Tucker Carlson

[Jim Eshelman]

Tucker Carlson, May 16, 1969, 10:07 AM, San Francisco, CA (AA)

Yesterday (4/24/2023), Carlson was fired from Fox News. Carlson lives in Woodstock, Maine and has a private studio there from which he broadcasts, so I assume this is the correct location of the event.

His SLR two days earlier for Woodstock, ME is devastating. Take this alone:

7°00' Ari - t Sun
7°45' Cap - SLR MC
7°46' Ari - r Saturn

With precision like this, the fully connected Pluto at 5°17' seems distant by comparison! And there's more! - Here is the full SLR breakdown:

r Mercury on Asc -7°55'
t Venus on Asc -7°22'
r Neptune on Dsc -1°53'
r Saturn on EP -0°01'
---------------------------
r Sun on Asc +0°48'
t Moon on Asc +0°56' [r Moon 3°06']
t Sun on EP +0°45'
t Pluto on MC +4°41'
t Uranus on Asc +4°47'
t Mercury on Asc +8°46'

-- t Uranus-Pluto sq 0°07' M
-- t Moon co r Sun 0°08' M [r Moon-Sun co 2°18' M]
-- t Venus co r Mercury 0°17'
-- t Sun co r Saturn 0°46'
-- t Mercury co r Saturn 1°06' M
-- t Uranus co r Moon 1°41' M
-- t Pluto sq r Moon 1°34' M
-- t Sun-Pluto sq 1°43'
-- r Sun-Neptune op 1°45'
-- r Moon-Neptune op 2°19' M
-- t Mercury-Uranus co 2°23'
-- t Pluto sq r Saturn 2°29'

Other Partile Aspects
t Neptune op r Jupiter 0°27'
t Sun op r Pluto 1°00' M

[mikestar13]

I suspect the fallout from the Dominion settlement isn't over. Even a giant corporation feels 3/4 of a billion dollars quite strongly. Mainstream media reports the firing was ordered by Rupert Murdoch himself. Carlson was a proponent of the vote-rigging conspiracy theory, though it doubtful that he or anyone else employed at Fox actually believed it. Some of their regular guests had drunk the Kool-Aid, however. Tucker pushed the theory heavily, though there were others who were even louder and more strident. Tucker onscreen was a Trump sycophant, but there is evidence he privately detested Trump. I can't say Tucker didn't deserve firing, but he's a bit of a sacrificial lamb (Neptune?). The whole conspiracy theory angle was decided in the first place at a higher level than on air personalities, in reaction to Fox hemorrhaging viewers to OAN and Newsmax, who were eagerly on board with the conspiracy theories that made up the so-called "steal".

Biden won 2020 fair and square, it's open to debate whether that was a good thing. That's the tack Fox and Republicans generally should have taken: "The American people chose Biden. They made a mistake. We'll be back in four years."

American politics has declined to the point that voting comes down to "who do I detest less". Absent substantial election reform, there is no way to break the Demopublican duopoly. Which is the least evil? I'm increasingly thinking neither of them.

Fox gets the brunt of my criticism because I am a Republican, and because in slanting the news rightward, they went off into outright lying. CNN slants the news leftward just as hard, but so far isn't doing outright lying. At times they have stretched the truth beyond recognition, but not reported anything known to be false to fact. There specialty seems to be reading conclusions into the news which can't be read out of it.

[Jim Eshelman]

Speaking as someone formally trained in journalism, my biggest complaint about how reporting evolved is something you just touched on: Blurring (or, too often, totally ignoring) the line between news and opinion. This has been creeping in for decades and has become more common.

The line should be hard: The best factual reporting that can be done, then opinion pieces in the opinion section. There is room for clearly labelled hybrid pieces ("news analysis") that try to help people sort out what the facts mean, but generally the two kept separate. Headlines are another fuzzy place, since today they aren't written by the reporters but by a headline team that seems to be a marketing department; but I can forgive thst if the underlying story is sound.

A silly headline story: One day in 2008 Obama and McCain were close in a new poll with McCain about 1% closer. AP write thr main story and it was carried (more or less verbatim) by most papers. (The underlying facts and presentation were the same.) But one paper wrote the headline something like, "Obama Maintains Lead," while another used "McCain Gains." While the actual stories were indistinguishable, the headlines played to the target customers. Both were honest. I have no trouble with that.

I will often read Wall Street Journal's news articles, and only occasionally their editorials. On news, it usually isn't distinguishable from New York Times - both have excellent reporters and strong institutional commitment to the highest forms of journalism. (When they fall short of it, that's just a bad day in the workplace. Everybody falls short sometimes.) You would have to follow both papers closely to be able to tell the difference between the original reporting articles each publishes on matching topics: It's in literary style or presentation, capitalization rules, and things writers notice but not in their opinions on the news. - That's saved for the opinion section (where the papers differ a lot!).

The Times and the Journal remain two of the greatest papers anywhere because they take the facts vs. opinions line seriously (and also do their jobs very well).

The problem (to circle back to my opening sentence) is that the public never had a clear idea of the difference between facts and opinions. In the past, journalists took on the responsibility of keeping the line and, where possible, educating the public on the difference. Over time, news sources (become increasingly entertainment centers) played to what people wanted and eroded (sometimes removed) the line between news and opinion. That got us where we are today.

Regrettably, not only is Walter Conkrite dead - his spirit is gone from journalism in most places.

[Jim Eshelman]

A fine example of cultural trends around this just happened: I just got news that Jerry Springer died. today.

Most people equate Springer's show with explosive outrage, confrontation, shouting, and plenty of trash talk. However, he didn't start that way. I knew (and watched) Springer's show in the early few years when it was the most intelligent, level-tempered, thoughtful dialogue show on TV. If you never saw him there and have seen him more recently, this might seem unbelievable.

What happened? What happened is that his network and producer told him the show was finished, kaput, couldn't make it, ready for cancellation. The former mayor of Cincinnati was through. So he told his producer to do whatever he could to keep them on the air, and they invented a new show that played to the lowest common denominator of the available audience and relied on a big splash of outrage to break up someone's boring day.

The audience demands a good circus when they buy a ticket.

That's the story of TV news: Until the early '70s, the news departments never had to be profitable so they could just do their jobs. With increased parent corporate pressures, they had to start being profitable so they turned into entertainment divisions. They started providing a three-ring circus.

I always thought the shift must have broken Springer's heart except it saved his show - kept him from having to get a job <g>. He was an Aquarius-Virgo - thoughtful, far-seeing, profoundly curious, humanitarian - with Sun opposite Jupiter closely and malefics all background. Virgo Moon and exactly angular Mercury made Information Needs his strongest needs set. (Mercury and the three benefics top his Needs Priorities list.) He was born February 13, 1944, 11:45 PM BST, London, England (A data).

[SteveS]

Well put Mike & Jim.

[mikestar13]

I hadn't known that about Springer as I didn't watch his show in the early days, and only sporadically in the latter days (usually when someone else in the room wished to). Springer's show is a great analogy for the news. The lowest common denominator among humans is, bluntly, stupid people. Fox plays heavily to stupid people on the right, while CNN plays heavily to stupid people on the left. There aren't very many stupid centerists though they must exist, being a centerist requires one to see the vices and virtues of both sides, which requires a modicum of intelligence. Of course, there is the old saying "a moderate is someone who can be shot at by both sides". My motto is "moderation in all things, including moderation".

The Barry Goldwater quote "extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. And moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue" resonates with me. Goldwater is fascinating person: opposed the Civil Rights Act (because of what he perceived as lack of Federal jurisdiction--unlike the Southern Senators who opposed it due to hostility to civil rights as such) and he was a rightist--indeed for a time the darling of the right. But he opposed the influence of the religious right in politics and predicted no good would ever come of it, and near the end of his life was quite favorable to gay rights. Were he alive today, no doubt he would be read out of the Republican party if he hadn't already left it. I've little doubt several prominent Democrats in living memory would be read out of that party or would leave it voluntarily, likewise other prominent Republicans. For example, today Eisenhower wouldn't have a prayer to be the Republican nominee, and it's highly doubtful JFK could get the Democratic nomination.

[SteveS]

Again Mike—well put. What is your opinion causing this alarming amount of Circus political news? To me, it’s like the FrontPage Tabloid Headline News I would see at the check-out lines at grocery stores back in times far in the past. Is it the invention of Social Media that has caused this political divided frenzy?

[mikestar13]

Steve, I think the root of the problem is that the lowest common denominator in America has gotten way lower. Much of education has degenerated into inculcating ideology (left or right according to who's in charge of a particular school) and falling down on teaching facts and the importance of fact. Not to say we've ever been genuinely good at it, but now we mostly aren't striving for it. Also, the decline of religion has been concurrent with a tendency to pursue non-religious ideology with quasi-religious zeal. It seems that that days are gone when one's ideological/political opponents can be merely wrong rather than insane and/or evil.

Are you familiar with the film Idiocracy? In the tradition of the great dystopias such as 1984 andBrave New World, it is attempting to prevent itself from being prophetic. (Though more light-heatedly than most.) Today it seems to be failing in it's purpose. Then of course, that's what the increasingly oligarchic ruling class wants--stupid people are less able to challenge them than smart people. A facet of this strategy is to keep us as divided as possible over culture war issues, so we overlook economic issues: the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer, and the middle class is shrinking.

Legally, the issue that has the most effect is the Citizen's United decision which in essence allows unlimited political spending, based on the fallacious argument that money = speech and the questionable idea that a corporation as such has freedom of speech (of course individual shareholders and employees have freedom of speech, but not all will speak with one voice).

The election system in the US encourages extremism and a third-party (hopefully centerist) candidate cannot win. Likewise, a Republican who is in agreement with some Democratic ideas will never get the Republican nomination, nor vice-versa.

[Jim Eshelman]

Today, the United States progressed Mars is at 25°20' Virgo (7/4/1776 chart). For decades, it has been moving slowly through a dense area of natal factors:

21°31' Gem - Sun (1970-1978)
21°55' Vir - Asc (1972-1978)
23°11' Vir - Saturn (1976-1983)
24°00' Gem - MC (1979-1987) (2024-2032)
26°45' Vir - EPa (1991-1921)

There are some progressed planets in the mix, too, like Jupiter at 23°34' Gemini (at the moment), but the natal factors put up a formidable wall. I've just taken Mars to EPa in longitude, even that's the coward's way out <g> to finish off the list easily.

Little space exists between 1° orbs of items on this list and progressed Mars first moved within 1° in late 1970. Other than the brief time 1988-1990 (essentially the Bush 1 administration), there have been uninterrupted symbols of war, hatred, violence, and division since just about the time we left Vietnam - since just before Watergate changed the way people looked at the presidency - since shortly before the Roe v. Wade decision was rendered, a Southern Baptist successfully won the presidency campaigning heavily on his religion and then had that plank coopted by his ideological opposites - since right about the time corporate purchases acquired all major broadcast news outlets and turned them into profit centers. That cluster of events JUST as Mars began (thus far) a half century (eventually 70 years), almost nonstop trigger of these sensitive, difficult U.S. natal points has put us at war with ourselves (probably because we've been so little at war with anyone else during martial times).

Progressed Mars was stationary at 27°05' Virgo in 2007 and has been retrograding back across ever sense. We won't be out of this very soon. Specifically, progressed Mars will retrograde across all of the above factors until it leaves partile orb with natal Sun in 2039 - the same year IIRC that Pluto leaves Capricorn.

So this will get worse, not easier. - And then later generations will have to deal with the next wave after progressed Mars turns direct at 8°24' Virgo in 2087 and comes back across the above factors again 2135 through about 2150.

Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure. We are met on a great battlefield of that war.

[Veronica]

"there have been uninterrupted symbols of war, hatred, violence, and division...."

as a country founded by people fleeing the horrors of everywhere else in the world, a country whose citizens ancestors were burned, staked, beheaded, boiled alive,enslaved ect ect ad nauseam.....

Yes, our lowest common denominator has gotten lower. We have teeth too, and we will use them if you try to kill us or our beloveds like you did our ancestors.

[SteveS]

Thanks Mike for your comments which offer a lot of clarity for my blown mind with its questions WTF is happening to this Nation. No, I have not seen the film Idiocracy, I will check it out.

[mikestar13]

For convenience, here's a link to the Wikipedia article for Idiocracy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idiocracy

[SteveS]

Mike, I watched Idiocracy last night, LOL, and yep, this movie nailed it what it is happening to the Nation, only it’s not going to take till the year 2500, it’s going to happen(ing) a lot sooner. DC is already a 3 –ring Circus like it was in the Movie.

[mikestar13]

I found Idiocracy free on the internet Archive and rewatched it myself. Laughed my a** off and then cried over the fact were going to get there a lot sooner than 2500, we are a fair way along by now. If the trend continues, it will be full wrought by 2100 and maybe a good deal sooner. Idiocracy did not stress the dumbing down of education, but that is an additional factor that accelerates the process, which is very much both a cause and an effect. The metal decline from excessive reliance on technology is a significant factor, but dysgenetics (the tendency for less intelligent people to have more children than more intelligent people--which seems to be accelerating) is the main driver. This has been with us from the start--people always limit their reproduction within the limits of their knowledge and available technology. Collectively, there are (usually religiously/ideologically driven) individual exceptions, but I don't expect a man who feels his faith compels him to father fifteen children he can't support will have a high IQ.

Enormously funny, I find Idiocracy fully as dystopian as 1984, but more reminiscent of Brave New World (the average person in Idiocracy seems about like an epsilon-minus semi-moron). It's often been asserted that if this degree absolutism comes to pass, the East will emulate 1984, while the West will emulate Brave New World. I think that not unlikely, looking at the US versus China.

[SteveS]

I hear you Mike, and agree.