Aquarius and Leo are opposition signs, (meaning they are on opposite sides of the zodiac wheel from each other), and they form a duality of personality.  While the opposites do attract, and while they fare pretty well as couples, they seldom make good working partners, as they have opposite orientations. 

Aquarius (Franklin D Roosevelt, Ronald Reagan, Abe Lincoln) is a master of substance, and a pawn of form.  They cherish substance and often discount form.  As Presidents they are often elected in times of turmoil and carry the nation through troubled times by their force of will.  They are usually focused and committed to a substantive agenda for the public welfare, and are willing to sacrifice form, like being personally unpopular, to achieve it.  Aquarians have no problems at all bending the rules, if necessary, to achieve their agenda for the public welfare,  such as Reagan with Iran-Contra, or Roosevelt packing the Supreme Court, or Lincoln suspending habeas corpus.)  Things like style, fashion, and accepted social norms, are often lesser concerns for Aquarians, who see these as empty, trivial, fake, and having no real substance, expecially in relation to the greater agenda that they are totally committed to.  The challenge for an Aquarius, is to have enough patience to mix proper form with their substance, and not to totally eschew the normal accepted forms.  Success usually comes when they can channel their substance through accepted forms, and not ignore those forms or lose patience and explode those forms, which they only view as a nuisance holding back real substance.

Leo (Herbert Hoover, Bill Clinton, Benjamin Harrison) is a master of form, and a pawn of substance.  They cherish form, and discount substance.  As presidents they are often elected after times of turmoil when the nation is more stable.  (Interestingly enough, both Harrison and Clinton were elected by less than a majority vote – a triumph of form over substance.)  They usually have no substantive agenda, and are willing to compromise substance for their own popularity and greater form. There are many historical examples of this like Hoover signing the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act that Hoover actually opposed, or Hoover endorsing Prohibition to get elected -but drinking nightly at the Belgian Embassy, or Harrison writing reciprocity provisions into the McKinley Tariff to make it more acceptable, or Clinton’s endorsement of welfare reform, that he opposed).  Things like style, fashion, and popularity (not substance, facts, and truth) are often of far greater concern for them, because these allow them to glow and shine. (President Coolidge often referred to his ambitious and popular Commerce Secretary, Hoover, as “Wonder Boy.”  Harrison was also said to have been ‘wonderful.’  It was said of Harrison that when he was on stage, he could easily mesmerize a crowd of 30,000, but that he was terrible at talking to only five people in a back room.  And of course, charming President Clinton is affectionately known as ‘Slick Willie.’)  The challenge for a Leo is to have enough patience to mix proper substance with their form, and not to be an empty suit of very shiny armor.  Success usually comes when they are willing to limit their form to enhancing substance, and not ignore substance, or lose their grounding in substance, which they only view as a nuisance holding back their greater form.

Anyway, what brought this up?  Me, the Aquarius.   I put some effort into form and did some work on my links to old posts.  Boring, but more organized. (pats self on back)  Ya like ?   Better form for more substance?

PS- this sort of makes me think maybe King Saul was a Leo, and King David was an Aquarius ?