United States – Election Outcome 2016

November 9, 2016

 

Padmini Arhant. Author & Presenter PadminiArhant.com. Spousal Partner Divine Mission.

 

 

United States – Election Outcome 2016

By Padmini Arhant

 

Congratulations! America. You made it through the arduous and grueling election season sensationalized and trivialized to invalidate electorate expectations with customized outcome.

Congratulations! To Republican candidate Donald Trump on the victory that was almost written off against the contender by pollsters and several speculators across the spectrum.

Congratulations! To all winners tonight in the Senate, House and Gubernatorial race representing Congress and State assembly of respective states nationwide.

The anxiety and concerns over unexpected turn of events in the Presidential race is not surprising considering anticipation for a different result.  

The global markets reaction to United States electoral outcome is misplaced as economic stability and prosperity not only in the United States but globally would remain the priority with fair and balanced trade rather than disproportionate dealings serving as an advantage for some over others in the global economy.

Furthermore, the citizens in the United States deserve a change that guarantees economic opportunity, political functionality with transparency and accountability exempting none above law. National and global security is paramount and possible in pursuing peaceful resolutions to conflicts rather than contemporary means proved counterproductive.

The concept of terror and terrorism needs to be addressed effectively beginning with identifying the cause and source that leads to weapons supply to terror networks besides funding, arming and training various terror factions for hegemonic goals that were never viable.

The American electorate cast their ballots to initiate new political system that represents the people and issues related to economy, safety, security, clean environment and equal rights barring divisiveness and prejudice.

United States is a melting pot with immigrants from around the world contributing to national wealth and economic progress. The people regardless of race, religion, gender and lifestyle orientation are all Americans and accordingly to be treated with respect, fairness and equality that would promote unity in society.

Politics refraining from political bargains and politicizing events for individual and vested interests is critical to move forward. Any kind of hidden strategies to disrupt governance or passing legislations against electorate benefit conforming to traditions maintained until now would unnecessarily create discord wasting taxpayer dollars that otherwise is to be invested in the economy, education, healthcare, infrastructure and clean environment.

In foreign policy, United States interventions spreading violence, turmoil and political instability is best abandoned with diplomacy and dialogue leading the way in dispute settlements and international affairs.

On the economic front, tax reforms to facilitate job growth in the manufacturing, service and diverse sectors boosting investments in economy is critical. Similarly, small and medium businesses also require necessary breaks and capital liquidity to successfully run operations in the United States.

The broad based economic policy will be discussed in due course.  The global matter will be included in the forthcoming presentation.

All citizens are to be treated fairly regardless of their status whether legal or undocumented with families born and settled in the United States.

The environmental cause cannot be ignored as planet protection is pivotal for life existence.

The incumbents and new members joining congress to form government pledging allegiance to serve the people and the nation with liberty and justice for all is the electoral mandate not to be misinterpreted as political capital and continue with business as usual.

Wishing United States electorate and the country as well as the world at large positive development and better future.

Peace to all!

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Political Game Debunked

October 23, 2016

Divine Power.
God Shiva - The Divine Power with
Padmini Arhant. Author & Presenter PadminiArhant.com. Divine Mission.

Ladies and Gentlemen – It has been a while since an interview with prominent figures on this site. Today I present the prospect for all to be informed, entertained and enlightened in the interaction between Mr. Wise Au Fait and Mrs. Prudent Au Fait (pronounced Oh Fe French).

Ladies and Gentlemen, I have the pleasure and honor to introduce the venerable, luminary, significant, phenomenal yet humble and the one and only Supreme entity Mr. Wise Au Fait.

Mrs. Au Fait – Mr. Wise Au Fait – Welcome to the domain padminiarhant.com.

Mr. Au Fait –My pleasure. Thank you for having me to interact with you and the rest of the world.

Mrs. Au Fait – How are you?

Mr. Au Fait  – I am fine. Thank you and How are you?

Mrs. Au Fait – I am well. Thank you.

The topic we are going to discuss in this program is Political Game.

Mrs. Au Fait What is really going on? United States is caught in election mania with one candidate having been affected by pneumonia that has not been entirely contained while the other subdued by sexophrenia.

Mr. Au Fait – Let me help your audience orient with the picture comprising artistes and contributors in diverse format.

As you appropriately titled the topic – Political Game, the plan and objectives ought to be understood by all – the people in particular as they are pawns in this Grand Chess Game.

Mrs. Au Fait  – you mentioned Chess. Do you care to clarify the origin of Chess considering speculations in this regard?

Mr. Au Fait  – Gladly. Chess originated from India going back to the time of epic Mahabharata when Lord Krishna as Lord Vishnu’s (the protector of universe) incarnate presented the preview of Kaliyuga or Kaliyug depicting the events now taking place in the dark age. Chess otherwise known at that time as chaturang (meaning adeptness and cleverness) and later interpreted as Shathranj. In Mahabharata chess game was critical behind events and the ultimate outcome.

Mrs. Au Fait – Thank you for that.

Mr. Au Fait – You are welcome.

Mr. Au Fait – What is really happening now is the people as electorate are audience and participants in the picture produced and directed by stakeholders of dysfunctional system in place.

What do you have in United States Politics?

Mrs. Au Fait – Well the two party system. The democrats and republicans claiming to have respective ideology and party platform.

Mr. Au Fait – Correct. There is citizenry as the system described as democratic even though democracy is a convenient access to modify thought process. People for various causes although some for self-interest and others towards common benefits are all considered a major hurdle by stakeholders i.e. investors in political campaigns reserving the rights on candidacy for profitable returns to sole advantage not barring incognito power – the permanent forces behind the system.

Accordingly, the stakeholders as you aptly refer to them as conglomerate and hegemony have devised the grand strategy to repeal democracy, election, faith i.e. religion in society, environment protection, peace and progress. The prime target is truth and facts based exposé.

What do you know. The plot thickens with the urgency to impose the undesirable as the perfect choice.

Mrs. Au Fait – How so? Could you please elaborate?

Mr. Au Fait  – Certainly.

In this game what needs to be recognized is relentless efforts are made to prove right as wrong, fictitious as factual and relevant made irrelevant.

After discounting everyone who came on board to play the scripted role in this election, the race came down to three people. 

The Republican contender Donald Trump and close friend of Clintons presumed to be representing the right wing, the Democrat contestant Hillary Clinton supposedly the left wing and even characterized as liberal and the third challenger Bernie Sanders positioned to be Independent but caucus with democrat so ran on democrat ticket.

The republican candidate slogan embarked on – Make America Great Again.

The democrat candidate launched her campaign on – Stronger Together along with latest catchphrase – ‘When They Go Low We Go High.’ – per advice from her friend Michelle Obama at the White House.

The other democrat candidate Bernie Sanders slogan was – A Future to believe in Not me, Us. Feel the Bern.

I guess in this context, Bernie did warn his fans not to believe in him given his limited role to quit the domain for the main character – hegemony and conglomerate envoy Hillary Clinton. Mind you this was meant to be a political revolution from Bernie Sanders. The followers were noted as Berners.

Mrs. Au Fait – So what happened?

Well the media and press stated – Trump runs and Hillary fires back when the result was the Berners sadly and predictably got burned out in the firing. Maybe Hillary Clinton firing aimed at any moving target not necessarily Trump alone conforming with her foreign policy.

Mrs.Au Fait – From what you are saying – Hillary is not only hilarious but also merciless.

Mr. Au Fait – hilarious is an understatement that is exemplified in her signature laughter. However, merciless linked to obsession with power.

Mrs. Au Fait  – What else?

Mr. Au Fait – Along the sidelines the stakeholders lined up lemonade stalls as they had to cover the base you see.

Mrs. Au Fait – Yes I see. You mean the token third party candidates on their payroll as well.

Mr. Au Fait  – Yes. Spot on.

The one assigned to be Libertarian Gary Johnson has Aleppo moments many times over to cliché prevalent ignorance in foreign affairs regarded United States personal matter.

The other candidate apparently representing Green Party Dr. Jill Stein with a medical degree is a regular feature to grab 1% vote and sabotage election to close the gap between two major contenders leaving the margin of error insignificant in the predetermined verdict. The interesting factor with this candidate is despite medical background in technology guided medicine, she makes comments like – Wi-Fi fries children brains prompting the remark – progressive is anti-science loon.

There you have it – the cast in the political drama to beguile voters –  the audience and partakers in the election.

Mrs. Au Fait – How exactly stakeholders aka the masterminds behind this not so genius political drama plan on achieving their goal?

Mr. Au Fait  –As I mentioned earlier the intention is to null and void election through pre-selected candidacy pledged allegiance to stakeholders’ scheme.

The electoral college system influenced to promote pre-selected candidate and dismiss popular vote validating invalidate electoral process in the name of democracy. Remember 2000 Presidential election – Gore v. Bush.

When you come to think of it, the candidates in the Presidential election from the beginning until now performed according to script and departed when required from the scene to let the electorate know the following;

The idea of Progressiveness is anything but viable and intelligent. 

Secondly, showcasing stakeholders’ candidacy democrat  in disguise Super Pac and establishment member Hillary Clinton as ideal regardless of disastrous track record.

The office of Presidency is auctioned every four years with highest bidders claiming greater stake and profitability. Similarly Congress every two years is subject to bidding with special interests, Super Pac and donors near and far throw their weight around candidacy for investment dividends.

Furthermore, in 2008 they switched gears to democrat candidate and managed to betray public trust advancing mission initiated in 2000 and 2004.

Since 2008 until now they pushed anti-republic domestic and foreign policy with the so-called democratic Presidency retaining members responsible for sub-prime mortgage crisis represented in Treasury department. The defense department spearheaded aggressive interventions through democratic administration.

The trajectory in the past eight years proves the camouflaged democrat is the preferred choice for stakeholders and hegemony to cancel election and concept of democracy.

The aim is to eliminate election and prolong own operatives and representatives appointment to the office of Presidency abrogating voters and mandate.

What you can see is unusual bipartisanship from Republicans willing to acknowledge pre-selected electoral consequence to the extent of many abandoning republican base in the lead up to colluding with stakeholders on their choice for democratic candidate Hillary Clinton.

The fact of the matter is those poised as democrats in Presidential race have become the favorite for stakeholders and hegemony due to convenience and ability to deceive electorate under the pretext as liberal and moderate to lure democratic and independent voters respectively besides disenchanted republican voters in the bully pulpit.

The truth is electorate from all sides are taken for ride and defrauded by the political coalition as republican and democrat alike including fringe parties, the third party.

The reality is there are no political parties anymore. There is only one faction committed to disenfranchisement with conglomerate and foreign entities run and controlled system for vested interests.

Politics has actors with scripted performance rewarded for treason and crimes against humanity with peace prize and immunity for life.

The establishment forbids opportunity to mainstream population in the fervor to continue undemocratic and unconstitutional trend upholding dynasty rule and privileged society diktat.

However, anything that violates suitable norm and tramples on millions of voters’ legitimacy is deemed defunct expediting archaic tradition termination.

People need to wake up and reject such custom and convention to restore republic rule.

Mrs. Au FaitMr. Wise Au Fait, I appreciate your invaluable insight and enlightenment.  I request your esteemed involvement in shedding light on womanhood currently exploited using unsuitable women folks in politics to disgrace gender sanctity for individual and secret society aspirations.

Mr. Au Fait – I look forward to that discussion with you – Mrs. Prudent Au Fait.

Mrs. Au Fait  – Thank you Mr. Wise Au Fait.

Mr. Au Fait – Thank you for having me to engage in this interesting conversation with you, Mrs. Prudent Au Fait and many around the world.

———————————————————————————————————————————————

Now this brings the first segment on Political Game to end. The next topic on Political Game would focus on womanhood and designated role in women leadership poised to endanger life and global security through nuclear weapons and mass destruction.

Thank you all for your concentration and time.

Peace to all!

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

 

U.S. Election Debacle – Selection disguised as Election

October 20, 2016

PADMINI ARHANT. Author & Presenter PadminiArhant.com. Spousal Partner Divine Mission.

The Art of Lying in Politics – Denying the Undeniable Facts

         By Padmini Arhant

The third and final U.S. Presidential debate ended clarifying the political establishment determination to impose fait accompli on electorate prior to election day.

Whenever one candidacy is treated as extraordinary despite conspicuous flaws and numerous breaches deemed criminal, the electorate become instruments to devious agenda.

The massive publicity, funding along with press editorials, media and entertainment industry patronage among several others including three major networks FOX, CNN and MSNBC colluding that are otherwise considered rivals to promote and declare the democrat Presidential nominee Hillary Clinton to be conglomerate representative for fifth term in the White House verifies the so-called democratic process.

Since election is taken for granted and transformed into mere formality and political circus to coronate the pre-selected choice, the democrat Presidential nominee Hillary Clinton,

The following questions are posed alongside shedding light on impervious data delineating facts from falsehood.

The claim on United States election to be free and fair is a misnomer considering twenty first century marked with electoral outcome disputes in the year 2000, 2004 Presidential election and thereafter noting alterations and irregularities that are common now.

The democrat Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton position as the advocate and champion of women and children’s rights, working class, gay rights and immigrants’ welfare while being financed by wall street, special interests, national and foreign donors stupefy audience knowing in politics the strategy is to say anything to win election. The trait prominent in some more than others confirming obsession with power.

The democrat nominee Hillary Clinton vows to pay for entitlements like Medicare and social security by taxing the rich and wealthy including corporations that are bankrolling her campaign.

Does this mean, the democrat Presidential candidate betrayal is certain against one or the other? 

Whom is she likely to deceive ?– the campaign investors or the voters casting ballots enabling special interests’ backed candidacy with Super Pac and campaign funders deriving more value for money in the lobbyists drafted legislations.

On the question about Supreme Court nominees – the democrat Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton citing the people wronged in the Citizens United case with the Supreme Court allowing unlimited campaign contributions from diverse sources while Hillary Clinton, the politician representing conglomerate and hegemony capitalizing on corporate cash speaks volume about the candidate’s integrity or the lack thereof.

On the subject of Affordable Care Act aka modestly titled Obama Care – although this is a topic deserving discussion in entirety which will be presented in due course on this site, the crux of the matter is the health care reform deceptively deviated from benefiting average citizens to bonanza for health insurance and health care industry.

The mandatory health insurance tied to penalty upon failure to do so made effective in January 2014 expects citizens to subscribe to health insurance whether affordable by them or not especially with health insurance premiums being high and any low cost plans covering little or nothing leaving subscribers at the health insurance and health care industry mercy worse than before.

In the meantime, the health insurance companies raking profits on additional 35 to 37 million subscribers brought on board via Obama care. The young healthy citizens on moderate income forced into compulsory health insurance plan are essentially paying for others with pre-existing conditions that is highlighted as landmark achievement attributing credit to health insurance industry as a major concession on their part when they are the beneficiary and the healthy groups on meager income bearing the cost.

The democrat Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton upholding the Affordable Care Act in the face of unaffordability for many in mainstream suggests pandering to current administration for political support besides complicity in misrepresentation of health care legislation.

In the economic sector – the Presidential nominee Hillary Clinton’s pledge to energy giants, finance and importantly defense industry is an open secret.  As recipient of substantial campaign donations, the quid pro quo between the democrat candidate Hillary Clinton and Super Pac as well as special interests from far and wide null and void campaign promise to democratic base and voters across the spectrum.

Immigrants and immigration policyPresident Barack Obama administration having assumed office in 2012 as reelection deported 2 million undocumented residents soon after election despite overwhelming Latino voters lured into campaign slogan on path to citizenship that is repeated by colleague and present Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.

Here is the interesting and disappointing factor on the slogan – path to citizenship.  This was indeed fulfilled by Obama administration. However not towards U.S. citizenship but the citizenship of the country of origin for the people dispatched to respective homeland. There is little or no doubt the democrat Presidential nominee Hillary Clinton surpassing deportation number given the track record on egregious actions.

Again the second time contestant Hillary Clinton in Presidential race having ceded to then democrat Presidential contender Barack Obama in 2008 not without a deal to be appointed Secretary of Statethird in line for Presidency flip flops on issues to suit political aspirations. 

The candidate Hillary Clinton opposition to issue driver license to undocumented workers in 2008 and disapproval of temporary resident status deprived many qualified people who were taxpayers in the economy from living together with U.S. born children as a family.

Environment – The former secretary Hillary Clinton and President Barack Obama arrival in Copenhagen in 2009 for Cop 15 UN Climate summit and sabotage of the deal contributed to seven years carbon emission that is misquoted now as having slowed down climate change during President Barack Obama appearance on television show. 

Again in this instance in semblance with path to citizenship, the steps adopted then to undermine genuine environment goals at conglomerate behest did restrict improvement in clean air environment reversing climate change not for the better. 

Foreign Policy – the democrat candidate Hillary Clinton legacy is premised on violence, creation of terror networks facilitating the means to justify aggression, illegal interventions and subjugation of population under brutal and corrupt regimes throughout the world.

The former secretary of state Hillary Clinton’s cavalier approach and belligerence resulting in deaths and destruction, chaos and catastrophe worldwide is the hall mark of her political career spanning over thirty years and more.

In the recently concluded Presidential debate, the democrat contender Hillary Clinton proudly asserted on having been involved in the raid of  al Qaida terror group leader Osama Bin Laden, the CIA asset in 2011.

Not realizing the administration and key members’ recounting is yet another confession on treason against United States and the victims of 9/11 attack. 

The concocted theory on Osama Bin Laden deceased in 2001 and resurrected to protect those implicated in 9/11 inside operation and glorify successor to boost administration record beguiling American people and the world is routine offense amongst those violating public trust.

The democrat Presidential nominee Hillary Clinton often remarked about her opponent temperamentally not fit to be President.  The same apparently not applicable to her with willingness to use nuclear weapons and obliterate nations not in compliance with her demand.

 

The Republican contender Donald Trump was frequently asked about accepting poll results and the same was not sought from democrat nominee Hillary Clinton who fiercely contested against then challenger Barack Obama in the democratic primary in 2008 going as far as quoting election mishaps referencing democrat Presidential contestant Robert Kennedy assassination. The inherent threat from disgruntled democratic candidate Hillary Clinton in 2008 not necessarily regarded fraudulent by patrons and surrogates’ behind Hillary Clinton Presidential bid.

Lastly, on constitutionality – the former secretary of state Hillary Clinton securing the title and post as foreign secretary was unconstitutional as she was then New York State Senator pact for high profile job in the newly elected administration presented conflict of interests abandoning responsibility towards constituents in the relevant state.

Nonetheless Senator Hillary Clinton prioritized her political ambition over the people of the state of New York and the nation at large as member in the United States Senate.

The democrat Presidential contestant Hillary Clinton as  member of political dynasty and conglomerate envoy  granted immunity in upending constitution, election and serious violations amounting to crimes against humanity and misuse of public office and authority.

Not surprisingly the Bush family are switching party lines to vote for the democrat in disguise, Presidential nominee Hillary Rodham Clinton.

As for incumbent President Barack Obama endorsement of democrat Presidential nominee Hillary Clinton and urging voters to vote for Clinton prompts the legitimate query – If Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton is a great choice then why did this not happen in 2008 when he ran against her? Why did he not let his opponent Hillary Clinton win during democratic primary rather than engage in contentious battle then in 2008?

Question from the mediaHow come the republican nominee Donald Trump unable to beat democrat nominee Hillary Clinton given the latter’s controversial and scandalous background?

Politics and media selective memory fails to remember that democrat primary in 2016 Presidential race, Vermont Senator (I) Bernie Sanders ran on democrat ticket against democrat contender Hillary Clinton.  Unlike media focused republican nominee Donald Trump and sensationalized coverage, Senator Sanders described as mellow and conducive Progressive standing to Wall Street and Super Pac represented by democrat Hillary Clinton could not prevail departing from the domain for pre-selected candidacy.

The eagerness to wrap the event with proposals to acknowledge and concede to election results to one contender but not the other indicate premeditated strategy adding insult to injury and humiliation for millions of voters participating in the national election.

The quest for warfare, sponsoring terrorism, humanitarian disasters notwithstanding nuclear melt down favored in advancing the democrat Presidential candidacy of Hillary Clinton.

Never too late to rise to the occasion and reject undemocratic and unethical tactics deployed to prolong status quo. 

Where there is will, there is a way to preserve democracy and liberty with equal opportunity for all and not just the privileged category.

Peace to all!

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Politics Preference – Dynasty and Establishment Rule

October 18, 2016

PADMINI ARHANT. Author & Presenter PadminiArhant.com. Spousal Partner Divine Mission.

Politics Preference – Dynasty and Establishment Rule

By Padmini Arhant

Synopsis on track record depicting reality and potential threat to peace, global security and humanitarian cause.

The topic highlights Presidential candidacy currently exempt from scrutiny.

Those in position of power and authority especially the members of political establishment are granted immunity on crimes against citizens at home and abroad.

Whether 9/11 commission or Benghazi committee and congressional hearings related to national interests and loss of lives, the evidences, countless witnesses and testimonials are discarded and those directly involved and responsible for casualties are exonerated inflicting more pain on victims’ families wound. 

The congressional inquiry and the so-called fact finding investigations are set up to vindicate the guilty with no respect for those having lost their lives in senseless violence and terror that could have been averted had the ones heading the department and administration exercised necessary discretion to save lives as priority.

Similarly, the peace efforts to stop bloodshed in wanton wars deploying terror networks resulting in deaths of innocent civilians in several thousands and millions as refugees are enthusiastically thwarted and proudly claimed as diplomatic victory by supposedly a democrat.

Toppling democratically elected governments in poorer nations subjugating population to corrupt and authoritarian regimes for direct economic and political control was carried out with passion and regarded astute foreign policy.

The democrat Presidential nominee Hillary Clinton has been in politics for decades with trajectory conforming to above outlined strategy.

Throughout her political career, beginning with balkanization of former Yugoslavia and Eastern bloc and later favoring military invasions for hegemonic goals in Iraq and Afghanistan has been the trend.

The former Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton actively promoted aggressive interventions not barring removal of governments in Latin America, Middle East, Eastern Europe, Central and South East Asia.

As head of the state department, the activities involved deposing people choice governments overseas, playing prominent role in endorsement of rigged elections in Afghanistan enabling proxy government identified for corruption and criminality.

The former secretary of state Hillary Clinton asserted close ties with Saudi dynasty implicated in 9/11 terrorism. The coalition fostered and fomented insurgency at Saudi government behest in Iraq, Syria, Libya and Yemen.  Additionally, aiding and abetting weapons supply to dictatorial powers like Bahrain’s Al Khalifa regime to quell pro-democracy activism extended in Egypt as well.

Similarly, the democrat Presidential nominee Hillary Clinton opposed peaceful resolutions in Middle East conflicts such as Palestinian statehood and Syrian ceasefire in compliance with extraneous forces agenda for economic and strategic benefits.

As former secretary of state, Hillary Clinton’s relentless pursuits to sabotage peace accord on Syria, stabilization of Libya, Iraq, Egypt and Yemen…are just few among numerous undertakings as a democrat in disguise.

In the United States, the Presidential contender Hillary Clinton’s contradictions with respect to working class, minority, gay rights and immigrants along with rejecting proposal on issuing driver license to undocumented workers that could have generated revenue for California, Arizona, New Mexico and Texas – the states adjoining Mexico exemplify inconsistency and lack of integrity.

The registration of undocumented drivers could ease the burden on taxpayers and lawful motorists on road accidents that otherwise is a liability to legal residents in these incidents.

On women’s rights, the misguided notion about democrat Presidential nominee Hillary Clinton needs to be clarified considering adverse impact on women in the United States and overseas due to actions and decisions exacerbating women’s plight viz. Afghanistan, South Asia, Latin America and war torn Africa.

Sexual harassment being dominant in the current Presidential race, the partisanship accepting allegations against the Republican nominee Donald Trump as irrefutable while dismissal of women in the long known sex scandals of former President Bill Clinton as hoax reveals discrimination of victims in sexual assault with little or no concern for womanhood in general.

The abuse of power from the spouse Hillary Clinton in this instance towards sexually harassed members ranging from intimidation to leave town to warnings upon disclosure of their experience apparently suitable in the call for civility and empathy for women in the paradoxical paradigm.

Regardless, the hypocrisy in the treatment of women affected in political class misuse of authority is pejorative.

Furthermore, the democrat Presidential contestant Hillary Clinton background and personality projected as advanced, progressive modern woman raise the legitimate question.

Why didn’t Hillary Clinton distance herself and seek divorce from a marriage snowed with sex scandals and indignation?

Whatever the reasons are, the status clarifies political convenience and superficial image.

On the campaign trail, the Super Pac and special interests financed elections, the wall street funding and energy giants backing of nominees with the democrat Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton established record as chief beneficiary pose credibility factor on economic and environment matter.

The tax return release without complete disclosure on campaign finance from diverse sources as bidders on candidacy undermines voter expectations with disillusionment upon assuming term in office.

Presidential nominee Hillary Clinton profile submerged in controversy, secrecy and complicity on violations of lives and human rights notwithstanding Clinton foundation associations and dealings defiantly upheld as political cadre prerogative.

Above all, the democratic Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton’s convictions on national and international affairs premised on deception, violence and dangerous means not barring willingness to use nuclear weapons remains existential risk to global security and humanity at large.

The former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton might have travelled to 120 countries and more during her official tenure, however her understanding of foreign cultures and civilizations failed to meet basic standards to appreciate life and liberty for all not the selective few she represents in the power struggle.

Apart from that targeting divine power, statesman Mahatma Gandhi and civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr. and alike are a fair game to ex-foreign secretary Hillary Clinton and political apparatus.

Election transformed into figurative postulate, democracy is challenged under these conditions to capitulate or retaliate.

United States electoral outcome in recent memory has been marred with disputes and irregularities citing deliberate calibration of vote diversion, disenfranchisement and importantly electoral college system overriding popular vote.

Yet, the will of the people and discernment could prevail preventing  political preference to retain dynasty rule and conglomerate representation.

Peace to all!

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

 

United States Presidential Race 2016

June 17, 2015

Dear Citizens,

The segment will focus on the United States Presidential race 2016.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

U.S. Foreign Policy in the 20th and 21st Century

July 6, 2009

By Padmini Arhant

The United States foreign policy in the twentieth and twenty first century viewed by allies and adversaries differently depending upon the U.S. engagement viz. modus operandi in the conflicts of the affected regions.

Throughout the twentieth century, the United States direct and indirect dominant role brought peace and chaos to the world order, ominously the Cuban crisis and the infamous Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos war combined with constant interventions in the Korean Peninsula, the Americas, the Middle East, Africa as well as South and South East Asia.

With the exception of sparing the world from Nazi and fascist rule in Europe and elsewhere – a significant contribution to the birth of democracies in Japan and Western Europe,

Ironically, the subsequent U.S. foreign policy mostly enabled the rise of brutal regimes and totalitarianism particularly in the under developed, poor and impoverished parts of the world.

The colonial British dethroned by the Imperial U.S. foreign policy primarily responsible for the status quo in the Middle East, while other European and Mediterranean colonialists – France, Netherlands, Spain, Greece and Portugal leaving their trademark in Africa, Asia and the Americas.

World witnessed the emergence of Saddam Hussein in Iraq, Theocracy in Iran following the overthrow of U.S. backed monarchy Shah of Iran including the predecessors and the successors in the entire Middle East aided by the contrived U.S. foreign policy driven by selective internal and external political interests focused on personal agenda.

Much to the operators’ surprise, their misguided policies led to the formation of terror organization such as Al Qaeda and the coronation of its leader Osama Bin Laden, a former Mujahedeen trained by CIA and the U.S. professional armed forces during the confrontation with the Afghanistan invaders, the former Soviet Union.

Given the track record of military aggression and perpetual violence by the profiteers representing the military industrial complex successfully causing carnage and destruction around the world up until now,

The cold war era might have curbed huge conventional and nuclear clashes between the two Superpowers in the 60’s and the 70’s but certainly facilitated the lucrative arms race specifically the nuclear arsenal between the rich and poor nations.

Late twentieth century comprising the Soviet Union disintegration along with nuclear fragmentation in that politically unstable vast region left the field open for U.S. foreign policy dominance in the world.

The United States foreign policy architects wasted no time in the invasions and occupations on the national security pretext and supporting their ‘ally’ Israel in the highly volatile Middle East or promoting ill-conceived democracies in the Western hemisphere through military coups.

The United States reputation until the 2008 Presidential election, as the leader of the free world and the Superpower tarnished because of the failed U.S. foreign policies for most part of the twentieth century and well into the twenty first century. Again, U.S blunders complemented with Iraqi invasion contributed to the neglect of the U.S. mission in Afghanistan to eliminate the strengthening Al Qaeda and Taliban forces from the northwestern Pakistani turf.

Further in the Middle East, as a defense surrogate the United States’ sworn allegiance to Israel against potential threats and attacks from Iran, Syria, Lebanon through Hezbollah, and Palestinian Gaza through Hamas is another factor for skepticism towards the ‘Western partner, USA’ among the Arab nations controlling the ‘oil’, the world’s most required natural resource.

Although, the strange predicament of U.S. surrogacy towards Israel and platonic relationship with the Arab world defended by declaring energy independence to undermine Arab stance in this matter, the reality of it is at least a decade away if not longer considering the Washington stalemate in the energy bill pending Senate approval.

The existing Israeli illegal invasion and occupation of Palestinian territories through settlements expansion must end to resolve the relic Israeli-Palestinian issue.

Meanwhile, in the Iranian political crisis and nuclear program, the recent rhetoric from the key White House representatives is not helpful as it creates unnecessary obstacles on the path towards democracy and stability in the Middle East such as Iraq and inevitably Iran.

Aside from pursuing the independent Palestinian state free of Israeli control in any form or shape and ensuring Israel’s safety and security as a sovereign state, it is paramount for Iran to free itself from the repressive theocratic regime for long lasting peace in the Middle East.

Fortunately, the current developments by the Iranian dissent galvanizing pro-reformist movements and the moderate clerics’ defiance to validate the rigged June 12 election results are optimistic and encouraging in terms of the possible democratic Iran evolving amidst reprehensible pro-democracy crackdown and human rights violation.

Any assertion by the United States proclaiming Israel’s sovereignty as a precursor for military strikes against Iranian hypothetical nuclear proliferation could be immensely detrimental to the United States, Israel, Iraq, and the remaining international security.

Why United States must refrain from controversial political posturing in an effort to defend Israel against alleged Iranian nuclear threat?

And

Why Israel should abandon any military option against Iran?

1. Firstly, Iran embroiled in the political crisis following the courageous decision by the pro-democratic Iranian population to seek twenty first century governance that guarantees fundamental human rights and economic relief with jobs, distribution of oil revenues through investment in common national growth and development.

2. Iranian theocracy fractured from the political turmoil delineating the moderate clerics from the hardliners with respect to unlawful killings, arrests and clamp down in the wake of forming the theocratic rule with their nominee Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, an unpopular choice even among the
Ayatollahs representing the theocracy.

3. During the political transitioning in Iran any such statements by the United States – “Israel has a sovereign right to strike Iran’s apparent nuclear site and that the United States will not interfere in Israeli mission with the reaffirmation from the State Department that strike against Israel will be an attack against the United States” sever than serve the purpose.
———————————————————————————–

ABC’S SUNDAY TALK ON JUNE 5, 2009: “This Week” Host George Stephanopoulos

Three times, I asked Biden if the Obama Administration would stand in the way of an Israeli military strike. Three times, he repeated that Israel was free to do what it needed to do. “If the Netanyahu government decides to take a course of action different than the one being pursued now, that is their sovereign right to do that. That is not our choice.”

A subsequent interview with the Secretary of State – Hillary Clinton.

“CLINTON: I would make it clear to the Iranians that an attack on Israel would incur massive retaliation from the United States.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

STEPHANOPOULOS: Is it U.S. policy now?

CLINTON: I think it is U.S. policy to the extent that we have alliances and understandings with a number of nations. They may not be formal, as it is with NATO, but I don’t think there is any doubt in anyone’s mind that, were Israel to suffer a nuclear attack by Iran, there would be retaliation.

STEPHANOPOULOS: By the United States?

CLINTON: Well, I think there would be retaliation. And I think part of what is clear is, we want to avoid a — a Middle East arms race which leads to nuclear weapons being in the possession of other countries in the Middle East, and we want to make clear that there are consequences and costs.”
————————————————————————————–
Analysis – By Padmini Arhant

President Obama’s candidacy pledged towards relentless diplomacy and peaceful negotiations in all foreign policy matters including the Middle East, assuring a dramatic shift from the Bush administration’s formula involving military action to resolve any political crisis.

The commitment reversal in the Iranian matter would deeply hurt the administration’s credibility in the Middle East as well as among the nations, the President is attempting to outreach for better international relations i.e. Russia and its allies.

United States and Israeli positions could also be misconstrued as provocative and derail the ‘behind the scenes’ progress developing in Iran. Besides fomenting fear and concern among the Iranian population already mortified from the latest violence, it could escalate tension in the neighboring Iraq adjusting to the gradual U.S. troops withdrawal from its cities with the hope of seeing complete timeline withdrawal by 2011.

United States will be officially presenting itself complicit in the catastrophic event with similar overtures not barring double standards in anything related to Israel.

Above all, the economic impact is even greater with respect to crude oil stocks superficially skyrocketing based on the speculative ramifications of Israeli strike against Iran (an OPEC member and one of the leading oil producers) on United States watch.

Moreover, Israel’s unilateral action against Iran would isolate Israel and exacerbate Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s status as a hardliner even though the Prime Minister now appearing to reconcile terms with the two states solutions vital for the Israeli-Palestinian future and,

Notwithstanding the proposed Israeli military action jeopardizing the Arab states’ recognition of Israel as a sovereign state and a viable peace partner in the Middle East.

As for the rest of the world, the terror attacks will substantially increase by default, embolden the weakened Al Qaeda in Iraq and Pakistan with vigorous recruitments through mere propaganda that U.S, and ally Israel preparing yet another military action against an Islamic nation Iran after the prolonged occupation in Iraq.

In light of the projected precarious scenarios, United States being the world leader has a moral responsibility to prioritize diplomacy and non-violence over military attacks either directly or by proxy.

It’s time for the United States to make a conscientious departure from the disastrous old ways proven counterproductive and write a new chapter in history by remaining a trustworthy partner and a reliable negotiator for all nations in the establishment of global peace.

Opportunities are rare and power guided by wisdom produce positive outcome.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

http://youtu.be/wHduddO7ZaU http://youtu.be/IWtj7kr35Ck http://youtu.be/p9QO-http://youtu.be/p9QO-xvkyRY http://youtu.be/bm92_NDdTw4 http://youtu.be/dLT8UjF7ZYY http://youtu.be/EpM49PRu5h4 http://youtu.be/dNoskHbTaOk http://youtu.be/xcfEIsX7t6A http://youtu.be/3fgpJJUGElQ

Communication

January 15, 2009

From: Jill Biden

To: Padmini Arhant

Sent: Friday, January 9, 2009 10:24:25 AM

Subject: Our partner for change

Padmini —

We’re just 11 days away from the start of an important journey that will move our country in a new direction.

But as we all prepare for that journey, we can’t forget our commitment to help Hillary Clinton retire her campaign debt.

I got to know Hillary on the campaign trail, and I saw firsthand what a vital role she played in Barack’s election. And as our soon-to-be Secretary of State, Senator Clinton is working hard now to help Barack implement policies that will help us meet the global challenges we face.

Will you help us honor our promise and support our friend Hillary Clinton by making a donation of $100 or more today?

During the general election, Hillary was a tireless advocate for Barack, traveling across the country and uniting people in our movement for change.

As a wife and a mother, I know the kind of sacrifice she made as a candidate, an advocate for Barack and Joe, and now as a member of the cabinet. She made those sacrifices because she believed in the change that we all worked so hard for.

Now, we need to help Hillary focus on the challenges that she will face as Secretary of State. You can show your support and make sure the hard-working individuals and small businesses who were a part of Hillary’s campaign effort are paid for their hard work.

Make a donation of $100 or more now to help one of our vital partners for change:

http://donate.barackobama.com/hillary

Thank you for everything,

Jill
—————————————————————————————————
From: Padmini Arhant
To: Jill Biden info@barackobama.com
Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2009 3:10:13 AM
Subject: Re: Our partner for change
Dear Jill,

Thank you for your email.

Due to unfortunate circumstances and bad economic situation, it is difficult to make any commitment towards such cause.

Hope you understand the predicament.

Please accept my apologies for the delay in my response and inability to comply with your request.

Best Regards

Padmini

________________________________________

Voice of Democracy

December 10, 2008

One Big Happy Family!

Only if family politics could be resolved like Washington Politics, then,

It would be Utopia and,

Thanks giving, Christmas and every other religious celebration will eternally be,

This is the Season to be jolly! SHA LA LA LA LA~ LA LA LA LA

Moreover,

No child will be in a foster home and,

There will be no such thing as a single parent regardless of whether one is,

Straight or gay, well that is another completely different saga — What is good for me is not good for you!

It is all in the context of the recent developments following election that deserve attention and action.

The presidential election is over and what an entertainment that was?

Now the nominations for key cabinet positions are in place.

What are interesting about the entire episode of the election are,

The country and the world were primed and prepared for the process of “Change?”

Change we can all believe in!

Somewhat similar to the release or performance of an exciting movie, opera, musical, favorite rock, jazz, classical concert or a comedy show whatever one might be interested in.

We all even had a preview so to speak.

The campaign slogan was…

Change the way Washington functions i.e. eliminate cronyism yielding to corruption and miserable failure in all fronts witnessed and experienced by the nation and the entire world in the past eight years.

If you have missed the last eight years because you have been away or not awake then please refer to the blogpost titled The Republic’s Verdict – Crime against humanity on this website.

If memory serves, the political slogan against the Republican opponents,

Senator John McCain and Gov. Sarah Palin was – If elected they will be more of the same meaning Bush/Cheney Empire.

Soon after Halloween, What did democracy do on November 4, 2008?

They were terrified at the mere thought of the nation ruled by a Vampire again,

Oops, that was supposed to be Bush/Cheney Empire.

So, the Red States and the Blue states of the great United States came together and unanimously rejected the possible nightmare and instead made the right choice by electing the,

“Change we can all believe in” at least on that particular day.

The excited audience i.e. the people of the United States who are also the electorate was all ready to view the gala opening of the new administration’s panel in a manner similar to much anticipated…

The Academy Award/Oscar ceremony and waited for the announcement of the nominees names.

Then I received the following email stating,

The nominees are…

From: "David Plouffe, BarackObama.com"

To: Padmini Arhant

Sent: Tuesday, December 2, 2008 4:53:21 AM

Subject: National security announcement from Barack

Padmini —

Yesterday, President-elect Barack Obama and Vice President-elect Joe Biden announced key members of their national security team.

Barack and Joe have asked some of the country’s most experienced leaders on national security, foreign policy, law enforcement, and military matters to come together to renew America’s security and standing in the world.

Watch the video of Barack’s announcement and learn about the national security team.

Hillary Clinton, U.S. Senator from New York and former First Lady, will serve as Secretary of State.

Secretary Robert Gates, the current Secretary of Defense, will continue to serve in that role.

Eric Holder, former Deputy Attorney General and a former United States Attorney for the District of Columbia, will serve as Attorney General.

Janet Napolitano, Governor and former U.S. Attorney for Arizona, will serve as Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security.

Dr. Susan E. Rice, a Senior Foreign Policy Advisor to the Obama for America campaign, a Senior Fellow at the Brookings Institution, and former U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs, will serve as Ambassador to the United Nations.

General Jim Jones, USMC (Ret), former Allied Commander, Europe, and Commander of the United States European Command, will serve as National Security Advisor.

Barack’s national security team has been assembled to represent all elements of American power, diplomacy, and leadership that will be vital in overcoming the challenges of the 21st century.

Watch the video of today’s press conference:

http://my.barackobama.com/natsecteam

These appointees will be tasked with strengthening current alliances and forging new ones, protecting our citizens at home, defending against our enemies, and promoting our values and moral leadership throughout the world.

While the challenges they are sure to face will be great, the opportunities to unify our country and our world will be even greater.

With your support, we’ll meet those challenges and opportunities with the hope and optimism that has brought us to this moment of change.

Thank you,

David

David Plouffe
Campaign Manager
Obama for America

———————————————————–

Furthermore, the following communication from the Vice President-elect Joe Biden,

On the selection of the particular nominee for the most sensitive cabinet position,

Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton as Secretary of State to represent United States in damage control of the image and reputation that she was equally responsible.

From: Joe Biden

To: Padmini Arhant

Sent: Friday, December 5, 2008 5:39:57 AM

Subject: Our commitment to a friend

Padmini —

President-elect Obama and I have been assembling our team, and we plan to hit the ground running next month.

We want to be ready to go, and that’s why I’m asking you to help us honor an outstanding commitment we made during the election.

Our campaign pledged to help Senator Hillary Clinton — one of the vital members of our team and our future Secretary of State — retire her campaign debt. That’s the money her campaign owes to the vendors across the country that make our political process possible.

Barack and I had the deepest respect for Hillary as an opponent on the campaign trail. Her undeniable intellect, talent, and passion strengthened Barack as a candidate and tested our movement for change.

We welcome Hillary as a partner in our administration, and I hope you will show your support by helping Barack fulfill our campaign promise.

Will you make a contribution of $100 or more now to retire Hillary’s campaign debt?

I saw your generosity and commitment to this team throughout the election, and I know we can do it.

In the general election, Hillary was one of our strongest advocates. She traveled the country and did more than 70 events, raising money and bringing new supporters into our campaign.

As Secretary of State, she will be indispensable in furthering Barack’s agenda for change.

Let’s welcome Hillary to the team and thank her for her efforts in support of our campaign by helping to retire her debt to the hard-working individuals and small businesses that were a part of the election:

https://donate.barackobama.com/hillary

Your support and generosity got us this far, and I know I can count on it now.

Thank you,

Joe

——————————————————

My response to the Vice President-elect Joe Biden:

From: Padmini Arhant

To: info@barackobama.com

Subject: Re: Our commitment to a friend

Hon. Vice President-elect Joe Biden,

Thank you for the update.

Please accept my apologies for the delayed response.

As always, I will present my thoughts and views in this matter through my blogpost on the website www.padminiarhant.com.

Meanwhile, I wish you and the President-elect Barack Obama success in all the tasks ahead of the new administration.

Best Regards

Padmini Arhant
———————————————————————————

Reaction: Shock and Awe!

There is more excitement in terms of the nominees recruiting their own staff members.

Again, not long ago Professor Samantha Power, the foreign policy advisor to Obama campaign resigned amidst tough Primary battle in March 2008, after the following comment:

“Hillary Clinton is a monster who will stoop to anything to get what she wants.”

It was certainly not a Freudian slip.

Now, none other than Senator Hillary Clinton rehires Professor Power in the transition team.

It is an amazing unification of souls in utter reverence for one another despite past turbulence in the love-hate relationship.

Is it believable? One’s guess is as good as others are.

————————————————————————————-

Comparative Review:

The national security team geared up for the challenges created by the incumbent administration – Bush/Cheney Empire, resonates the dictum of the administrators they are in cohort with.

For instance,

War over Peace – Having conscientiously voted for Iraq war as the member of the Senate Committee for Armed Services and,

Thereby approving the death penalty of brave young men and women in our armed forces and millions of innocent civilians in Iraq including members of the International peacekeeping force.

Blatant threats over diplomacy i.e. Obliterate Iran with Nuclear Weapons.

Default on timeline for troop withdrawal from Iraq on the pretext of national security when,

In fact, the reason is to maintain and mobilize the lucrative arms race and now even the nuclear weapons for the Defense industry.

Ironically, the entire team is from the twentieth century establishment that pursues the personal goal…

Claiming Power to dominate the world with belligerent policy and malevolent philosophy that has exacerbated terror and horror in the present world environment.

The portfolio assigned to the individuals in the national security team is oxymoron to their personal profile and voting record.

What is next?

Gov. Sarah Palin as the environment czar?

The appointments suggest the strategy – “I dare you to defy me” appears to be prevalent in the reverse manner.

Who is in control of who is the impending issue of concern for democracy?

As if, this nation is devoid of eligible candidates for all of the above positions with sincere commitment towards the nation and democracy rather than narcissistic aspirations.

Politics is never without bargains as witnessed in the latest Illinois Gov.Rod Blagojevich scandal.

Negotiations like “What is in it for me?” as opposed to how can I make a difference in the world by doing what is good for the country and the entire world.

That would be music to ears.

Something the great former President John F. Kennedy taught his fellow compatriots and citizens of the world.

“Ask not what the country can do for you; Ask what you can do for the country.”

When a new beginning is promised and then broken upon securing power or political capital, to symbolize “Politics as usual”, then the frustration, anger and disappointment is justified among the electorate delivering their power to the elected officials.

——————————————————————–

Evidence:

Source: http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20081208/pl_politico/16292 -Thank you.

Carol E. Lee, Nia-Malika Henderson Carol E. Lee, Nia-malika Henderson – Mon Dec 8, 4:22 am ET

Liberals voice concerns about Obama

Liberals are growing increasingly nervous – and some just flat-out angry – that President-elect Barack Obama  seems to be stiffing them on Cabinet jobs and policy choices.

Obama has reversed pledges to immediately repeal tax cuts for the wealthy and take on Big Oil.

He’s hedged his call for a quick drawdown in Iraq. And he’s stocking his White House with anything but stalwarts of the left.

Now some are shedding a reluctance to puncture the liberal euphoria at being rid of President George W. Bush to say, in effect, that the new boss looks like the old boss.

“He has confirmed what our suspicions were by surrounding himself with a centrist to right cabinet. But we do hope that before it’s all over we can get at least one authentic progressive appointment,” said Tim Carpenter, national director of the Progressive Democrats of America.

OpenLeft blogger Chris Bowers went so far as to issue this plaintive plea: “Isn’t there ever a point when we can get an actual Democratic administration?”

Even supporters make clear they’re on the lookout for backsliding. “There’s a concern that he keep his basic promises and people are going to watch him,” said Roger Hickey, a co-founder of Campaign for America’s Future.

Obama insists he hasn’t abandoned the goals that made him feel to some like a liberal savior. But the left’s bill of particulars against Obama is long, and growing.

Obama drew rousing applause at campaign events when he vowed to tax the windfall profits of oil companies. As president-elect, Obama says he won’t enact the tax.

Obama’s pledge to repeal the Bush tax cuts and redistribute that money to the middle class made him a hero among Democrats who said the cuts favored the wealthy.

But now he’s struck a more cautious stance on rolling back tax cuts for people making over $250,000 a year, signaling he’ll merely let them expire as scheduled at the end of 2010.

Obama’s post-election rhetoric on Iraq and choices for national security team have some liberal Democrats even more perplexed.

As a candidate, Obama defined and separated himself from his challengers by highlighting his opposition to the war in Iraq from the start. He promised to begin to end the war on his first day in office.

Now Obama’s says that on his first day in office he will begin to “design a plan for a responsible drawdown,” as he told NBC’s “Meet the Press” Sunday.

Obama has also filled his national security positions with supporters of the Iraq war: Sen. Hillary Clinton, who voted to authorize force in Iraq, as his secretary of state; and President George W. Bush’s defense secretary, Robert Gates, continuing in the same role.

The central premise of the left’s criticism is direct – don’t bite the hand that feeds, Mr. President-elect.

The Internet that helped him so much during the election is lighting up with irritation and critiques.

“There don’t seem to be any liberals in Obama’s cabinet,” writes John Aravosis, the editor of Americablog.com.

“What does all of this mean for Obama’s policies, and just as important, Obama Supreme Court announcements?”

“Actually, it reminds me a bit of the campaign, at least the beginning and the middle, when the Obama campaign didn’t seem particularly interested in reaching out to progressives,” Aravosis continues.

“Once they realized that in order to win they needed to marshal everyone on their side, the reaching out began. I hope we’re not seeing a similar ‘we can do it alone’ approach in the transition team.”

This isn’t the first liberal letdown over Obama, who promptly angered the left after winning the Democratic primary by announcing he backed a compromise that would allow warrantless wiretapping on U.S. soil to continue.

Now it’s Obama’s Cabinet moves that are drawing the most fire. It’s not just that he’s picked Clinton and Gates.

It’s that liberal Democrats say they’re hard-pressed to find one of their own on Obama’s team so far – particularly on the economic side, where people like Tim Geithner and Lawrence Summers are hardly viewed as pro-labor.

“At his announcement of an economic team there was no secretary of labor.

If you don’t think the labor secretary is on the same level as treasury secretary, that gives me pause,” said Jonathan Tasini, who runs the website workinglife.org.

“The president-elect wouldn’t be president-elect without labor."

During the campaign Obama gained labor support by saying he favored legislation that would make it easier for unions to form inside companies.

The “card check” bill would get rid of a secret-ballot method of voting to form a union and replace it with a system that would require companies to recognize unions simply if a majority of workers signed cards saying they want one.

Obama still supports that legislation, aides say – but union leaders are worried that he no longer talks it up much as president-elect.

“It’s complicated,” said Tasini, who challenged Clinton for Senate in 2006. “On the one hand, the guy hasn’t even taken office yet so it’s a little hasty to be criticizing him.

On the other hand, there is legitimate cause for concern. I think people are still waiting but there is some edginess about this.”

That’s a view that seems to have kept some progressive leaders holding their fire.

There are signs of a struggle within the left wing of the Democratic Party about whether it’s just too soon to criticize Obama — and if there’s really anything to complain about just yet.

Case in point: One of the Campaign for America’s Future blogs commented on Obama’s decision not to tax oil companies’ windfall profits saying,

“Between this move and the move to wait to repeal the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy, it seems like the Obama team is buying into the right-wing frame that raising any taxes – even those on the richest citizens and wealthiest corporations – is bad for the economy.”

Yet Campaign for America’s Future will be join about 150 progressive organizations, economists and labor groups to release a statement Tuesday in support of a large economic stimulus package like the one Obama has proposed, said Hickey, a co-founder of the group.
“I’ve heard the most grousing about the windfall profits tax, but on the other hand, Obama has committed himself to a stimulus package that makes a down payment on energy efficiency and green jobs,” Hickey said.

“The old argument was, here’s how we afford to make these investments – we tax the oil companies’ windfall profits. … The new argument is, in a bad economy that could get worse, we don’t.”

Obama is asking for patience – saying he’s only shifting his stance on some issues because circumstances are shifting.

Aides say he backed off the windfall profits tax because oil prices have dropped below $80 a barrel. Obama also defended hedging on the Bush tax cuts.

“My economic team right now is examining, do we repeal that through legislation?

Do we let it lapse so that, when the Bush tax cuts expire, they’re not renewed when it comes to wealthiest Americans?” Obama said on “Meet the Press.” “We don’t yet know what the best approach is going to be.”

On Iraq, he says he’s just trying to make sure any U.S. pullout doesn’t ignite “any resurgence of terrorism in Iraq that could threaten our interests.”

Obama has told his supporters to look beyond his appointments, that the change he promised will come from him and that when his administration comes together they will be happy.

“I think that when you ultimately look at what this advisory board looks like, you’ll say this is a cross-section of opinion that in some ways reinforces conventional wisdom, in some ways breaks with orthodoxy in all sorts of way,”

Obama recently said in response to questions about his appointments during a news conference on the economy.

The leaders of some liberal groups are willing to wait and see.

“He hasn’t had a first day in office,” said John Isaacs, the executive director for Council for Livable World. “To me it’s not as important as who’s there, than what kind of policies they carry out.”

“These aren’t out-and-out liberals on the national security team, but they may be successful implementers of what the Obama national security policy is,” Isaacs added.

“We want to see what policies are carried forward, as opposed to appointments.”

Juan Cole, who runs a prominent anti-war blog called Informed Comment, said he worries Obama will get bad advice from Clinton on the Middle East, calling her too pro-Israel and “belligerent” toward Iran.

“But overall, my estimation is that he has chosen competence over ideology, and I’m willing to cut him some slack,” Cole said.

Other voices of the left don’t like what they’re seeing so far and aren’t waiting for more before they speak up.

New York Times columnist Frank Rich warned that Obama’s economic team of Summers and Geithner reminded him of John F. Kennedy’s “best and the brightest” team, who blundered in Vietnam despite their blue-chip pedigrees.

David Corn, Washington bureau chief of the liberal magazine Mother Jones, wrote in Sunday’s Washington Post that he is “not yet reaching for a pitchfork.”

But the headline of his op-ed sums up his point about Obama’s Cabinet appointments so far: “This Wasn’t Quite the Change We Envisioned.”

————————————————————–

Significance of the Magna Carta to U.S. Constitution:

Let us reflect on the prominent Magna Carta as it has great relevance to the events since the dawn of the twenty first century i.e. Year 2000 – 2008 /up until now.

Courtesy: Wikipedia.org – Thank you.

Magna Carta (Latin for Great Charter, literally "Great Paper"), also called Magna Carta Libertatum (Great Charter of Freedoms), is an English legal charter, originally issued in the year 1215. It was written in Latin.

Magna Carta required King John of England to proclaim certain rights (mainly of his barons), respect certain legal procedures, and accept that his will could be bound by the law.

It explicitly protected certain rights of the King’s subjects, whether free or fettered — most notably the writ of habeas corpus, allowing appeal against unlawful imprisonment.

Magna Carta was arguably the most significant early influence on the extensive historical process that led to the rule of constitutional law today in the English speaking world.

Magna Carta influenced the development of the common law and many constitutional documents, including the United States Constitution.

Magna Carta was the first document forced onto an English King by a group of his subjects (the barons) in an attempt to limit his powers by law and protect their privileges.

It was preceded by the 1100 Charter of Liberties in which King Henry I voluntarily stated what his own powers were under the law.

In practice, Magna Carta mostly did not limit the power of the King in the Middle Ages;[citation needed] by the time of the English Civil War,

However, it had become an important symbol for those who wished to show that the King was bound by the law.

—————————————————————-

BACKGROUND

After the Norman conquest of England in 1066 and advances in the 12th century, the English King had by 1199 become a powerful and influential monarch in Europe.

But after King John of England was crowned in the early 13th century, a series of failures at home and abroad, combined with perceived abuses of the king’s power, led the English barons to revolt and attempt to restrain what the king could legally do.

———————————————–

SYMBOL AND PRACTICE

Magna Carta is often a symbol for the first time the citizens of England were granted rights against an absolute king.

————————————————————

AMERICA

The document is also honored in America, where it is an antecedent of the United States Constitution and Bill of Rights.

The United States has contributed the Runnymede Memorial and Lincoln Cathedral offers a Magna Carta Week.[11]

————————————————————————-

Food for Thoughts:

As stated earlier, the nation and the world is tired and bogged down from the devious modus operandi of the demagogues for centuries now more relevantly in the past eight years.

These stalwarts launch their figureheads continually and successfully to oppress and suppress the possibility of peace, progress and prosperity for all to protect self-interest and those selective few in agreement with their accord.

Thus, making a mockery of the highest office on land i.e. The Presidency of the United States and democracy defined as the government of the people, by the people and for the people.

So, in a concerted effort the nation decided to move forward by electing a leader of the nation,

As the world’s superpower to bring about the real Change…

A complete transformation of anything and everything resembling the current administration responsible for chaos and catastrophe at home and abroad.

In return, the electorate is handed a dish whipped with the same ingredients at an alarming proportion and guaranteed different results upon tasting.

So, naturally it is delectable to the taste buds of those immune to the familiar taste otherwise the status quo.

Another important factor to focus upon is;

It is apparent from the Vice President-elect Joe Biden’s email that Senator Hillary Clinton successfully negotiated with the Obama-Biden administration to make a commitment with,

A. A key cabinet position such as Secretary of State to gain on-the job training and experience in foreign policy, the primary reason for her to lose the democratic nomination.

Thereby, strengthening her attempts in 2012.

B. Assistance in eliminating her political campaign debt, despite the combined income of the Clintons’ reported as $109 million in their tax return.

——————————————————————

Source: Chicago Sun-Times – Thank you.

http://blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/2008/04/clinton_releases_income_tax_re.html

“Clinton releases income tax returns for 2000-2006 show $109 million gross income.

By Lynn Sweet on April 4, 2008 5:18 PM | Permalink | Comments (18)

Sen. HIllary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) released tax returns for the years 2000-2006 on Friday afternoon. LINK

Disclosure of these returns has been an issue of Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.).

The Clintons had previously released returns for the years President Clinton was in public life, in the White House and Washington.

But the big interest is in the years since he left and reaped millions of dollars once back in private life.”

—————————————————————————————–

Commitments from the Obama-Biden administration in return for campaigning rendered as a favor rather than a duty and obligation to,

The political party the Senator represents in the United States Senate and,

The nation all elected officials pledge to serve at all times.

———————————————————————

The article by Ellen Goodman, a columnist for The Boston Globe in the Mercury News, Friday, December 5, 2008 – Thank you.

Excerpt from the article "In Clinton’s newest role, women’s rights to go global"

Huge Challenges:

“Still the new secretary of state will be operating in a world in which three-fifths, of the world’s poorest people are women and girls.

Seventy percent of the children not in school are girls.

Half a million women die every year in childbirth.

One in three women will suffer from the pandemic of violence – rape, honor killings, genital mutilation.

But only 16 percent of legislators are women, and less than 3 percent of the people at the table when peace treaties are signed are female.”
——————————————————————————————————–
Analysis:

The highlighted tragedies are precisely the chilling facts and results of the on-going Iraq and Afghanistan war as well as in most civil wars in Africa.

According to human rights organizations and United nations refugee commission, women and children are the most vulnerable victims besides being major casualties during and aftermath of any war around the world.

What did Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton do as a legislator and a member of the Senate Committee for Arme d Services with privileges and complete access to information to prevent a war?

Senator Hillary Clinton did exactly the opposite.

Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton’s record as the former First Lady, Senator and the Presidential candidate in 2008 reverberates rhetoric in complete coherence with the Bush administration for the urgency to declare war over peace and diplomacy at every possible opportunity.

Why did Senator Hillary Clinton willfully squander the privilege to be part of history making as one of the few females at the table to sign the peace treaty rather than amplifying the war message of the Bush administration?

Because Old habits die hard.

—————————————————————————————-

Confirmation of Hillary Clinton on Military Policy

Stephen Zunes | December 12, 2007

EDITOR: EMILY SCHWARTZ GRECO, Foreign Policy In Focus

w ww.fpif.org

While much attention has been given to Senator Hillary Clinton’s support for the U.S. invasion of Iraq,

Her foreign policy record regarding other international conflicts and her apparent eagerness to accept the use of force appears to indicate that her fateful vote authorizing the invasion and her subsequent support for the occupation and counter-insurgency war was no aberration.

Indeed, there’s every indication that, as president, her foreign policy agenda would closely parallel that of the Bush administration.

Despite efforts by some conservative Republicans to portray her as being on the left wing of the Democratic Party, in reality her foreign policy positions bear a far closer resemblance to those of Ronald Reagan than they do of George McGovern.

For example, rather than challenge President George W. Bush’s dramatic increases in military spending,

Senator Clinton argues that they are not enough and the United States needs to spend even more in subsequent years.

At the end of the Cold War, many Democrats were claiming that the American public would be able to benefit from a “peace dividend” resulting from dramatically-reduced military spending following the demise of the Soviet Union.

Clinton, however, has called for dramatic increases in the military budget, even though the United States, despite being surrounded by two oceans and weak friendly neighbors, already spends as much on its military as all the rest of the world combined.

——————————————————————-

Conclusion:

After reviewing the above facts, should it be a surprise that,

The Republican representatives from top to bottom of the hierarchy were jubilant at the announcement of the National Security team of the new administration?

Whatever happened to the selection process on meritocracy?

What about the commitment to the people representing democracy?

Why should the commitment to establishment supersede the one with the people?

The Campaign pledge was to eliminate cronyism, nepotism, symbolism and pave way for new kind of politics in Washington representing the true American democracy and not dynasty.

With all due respect, unfortunately the present team of appointees all around have bargained the positions in exchange for rallying during election.

Even though the pledge of support was visible only after confirmation of the Presidential candidate as the absolute winner in November 2008.

Unlike, millions of ordinary citizens across the nation who selflessly contributed their time and money to enable democracy…

"Hope and Change", prevail on November 4, 2008.

In the land of Republic, the power lies with the people.

History is testimony to the fact that whenever the will of the people is denied and the trust violated,

It is the sign of democracy under siege.

Hope and Change was certainly the desire of all those exhausted with,

“The Politics as usual.”

Hope becomes reality

and

Change is inevitable only,

When one fulfills promises and commitments to the people of the Republic and not the power and establishment standing in way of peace, progress and prosperity for all.

After all, in a democracy one has to return to the electoral process to retain power and

Wisdom confirms the element of truth – Trust and Goodwill are not negotiable assets.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Change we can believe in – The ideal Secretary of State

November 24, 2008

Let us see what the American electorate and some courageous journalists/reporters thoughts are in this respect.

The authors in the capacity as responsible journalists and citizens have raised some relevant questions of the most important aspect of new presidency i.e. recruiting staff members for key positions and administrative tasks.

—————————————————————
The author, Mr. Pinsker has highlighted the ironies between the Lincoln Presidency and the scenario with the future Obama Presidency.

Obama shouldn’t copy Lincoln’s Cabinet style – Matthew Pinsker, author of “Lincoln’s Sanctuary: Abraham Lincoln and the Soldiers’ Home,” wrote the article for the Los Angeles Times.

Consider this inconvenient truth: Out of the four leading vote-getters for the 1860 Republican presidential nomination whom Lincoln placed on his original team, three left during his first term – one in disgrace, one in defiance and one in disgust.

Chase was the defiant rival.

As Goodwin acknowledges, the Treasury chief never reconciled himself to Lincoln’s victory, continuously angling to replace him.

Lincoln put up with this aggravation until he secured renomination and then dumped his brilliant but arrogant subordinate because, in his words their “mutual embarrassment” was no longer sustainable.

The significance of Seward’s contributions as Lincoln’s secretary of state have been challenged by many historians, and his repeated fights with other party leaders were always distracting.

Lincoln was a political genius, but his model for Cabinet-building should stand more as a cautionary tale than as a leadership manual.”
———————————————————

One of my favorite and esteemed journalists, Mr. Friedman poses a potent issue…

Cabinet post for Clinton presents special concerns – Thomas L. Friedman is a New York Times columnist.

“So President-elect Barack Obama is considering Hillary Clinton as secretary of state,

How should we feel about that?

My question is whether a President Obama and a Secretary of State Clinton,

Given all that has gone down between them and their staffs, can have that kind of relationship,

Particularly with Clinton always thinking four to eight years ahead, and the possibility that she may run again for the presidency.

I just don’t know.

When it comes to appointing a secretary of state, you do not want a team of rivals.”

—————————————————————-

Hillary Clinton a better fit for Senate than secretary of state – David S. Broder, Washington Post columnist.

As per the article…

What President-elect Barack Obama wants and needs in the person running the State Department is a diplomat who will carry out his foreign policy.

He does not need someone who will tell him how to approach the world or be his mentor in international relations.

The last thing he needs is a secretary of state carving out an independently based foreign policy.”

————————————————————–

Obama staff: friends, others – Administration a mix of loyal advisers, Clinton Veterans – Charles Babington and Liz Sidoti, Associated Press

A particular segment of the article is noteworthy:

“Obama raised eyebrows this month when he tapped some of Clinton’s closest allies for important jobs.

John Podesta, Clinton’s former White House chief of staff, is heading the transition effort. Illinois Rep. Rahm Emanuel, a former top Clinton adviser, is Obama’s chief of staff.

Former Clinton appointees Eric Holder and Janet Napolitano appear in line for Cabinet posts.

Even more, startling to many, Obama has signaled plans to name former first lady Hillary Clinton as secretary of state.

Some Obama supporters have praised him for reaching out to his toughest primary opponent.

But others question why they worked so hard to defeat Clinton only to see her, and many close to her, grab prizes in the new administration.

They note that Obama repeatedly campaigned against “the politics of the past” and Washington “dramas,” thinly veiled jabs at the Clinton presidency as well as President George W. Bush’s tenure.”
———————————————————-

Letter to the editor of mercury news on various dates: Thank you.

Voice of the Electorate…

Business as usual despite change vows –

Barack Obama sucked people into believing he is all about change, which they want more than anything else.

Then once we elect him, he surrounds himself with all the very same people who have absolutely no reason, or desire to change anything. All that has changed here is the name of the guy on top who’s getting his pockets lined.

Good luck, America…it’s business as usual.

David Harbert
—————————————————————–

After election, all we can do is hope –

“It hasn’t taken very long for the media to turn pessimistic on Barack Obama’s ability to deliver on his sweeping promises for change and reform.

Instead there are predictions of smaller incremental improvements, like “Obama can make quick, modest gains on health care”.

This could be the test Joe Biden predicted would come during the early months of the Obama administration, but rather than some external foreign crisis, this will be a test of his internal mettle – a crisis of conscience.

Will Obama have the courage to stand up to the powerful interests in Washington and do what he thinks is right, or will he back down and give up on his promises?

We’ve already voted, now all we can do is hope.”

Rob Morgan
——————————————————————-

Don’t see much change so far –

I did not vote for either Barack Obama or John McCain, but as Obama won the election, he is now my president and I am anxious to see how he will move our country forward.

But throughout the campaign, I kept hearing about “change” and now I see that Obama and his selections are not much “change” at all.

Where are the new faces?

Where is the “change”?

Unfortunately, at least now it seems we’ll all have to wait another four years for “change.”

Brian Chang
——————————————————————-

Where are the fresh faces in Cabinet?

I didn’t vote for Barack Obama, but I’m hoping that he will be a great president because the country needs one.

But I look at some of his nominations for Cabinet and staff positions and wonder where the “change” is going to come from since, as I read online today more than half of the people named to Obama’s transition or staff posts have ties to President Clinton’s administration.

And people like Hillary Clinton as possible secretary of state and Tom Daschle as health and human services secretary seem like “more of the same.”

I was hoping for some fresh faces, but maybe that is still to come.

Randy Breunling

———————————————————————-

From: "David Plouffe, BarackObama.com"

To: Padmini Arhant

Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2008 1:47:54 PM

Subject: Where we go from here

Padmini –

Please take a few minutes and help shape the future of this movement.

Share your campaign experience and your thoughts on the best way to keep supporting our agenda for change.

The inauguration is just 63 days away, and as President-elect Obama and Vice President-elect Biden prepare to take office, they’ll need your support more than ever.

You’ve built an organization in your community and across the country that will continue to work for change — whether it’s by building grassroots support for legislation, backing state and local candidates, or sharing organizing techniques to effect change in your neighborhood.

Your hard work built this movement. Now it’s up to you to decide how we move forward.

Take this short survey and share your ideas:

http://my.barackobama.com/whatsnext

Thanks to you, this country has an historic opportunity. Electing Barack was the first big step, but there’s a lot of challenging and important work ahead.

Together, we can keep making history,

David

David Plouffe
Campaign Manager

Obama for America
———————————————————-

To: info@barackobama.com

Re: Where we go from here

Padmini Arhant

Dear David,

The past week has been hectic for me.

Therefore, could not reply to your request.

However, please view my feedback in the blog post on the relevant topic.

Thanks and Best Regards

Padmini
————————————————————————

Analysis:

It is evident from the above articles and comments that the American electorate as well as the nationally acclaimed journalists and authors have spoken regarding the appointees to various posts and nominees for key positions.

I concur with all of them against leaning back to the Clinton era for most important administrative posts and cabinet positions.

The Obama movement for “change” is unique and it should reflect that message starting with the appointment of staff members all around.

It is fair to admit that the former President Bill Clinton had a successful two terms from the economic standpoint.

However, it is worth remembering that foreign policy matter suffered a great deal in many respects, including a terror attack on the World Trade Center.

We are in a new millennium and a dynamic Presidency ahead of us, there is talent galore to fill in cabinet and other administrative positions.

They do not have to be Clinton associates and advisers.

Further, the movement to transform Washington was a pledge to the American electorate with a commitment to have Obama administration represented by outsiders and not insiders of past power and establishment.

Many aspiring and deserving individuals without any ties to political interests in Washington will enthusiastically serve the Obama-Biden administration in utter loyalty and competence unlike seen before.

It is also important to consider many qualified volunteers and campaign staff across the nation for administrative posts who generously offered their time, resources and support for the success of the Obama-Biden candidacy.

The present recruitment or nomination is suggestive of nepotism and favoritism that is typical of Washington all along.

Naturally, the electorate is frustrated not seeing any identifiable change that is desperately required for national interest.

Secretary of State – The most sensitive cabinet position given the present volatile world environment.

Unfortunately, from the track record of the incumbent administration in international affairs, there is an urgent requirement for mending process with peace and diplomacy.

Senator Hillary Clinton is a hard working public official and aptly qualified as a Senator to represent the people of the Great State of New York.

Nevertheless, the reason Senator Clinton lost the primary election was her gaffes regarding foreign policy experience…

Bosnia sniper attack,

Her vows “To Obliterate Iran with Nuclear Weapons”

Failing to acknowledge until the end of the Primary season that her vote for Iraq War was indeed a mistake.

Notwithstanding other facts detailed during Democratic Primary election about her foreign policy resembling the present administration rather than the future Obama administration.

There will be many awkward moments with great conflict of interest if the voting record and political platform of the Secretary of State is drastically different from the President they are serving.

Not excluding the lack of respect and unnecessary diplomatic tension it would create among the international circle.

In a nutshell, Senator Clinton’s experience and leadership is suitable for fulfilling the commitments towards the people of the great state of New York considering the recent political turmoil experienced by them.

Some might argue that disagreement is healthy and perhaps adds a new dimension to the Obama-Biden administration.

Their argument is valid provided, the disagreement is not to undermine the elected President, the highest authority.

Usually, there are two possibilities for individuals to disagree with one another.

First, when the ulterior motive is to promote personal agenda.

Alternatively, when the individual in disagreement genuinely cares about the issue and offers an objective viewpoint to guide the stray party.

Therefore, the ideal candidate for Secretary of State symbolizing the real change,

The promise by Obama-Biden administration…

Is an entity — with a consistent and proven voting record, personal philosophy and firm commitment towards peace and diplomacy in national and international legislations.

Even though, there are quite a few choices available,

The candidate with the following credentials is best suited for the Secretary of State position –

Legitimate concern for civil rights and ethics

Voting against unjustified wars

Voting against unlawful tapping of private communication among citizens of the United States

Reaching across the aisle to work with opponents in a maverick style – a valuable asset in resolving many international conflicts,

That candidate is none other than the elected official from the Great State of Wisconsin, Senator Russ Feingold.

Senator Feingold will demonstrate leadership, experience, patience, confidence and intellect in resolving many pending international conflicts especially the Middle East between the States of Israel and Palestine and other global matter.

It is evident that Senator Feingold by voting against Iraq war displayed courage and judgment like the President-elect Barack Obama.

The similarity between them is uncanny in terms of many issues and policy matter.

At the same time, Senator Feingold has respectfully disagreed with President-elect Barack Obama on issues like Public Financing and FISA.

Senator Feingold has the right balance — maturity and experience in handling any international crisis with poise and diligence to the satisfaction of the American electorate and international community.

Inconclusively, Senator Feingold’s appointment will create an opportunity to expedite the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in the best interests of the people of the two nations entitled to independence, peace, security and sovereignty.

Also, curb global terrorism the premise of unresolved Middle east conflict.

Finally, I’m confident that President-elect Barack Obama and Vice President-elect Joe Biden will deliver the “authentic Change we can believe in” all matter.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

The Oscillating Pendulum

November 16, 2008

The historic election is over and the new administration is in the process of recruiting members for key positions.

It is still important to reflect on the role of media and news organization in this electoral process.

Extreme media bias towards one candidate and overwhelmingly condescending against another caused a great deal of frustration, anger and disappointment among the electorate.

The anti-media sentiments reverberated all over the cyberspace.

Media hype was intense during the Democratic Primary election.

Since I was vigorously involved during that time, I have great memories that will remain part of me for a long time.

There were several incidents but some of them have a greater impact on individuals, more severely than others do.

Mainly due to the smear tactics and negative attacks hurled on people like me entering the political campaign for the first time as surrogates, representatives or grass root supporters.

One particular incident is worth the spotlight because it is about the media personalities conducting themselves as the world authority in all matter especially the political race such as the Presidential election.

Ironically, in this Presidential election they were repeatedly wrong with both Democratic and Republican nominees.

Why?

They followed the conventional wisdom and failed to see or accept new possibilities and developments.

Only to steer course once the tide turned in a different direction sweeping anything and everything on the way.

The spotlight is precisely on MSNBC.

The network that took lot of heat from the public and rightfully so, for being excessively in favor of Obama Campaign in an unprecedented appeasement of the candidate then, Senator Barack Obama.

It is noteworthy that MSNBC initially rejected the candidate Senator Barack Obama against their preferred candidate, Senator Hillary Clinton.

Likewise, the venerable New York Times endorsed Senator Hillary Clinton way back on January 25, 2008 as the “IDEAL COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF.” and

Emphasizing that President-elect Barack Obama was not qualified in that respect,

Quoted by the recent Nobel Laureate Paul Krugman through national and international telecast on CNN.

I was devastated to note the hasty decision by a leading and the most respectable news organization such as New York Times.

Immediately, I made my first and only contact with the cable media outlet, Free Speech and World Link Television expressing my emotion on the endorsement.

Here is extract of the email titled The Moment of Truth sent to Amy Goodman of Free Speech Television on January 25, 2008, 12.22P.M PST , in that context:

“This morning the endorsement by New York Times is another way of indicating that Senator Clinton will be the future President of the United States.

Senator Clinton made many overtures in her recent T.V talk show appearances that I should go away and abandon the Obama campaign to suppress the Iraq war issue finally.

The impression I have is,

If Senator Obama becomes the nominee, there is absolutely no turning back for him as he would win the general election.”

———————————————-

In reality, what exactly happened prior to our President-elect Barack Obama establishing himself as a formidable candidate in the election is attention worthy.

First, my personal experience with MSNBC goes back to the days when the incumbent administration laid out the strategy to sell the unpopular Iraq war to the public and the United Nations.

I happened to be one of the unfortunate victims of mandatory public opinion survey superficially conducted by the administration to gain public support for the illegal invasion of Iraq.

This matter verified and confirmed truthful by the Institute for Public Policy, a non-profit organization, following the claim in my blog post during the Democratic Primary election.

With the relentless pro-Iraq war rally from networks such as MSNBC and FOX, the administration successfully launched their mission.

Although, there were other major networks equally involved in drumming their support for the Iraq war…

MSNBC displayed no qualms in abruptly eliminating dissent like the popular and visibly democratic, none other than their own talk show host, Mr. Phil Donahue.

My first unpleasant experience with MSNBC is regarding the anti-Iraq war message conveyed to the administration in response to the mandatory survey.

In my statement, I clearly emphasized the blunder by the administration on their commitment to wage war against Iraq and,

The consequences ensuing in terms of loss of lives, economic costs, national reputation and everything else that followed the disastrous war.

The born again liberal MSNBC demonized and targeted me as anti-patriotic with spam mail flooding my Inbox.

Further, the obscene materials via virus corrupted my database, forcing me to abandon the hard disk for a new one.

It was nothing short of homegrown terrorism for my anti-war position.

It is important to cite the article by Victor Davis Hanson, A senior fellow at the Hoover Institution,

Ref. San Jose Mercury News, November 13, 2008.

The article quotes “Most polls reveal that American voters believed that their media was biased in favor of Obama.

The popular journalist Chris Matthews even bragged that it was his job responsibility to see that Obama succeeds.”
———————————————————————-

Chris Matthews brags about his support to Obama during the election.

It might be the case but the evidence is against such claim.

Chris Matthews threw his weight not until the candidate Barack Obama proven the Democratic nominee against all odds.

Mr. Chris Matthews clearly knows about what this is.

During the fiercely battled Democratic Primary election, Nevada Primary & Caucus held on Saturday, January 19, 2008.

I published the following blog post that morning 4.19 am EST, my time 1.19am PST causing fury and anger among the Clinton campaign and their surrogates in the media, especially Chris Matthews of MSNBC.

Post from Padmini Arhant’s Blog: – www.my.barackobama.com

Electability Factor
By "Voice behind the movement" – Jan 19th, 2008 at 4:19 am EST

Comments |  Mail to a Friend  |  Report Objectionable Content
Electability Factor:

The voters should focus on the electability factor when casting the vote in the primaries for their respective candidates.

The candidate, who can eventually lead the Democratic Party to victory in the general election in November 2008, will be the ideal nominee.

There will be various issues discussed and debated between the two parties during the general election.

Given the track record of the Republican Party in the general election, the Democratic Party would be well positioned with a candidate voting against the Iraq war.

Senator Barack Obama had consistently opposed the Iraq war.

He voted for the funding of the Iraq war to protect the interest and security of our brave young men and women in harm’s way and enable Iraq stabilize as a sovereign nation ultimately leading to the withdrawal of our troops.

The illegitimate Iraq war has been a major catastrophe for our national economy, security, credibility to deal with International crisis, and our image as the leader of the new world.

The Republican Party nominee voting for the Iraq war could be challenged and held accountable by the Democratic Party nominee voting against the war.

The victory strategy for the Democratic Party in the general election should be on the premise of Iraq war to honor the sacrifice by brave young men and women who lost their lives and all those currently serving in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The victory for Democratic Party would then truly represent the ‘real change’ against the ‘status quo’ or the establishment.

Padmini Arhant – Copyrights reserved

OBAMA SUPPORTER

————————————————————

To emphasize again, the blog post created enormous outrage with the Clinton campaign bitterly complaining about my attempt to influence the election negatively on that date.

As usual, mainstream media lend support to the power and establishment expresses their reaction in a manner to warn a private citizen like myself to stay off the campaign trail.

Like the BET CEO, Mr. Robert Thompson a close Clinton surrogate, with his exclusive appearance on–

The Situation Room, hosted by Mr. Wolf Blitzer, on CNN specifically advised me by referring to me as,

The “woman of color” to cease my campaigning for the candidate then, Senator Barack Obama.

The Nevada Primary was won by Senator Hillary Clinton.

President-elect Barack Obama had the caucus victory.

The MSNBC coverage on Saturday, January 19, 2008, the day Nevada results was declared, is evidence to the outburst of a media commentator against a private citizen.

Chris Matthews, in particular admonished me directly by wagging his finger and in uttermost condemnation of my interference in the Presidential election.

He said, “This is not a horse race for betting. It is a serious Presidential race.

Individuals with no knowledge or experience should stay out of political campaigns.”

It was a clear indication that individuals like me have no place in politics or public forum.

The sentiment was shared by another MSNBC host Andrea Mitchell who initially tried to remain objective during the discussion with Clinton aid about that particular blog post that morning.

However, she later on made a bizarre remark about a possible substance abuse by me because of my daring attempts to envision a future with an African American Presidency.

Only, if Andrea Mitchell would have played a similar role in critiquing her spouse and the ex-Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan,

Equally responsible for neglecting the warnings of the economic turmoil that nearly brought the domestic and international financial markets on the brink of collapse,

The recent bailouts may not have been necessary.

Thankfully, we are living in a technology driven age, where such incidents cannot possibly be buried in a time capsule with a hope of never being found until it becomes irrelevant.

All these blatant attacks and innuendoes were to demoralize me and debilitate my effort in spreading the message of our movement.

I owe my passion, commitment and drive to get further involved in the campaign to my children especially my eleven-year-old child.

He encouraged me to stand up to partisan politics and send a strong message to commentators like Chris Matthews, Andrea Mitchell and the likes,

That, ordinary people can do extraordinary things in life.

In fact, he was targeted as well with a nickname sidekick by the President-elect Barack Obama’s opponents for his exceptional role in exploiting the web technology with the publication of my blog posts.

My son’s advice to me was, not to rest until Senator Barack Obama is elected "The President" Barack Obama.

I am glad and proud of my son’s advice to fight against the odds given the extreme stressful situation at that time.

Surely, children have a better sense of rationality enabling them to behold a different vision for the world.

They realize the burden on them with respect to the national debt, credibility and financial security as future taxpayers of the economy.

Prior to the election coverage, MSNBC’s show —

The Countdown by Keith Olbermann targeted the American idol contestant Sanjaya Malakar and

Sadistically mocked him almost on a daily basis to survive competition with condescending remarks through critic like Maria Melito.

Maria Melito in her brutal attack against Sanjaya Malakar claimed that the reason for Sanjaya to gain unprecedented votes was because…

“The people of his ethnicity i.e. India, voting for him never had anyone rise to the hall of fame in history.”

Sadly, such comment reflected ignorance as anyone born on Planet Earth, should know the ancient Indus valley civilization which is India is not new to fame and wisdom.

The land in South East Asia is the origin and birth place of celestial beings like the Holy Lord Krishna, Holy and Graceful Gautama Buddha and sentient beings of the twentieth century such as Mahatma Gandhi —

The noble soul, the light of the world, the mentor of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and Dr. Nelson Mandela, preached and practiced non-violence, peace and unity that are oxy-moron in the contemporary world.

Not excluding other notable scholars like Nobel laureates…

The Poet Rabindra Nath Tagore for literature in 1913 and DR. Har Gobind Khorana for Physiology or Medicine in 1968 to name a few.

Besides, Sanjaya Malakar fan base sprawled across the social spectrum as demonstrated by his young admirer, Ashley Ferl awestruck during his performance.

Young Ashley Ferl, was in return summoned to the Senate for rigorous interrogation by the elected officials…

Prioritizing investigation of genuine admiration for a young performer on the national stage over serious issues like Abu Ghraib, Katrina and deliberate exposure of CIA overt operative Mrs. Valerie Plaim.

To revert to the article by Victor Davis Hanson, ref. San Jose Mercury News, Nov 13, 2008, titled — “The kind of real ‘hope and change’ we can believe in for next year”

“The media, meanwhile should be careful not to abandon fairness and discretion for short-term political advantage.

When the wheel turns – and it too, always does – what you did or said will come back to haunt you.”

I could not agree more with the affirmation.

I hope Chris Matthews and others learned a lesson or two from this historic political event.

When Change occurs, it happens all around much to the dismay of those consumed with fallacy and egocentrism regardless of the empire they reign.

The mainstream, far left and right media as well as some news organization with an exception of cable network like —

“The Daily Show with Jon Stewart”, “The Colbert Report” and “The Late Night Shows”,

Failed to meet the journalistic standards of objectivity and professionalism required in the presentation of views and analysis of any events particularly a Presidential election or for that matter, serious missions like the war.

The role of MSNBC and FOX in their relentless bashing of the candidates from both political aisles successfully drove the viewers to the cyberspace in search of

Truth and Transparency desperately sought by people of the human race.

Whether it is young Sanjaya Malakar reaching for the stars or young Senator from the State of Illinois, President-elect Barack Obama successfully taking a shot at the highest office on land,

Their audacity of hope was challenged with rhetoric filled with racial slur, negative attacks and divisive politics to deny them the spotlight.

It is admirable that both individuals displayed a decorum signifying unity and poise seen unlike before in dealing with excessive criticism from the entities exhibiting power in the corporate media and Public office.

United States is a nation of immigrants from all over the world.

Any social progress to the satisfaction of all those feeling disfranchised is attainable only if the media and the elected officials recognize their share of responsibility in the service to democracy.

Further, the author of the cited article, Mr. Victor Davis Hanson, concluded with the following passage:

“Obama and his giddy Democratic majority sound like they think they will now be novel exceptions to these iron laws of politics, as if they really believe their hype that they are the “change” we have been waiting for, with cosmic power to stop the planet from heating and the seas from rising.

But the only real difference from the past old politics is that the present avatars of “hope and change” apparently don’t believe that the age-old adage – “The more things change, the more they remain the same” – will really apply to them as well.”

————————————————————–

It does not require the cosmic power to stop the planet form heating and the seas from rising.

It is doable by the ordinary human power to respect life in general and act responsibly for their survival now and in the future.

Failing that,

Perhaps the cosmic power could influence the resisting human nature to preserve and protect the ecological balance necessary for the sustenance of the planet.

As for the age-old adage referenced above applying to the present avatars of ‘Hope and Change”,

It entirely depends on the agents of change and their target.

The age-old adage applies to those involved in cosmetic change rather than fundamental change, the ultimate goal and mission of the present avatars of “Hope and Change.”

Cosmetic change is delusional and beneficial for short-term gains affecting a selective few, hence it yields “more of the same” result.

Whereas, fundamental change target the philosophy of the institution as the sovereign power and,

Therefore, it is real, long lasting and universal.

As per the Hindu mythology, Almighty God Shiva is depicted the

“Lord of Destruction.”

Destruction is Deliverance for a New beginning with a divine commitment to depart from the age-old adage towards new-era prophecy, a divergence from

“The Oscillating Pendulum.” —

The significance and the sole purpose of the avatars of “Hope and Change.”

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Next Page »