An update on the Obama inauguration chart shown below is in order. Although he was officially installed in office as of Noon on the 20th, according to the 20th Amendment to the Constitution, President Obama retook his oath of office yesterday at 7:35 PM. It was a bit of lawyer-think on the part of all concerned, to prevent future lawsuits that might claim he wasn’t really the president when he signed a particular measure or law.
As noted when we discussed the chart in the last post, the Moon was void of course at the time of the first oath, and Mercury was Retrograde. The inauguration was an atypical national and global event, and the chart itself portrayed the moment perfectly. I stand with my original position–the chart of the inauguration was the chart of the event itself and NOT the chart of his presidency. For my earlier posts about Mercury retrograde and a table of dates of future retrograde periods, see the category Current Astrological conditions. For particulars about the second oath, go to the following link at CNN:
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/01/21/obama.oath/index.html#cnnSTCOther1?eref=rss_topstories
The CNN article notes: “President Obama retook his oath of office Wednesday after Chief Justice John Roberts flubbed while delivering it at Tuesday’s inauguration. President Barack Obama takes the oath of office — his second in two days — in the White House on Wednesday. The second oath — also administered by Roberts — took place at 7:35 p.m. Wednesday in the White House’s Map Room. Roberts asked Obama whether he was ready.
“I am, and we’re going to do it very slowly,” Obama replied.
The do-over was aimed at dispelling any confusion that might arise from Tuesday’s take — in which “faithfully” was said out of sequence — and erase any question that Obama is legally the president. However, per the Constitution, Obama became president at noon Tuesday without taking the oath.”We believe that the oath of office was administered effectively and that the president was sworn in appropriately yesterday,” White House counsel Greg Craig said Wednesday in a written statement.”
CNN also reported that two other presidents had taken their oaths of office twice: Calvin Coolidge on August 2, 1923, and Chester Alan Arthur on September 19, 1881. Out of curiosity, I looked up both dates and Mercury was not retrograde either time.
Donna,
I would like to dispell the notion that Obama was sworn in during a void Moon. When I received training for electional charts, I was taught that the Moon is not void if the Moon is making an aspect to an angle of the chart or the Part of Fortune. I have found this to be true in all the cases I’ve reviewed where it would otherwise have been considered void.
Obama was inaugurated when the Moon was sextile the MC for Washington DC. Does this aspect work? Ask Obama, since it was the ONLY aspect he had going for him when he put his hat into the ring for the Democratic nomination. Otherwise the Moon was void at that time too, but he managed to make it all the way to the White House with it. If it wasn’t void then, it can’t have been void when he took the inauguration oath. And if it was really void when he put his hat in the ring, he shouldn’t be there today.
So I would love to see astrologers get a grip on this void Moon issue and realize that Obama was NOT inaugurated during one. If he’s as successful with his administration as his campaign was, we’ll see some great things.
Blessings always,
Madeline Gerwick
By: Madeline Gerwick on January 27, 2009
at 8:46 am
Good to hear from you, Madeline! That’s good news about the VC Moon. But I wasn’t believing it anyway, because the man has already made a great many significant changes in just a few days. And I still stand by my belief that the chart of the Inauguration is NOT the chart of his presidency, it is the chart of the Inaugural Celebration, which fit the chart to a tee. Regards, Donna
By: Donna Cunningham on January 27, 2009
at 4:33 pm
Hi Donna,
You asked me to comment on this issue of President Obama’s inaugural oath. Was it a void-of-course moon or not.? As usual, there is disagreement among astrologers. What else is new?
I do not consider moon aspects to the angles, arabic parts or fixed stars when judging whether the Moon is void. I use only ptolemaic aspects to planets.
The question boils down to this. What is the definition of the void-of-course-moon in the first place?
If it means that the matter comes to nothing, then you can see how some astrologers will look at Obama’s swearing in as coming to nothing–if indeed the Moon was truly void. Then if the matter DID turn out okay, it must be”something else” to make it viable.
However, another explanation is that the void moon may have various interpretations.
It is obvious that the Inaugural and swearing in DID happen. Obama indeed became president of the United States at noon that day according to the Constitution. (Let’s ignore for now the pecadillos of Mercury retrograde and the ridiculous claim that somehow he wasn’t really sworn in. But we must give each of the factors their due.)
If the VOC moon in the context of that chart was simply saying,”There is nothing to worry about and nothing more to do. This is as good as done.” that would be a super appropriate explanation for this event. In my work, that definition of the VOC moon has served me very well.
Now let’s look at another major distinction. Judge the void moon differently depending on whether it is an EVENT CHART or a HORARY QUESTION. The inaugural oath was obviously an event. Event charts with a void moon very seldom mean that nothing is going to happen, or that the matter at hand comes to nothing. Even the Super Bowl could be in trouble if that were the case.
Additionally, void-of-course-moon Horary charts also can be overcome and refute the testimony that the matter comes to nothing. If other factors in the chart bring significators together powerfully enough, it will work out. I have charts in my files that show this absolutely.
Conclusion: I regard the moon as void-of-course in the Inaugural chart and according to the interpretation that I use was extraordinarily accurate. According to astrology guru, William Lilly, things may nevertheless “go hardly on.” I think we can all agree on that. It very well could spell hard times for his first term in office.
By: Diana Stone on January 28, 2009
at 3:10 am
It’s 12-7-2010, and I’d just put up a link to this article in a list of links to Mercury Retrograde pieces. In retrospect, this is eerie, considering how the Obama administration has played out, being blocked so often by congress. There’s even a fair chance that his biggest piece of legislation, on medical reform, might be repealed. Donna
By: Donna Cunningham on December 7, 2010
at 9:35 am