by Daniel Giamario2008 head shots daniel 122

Last year on Election Day was the first of five exact Saturn Uranus oppositions:  November 4, 2008, February 5, 2009, September 15, 2009, April 26, 2010, and July 26, 2010.  I have mentioned in past articles this can be seen as an ascending octave of the previous Saturn Uranus oppositions of 1964-1966.  I see this culturally as the encounter between mature idealism and universal values with hierarchical, patriarchal dominator control programs, sometimes known as the “culture wars”.

I envision these grand planetary dances through a dialectic model.  The November 4, 2008 and February 5, 2009 conjunctions are the thesis, the introduction and accent on hope and idealism represented by the election of the Aquarius-rising Obama and the vast outpouring of hope and good will throughout the world that happened at that time.  The September 15, 2009 conjunction as at the center point of the antithesis, representing the rising tide of big money, big pharma, the insurance conglomerate, the defense (war) establishment, and fear-based conservatives launching a counter attack on mature idealism and universal global values.

The time frame from the Pluto station nearest to the galactic/solar system cross on September 11, 2009 (see Cayelin’s article) opens a most momentous time period for global humanity.  This is followed by the exact Saturn Uranus opposition on the 15th at 24 Virgo 24, the Sun Uranus opposition on the 17th at 24 Pisces 38 and the Sun Saturn conjunction at 24 Virgo 58 on the same day!  Essentially this means there is an exact Earth, Sun, Saturn, Uranus lineup, followed the next day by the New Moon at 25 Virgo 59!  Meanwhile, Mercury aligns with the Sun at 27 Virgo on September 20.  Finally, this whole time period is framed by the Mercury retrograde from September 6 to September 29 and Saturn in the underworld (invisible behind the Sun) from August 31 through October 6.

Meanwhile, Mr. Obama, the November 4, 2008 beacon of universal Aquarian values and mature idealism (“I am my brother’s keeper” from his Grant Park speech) is undergoing the most overwhelmingly difficult aspects any human being in such a position could ever go through.  He has Saturn on his Virgo Mars for the first time in thirty years, Pluto opposing his Cancer Venus for the only time in a lifetime, transiting North Node on Jupiter and soon on Saturn, as well as Jupiter near his Aquarius rising for a month. Plus, the progressed Moon is transiting Obama’s South Node.  If we conjecture that he has been honest about his visionary ideals, we can then imagine the pressure he must be under with the underworld power of big money represented by Pluto opposing his Venus. This is a challenge to his manhood (Mars in Virgo) desiring to serve the earth mother and the people represented by Saturn conjunct his Mars while at the same time having the obvious and remarkable opportunity to ride the waves of mature idealism represented by Jupiter’s transit of his Aquarius ascendant.  I pray that Obama’s Gemini Moon won’t obstruct the moral center and warrior like determination he must have to carry his vision through, as it did John Kerry, another Gemini Moon. Obama truly needs our prayers.

Some issues to consider:  Access to health care, food, and shelter is a basic human right and not a privilege and demonstrates the mature idealism of the current cycles.  The social services provided by a government representing the commons through the will of sovereign citizens, including firefighting, roads, military, police, prisons, the care for those who are mentally or economically impaired, and health care can never be best served by a for-profit system.  Such an idea never even came up until 1969.  This needs to be said and understood.  Every other western democratic nation on Earth knows this.  A final issue to consider for now is either we are a global family and one Earth, or we aren’t going to make it.  It’s our choice.

From the perspective of the celestial or the upper world, all is well and the universe is unfolding as it should.  Great Mystery surely is just fine (unless as it was said in the old Star Wars movies “There is a disturbance in the Force.”)  Seriously, though, from the perspective of the middle world, we do have a part to play; spiritual bypass or light polarization are not options.

Finally, the third act, the underlying synthesis, is yet to be played out.  The Saturn Uranus conjunctions of April and July 2010 will reveal the dialectical outcome of this great engagement between Saturn and Uranus now at the Turning of the Ages and the Galactic Alignment.

PS:  I continue to recommend the recent work of Bill Moyers, the articles by Matt Taibbi in Rolling Stones (most recently regarding Goldman Sachs and the health care debate), the Nation magazine and the transmissions coming from Tom Kenyon.  Keep informed.

PPS:  Not coincidentally, the great Uranian symbols of the previous Uranus Saturn opposition of 1964-1966, the Beatles, have chosen this time to remaster their entire catalog.  Enjoy the magic.

For more details about these events check out the Shamanic Astrology Monthly Call (newest recording now available from September 6 call)  for $11 purchase in MP3 format delivered via email for non SAMS members here

Also here are links to the interviews mentioned in the Monthly Call.

10 minute segment Bill Maher Interviews Bill Moyers: The Conscience of a Nation Pt 2

and 5 minute segment Bill Moyers Special Comment to Obama – “Mr. President. We need a fighter.”

Additional Response to Comments Below by Daniel on October 14, 2009

Thanks for all the comments. Here are some more of my own:  I would personally desire for Uranus to WIN, however winning in this case is the old paradigm, we need some sort of synthesis…I am not so sure that Uranus always wins, incidentally….Some response here to Janet Miller and R. Phoenix:   I have WAY more concern about the for-profit insurance industry and defense (war) industry, massive corporations, banking and Wall Street, than the ‘government’, which, unfortunately has almost totally been taken other by them.

I envision an Aquarian government formed by the will of sovereign citizens organized for the good of the commons. I certainly don’t agree that Uranus just means “I’ll do it myself”. I see the Aquarian overlay which is an egalitarian commons with jointly held ideals, not only maverick individualism. I reference the ideals of the “Aquarian Dispensation’, sourced originally in seed form over 6000 years ago. What some of you are seeing as Uranus and Aquarius is, in my view, the shadow side of Leo and the me generation.  Uranus and Aquarius are not adverse to oneness and wholeness or the commons; and certainly don’t only represent radical individualism.

For reference: historically, Communism and Socialism are Aquarian….Saturn and Capricorn are Fascism (Gov’t controlled by business) and dominator paradigms. We somehow need a synthesis. not a war.  To R. Phoenix, I completely agree with your assessment of Obama as simply representing ‘one party’, a party of corporate government controlled by Wall Street, Big Banks, and massive corporations .i.e.fascism.  My predisposition is Aquarian as I see it. I do not personally align myself with either wing of the ‘one party’. Also, I have never really based anything on the foundation of the Magna Carta or the US Constitution, and I’ve never been a fan of Plato’s Republic. But the words of Martin Luther King, the latter writings of Malcolm X, Dick Gregory, Ursula LeGuin, Marion Zimmer Bradley, Bill Moyers, Elizabeth Debold, Michael Moore, Thom Hartmann and Rachel Madow ring true for me.

I love the concept of ‘promoting the general welfare’ and then to flesh that out. And yes, A Mature Idealism includes the moral, ethical and humane commitment that health care, food, and shelter are basic human rights; true as much for a child or family member of your own or ANY member of the human family. I, of course, agree with the sage commentary on alternative health care and individual personal responsible preventative self-care. These are footnotes to the larger story in my view.   Thanks for all the stimulating feedback….Also the new Matt Taibbi article in Rolling Stone is essential reading as well at Keith Obermann’s hour long commentary last Friday to be repeated on October 16th.


  1. Hey, Daniel! YES. Your synopsis is awesome. You and Richard Tarnas are my astro-gurus. Thanks for your good work with my clients. There are events in my life–doorways, actually–whose threshold I stand upon. When I am well into the journey into the next unknown I’ll seek your wise counsel. Thanks for being you…being here…right now…shining light into each of our Galactic Centers! Blessings…..

  2. Hi Daniel,

    Bravo, my thoughts exactly.
    I keep wondering why more people have not deepened to see the profit/non-profit debate is one that need not be pursued, it’s a drawn conclusion?

    Mature Idealism = great wisdom
    Conventional Wisdom = oxymoron

    All the best,

    With warm regards,

  3. Though I always get lost on the technical side of astrological alignments, your plain English summation is always right on target with my personal instincts, Daniel. The fact that mankind must come to terms as a global family on this one Earth is “way” paramount. If we don’t, you’re right as rain, we are not going to make it. While I wish things on that front were looking a little better than they are right now, in the course of trying to adjust the direction our Country for the good of human fairness and ethnic tolerance, my President (and my fellow Americans) absolutely have my prayers. Thanks for another really great read man!!!

    Peace and love, and all that gooey stuff to all – Shamanic Astrology Rocks!

  4. Yo Daniel, Yo seer,

    it is awesome when you peer into the as-above-so-below to reveal a macro vision of what is happening. My Aquarius loves it. And just imagine what Obama must be going through psychologically. May we hold his leadership in the highest. Would love you now to address the Pluto-Uranus Square…

  5. Hi Daniel,

    I love the depth and detail in your post, but unless I am missing something in the Magna Carte or Plato’s Republic, I’m not sure that it’s written anywhere that, “Access to health care, food, and shelter is a basic human right and not a privilege and demonstrates the mature idealism of the current cycles.” This might be implied in the heart and soul of the modern progressive, but outside of “The Constitution” we are not given any other inalienable rights than the “Preamble,”

    “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence,[1] promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”

    Promoting general Welfare gets as close as it can to “insuring” that we have some chance of living in a mutually supportive society.

    I think we all see the world through our various lenses and interpret our positions based on our pre-dispositions.

    I have seen little from the current president that does not align with the modality that there is only one party and that we are given the illusion of change, every 4-8 years as some safeguard against total rebellion.

    I am more aligned with the perceptions and findings of Carl Johan Calleman, whose Mayan count portends the end of oligarchic, dominator paradigms. In Calleman’s model and mine, this is a much more local affair, than a large, sprawling, monolithic structure that calls for the conformity of the top down model, which is what we are currently witnessing, with all the grace of a hippo on a trampoline.

  6. Brilliant! You have really called it with your dialectical approach and reference to Obama’s challenges. I’ve been praying for him since the election; nobody said it would be easy. Born in Hawaii and being a surfer, should help him “ride the wave!” Mahalo.

  7. Have you considered that the people who want government in charge of healthcare are the Saturns in this formula? Uranus is the agent of “I’ll do it myself. Government can’t handle this as well as I can”. Uranus will win. It always does, as the outer planet.

    Saturn Opposite Uranus worked for Obama when he was not the government, but not now that he is the government.

  8. Dear Daniel,
    Thank you for your continued insight.
    I would love to see all the people who were in Washington for the inauguration return and give a cheer of support to President Obama now.
    Your suggestion of prayers for him is timely.
    Much appreciation to you,
    Viki King

  9. Hi Daniel,

    I find it fascinating that that this whole health care debate doesn’t include the options that a) are included in European and other nations health care and b) are used widely today by those Americans without healthcare: namely alternative care like acupuncture, massage therapy, herbal and Naturopahthic, homeopathic remedies, etc. Of course, these are not new but are not options being discussed.

    The truly progressive Uranian, forward inclusions (to the western world) are tools like BioGenesis (channeled from an Ascended Master) and Soul level work of Shamanism and other psychic healings are not even on the radar. These tools/ techniques are being used by those without official health coverage with great success in my little community.

    It is these “Uranian”, universal aspects of health care that i’d like to see sqeeze through the rings of Saturn on the way to manifestation here on Earth.

  10. Thank you Daniel for your wise council. Loved the Moyers,
    Mahr exchange. Mahr’s “new rules” segment is some of the
    best political commentary on television.
    As for Obama, let us see Angels before him, behind him, to each side, above him and below him. That said, I take some comfort
    in knowing that there is perfection in all things; being at
    peace with what is in the moment.

  11. Wow, awesome Daniel! I totally agree with your assertion about health care being a basic human right like food/shelter, police/fire protection, etc. Just think of what would happen if the police and fire departments were run by corporations like health care!

    9-1-1 Caller: my husband just had a heart attack!
    9-1-1 Operator: just a moment please while we check your credit rating and please have your credit card info ready, the house call will be $899 and today we have a 2 for 1 special on oxygen…

    The fact that we are not even talking about the problem with making a profit off of our sick citizens is sure indication we have a long way to go here…

    What can we do about this? This is the question of the historical moment.

    One thing would be to join “Physicians for a National Health Program”: http://www.pnhp.org

    Ua ola loko i ke aloha (love gives life within)

  12. Hi Daniel —

    Your brilliance and insight continues to inspire me! I love how you have captured and expressed the essence of the energies that are at play in all three “worlds.” I will now forward this to all in my address book. I pray for a portal to open through which this information can be shared with Obama. Hmmm … perhaps I’ll send it to his personal email through his website. I’m sure he will appreciate the deeper support we are providing. Sending you so much love. Anticipating our time together next month at the October Event

  13. Hi Daniel,

    I couldn’t agree more about the influence of big business on the planet as a whole. For too many years instead of “Government by the people, for the people etc ” it has been Government by the Corporation, for the Corporation. Nowhere has there been a place for the people of this nation. My hopes and my prayers remain with President Obama. One can only imagine the tremendous pressures being placed upon him. Agree about the Nation magazine, Matt Taibbi and Moyers, Am missing the influence of Bill Mahr at the moment. Keep up your excellent commentary.

  14. “’Rights’ are a moral concept – the concept that provides a logical transition from the principles guiding an individual’s actions to the principles guiding his relationship with others – the concept that preserves and protects individual morality in a social context – the link between the moral code of a man and the legal code of a society, between ethics and politics. Individual rights are the means of subordinating society to moral law…

    The most profoundly revolutionary achievement of the United States of America was the subordination of society to moral law… All previous systems had regarded man as a sacrificial means to the ends of others, and society as an end in itself. The United States regarded man as an end in himself, and society as a means to the peaceful, orderly, voluntary co-existence of individuals. All previous systems had held that man’s life belongs to society, that society can dispose of him in any way it pleases, and that any freedom he enjoys is his only by favor, by the permission of society, which may be revoked at any time. The United States held that man’s life is his by right (which means: by moral principle and by his nature), that a right is the property of an individual, that society as such has no rights, and that the only moral purpose of a government is the protection of individual rights.

    A ‘right’ is a moral principle defining and sanctioning a man’s freedom of action in a social context. There is only one fundamental right (all the others are its consequences or corollaries): a man’s right to his own life. Life is a process of self-sustaining and self-generated action; the right to life means the right to engage in self-sustaining and self-generated action – which means: the freedom to take all the actions required by the nature of a rational being for the support, the furtherance, the fulfillment and the enjoyment of his own life. (Such is the meaning of the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.)

    The concept of a ‘right’ pertains only to action – specifically, to freedom of action. It means freedom from physical compulsion, coercion or interference by other men.

    Thus, for every individual, a right is the moral sanction of a positive – of his freedom to act on his own judgment, for his own goals, by his own voluntary, uncoerced choice. As to his neighbors, his rights impose no obligations on them except of a negative kind: to abstain from violating his rights.

    The right to life is the source of all rights – and the right to property is their only implementation. Without property rights, no other rights are possible. Since man has to sustain his life by his own effort, the man who has no right to the product of his effort has no means to sustain his life. The man who produces while others dispose of his product, is a slave.

    Bear in mind that the right to property is a right to action, like all the others: it is not the right to an object, but to the action and the consequences of producing or earning that object. It is not a guarantee that a man will earn any property, but only a guarantee that he will own it if he earns it. It is the right to gain, to keep, to use and to dispose of material values.

    The concept of individual rights is so new in human history that most men have not grasped it fully to this day. In accordance with the two theories of ethics, the mystical or the social, some men assert that rights are a gift of God – others, that rights are a gift of society. But, in fact, the source of rights is man’s nature.

    The Declaration of Independence stated that men ‘are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights.’ Whether one believes that man is the product of a Creator or of nature, the issue of man’s origin does not alter the fact that he is an entity of a specific kind – a rational being – that he cannot function successfully under coercion, and that rights are a necessary condition of his particular mode of survival…

    To violate man’s rights means to compel him to act against his own judgment, or to expropriate his values. Basically, there is only one way to do it: by the use of physical force. There are two potential violators of man’s rights: the criminal and the government. The great achievement of the United States was to draw a distinction between these two – by forbidding to the second the legalized version of the activities of the first…

    Thus the government’s function was changed from the role of ruler to the role of servant. The government was set to protect man from criminals – and the Constitution was written to protect man from the government. The Bill of Rights was not directed against private citizens, but against the government – as an explicit declaration that individual rights supersede any public or social power…

    It was the concept of individual rights that had given birth to a free society. It was with the destruction of individual rights that the destruction of freedom had to begin.

    A collectivist tyranny dare not enslave a country by an outright confiscation of its values, material or moral. It has to be done by a process of internal corruption. Just as in the material realm the plundering of a country’s wealth is accomplished by inflating the currency – so today one may witness the process of inflation being applied to the realm of rights. The process entails such a growth of newly promulgated ‘rights’ that people do not notice the fact that the meaning of the concept is being reversed. Just as bad money drives out good money, so these ‘printing-press rights’ negate authentic rights.

    Consider the curious fact that never has there been such a proliferation, all over the world, of two contradictory phenomena: of alleged new ‘rights’ and of slave-labor camps. The ‘gimmick’ was the switch of the concept of rights from the political to the economic realm. The Democratic Party platform of 1960 summarizes the switch boldly and explicitly. It declares that a Democratic Administration ‘will reaffirm the economic bill of rights which Franklin Roosevelt wrote into our national conscience sixteen years ago.’ Bear clearly in mind the meaning of the concept of ‘rights’ when you read the list which the platform offers… A single question added to each of the above eight clauses would make the issue clear: At whose expense?

    Jobs, food, clothing, recreation, homes, medical care, education, etc., do not grow in nature. These are man-made values – goods and services produced by men. Who is to provide them? If some men are entitled by right to the products of the work of others, it means that those others are deprived of rights and condemned to slave labor. Any alleged ‘rights’ of one man, which necessitates the violation of the rights of another, is not and cannot be a right.

    No man can have a right to impose an unchosen obligation, an unrewarded duty or an involuntary servitude on another man. There can be no such thing as ‘the right to enslave.’ A right does not include the material implementation of that right by other men; it includes only the freedom to earn that implementation by one’s own effort.

    Observe, in this context, the intellectual precision of the Founding Fathers: they spoke of the right to the pursuit of happiness – not of the right to happiness. It means that a man has the right to take the actions he deems necessary to achieve his happiness; it does not mean that others must make him happy. The right to life means that a man has the right to support his life by his own work (on any economic level, as high as his ability will carry him); it does not mean that others must provide him with the necessities of life.

    The right to property means that a man has the right to take the economic actions necessary to earn property, to use it and to dispose of it; it does not mean that others must provide him with property. The right of free speech means that a man has the right to express his ideas without danger of suppression, interference or punitive action by the government. It does not mean that others must provide him with a lecture hall, a radio station or a printing press through which to express his ideas…

    Property rights and the right of free trade are man’s only ‘economic rights’ (they are, in fact, political rights) – and there can be no such thing as ‘an economic bill of rights.’ But observe that the advocates of the latter have all but destroyed the former…

    Criminals are a small minority in any age or country. And the harm they have done to mankind is infinitesimal when compared to the horrors – the bloodshed, the wars, the persecutions, the confiscations, the famines, the enslavements, the wholesale destructions – perpetrated by mankind’s governments. Potentially, a government is the most dangerous threat to man’s rights: it holds a legal monopoly on the use of physical force against legally disarmed victims. When unlimited and unrestricted by individual’s rights, a government is man’s deadliest enemy. It is not as protection against private actions, but against governmental actions that the Bill of Rights was written…

    Such is the state of one of today’s most crucial issues: political rights versus ‘economic rights.’ It’s either-or. One destroys the other. But there are, in fact, no ‘economic rights,’ no ‘collective rights,’ no ‘public-interest rights.’ The term ‘individual rights’ is a redundancy: there is no other kind of rights and no one else to possess them…” -from Man’s Rights by Ayn Rand

Leave a Reply to Joan Denton Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *