I was reading an article and string of comments about this earlier today, Lynn – well not astrology-related, just age-related with regard to reactions to Obama’s campaign.

It appears that most (not all) 60+ groups incline towards Hillary Clinton. I don’t know whether it’s Pluto in Leo related or just simple age and experience related.

Many 60+ people, though Pluto in Leo, were not as self-centered as the usual stereotype of their generation, especially in poorer areas where they had to scratch and scrape for a living for their families, just like the previous and following generations did and do.

I don’t think Obama will be able to reach many of this age group, he’s set out to appeal to a particular group in a particular way and it doesn’t appeal to seniors. Experience means more than style after a certain age. Perhaps the senior group also feels that he’s not interested in them, I haven’t heard him mention seniors once – Hillary Clinton does, Edwards did, Kucinich did.

Obama doesn’t appeal to me or my husband, I’m early Pluto in Leo, he late Pluto in Cancer

Mercury Rx? Did you mean to post this article twice?

FYI, I can’t remember if I posted it here or not, but I saw a blog comment from Tracy Marks (she of the 12th house books) a few months ago, who said she uses a 2:46pm birth time for Barack.

That gives him a Sag Asc with Virgo MC. Neptune in the 11th and Sun in 9th. Pluto close to the MC.

I’ve been casually using that chart for the past few months, and especially now that Jupiter has moved into his 2nd house and is approaching a Trine to his MC, he’s suddenly pulling in crazy money, even crazier than before.

He raised 32 million in January, and today alone has raised (what will soon be) 6 million dollars since the polls closed yesterday.

Anyway, just wanted to toss that time out there since I don’t think the Scorpio rising chart fits him at all. And I couldn’t find an online resource for Tracy to sound out how she came to using that time.

By the way, I’m not a professional astrologer, but have been “dabbling” for the past 30 years.

http://www.circlesoflight.com/wo…r/06-12-
25.html

I have found this topic of the late vs. early Boomers interesting for some time. I am one of those late Boomers (May 7, 1964). I have wondered if having a pluto-uranus conjuction intensifies the difference even more. I also happen to have a lovely moon-chiron conjunction opposing my pluto. Yes, transformation through healing my wounds has been a theme of my life for along time

Obama is a Gen Xer, not a boomer – the start date is 1960. Gen X types tend to be much more hard nosed and less idealistic than Boomers. Pluto in Virgo is about cleaning up a mess – and in an echo of the 60s this means war, pollution, and inequality. Obama’s speeches are very King like – but if you read his books his feet are very much on the ground.

By the way McCain isn’t a boomer either – he’s a member of the silent generation having been born before the end of WW II

There’s also blogger-rumblings that McCain, having been born outside of a US territory, isn’t actually eligible to be president. But that didn’t stop them from pushing Arnie (also not born in the US) on California, although I confess to not knowing if a naturalized citizen can run for state-level offices.

Now, if either McCain or Schwarzenegger were Democrats, the Republicans would have screamed bloody murder about it long ago, but it must be one of those double standards..

Twilight, the age thing has a lot to do with race. My 80-year old mother, who is a radical leftist, doesn’t like “the blacks” because of her experience with them in Newark in the 1960s during the Revolution. She says Obama doesn’t have enough experience, but she liked John Edwards who has even less. She says John Edwards “could talk to the Europeans,” even though Obama was on the foreign relations committee. All of this is code for “I won’t vote for him because he’s black” even though most people won’t say it. I’m not saying that’s the only reason people don’t want to vote for him, but really the only experience Hillary has over Obama is (1) age and (2) first lady

Patty, there are a lot of birth times floating around out there for Barack, and none of them can be relied upon.

And oops! My revision of this article accidentally duplicated the post

Beth, I have been doing a lot of readings for people in your age group over the past year – with Chiron opposing that Uranus/Pluto conjunction in Virgo, the Uranus opposition has been hitting pretty hard. Some demographers say 1964 is the end of the baby boom, but that seems late to me

I know Pluto is into somber serious dedicated hard working Capricorn, but surely we don’t have to call an end to “happiness??”

(End of the happiness craze)

I am so blessed and inspired by the work of Abraham. It ‘s a reminder that we can work with universal laws to create what we need, including happiness..through any astrological cycle

Actually the cutoff is 1964, Michael, but who’s counting? It IS, after all, all about finding someone to blame for the problems we experience today.

What I find amusing about the Gen-X and Gen-Y bitching about baby boomers is that in bemoaning the fact that we think we’re so special (and I for one never for one minute in my entire life have thought I was anything special), they’re appropriating Obama for themselves as President of the Kool Kidz Klub because THEY are special.

What I try to explain to people is that “boomer culture” is as much a product of Madison Avenue as those ghastly Ameriprise commercials which led one of my commenters to insist that Dennis Hopper, who was born in 2936, is a baby boomer because he represents that generation. And the Beatles are baby boomers as well, for all that they were born in 1940-42.

You can make anyone fit into a group you hate if you want to.

The reality is that most of us who were born between 1946 and 1964 didn’t participate in the high-profile events of the 1960′s and early 1970′s, and if we did, it was very much on the periphery. There were 76 million people born during that time, and 200,000 of them went to Woodstock. That’s 0.3%. An even smaller percentage moved to Haight-Ashbury, went to the Altamont festival, or were at Kent State or other college protests.

The reality outside of the advertising industry, magazine publishers, and companies trying to sell us STUFF, is that most of us were living not all that much differently from the way kids are today, except that our worry about the future came later.

I graduated high school into the first Arab oil embargo, and college in the middle of the second. We were in a recession and jobs were few and far between. So I’m loath to just sit by and let these people beat on people like me just because the world sucks for them.

They argue that because there were so many of us we should have made more of a difference. Well, it sure wasn’t for lack of trying on the part of us who were on the left side of the fence. And there were ALWAYS the ones on the right — the George W. Bushes and the Karl Roves — the guys in plaid pants who joined YAF and put “Love it or Leave It” stickers on their cars as they went off to college to avoid getting drafted into the war they supported. So it’s a generation that’s hardly monolithic, much as Gen-X likes to think we are.

What grieves me about this appropriation of Obama is that I remember when I did work for Howard Dean in 2004. I would go to Meetups where we would write letters to Iowa voters and we all sat at the same table — black, white, WWII generation, boomers, Gen-X, Gen-Y, and college kids — and we all got along just fine. There is absolutely no reason for this kind of Balkanization into age groups that we see going on now.

The hideous irony is that it’s entirely possible that even if Obama comes into the convention with more pledged regular delegates, the s

Lynn – Well race may be a problem in the minds of some – probably the most elderly of the group whose memory covers what must have been bad times in the USA. I can’t argue with that.

I do think that the 60+ age group, who have a lot of experience of their own, have a different way of viewing things in general. Almost any market rearcher first asks one’s age group – that’s for reasons far removed from race.

In the case of my husband and me, I can assure you that race is a non-issue. We have a black Mayor in our town and we supported him enthusiastically against 3 other white guys who were candidates. It was down to his attitude, not his colour.

This election is throwing up a lot of interesting issues, quite apart from who will be the next president – I’m enjoying it!

I haven’t read anyone connecting the Pluto in Leo generation as the generation that faced the appearance of and healing journey of the wounded child. The whole “Inner Child” revolution was birthed by the Pluto in Leo folks, and in its shadow side appeared the blaming of parents and of childhood in general for whatever’s wrong. There’s a lot of generational unfinished business in that regard. If that dynamic is seen in light of the age distinction between Obama and Clinton, it lends to quite some interesting trains of thought

Re: birth time.

There are astrologers who specialize in rectification charts – related to life events. With all the astrologers around, hasn’t anyone done this for Obama and Clinton

Interesting discussion of late vs. early boomers. My observation of the Obama support includes MANY were born in the 80′s and 90′s and the article didn’t add their voice into the conversation. I was an Obama rally last weekend with 15,000 and the percentage of under 30 year olds was almost 50%. Would enjoy a perspective of the aspects they bring under Libra and Scorpio signs and the energies they bring, especially the Scorpios.

The real question is do people really want to change things or not. Clinton and McCain both represent the status quo. Obama is something different. I’ve had enough of the status quo politicians. They are running this nation into the ground. Obama is the only candidate that represents something new

wow! Good comments! I’m just going to add from my own experience of moving through my second Saturn return, I believe we will see more and more of the Pluto in Leo generation undergoing a sea-change after their second Saturn return. There is a good possibility we will start spreading the innate warmth and caring of Leo in what ever we do . . . Pluto is ALWAYS about transformation and transmutation

This is such an interesting discussion. I am just going through my second Saturn return and have been more inspired by Obama than my 31 year old twins(but we’re working on that–they are Capricorn with Virgo moon and Leo asc and I am a relentless Scorpio when I am on a mission!). Most of my coworkers, who are all Boomers and mostly female, support Barack. So I think the age split is fading.

Also, I was chuckling at the notion that most of us earlier Boomers think we are “special”. There were just too many of us–the teachers were so overworked with over 30 kids per classroom. We had lots of fun-there were so many kids to play with-but we hardly got special attention

Madeline, the “end of the happiness craze” in this article (which I hope to post on tonight) is about the frenzy to avoid depression by prescribing multiple medications to people who are often quite simply just sad. Or going through a Saturn transit.

Jill, thanks for your points but I’m glad you ran out of room before you had a chance to predict the horrible: that Hillary Clinton might lose the popular vote and win by Superdelegates. Something, by the way, Jill has predicted since the beginning. And she is rarely wrong. Hopefully she will be this time

Joann, yes, lots of people have rectified Obama’s chart, with many different results. Tracy Marks has him with Sag rising, I have him with Libra rising. There’s a 1:06 pm time floating around that is supposed to be from Frances McEvoy that gives him a Scorpio ascendant that no one likes.

Rectification is educated guess work and really can’t be relied on with any certainty

Shane – certainly the “wounded child” fits in well with the Pluto (destruction and/or obsession) in Leo (childhood) archetype.

Tom – Pluto of course entered Scorpio in 1982 until it went into Sag in 1995. So where are the Pluto in Leo (1971 to 1982) folks?

And Julie, I agree with you – all of my 50′ish and 60′ish friends on the left, now that Edwards and Kucinich aren’t a factor, are firmly behind Obama. I think this age thing is something manufactured by the media, and maybe by the younger folks who are trying to adopt something and make it their own. Just like they do with our music.

Thank you Lynn for this article! It explains a lot about how I feel towards the Pluto in Leo generation. I was born in 1967 so I’m with the Gen-X’s Uranus/Pluto in Virgo conjunction. I have to say that I do envy the Boomer’s fabulous music and sense of style. However, every time I talk to a Boomer, I find myself put off by their arrogance and naiveté. But then again, I have my Moon in Leo, so I understand

Lynn, it’s worse than you think. Did you know that Joe Lieberman, who has endorsed McCain and appears with him so much you’d think they were going steady, is one of those Democratic “superdelegates”?

Yeah, I ran out of room and didn’t realize it had been cut off. But you’re right about my prediction. And then it gets ugly. Then Gen-Y gets its own Chicago 1968

Lieberman’s super delegate status has been removed because he has chosen to back McCain. His operating role is now right where it belongs, with the Republicans.

On the subject of experience, Obama has the backing of several of the Kennedys (not all), but JFK had years of military, and Senatorial experience before he ran for President. Comopared to JFK, Obama is a beginner. We’ll see how much that matters

That’s a relief about Lieberman, Pat. But I frankly think the influence of the Kennedys is overrated, their mythology is tarnished and I think a thing of the past

When an old soul such as Obama, speaks unity, inclusiveness and oneness, the Heart hears and Remembers!

When someone, such as Obama, offers Hope and points the way to a better, brighter future, spoken from the innermost point of Truth or Soul,… the Heart Hears and Believes!

When Obama calls each of us to action and participation to Duty, we are reminded of our Responsibility to our common destiny.

As Obama states so poignantly, “We are the Ones, We Have Been Waiting For

One of the exciting things about Obama is that by his very inclusion in the race, he is making people interested in politics again. As an immigrant, one of the distressing things for me has been the extent with which the American public is so disconnected with world events and even with happenings in their own country. It’s kinda scary, actually, almost as if everyone would prefer to live in a dream (and I like dreams, as the name of my website suggests). No matter what anyone thinks about Obama, he has electrified people into actually reading the news again. Young people are tuning into Meet the Press and the Sunday morning shows. This race is as exciting as the Superbowl and it’s about time that Americans of all ages started to pay attention to political matters once again. Another reason I support him is that he has a different perspective on world events than previous presidents, if only by virtue of the fact that he is solidly bicultural and has lived outside of the U.S. If the U.S. is going to be the only superpower left, we as American citizens must recognize our responsibility to the world at large and this is not only achieved by going to war, since this is the old way of doing things. The rest of the world now perceives the U.S. as bullies–I’m sorry, but this is true and such a perception doesn’t help our cause. Who can trust a bully?

Obama is the only candidate who seems willing to listen to the outside world and to work toward solutions that encompass both American interests and foreign powers’ needs for autonomy. It’s a new way of conducting foreign policy, one that takes into account the fact that the world is getting smaller and the U.S. can no longer afford to live in La La land

http://www.fourthturning.com/
htm…archetypes.html

The 4th Turning (book) deals with these generations/cycles. I bet you could find a pattern with the outer planets somehow.

The generation cycle: Hero, Prophet, Nomad, Artist.

Historical cycle: High, Awakening, Unraveling, Crisis

Madeline – a new book is out “Against Happiness”- there was an excerpt in the WSJ. I thought of Cappy Pluto immediately.

http://tinyurl.com/3amhe9

“… My sense is that most of us have been duped by the American craze for happiness. We might think that we’re leading a truly honest existence, one attuned to vivid realities and blooded hearts, when we’re really just behaving as predictably and artificially as robots, falling easily into well-worn “happy” behaviors, into the conventions of contentment, into obvious grins. Deceived, we miss out on the great interplay of the living cosmos, its luminous gloom, its terrible beauty.

the book, ‘Generations,’ which explores the repeating cycle of behavior in a culture, had the boomers starting with ’43 births. I don’t know that I believe generations are as cut and dried as researchers would like to think, but being old (64) I am in the group that is supposed to be pro Hillary and eager to see a woman in the White House. While I would not mind a woman there, it’s not my goal. My goal is a good person with strong leadership qualities and goals similar to mine. I am a supporter of Obama. I find it hard to believe the women who say they would vote for a woman simply because she is a woman. Vote on the issues and character. If someone sees someone as a person of character (regardless of gender) vote for them but not because they are or are not a woman.

If generations impact who we are, then it’s the parenting as well as the culture in which we grow up that is as much a factor as a number arbitrarily divided by a statistician often for purposes of sales. ‘Generations’ goes into why these groups do lead to a different mindset as one generation replaces another. It’s a book well worth reading for understanding more than an exact cut-off poin

Very sad day when we eschew happiness. And embrace “gloom” as some of the posts suggest!

Isn’t that what all the folks ON the antidepressants are after?? Happiness?

the goal is not wrong.

it’s the means.

Living holistically and in tune with mother nature and building upon and using our own natural unique abilities in this world are the key to happiness.

It is the cultural conditioning that causes us to define happiness in terms of Hollywood and “MORE MORE MORE” that may be causing some to decide “happiness” is not worth it.

I can be way happy even if I can’t afford the same “crib” as ICE T or wear those shoes with the red bottoms on them -I’ll get mine at Famous Footwear on sale (with plain soles thank you) and still be happy.

Maybe we should start reading about REAL heroes. And REAL happy people like, maybe “Leaves of Grass” or “Walden Pond” or some of the autobiographies of REAL successful ,happy people, not movie stars??

Also, modeling ourselves after snarky unfulfilled folks who still spend an inoridinate time acting out their inner child instead of GROWING UP AND INTO their inner adult, may be harmful to your spiritual health!

AUTHENTIC HAPPINESS is our birth right and I feel we let our own souls down when we settle for less!!

How many are afraid of their own potential? Too sensitive to allow for the fact that trying and occasionally failing may embarrass them..and then they’d have to pull themselves up by bootstraps and TRY HARDER?

Subscribing to Gloom and giving up — a true cop out. All IMHO

I don’t think that acknowledging the value of sadness is the same as giving up or subscribing to gloom. Not at all. Sometimes it’s only due to sadness and struggle that we appreciate the simple things instead of worrying about what we don’t have. Sometimes sadness is an appropriate temporary response that leads us to a more balanced and rich view of life–and thus to a sustainable contentment. The Buddha was born rich and sheltered from others’ troubles. It was only after willingly going away from his sheltered existence and encountered suffering, death, and turmoil that he was able to attain true happiness

Interesting post and one that is generating a lot of discussion. Great! When I was reading about how older folks support Clinton and younger ones are for Obama I immediately thought Pluto in Leo vs. Pluto in Virgo. In general it makes sense. However, there are plenty of exceptions and it really depends on the individual. As 2 examples, I am a late Pluto in Leo (February, 1957), a woman, and I’m for Obama. A friend of mine is a Pluto in Virgo (February, 1964), a man, and he likes Hillary. A great book to read if you want to get more of a handle on the whole Pluto issue is Cosmic Trends by Philip Brown. I actually read about it on this site. Check it out

I agree with Eme Madeline and I think you’re misunderstanding my point. Happiness and joy are indeed our birthright!! So do we want to have an authentic happiness that comes from working through problems and issues and coming out the other end with true joy and peace of mind, or do we want to be medicated into an artificial “happyness”? Dysfunction doesn’t go away, it just festers beneath the medication until like Heath Ledger, the mental emotional pain becomes so great that no amount of medication will satisfy it.

Cimbalok – as you’ll see in the Boomer thread, there are plenty of us Pluto in leo types that are behind Obama! And yes, I agree that Phil Brown’s book is terrific

I agree with the poster that mentioned that Obama rarely mentions older folks – and another key thing is that he is for taking a big handful of money out of social security and putting it in wall street. A person closer to retirement, who has watched their stock tank, their pensions be avoided by corporations who claim they can’t do pensions – has worries about this. If SS is in wall street, and wall street tanks, where’s the backup? An older person does not have 10 to 20 years to wait for recovery. Meanwhile wall street has already taken it’s commission off of social security and is living fine.

There are substantative reasons why older people like Clinton better.

Another thing – young women don’t experience the bias that older women experience. At entry level on jobs, there is less sexism than when they want that executive job. Women as a voting bloc grow more feminist as they get older, statistically. So the meaning of having a woman president is more for an older woman. This is a trend beyond a particular age band, because I don’t see it ending with this Pluto transit

I’m of the younger Pluto in Virgo generation supposedly for Obama. But I’m for Hillary.

Partly because she’s a woman. Why? Because women’s role in most societies tend to be different & I’m interested in how their experience can bring a different perspective to governing.

People say Obama is change. Is that simply because he’s a new face? His message’s not new. Call for changes, inclusion, contribution & unity have been advocated by other men before.

But what bothers me more is not Obama, but the hysteria generated around him. It smacks of mob mentality to me. I’m sure many supporters are fully versed in his records, policy proposals, & stance on issues. But I’m sure just as many are there just for the party. It sounds exciting. Everyone else is excited. I’m just worried about what happens after the party.

I like the deliberative & cautious way Hillary approach things. It feels more solid. In terms of details of policies & stance on issues, I don’t think she’s any worse than Obama.

And I don’t buy that Obama is more anti-Iraq war than she is. He wasn’t there in Congress to vote for war. He said himself he didn’t know how he would have voted if given the same info. I hope he wasn’t being disingenuous when he said that, because that would contradict his public image. His subsequent voting records hasn’t differ substantially from Hilary’s

Here are some policy differences between them that have influenced my decision for Obama:

Obama has backed higher fuel efficiency standards; Clinton has voted against them.

Obama seeks to reform the healthcare system through greater efficiency and lower cost; Clinton wants to mandate that every citizen carry health insurance.

Obama supports negotiation and incentives in dealing with Iran; Clinton supports military action.

The change to me is in the ability of Obama to play nicely with others. Clinton has a political machine that uses threats to stay in power (note the Geffen debacle a few months back). Obama is a guy that people want to work with and that can gather people of differing opinions and build consensus that can really get things done.

Clinton is such a divisive figure that millions more Republicans will show up to vote against her, and then once she’s elected they would work against her even harder. That just doesn’t bode well for the kind of change we need in this country, IMESHO

Also, Hillary is Tracy Flick: http://link.brightcove.com/
servi…bctid1377935786

I’m not going to claim I’m intimately familiar w/ both candidates records – because I don’t. But reading the position papers on Hillary’s website I find some of the common characterizations to be misleading. Like the claim that only Obama is for efficiency & lower cost in healthcare. Or only he is for negotiation w/ hostile nations. On these two particular issues Hillary’s position papers also mention these tactics as part of a larger strategy.

As for Obama being more unifying, I don’t know. Maybe he can convince centrist Republicans. But I’m not so sure about the GOP & other hardcore Republican camps. We just have to accept that on some issues people fundamentally disagree. The same will hold true for foreign states – eg hardcore Islamic states. You can talk, but when it comes to passing laws, different people want different laws. And many not only want themselves to behave a certain way, but also want everyone else to be the same – ie they don’t tolerate differences. I don’t see how Obama will be able to resolve that difference.

When you talk about unity in the abstract it’s very inspiring. But the devil is in the details.

If Obama truly believe in the liberal policies that he has put forth so far, I don’t see how he’ll be able to unite both Democrats & Republicans. And I have no doubts the GOPs will go after him as hard as they have after Clinton. I guess he has more leaway so far as he is lesser know, & perhaps the GOPs are not as strong as they once were.

The will to unite has to come from the people. Leaders can only go so far. I think leaders get too much credits for the hard work of the people. And people rely too much on “leaders” to solve problems. The Buddha is w/in you.

BTW I don’t know the reference to Tracy Flick – haven’t seen that movie. But the clip doesn’t exactly convince me otherwise. Yes, what about people who worked hard – do they not deserve success? That doesn’t seem fair to me. It would seem to discourage hard work – ie no matter how hard you try, if you’re unlucky to be born w/o charisma then you can forget about success. Is that the message Obama want to convey? I hope not.

I must admit, it’s a bit intimidating writing as a Hilary supporter in such a pro-Obama forum

It’s looking as though it’s all over bar the shouting after tonight.

Only some unexpected event can stop the roll of success for Obama.

I’m disappointed, I’ve been disappointed three times now – Kucinich, Edwards and Clinton – yes, a mixed selection, each with diminishing enthusiasm on my part.

What we Kucinich/Edwards/Clinton supporters have to keep in mind is that Obama is quite likely to win the general election, if his army of fans remain as enthusiastic as they are now. I’d feel happier if they were less vitriolic and more respectful of the other candidate, who will still be (at least) a senator after this is over. At times in forums on-line it’s been more like a schoolyard with taunts and bullying.

Anyway, it seems that the people of the USA HAVE woken up at last, which is what I’ve been whingeing about since I got here from the UK in 2004.
I just hope, having woken up , that they didn’t rollout of bed and put their feet in the wrong slippers.

As long as we end up with a Democrat for president, that’s really all that matters

Twilight, interestingly I’m a New Yorker now living in the UK. Is it the experience with Blair’s New Labour that has turn us a bit skeptical of popular movements you think?

Could well be, lola!

It’ll be very interesting to watch how things turn out

I am a Pluto in Cancer (9/16/37). I have nothing in common with that generation as it is described. I absolutely cannot agree with anyone like McCain or anyone of that generation and would not vote for anyone like him. I am so like Pluto in Leo and also Pluto in Virgo. I am perplexed because of this, but happy because I love both the Clintons and the Obamas. I would have been happy to vote for Obama and Clinton as I am to vote for Obama and Biden. I guess I have found my “own expression” and cultivated the best of the latter generations.