News | Rachel Maddow

Watch: Rachel Maddow Does Not Accept Being a Pisces


Rachel Maddow refuses to accept the new Zodiacal alignment that tells her she is a Pisces instead of an Aries.

She need not worry: "So, hear ye, hear ye! Vedic astrologers use the the sidereal zodiac, and most Western astrologers use the tropical zodiac. They have different purposes, and different philosophies. Both zodiacs work. Most Western astrologers are familiar with their sidereal chart — it tells a different story, and can reveal deeper tendencies you may have noticed but not named. I’m a Pisces in tropical astrology but an Aquarius in sidereal astrology. If you’re curious, cast your sidereal chart and see where the planets show up. As for Ophiuchus. This is an old hoax..."


Visit for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy


Feed This post's comment feed


  1. Not that it really matters, since neither is really legitimate. But it can be fun if you don't take it too seriously.

    Posted by: Wes | Jan 14, 2011 10:54:46 AM

  2. Man, I'm so glad my birthday is April 18 and I'm an Aries on both calendars. I don't know what I'd do if I had to choose between two pieces of horoscope fiction---I definitely wouldn't have time to read two!

    Actually my favorite thing about my birthday is that the month and day, multiplied, give you the year (last two digits only, obviously). It's very fancy.

    Posted by: Paul R | Jan 14, 2011 10:56:22 AM

  3. When I was a child back when Eisenhower was president, the astrological charts labeled my birthday, February 19, as being Aquarian...on the cusp, but most definitely an Aquarian. However, at some point in the following decades, the charts seruptitiously shifted and I woke one birthday morning to find that I was suddenly a Pisces!!! I am no damn fish...I am a waterboy. I was raised a waterboy; I grew up waterboyish. If someone asked me in a bar "What is your sign?" I inevitably answered Aquarian. Imagine the consequences Had I realized I was really a closet Pisces. The whole nature of the universe would have been altered. Rachel Maddow, I feel your pain. No one asked me if I wanted to be a Pisces. I am now and always will be an Aquarian, albeit an illegitimate one. (sorry for the lengthy post, but this whole subject pisces me off!)

    Posted by: Howard | Jan 14, 2011 10:57:56 AM

  4. Now I'm Ophiuchus? Serpent-bearer? WTF? Its an image of some guy holding his wang -- I mean a gigantic snake between his legs!

    On the other hand, it explains an old acquaintance of mine who displays every single stereotypically Aquarian personality trait known to man, and none of the Piscean traits as described. He was a cusp baby anyway, but this sidereal zodiac plants him firmly in Aquarian territory, like I always knew he was.

    Posted by: NaughtyLola | Jan 14, 2011 11:09:05 AM

  5. Same for both. Meaningless.

    Posted by: TANK | Jan 14, 2011 11:13:11 AM

  6. Astronomy terrorizing astrology one more time! (-: First they discover 3 new planets: Uranus, Neptun and Pluto forcing astrologists to contrive the way those new planets affect our lives. And then they change their mind about Pluto - it's actually NOT a planet, but an asteroid. And now new sign of zodiac and shifting of other. Astronomy rulez! :-p

    Posted by: TheSeer | Jan 14, 2011 11:39:49 AM

  7. I was quite happy as a Pisces and now they "changed" me to Aquarius. Does that mean I get to sleep with more sailors? In which case, I'm cool with it.

    Posted by: hugo | Jan 14, 2011 11:45:20 AM

  8. And what will they come up with NEXT to waste air time? Stay tuned.

    Posted by: ophu | Jan 14, 2011 12:14:56 PM

  9. I'm totally with Rachel on this--I wouldn't want to be a Pisces either--those people are nuts. And I refuse to be a Gemini--they're nuts too.

    Posted by: Daniel | Jan 14, 2011 12:53:28 PM

  10. There are no consistent map of the constellations throughout history, and over several thousand years a lot of the stars have moved across the sky. The year is not exactly 12 months long and precesses around the pole, so summer and winter constellations swap positions every 12000 years. All these facts together should eliminate any rigor from these matters.

    Posted by: anon | Jan 14, 2011 1:02:38 PM

  11. I'm proud to be a Pisces, which is the sign of creativity - I've been a successful professional artist all my life. I certainly DON'T want to be an Aquarius. All signs supposedly have "good" and "bad" atributes. Of course, I really don't believe any of this, but at 60 a Pisces I am and a Pisces I shall remain!

    Posted by: Megan D, Seattle WA | Jan 14, 2011 1:39:40 PM

  12. I believe it was that Ptolemy dude in ancient Greece who figured out the energies which seemed to bestow different traits upon people born at different times of year was much more likely to come from the Earth we were born on than from stars or the sun, which even he could tell were very, very far away. So the Tropical Zodiac was invented, and the Western world has been using it ever since. Nothing has changed in the Tropical Zodiac, only in the Sidereal Zodiac used by some from the mystic East.

    So, waterboy, you are still an Aquarian. Nothing about the Tropical Zodiac has changed - because it's wisely tied to the seasons of the earth, and not to the ever-changing positions of stars in the sky.

    Whew. Because I am SO Cancer - and never, ever a bit of Gemini!

    Posted by: Zlick | Jan 14, 2011 2:24:07 PM

  13. Here's what Wikipedia has to say about John Sladek, a science fiction writer who was apparently the first to bring up the idea of the 13th Zodiac sign: A strict materialist, Sladek subjected dubious science and the occult to merciless scrutiny in The New Apocrypha. Under the name of James Vogh, Sladek wrote Arachne Rising, which purports to be a nonfiction account of a thirteenth sign of the zodiac suppressed by the scientific establishment, in an attempt to demonstrate that people will believe anything.

    ****Isn't this how Scientology got started?

    Posted by: Eagledancer | Jan 14, 2011 4:22:15 PM

  14. She's fish.

    Posted by: Tom | Jan 14, 2011 6:22:21 PM

  15. I'm this new bogus sign as well, and I don't get it... what are the supposed traits of this sign. As a Sagittarius, I was SUPPOSED to be a philosopher (NOT REALLY), traveller (SURE), interested in religion (NOT), teacher (YAH, CAN BE) and hot in the sack (DUH!). But what great things is an Ophic-whacthamacallit? Do I need to call up Dione Warwick or Miss Cleo to find out? WTF?

    Posted by: GraphicJack | Jan 14, 2011 6:27:49 PM

  16. Somebody changed the matrix.

    Posted by: Mawm | Jan 14, 2011 11:14:58 PM

  17. i regret getting the tattoo of my zodiac...since it now is no zodiac

    Posted by: David | Jan 24, 2011 12:11:34 AM

  18. Your sign is assigned based on where
    the constellations are at the moment
    you have completely entered the world
    meaning the cord is cut, not today, not
    yesterday, not 2 years go, but at the time
    of your birth.
    Rachel is still and always a Aries.
    Couldn't you just tell she was anyway?
    Rachel and her sources are rarely wacked
    but this time yes, stick to what you do
    best and yes there may be a new sign but
    there likely wasn't one at the time you
    recent births.

    Posted by: Bob | Jan 30, 2011 6:42:36 AM

Post a comment


« «Lawyer: Wikileaks Soldier Bradley Manning Seeks Release from Pretrial Confinement« «