strong tendency to deceive America through his speech and writings.”

In summarizing my astrological judgement of this matter I wrote, “ Having now worked on this matter for weeks, I can find nothing in the USA’s chart to support the event of the apprehension or dispatch of a notorious fugitive – only that of a high-profile assassination.  My astrological assessment of the matter of the death of Osama bin Laden is that, whatever it was that actually happened on that day (and I do believe that someone was assassinated) it was interwoven with details that would either indict the US government in having taken part in some previous grand-deception upon the American public, or was, in itself, nothing more than fabricated tale of heroism – a fairy tale designed to bolster a failing President’s public approval rating.  Either way, if we are to believe that the executed was in fact Osama bin Laden, as there was no autopsy performed on the corpse, and as the remains were disposed of at sea, the truth – the whole truth – is likely to remain a monumental secret withheld from the American public.”

Readers may find the complete astrological judgment on the Judicium Astrologica blog at: http://robertwilliamusher.com/judiciumastrologica/2011/05/

Other news sources that also question the legitimacy of the Obama Administration’s story regarding the dispatch of Osama bin Laden can be found at:  http://www.cnn.com/2013/03/26/world/bergen-who-killed-bin-laden/index.htmlhttp://www.infowars.com/alex-jones-doesnt-buy-bin-ladens-death/


Tuesday – Having listened to President Barack Obama today, my interpretation of the core meaning of his words is that, he does not like, nor does he approve of, the US political process when it does not result in his getting his own way.  My guess is that, President Obama believes he would make an excellent dictator.

Completely unrelated to President Obama and his administration, I think that it is important to remember that, when a would-be-tyrant’s glorious pride has been wounded, or his or her sense of absolute, god-like authority challenged, that would-be-tyrant can resort to vindictive behavior.


For some time now it has become quite fashionable among Democrats to rage against capitalism, frequently accusing this economic system as being the source for all the world’s evils.  Among the evils Democrats will frequently attribute to capitalism are such nasty things as war, poverty and pollution – claiming profits from war-industries as being the motivating factor behind war, the selfishness of the ultra-rich and their exploitation of the poor being the source of poverty, and cost-cutting manufacturing by fat-cat industrialists as the source of the polluting of the world.  At times it would seem as though the political Left would feel good about blaming capitalism for even halitosis and tainted cork.

Lately, even Republicans (the supposed consummate capitalists) have been taking their own shots at capitalism.  However, while the envious, anti-free-enterprise perspective of the political Left comes as no surprise, the perspective from which the political Right’s attack on capitalism comes is quite surprising.  It would appear as though the anti-capitalist message of the inarguably Democrat-biased mainstream media – broadcast as an unending hypnotic drumbeat of false accusations – has served to convince even the Republicans that capitalism is evil – though in the minds of those among the political Right – a necessary evil.  In the wake of what is clearly the last days of free enterprise the Republicans have seemingly obediently accepted this fate, believing that, there is some sort of inevitability within capitalism that large corporations will ultimately replace all privately owned enterprise, and that somehow, this is good and to be accepted, and even embraced. In their ignorance and egotistic competition with the Democrats, the Republicans will even smile smugly at the self-injurious conquest of large corporations over small business, somehow – and preposterously so – believing it to be a victory over the Democrats.

As usual, both the Democrats and the Republicans have it all wrong.

The intention of this article is to give the reader a deeper understanding of what capitalism is and what it is not, as well as what it is and is not responsible for, in terms of the good or bad conditions of America at this present time.  If one is capable of putting ego and emotion aside and addressing this matter intellectually, then the following words will be useful, otherwise, this would be a good time for the reader to stop reading.


There are numerous economic systems that have been put into effect throughout the world, some being very good and some being very bad.  Economic systems, more than they are anything else, are a means to manage and distribute wealth and resources.  Communism, socialism and fascism are often mistaken for systems of government when they are in fact systems of wealth and resource management and distribution, id est: economic systems.  Because communism, socialism and fascism rob the producer of his or her productivity and ‘distribute’ that productivity to a parasite, those economic systems require a heavy-handed statist form of government to enforce the economic system, such as totalitarianism, and thus, those economic systems are erroneously mistaken for forms of government, such as totalitarianism.  In comparison to economic systems, there are probably twice as many ‘economic schools of thought’ (or economic theories) and the world should feel fortunate that most of them have never been put into effect.  But before one is gripped by exuberance, understand that, implemented in this present day America is one of the most fraudulent economic schools of thought to ever be devised: Keynesianism.  (More on that later.)


Within America’s original economic system – that is, the one that gave America its meteoric rise to financial prominence in the world – was a basic understanding that, free men and women owned their wealth and property without condition, that they enjoyed the right to freely contract as they wished, and that, provided one’s actions did not infringe on the rights and liberties of another, one could do as they wished with their resources and businesses.  Within the framework of the early-American economy was a system of tariffs and excise taxes designed to guarantee that, if natural resources and the product of labor left a community, then money – tangible, portable wealth – would be recycled back into that locality.  There was no monarch to claim his or her ‘fifth’ (or ‘royalty’) nor was there yet a cabal of aristocratic financiers to urge a monarch to create laws that gave them an advantage over their non-aristocratic competitors.  The system America’s Founders envisioned, which has recently been so accurately summarized by Dr. Ron Paul in his ideological mantra of, “Liberty, peace and prosperity,” worked, and it worked so well that poverty was nearly stricken.  Thus, to deny that the Laissez Faire economic system, combined with the right to free enterprise, or what we have come to know as capitalism – was anything less than the most successful economic system ever experienced upon the Earth, is to demonstrate oneself as being guilty of willful ignorance, or plain stupidity, or reveal oneself as a liar – and in the case of the latter, most likely a liar with something to gain by injuring America.

All this stated, the uninitiated might rightfully ask how, if capitalism is so good, its reputation could become so severely sullied in the eyes of both the political Left and Right, as well as ask why, if capitalism is so good, is it that such great disparity can exist between the country’s rich and poor.  Another legitimate question the uninitiated might legitimately pose is why, if capitalism is all the good that its proponents claim it to be, has the overall quality of life in America for all but the very rich plummeted to such great depths.


Capitalism is an economic system characterized by the right to engage in free enterprise, and, with the exception of reasonable tariffs and excise taxes, a laissez faire or, ‘hands off’ position by the government regarding economic matters.  (Laissez Faire economics interpreted means to allow the natural business cycle to do as it will on its own with zero governmental interference.)  Capitalism guarantees one man or woman the right to compete in commerce with another man or woman, without the government engaging in any legislative action whatsoever that results in a commercial advantage being given to one man or woman over another.  Capitalism allows one to run their business on their own and as they wish, without having government as a dictatorial partner.  Capitalism allows those who engage in free enterprise to retain their own moral compass as they go about their business, and to enjoy the full fruits of their productivity without said productivity being subject to confiscation and redistribution.  With this definition taken into consideration, is there anyone currently living within the United States of America so willfully ignorant, or so plainly stupid, or so bald-faced a liar, as to say that the economic system America currently exists under is in fact capitalism?  The question is rhetorical.  Of course there is.  But people that ignorant or stupid, or whom are such bald-faced liars, are most likely engaging in some underhanded practice, or doing something frivolous, or perhaps watching CNN or Fox News, and are not likely searching for the truth and sensible solutions to America’s troubles.

To further answer those aforementioned questions, the fact is that, since May 10, 1886 and the landmark, precedence-setting Supreme Court ruling by notoriously corrupt Justice Morrison Remick Waite on behalf of the Southern Pacific Railroad Company versus Santa Clara County, America’s capitalism has been steadily replaced by that which has revealed itself to be the most anti-liberty, anti-peace, and anti-prosperity economic system ever devised: CORPORATISM.

The May 10, 1886 Supreme Court ruling on behalf of The Southern Pacific Railroad Company legally established corporations as having all the rights of an individual, while maintaining the reduced criminal and civil liability of a corporation.

While there had been pro-corporatism rulings by the Supreme Court prior to and after the May 10, 1886 ruling, none had been, nor have any since, been so critical.  It was on this day that the US Supreme Court gave birth to the corporate person – America’s new aristocracy.

History suggests that America’s Founders were very uneasy with the idea of incorporation.  Prior to this ruling, US law made incorporation difficult.  Approval of incorporation was usually granted only after submitting a clear and precise statement of purpose for the incorporation, and also requiring proof that the incorporation was of a benefit to the community in which it would operate.  Perhaps of greatest importance, incorporation was not granted indefinitely, and incorporations required, in their stated purpose, a time frame in which the stated objective would be completed, after which, the corporation would be dissolved and cease to exist.  But all that changed with the birth of corporate personhood.

Once the corporate person had been established, and now armed with its often bank-backed, financially privileged, aristocratic status, it was just a matter of time before the hired agents of corporations (we call them lobbyists today) began to successfully solicit members of Congress for favors in the form of legislation designed to give specific corporations commercial advantages over small, privately-owned businesses.  The rest, unfortunately, is American history.

And over the years as corporate law – or what should be referred to as, “corporate advantage in law” – was written into the books, capitalism began the process of dying.  From that seemingly fated day of May 10, 1886, it has been the corporate person who has fomented international hostilities and then become the financial beneficiary of war industries – not the small businessman.  It has been the corporate person that has been the financial beneficiary of adulterated processed foods and the farming of nutrition-robbed GMOs – not family farms.  It has been the corporate person that has enjoyed hiding behind a fundamentally aristocratic status as they have produced frightening amounts of pollution through the cutting of manufacturing costs – not the small businesswoman.  It has been the corporate person who has been the financial beneficiary of the dismantling of America’s manufacturing base, and the resulting poverty that accompanies a service-based economy – not American men and women engaging in free enterprise.  It has been the corporate person that has been the financial beneficiary of parasitic central banking and absurd monetary policies – not privately owned, community bankers.

In this confusion between what constitutes corporatism and what constitutes capitalism, blame can be placed upon academia, the media and government, as they have proven themselves to be equal conspirators in the deception.  Much of the fodder for this deception has been rooted in the adoption of the aforementioned, “fraudulent economic school of thought,” known as Keynesianism.

Keynesianism is an economic school of thought that was designed to produce a partnership between corporations and government, to encourage deficit spending and, thus, massive borrowing, so as to force the collateralizing of debt with natural resources, and to eliminate the middle class by first robbing them of their means to produce (and soon after, their wealth and lands), as well as to ensure an eternal two-class system of financial aristocracy versus poor, the latter state of which would be irrevocable, and whose members would carry the greater burden of a nation eternally bound in debt slavery.  Whether the product of a conspiracy of international financiers, or based solely upon the criminal insanity of its British author, John Maynard Keynes (1883-1946), Keynesianism, an economic school of thought based upon the author’s intentionally unnecessarily wordy 900-page economic theorem titled, The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money has been used as a technical guidebook for the implementation of corporatist-supremacy, its fraudulent theorem serving as justification for the outrage of reckless deficit spending, as well as justification for the now-irreversible damages of continued fractional reserve central banking.  And in regards to central banking, a digression is required so as to remind the reader that, the great facilitator of corporatism is the Federal Reserve Bank – an incorporated entity – and that the secretive actions of this shadowy parasitic entity have been made possible only through the establishing of the corporate person!  Returning to the subject of Keynesianism, it is this author’s opinion that, though many Federal Reserve administrators and US Treasury Secretaries have identified themselves as Keynesians, none arrive at that level in the money business without full knowing that Keynesianism serves to perpetuate the fraud of corporatism while serving to destroy capitalism. Id est: one cannot know much about economics without recognizing Keynesianism as a fraud.  (A parable that was shared with me is as follows: One will no sooner derive an accurate economic outlook using a false economic theorem than one will accurately measure 100-yards using a 31-inch yardstick.)  Ergo, if those in the know understand Keynesian economics to be a fraud, then Keynesianism is being used intentionally for the purpose of defrauding the American public.  It is without question in this author’s mind that Keynesian economics has served as an equal partner to the corporate person’s assassination of America’s capitalism, the assassination of every American man and woman’s right to free enterprise, and the looting of America’s liquid assets and natural resources.

It must be reiterated that pure capitalism – a combination of Laissez Faire economic policy, combined with the right to free enterprise, as well as reasonable tariffs, duties and excise taxes (to protect domestic productivity) – is the key to prosperity, creating not only a wealthy class (due to the greater industriousness and use of faculties by some) but a middle-class that leaves almost nothing left of a poor-class, as through true capitalism, poverty is nearly eradicated.

It must also be stated that the primary motive behind the slandering of capitalism is due to its being the scourge of the elitist, the monarch, the user, the looters, the parasites, as well as the envious and the lazy.  The elitist – aristocrat and monarchist alike – despise a prosperous middle class because it challenges their dictatorial authority.  These elitists have always hated the bourgeoisie – or middle class – as the middle class competes with them for resources.  The users, looters and parasites despise pure capitalism because it undermines their ability to attach themselves to a producer, and rob him or her of the fruits of their productivity.  The envious and the lazy also despise capitalism because in order for one to excel, one must do so on one’s own merits, and in order for one to obtain charity, one must remain in good standing with one’s neighbor, as there is no governmental mechanism in place to rob the producer and hand it over to the lout.  It is corporatism that has been the economic system under which these aforementioned sociopaths have thrived, not capitalism!

It must also be stated that, it is not the capitalist that is the hard-hearted miser in terms of charity for those who are truly in need, but it is in fact the corporatist that has earned this place.  Through all the years in which capitalism was the predominant economic system, the poor and needy were attended to by private charities funded by private holders of wealth, and this was apparently done so with much greater efficiency than America’s modern governmental welfare system.  Restated, the statists’ claim that, without government the needs of the unfortunate will go unmet, is a bald-faced lie and refuted by historical occurrences such as the private relief efforts during the Great Mississippi River Flood of 1927.  Private funding of charitable causes has declined correlative to increases in the income tax required to fund the ‘forced donations’ via government welfare.

If the words within this editorial have effectively pleaded a case to the reader in favor of acquitting capitalism of the charges brought falsely against it, and if this editorial has effectively stirred within the reader a passion to share the truth, I offer this advice: don’t bother arguing the differences between capitalism and corporatism with those on the political-Left in the hopes of demonstrating that it is the latter that is the enemy of which they speak.  The truth will not dissuade their hatred of capitalism as free enterprise is at the core of what they hate – a hatred born of fear and envy.  Preferring to wrap the world within a kindler, gentler form of slavery as opposed to what America’s Founders had set into motion, the average Democrat’s hatred of liberty, peace and prosperity is self-evident in the personal views they express daily, and the majority of the positions they hold politically.  Likewise, don’t bother trying to get the average Republican to stand against corporatism and uphold the virtues of capitalism.  They have been consumed by avarice, and desire more than anything to gain spectacular riches through the corporate machine as it dismantles the American economy and facilitates the building of a militaristic, global, religious empire.  This message is appropriate for those who have risen above the ‘Team-R versus Team-D’ paradigm, that is, the two-party fraud, as well as whom, perhaps by virtue of their youth, have not yet been conned by one or the other of the two predominant political parties and their polarizing platforms.


Although it is wrongly accused by some as the source for all the evils of the world, and by others, erroneously, as a necessary evil with which to facilitate prosperity, capitalism remains with us now as little more than a souvenir from a bygone age.  There is, however, a solution to the slander of capitalism and a means by which to reverse its being steamrolled by corporatism, a solution which is found in three simple, daunting, monumental, steps.  First, the theory behind Keynesian economics must be recognized, and accepted, by American academia as the fraud that it is and, secondly, this economic fraud must then be exposed to the American public by the mainstream media.  The third and most critical step, the Supreme Court must reverse the May 10, 1886 court ruling on behalf of the Southern Pacific Railroad Company resulting in the establishment of corporate personhood.  I state that these three steps are daunting because, and obviously, the egos to be found in the world of academia are not likely to accept the idea that, one of the darlings of Liberalism, that is, Keynesianism, has been a fraud since its birth, and a fraud from the day it was adopted by the world of academia!  Daunting because, it is not likely that bank-financed corporate mainstream media will readily report on the injury being done to America by the very economic system under which it [the corporate media] prospers!  Daunting also because, for one to expect to receive a pro-capitalist, anti-corporatist ruling from the bizarre collection of jurists currently presiding over the Supreme Court is as puerile as it is naive.  Thus, the initiating of the three required steps must begin at the grassroots level, and persist until popular, then becoming so boisterous and persistent that it cannot be ignored.  Fortunately, the sort of grassroots effort of which I write has in fact already begun.  One recent lower court ruling against the existence of the “corporate person” is the landmark Hallowich v. Range Resources (Washington County, PA, Judge Debbie O’Dell-Seneca presiding) which demonstrates there being some hope in reversing America’s nearly completed conversion to corporatism.

If some larger part of America can rise above the Democratic and Republican parties’ polarization, and address the matter of America’s adoption of a foreign and fraudulent economic theory (Keynesianism), as well as one devastatingly corrupt Supreme Court ruling, and do so through intellect rather than ego and emotion, then it may be possible to break the curse of corporate personhood, and yield back to every American man and woman their rights to liberty, peace and prosperity.




On the day of May 10, 1886 the United States of America was beneath a sky that warned of the activities of secret enemies, cabals and conspiracies, and warned also of fated, destiny-altering events due to long-term plots and strategies. These stellar influences also warned of treason of the most damaging kind.  As transiting Sun passed through America’s fifth house, transiting Moon, in the eighth, cast a square to it, connecting the interests of speculators to the shared resources of the American people.  Transiting Mercury squared its natal position, and cast a highly deceptive square to the USA’s natal Pluto in the country’s second house of income and resources.  Venus offered no help and only worsened matters with a square to her natal position and a square of under two-degrees to America’s natal Jupiter.  Malefic Mars, transiting America’s ninth house – the house of the courts and judges – cast squares to Uranus and the Ascendant, as well as a semi-square to natal Mercury.  (This signifies radical and unfortunate change, as well as hasty – or injurious – action by the courts.)  Jupiter’s retrograde square to Mars, and conjunction to Neptune, was a clear sign that the USA was in – or about to be in – a weakened state of being.  Saturn’s evil effects were undeniable, as it passed through America’s seventh house and cast conjunctions to natal Sun, Venus, Jupiter and then squared the Midheaven.  Transiting Uranus afflicted both America’s greater and lesser benefic by casting squares to Venus and Jupiter, and then approached an ego-altering conjunction to the Midheaven.  Transiting Neptune – the planet of fraud and deception – cast a square to America’s natal third house Moon, an influence correlative to the deception in commercial matters that would follow. However, the most damning effect was in the degree of the zodiac Neptune occupied at approximately 25-degrees Taurus – a close opposition to that ultra-sensitive degree in America’s horoscope at 22-degrees Scorpio, 34-minutes, the degree very often associated with severe injury done to America by its secret enemies.  Lastly, transiting Pluto’s trine from the sixth house to its natal position indicates a destiny-altering effect on the working classes and their position in relation to America’s income and resources.

The summary of this horoscopic figure is ominous.

And for the man responsible, Justice Morrison Remick Waite – infamous in his day for his avarice and corruption, his preponderance of planets (Sun, Mercury and Jupiter) in America’s twelfth house – the house of secret enemies –   indicates a willingness to impose his own moral code (or lack thereof) upon the nation at the cost of any injury to the USA.  Moreover, his Mars at 20-degrees Scorpio, 24-minutes identifies him as an active secret attacker of America, likely tied to cabals and/or conspiracies, and a likely spearhead for the carrying out of severely damaging plots.  All this is added to by the presence of his Saturn in the USA’s second house, indicating the potential for imposing a limiting effect on the greater financial health of America, as well as the potential for influencing monetary policy so as to favor those who engage in usury.  (Let us hope that Justice Waite is right now in either a particularly warm spot in Hell, or perhaps experiencing one of millions of back-to-back reincarnations as a dung beetle.)

The preponderance of the evil aspects cast to America’s horoscope by the transiting planets on the day of May 10, 1886 indicate a time when America was highly vulnerable to attack, especially one that originated from enemies from within the US, and which was carried out by its own courts.  These evil influences allowed for a thoroughly corrupt judge to rule on a matter that would alter the country’s destiny for now 127 years.  But it is through the understanding of the language of the stars that critical points in a nation’s life, such as this one of 1886, can be understood, and the damages resulting from bad decisions repaired.