Credibility Issue – President Barack Obama

April 12, 2010

By Padmini Arhant

A forewarning was issued since April 2008, regarding the candidacy of Senator Barack Obama that was disregarded.

Monday, May 5, 2008 @ http://padminiarhant.blogspot.com/2008/05/electability-factor.html

Electability Factor – By Padmini Arhant

Senator Barack Obama during his speech delivered on March 18th, 2008 in Philadelphia, following the Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s rhetoric, ascribed to the relationship with his former pastor as;

Source – “WORLD NET DAILY” (Thank you).

“And this helps explain, perhaps, my relationship with Reverend Wright. As imperfect as he may be, he has been like family to me. He strengthened my faith, officiated my wedding, and baptized my children.

Not once in my conversations with him have I heard him talk about any ethnic group in derogatory terms, or treat whites with whom he interacted with anything but courtesy and respect.

I can no more disown him than I can disown the black community. I can no more disown him than I can my white grandmother.

For some, nagging questions remain.

Did I know him to be an occasionally fierce critic of American domestic and foreign policy? Of course.

Did I ever hear him make remarks that could be considered controversial while I sat in church? Yes.”

Source – NPR.org, April 29, 2008 – (Thankyou).

• The following is a transcript of Illinois Sen. Barack Obama’s remarks about his former pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright. This speech was delivered in Hickory, N.C., on Tuesday, April 29, one day after Wright appeared at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C., to address accusations that he had made inflammatory remarks about the United States. The transcript was provided by the Federal News Service.

“Yesterday, we saw a very different vision of America. I am outraged by the comments that were made and saddened over the spectacle that we saw yesterday.

You know, I have been a member of Trinity United Church of Christ since 1992.

I have known Rev. Wright for almost 20 years.

The person I saw yesterday was not the person that I met 20 years ago.

His comments were not only divisive and destructive, but I believe that they end up giving comfort to those who prey on hate, and I believe that they do not portray accurately the perspective of the black church.

Now, I’ve already denounced the comments that had appeared in these previous sermons.

As I said, I had not heard them before.”

The contradictory statements from the Illinois Senator Barack Obama during his speeches on two different occasions concerning Rev. Wright unarguably provides legitimate reasons for critics and discerning electorate to question the judgment, loyalty and Patriotism factor from the candidate seeking the office of the “Presidency of United States.”

The inconsistency in the statements by the Senator foments the argument for the electorate that despite knowing his former pastor intimately for twenty years as described by the Senator himself,

He has been unable to change or influence the “mindset” of the controversial Rev. Wright about the nation that has embraced human race across the globe and provided unlimited opportunities for all like a mother towards her children with unconditional love.

The question arises about Senator Barack Obama’s leadership ability to transform “Washington Politics”, the other premise of his campaign, considering the above fact with “Rev. Wright.”

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

The Powerful Truth

April 12, 2010

By Padmini Arhant

Ever since the health care legislation bill was analyzed and presented on this website, democracy has been suppressed by powerful forces represented in the highest office through false propaganda by media and press corps including the nation’s so-called liberal magazine against Truth.

The obituary for Truth published in the newspapers through innuendo against the evidence of its existence is oxymoron, if not unscrupulous.

Again, for the record – Truth is well, alive, and more determined than ever to prove the purity and sanctity of its element.

When one has nothing to hide and is honest, open and completely transparent – the vehemently opposed ethical practice in contemporary politics, the deadly carcinogens polluting the minds beyond salvation consider Truth as a major threat to their diabolical means.

Often those who judge others on the premise of disparaging information provided by those in  Power against truthful dissent ought to turn inward and question their own morality prior to voluntarily reaching the lowest ebb in journalism and/or theatrical performance via skits and movies on the specific overseas vile television network.

Is news being reported to inform public or entertain them by transforming their magazine or program to a cheap tabloid and a desperate source of concocted lies to appease those in power with nuclear arsenal?

If it’s the latter, then it’s doomed to fail on  complicity with authority’s flagrance allegation of debauchery against Truth.

Any honorable individual would confront the facts and take responsibility for their wrong doings rather than indulging in character assassination of Truth.

As for the alleged cover up in the health care scandal – any incident political and otherwise propagated in the selective nation’s so-called liberal magazine and the public funded network in the name of  Free Speech,

The Bible – King James Version: John 1:47

“Jesus saw Nathanael coming to him, and saith of him, Behold an Israelite indeed, in whom is no guile!”

I present the unequivocal facts about my involvement going back to the political campaign of the candidate –

Senator Barack Hussein Obama and his spouse Michelle Obama.

a. 1608, William Shakespeare, King Lear, II, II, 102.
“I know, sir, I am no flatterer: he that beguiled you, in a plain accent.”

Beginning with my personal life, I was nurtured with the value to earn respect and not demand it.

My Principle – Rise to glory through your noble deeds that you can share with all.

Regarding the unsubstantiated allegation of debauchery –  I wish to state that chastity and morality is revealed in the human conduct.

When the guilty accuses the truth finder of debauchery for exposing the factual Presidential scandal it’s a confirmation of the accuser’s personal experience.

My personal life is no longer personal and subject to the triviality of –

‘She is anyone’s guess and a fair game indeed.’

Accordingly, the self promoted moral guardians of the society consider their prerogative to target the woman who is a mother, sister, daughter…in family relations.

More importantly, a human being committed to the sanctity of spiritual call by accepting God’s will. 

I bear none other than the Almighty God witness to this truth.

Never mind about the fact that she too has a family.

The passion, dedication, sacrifices made thus far for humanitarian issues is presumed a sheer exhibition on the world stage, despite enormous benefits to those responsible for the caricature.

Further on chastity and morality issue:

The irony is the purveyors of physical pleasure (the flesh trade) are denigrated by those contributing to the establishment.

What does one call trading human trust for profit and self-interest in today’s politics?

If morality and ethical norm is patented by those holding the power mantel, then it’s incumbent upon them to demonstrate through action.

After all, isn’t action believable than rhetoric?

Reverting to the political involvement that began in January through April 2008 – then September 2008- until March 2010.

I was approached by the candidate Senator Barack Obama via email, subsequent to my first time political donation in life – an amount $25.00.

From then onwards, I had repeat requests from then Senator Barack Obama, his spouse Michelle Obama and other prominent Democratic Party members to volunteer for the campaign and make regular donations.

The endless course literally led me to financial bankruptcy serving the beneficiaries not only in political gains but also material for mockery of my difficult monetary status.

The email requests were periodically published on the website including my responses.

I adopted the policy of transparency and accountability from day one of the Presidential election campaign and advocated vigorously in that regard.

On all issues pertaining to political, economic, social and environment matter, I emphasized on ethical efficacy conspicuously abandoned in the political capital, Washington D.C. where decisions concerning millions of lives across the globe are made.

I routinely submitted the communication with all political entities via World Wide Web for public view and understanding of the issues that are imperative to global community.

All my ideas, suggestions and strategies were presented on the web site and were addressed to the authorities for implementation.

However, they were selectively neglected on both domestic and international issues. The ones that were adopted like the economic stimulus and the job bill assumed the administration’s titles.

I deplored the pork barrel or earmark spending in the stimulus bill through the blogpost upon identifying the items in the news report.

Any communication from the President of the United States and the Democratic Party were strictly related to campaign donations, rallying for the candidates and complaints about the opposition attacks.

The communication was published on the website and available for public review.

I unsubscribed to the email from the President Barack Obama, the administration and the campaign in early October 2009.

The reason being, it had only instructions to energize the public on health care, energy legislation asking constituents to contact their local representatives without providing any details on the bill.

I learned about the components from the news report published in my local newspaper, on-line news publications and television broadcast.

My communication was always relayed through the website, for which there was no response.

I was not privy to the White House and/or the Congress members’ dealings and discussions with any interest groups in Wall Street, Washington and elsewhere.

My information source on legislative matter and the political affairs was solely through local and international news reports available in print and public news media.

As stated earlier, I was never hired by the White House, the Democratic Party, corporations, any groups or agencies intimately or remotely affiliated or associated to political members or authorities in Washington, Wall Street or anywhere in the World.

I was constantly approached for mandatory service without pay as the political aide by the Obama campaign and then the administration in getting the Democrats elected to Congress and never briefed or detailed on the nature of any developments on the legislations or administration’s policies.

I worked since January 2008 and until now without any payments or benefits.

Now, there are false rumors about me claiming unemployment benefit, which is absurd and completely distorted. I’ve never been on any unemployment benefit.

At the same time floating the fictitious narrative on me as super wealthy to drown any other candidate.

A  Super wealthy  collecting unemployment benefit alongside!  Obviously, they were attributing own practice to feel better.

Then the comedy satire insinuating bipolar disease, acute mental illness and the continuous slander thereafter to show their loyalty to political class is nothing more than own mirror reflection.

Perhaps, the notion is that Brown Foreigners are not supposed to eat. They don’t need a home and maintain a modest existence by being able to pay their utility bills, transportation needs, and provide for their family.

My explicit request to President Barack Obama on my precise role in the administration or the Democratic Party following the influx of donation reminders had no response to that until date.

I regularly clarified my position with President Barack Obama in 2009 and 2010 through the website, that I was unwilling to be a cheerleader of policies against public interest and refused to be an attack dog for the administration at any time.

I had no previous knowledge about the distant period setting and the health bill negotiations between the White House and their special interest allies.

It was also published on the website and obtainable if required.

I was treated as the political campaigner for the Democratic Party and not an administration or Congress member. They sought help with the political election in 2010 to boost public support for President Barack Obama.

There is political smear from the critics, more interested in the investigation of my openness instead of channeling their resources towards the Bilderberg secret meeting attended by Presidential candidates Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and John McCain in 2008 that I unveiled on my website for public awareness and fearlessly dissented the authorities’ decisions on many issues including the troops increase in Afghanistan.

If I were to allegedly cover up on the health care or any other issue manufactured by the White House,

Why would I become the victim of violent threats by the authority in power?

Why would they insist that I should quit being inquisitive and even nick named me Snoop Dog in their parlance?

I questioned the then candidate Barack Obama on flip-flopping of issues during the political campaign and after the administration assuming power in the White House.

For switching from Single Payer System to private health care for profit.

Defaulting on campaign finance at the crucial moment of the Presidential election.

Casting his vote on FISA in 2008. Patriot act and the discriminatory policy in 2009.

Torture, detention, overseas rendition, troop withdrawal from Iraq and Afghanistan, altering the 9/11 terrorists federal trial to a military jurisdiction, the continuation of the predecessor, the former President George W. Bush’s policy.

Collecting public donations while claiming that there were no special interests’ contributions to his campaign, when the funds were flowing from Goldman Sachs, AIG, health industry and others – the figures that I published on the website much to the administration’s anger.

The administration and the State Department blocked the EU unilateral declaration under Sweden’s Presidency that embraced my policy on Israeli-Palestinian conflict. It was scheduled in November 2009. The people in both states were prepared and unbeknown the news vanished.

Similarly, in the Honduran crisis, the military coup leader agreed to step down and allow the former President Manuel Zelaya to remain in office until the national election in November 2009. The prospect was extinguished with the administration not inclined to intervene.

The materials with visual content were published on the website to this effect.

Haiti – the recommendation on the exiled leader Jean Bertrand Aristide’s return to his country was ignored.

Challenged on the environmental policies that was contradictory to the pledge made on the campaign trail. I called the COP15 summit a failure in the absence of real achievement.

In the 2008 Pennsylvania Primary election – I expressed my objection earlier on about Senator Obama’s approval to spend an estimated 11 million dollars on the television advertisement against his formidable opponent Senator Hillary Clinton while they declined to pay the foot soldiers $10 an hour for going door-to-door campaign. Most of them were African Americans eager to serve in the contentious primary that he lost to his democratic contender.

Lately, I responded to the Washington Post’s article by Richard Cohen on,

“Obama Policy unappreciated by the right and the left,” where I indicated that showering praise on the inadequate or failed policy would qualify as cronyism and exacerbate the corrupt political system.

I was issued a warning and a remark ‘She does not follow rules and creates her own that does not bode well with the authority.’  i.e. the international incognito clique running the gamut via proxies and puppet governments worldwide.

Because of my strong position on ethics and morality, I was abruptly eliminated from the campaign in March 2008 after ensuring the Democratic Party nomination in the primary election victories.

Perhaps, the critics’ selective memory may not serve them well.

I launched a campaign through my earlier website and endorsed the former Vice President Al Gore for President in May 2008. Furthermore, in an unprecedented gesture, I selected the Wisconsin Senator Russ Feingold as the Vice Presidential candidate on the ticket.

It was in protest of the dramatic shift in Senator Obama’s policies visible after clinching the Democratic Party nomination. My rejection of the international Presidential candidate Barack Obama infuriated many of his ardent supporters, who have now become my cynics.

I was called a traitor even though the Senator’s policies did not synchronize with the base.

After the arrival of the Alaskan Governor Sarah Palin, the Republican candidates gained momentum in the general election and so did the communication from the candidate Barack Obama, his spouse Michelle Obama (for whom I was non-existent during the Gala Democratic Party Nomination) and the Obama campaign.

The flurry of emails and snail mail asking me to get back in the campaign was superfluous.

They managed to persuade the Vice President Al Gore to email me and send a letter in that regard, which was also published on the website.

Somehow, the alleged ‘character’ of the woman they have misportrayed now didn’t seem to matter then, when they were aspiring their dreams.

Is it political expediency or cutthroat politics to borrow the term recently used by them?

My communication medium from the start has been the website to keep the public informed on the direct engagement with the power in Washington throughout the election and up until now.

Unlike the then candidate Barack Obama’s surrogate and spouse Michelle Obama, reportedly dictated the The View  show hosts on the permissible questions that debarred the co-host Elisabeth Hasselbeck from straying in the contrived conversation.

The press media also confirmed on the restrictions imposed by the Obama campaign that prohibited many reporters and anchors from asking relevant questions with the candidate and the talking heads.

The prevalent censorship on free speech and the Nuclear Policy signed with Russia on April 9, 2010 – especially the overtone against the non signatories of NPT and reservations to use nuclear weapons is extremely disturbing and deserves scrutiny.

There were verbal attacks against me on the delay in rebuking the administration on the health care legislation scandal.

It’s easier to view the situation from one’s own perspective.

According to the news media, certain African American legislators were in the process of creating a preventive measure to grant immunity to Obama Presidency against impeachment following the inauguration.

Besides, it was necessary to be mindful of the repercussions such as the racial discord, two wars and the stock market in the aggressive removal of the President of the United States, found guilty of treason.

Therefore, the systematic procedure was to hold the elected official to the highest office accountable to the people, who have been betrayed in the national legislation that was bound to impact millions of lives.

Hence, soon after I exposed the unethical bargain with the health insurance industry,

I waited for the explanation from the President of the United States and the Congress leaders who shared the recognition as the victorious team of historic health care reform.

I ask the Press Corps and the media,

Why are you not pursuing those members in this matter, who are the signatories to this legislation?

Isn’t Congress leaders and other legislators’ responsibility to review the content prior to casting their vote?

I was never presented with the details of the bill, until the report from the New York Times, which none of the critics, who are attacking me bothered to analyze and bring it to public attention.

So much for their investigative journalism in the liberal frontier.

The President then conveniently sent me a letter in the usual manner – glorify privately and vilify publicly.

There was no request from the President to share with the public, I still went ahead and published the content to honor democracy.

Subsequently, there is no remorse or acknowledgment from the President of the United States, elected to the office to protect the republic interest.

Up until such time, I was a mere blogger to indefinitely campaign for elections.

If my word was the rule of law,

Why was my plea prior to the final health care vote, to modify the legislation to universal health care in the letter published on the website to President Barack Obama discarded?

After them being caught in the act of ethical compromise that I detected on my volition, I was bullied with death threats and implicated as an accomplice to turn the tide against me, the public watchdog all along.

Any domestic and global policy submission through the web site was initiated exclusively due to my commitment to the higher calling to serve humanity.

When there is divine intervention the integrity is measured by the solemn oath to serve the people not just in the United States but also across the globe and I’m expected to deliver the humanitarian goals determined by the Supreme cosmic force.

Unlike the tradition in contemporary politics, there is neither carte blanche nor financial gains in humanitarian service. The rules cannot be circumvented for the appointee’s agenda.

Whatever is being organized, it’s in coherence with universal convergence for a new beginning and a bright future.

I hope this would put the derogatory demagoguery to rest. If it doesn’t then it would be to the offenders’ downfall caused by their recalcitrant behavior.

People in glass houses should not cast stones at others.

The content is in reference to the events unfolding at present.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Amendments to National Health Care Legislation

April 7, 2010

By Padmini Arhant

The health care legislation was signed into law in late March 2010. Subsequently, there is lot of disappointment to the effects of law and the insurance industry obligations that appear to contain many loopholes resembling the status quo.

Hence, upon reviewing the major components of the bill per the statements from the President’s letter, along with the data made available by Congress and the Congressional Budget Office,

It’s clear that amendments are necessary to protect ‘average Americans’ interests from the health industry behemoths.

Statements from the President’s letter:

“Now we need to begin the process of implementing these historic changes.

To ensure a successful, stable transition, many of these changes will phase into full effect over the next several years.”

1. “But for millions of Americans, many of the benefits of reform will begin this year – some will even take effect this week.”

Recommendation: Although, it’s claimed that the uninsured with pre-existing conditions would be covered beginning this week, the data should be provided for public knowledge.

The insurance companies willing to offer coverage to the uninsured population with pre-existing conditions including the information on the eligibility, the premium costs and the federal funding source is essential to confirm the benefit.

2. “Uninsured Americans with pre-existing conditions can join a special high-risk pool to get the coverage they need, starting in just 90 days.”

Recommendation: “High-risk” pool coverage starts effective immediately and not in three months’ time.

Insurance industry must note that this is a health issue and not a decision about any recreational activity or a vacation.

For some it could be a life threatening illness requiring urgent medical intervention.

Moreover, in the absence of specifics from the insurance industry – on coverage costs, limits and treatment level, the patients could be inhibited from seeking the comprehensive coverage they might need for their health problem.

3. “And Americans with insurance will be protected from seeing their insurance revoked when they get sick, or facing restrictive annual limits on the care they receive.”

Recommendation: This legislative law applies to the ‘currently insured,’ who are pre-screened and selected as the ‘low risk’ subscribers.

However, the law must be extended to the uninsured regardless of medical history.

4. “We passed this reform for 5th-grader Marcelas Owens, whose mother died because she didn’t get the health care she needed after she got sick, lost her job and her health insurance. Marcelas’ message to Congress was simple: “Finish health care reform. No other kid should lose their mom because they don’t have health care.”

We passed this reform for Natoma Canfield, who wrote to tell me that she could no longer afford her health insurance policy. Since losing her health insurance coverage in January, Natoma has been diagnosed with Leukemia and is fighting for her life.

Recommendation: In order to protect victims of such tragic situations, the Medicaid and Medicare (if age qualified) expansion is vital as suggested below.

5. We passed this reform for Ryan Smith, a small business owner with five employees. Ryan was doing his part to provide health insurance to his employees, but cannot keep up with rising health care costs.

Small businesses will receive significant tax cuts, this year, to help them afford health coverage for all their employees.

Recommendation: The public option is the reliable option for Small business and self-employed individuals struggling to compete in the dire economy.

Because, it’s being facilitated through tax cuts (federal funding) to enable their private coverage,

The public option is the ideal choice that would produce savings for this demography and the government.

6. “Early retirees will receive help to reduce premium costs.”

Recommendation: Again, the burden is shifted from the insurance industry to the taxpayers via federal help.

Instead, the Medicare threshold should be lowered from 65 to 55 in the amendment that would adequately address the issue.

7. Young people will be allowed coverage under their parents’ plan until the age of 26.

Recommendation: It should be at no additional costs to the subscribers.

8. Children will be protected against discrimination on the basis of medical history.

Recommendation: It’s verified to be true for the ‘insured’ but not the uninsured.

It was also revealed that the law is interpreted by the insurance industry as a discretionary action. Otherwise, a non-committal response and even coverage denial to this piece of legislation.

Therefore, imposing penalties for failure to comply will make the law effective.

9. We’re also making investments to train primary care doctors, nurses, and public health professionals.

Recommendation: It’s a step in the positive direction.

To make the investment worthwhile, it’s imperative to utilize the health care services for Medicare, Medicaid, CHIP, VA patients as well as the ‘Public Option’ subscribers rather than the private industry solely benefiting from it.

10. “State-level consumer assistance programs to help patients understand and defend their new rights” –

Recommendation: This could create variation in practice allowing the insurance and the health care industry to circumvent the respective state laws as seen in the environmental matter on carbon emissions, leading the environmental agency to adopt a standard law across the country.

That’s why, the independent and non-profit ‘National Consumer Health Rights Agency,’ would be ideal to deliver the service.

“In Marcela, Ryan, Natoma, my mom and so many other Americans, we are reminded of what this fight was about. It wasn’t about politics. It was about doing the right thing, and taking care of the hardworking people that make our country great.”

It would be beneficial to the suffering population upon incorporating the above recommendations and the amendments listed below.
————————————————————————————————–
By Padmini Arhant

Amendments to the National Health Care Legislation

Since the health care legislation is already passed, the applicable changes should be rapid without any legislative rigmarole.

1. Effects of law commencing in 90 days, 6 months and within a year must begin tomorrow and no later than April 12, 2010 to accommodate all different health situations experienced by those who are ill at present.

2. The contentious settings in 2014 and 2019 for full effects should be brought forward to June 2010.

3. Simultaneously, the tax laws scheduled for 2013 and 2018 should be modified to be effective immediately.

Accepting the uninsured patients as new subscribers should not be a daunting task given the resources and the established system that are currently in place.

In addition, the federal funding for private insurance coverage should be diverted to ‘public option,’ program, CHIP, Medicaid and Medicare expansion notwithstanding the VA patient care.

4. Introduction of public option to induce real competition is the hallmark of the amendment.

5. Lowering the Medicare eligibility threshold from 65 to 55 as agreed by most legislators in Congress during the health care debate.

6. Medicaid expansion to the unemployed and senior citizens falling short on prescription drug expenses despite the $250 rebate upon them reaching the coverage gap.

NB: The votes are available in the House and the Senate to pass these rules via ‘the reconciliation process,’ if the bipartisanship remains impossible.

7. Revive the deal with the health care service and Big Pharma on the estimated $500 billion dollar savings that was initially committed by the industries.

8. Jan 1, 2011 – Enactment calls for ‘marketplace’ insurers to invest premium dollars on medical services by 80 percent for individuals and small plans, whereas the large groups by 85 percent respectively.

Recommendation: Monitoring is essential to ensure such practice among the insurers.

The law would be redundant without oversight.

Independent and non-profit ‘National Consumer Health Rights Agency,’ is appropriate for it would prevent breach of the investment criteria.

9. Anti-trust laws passed by Congress should be extended for a longer period i.e. until 2020.

10. Mandatory insurance should be based on affordability and individuals without sufficient financial means automatically qualify for federal medical program via public option at a lower competitive cost and not higher than the private sector as determined earlier to boost the private insurance sales, during the health care legislative process.

Alternatively, the Medicaid program should be accessible for these individuals and families experiencing sudden change in status due to loss of family income generating an insurance lapse in premium payments.

These changes will provide for all Americans.

The health care reform would be meaningful with the all of the above recommendations and amendments.

Those who contribute to these enactments need not be concerned about their re-election for they will be guaranteed a victory in November, 2010.

The legislators from both sides of the aisle could make this happen by showing their willingness to prioritize their constituent’s physical health over the special interests’ financial gains.

Ultimately, the power lies in the citizen’s vote regardless of corporate campaign financing.

‘Change’ is made possible by the people in a democracy and not the profit seekers.

If there is will, there is a way.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant


P.S: Comprehensive analysis on National Health Care Legislation was previously published on March 29, 2010 under “Health,” Category on this website.

For the Record

April 6, 2010

By Padmini Arhant

I have never been on the White House payroll or received any payments in cash or kind from the authorities and any political parties, or anyone remotely associated or affiliated to the political, corporate and any form of organizations in the United States or anywhere in the world.

Furthermore, the humanitarian work has been entirely a free service, on a “volunteer” basis from the beginning and up until now.

Any communication received from or sent to the White House and the political party has been published for the worldview throughout my involvement in politics.

The painting that was mailed by the Chairman of the Democratic National Party, Gov. Tim Kaine with a request to contribute to electing the Democratic Party members was published on the website prior to the final health care vote that I did not endorse.

Unlike the public network pledging to be the ‘voice for democracy,’ who attacked me for not doing so, yet applying my current donation for the negative attributes towards whistle blowers is the irony in public affairs.

Is mudslinging a sign of insecurity or a “Free Speech” misnomer?

I have never met the then candidate and now the President Barack Obama in person nor had verbal conversations during the campaign and until now.

All communications have taken place via email and conventional mail up until last year.

Subsequently, the communication has been through regular mail only.

The materials were all published on the website and available for public review.

Therefore, for journalism to thrive in honor of democracy, I request certain members unnecessarily engaged in unsubstantiated allegations to refrain from defamation of persons dedicated to humanitarian service.

Instead, invest their time and my donations for a productive cause.

Solidarity in promoting truth and justice is required from the media and the press corps, the only hope for democracy to succeed.

Human values are determined by their actions and the noble virtues reflected through their courage to face those challenging the ideals.

I remain steadfast in lending the voice to the voiceless and will continue to strive for peace on earth.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Response to President’s Statements on National Health Care Legislation

April 6, 2010

By Padmini Arhant

With respect to the content from President Barack Obama’s letter, the explanation is not necessarily accepted as ‘satisfactory.’

Hence, the White House must provide reasons to the legitimate questions raised in the analysis on National Health Care legislation and more to be submitted shortly.

Democracy thrives when the voice of the people are heard especially, with the legislative matter that affects millions of lives.

Avoiding the subject only arouses suspicion and creates confusion among the vast majority yet to be convinced on the ethical aspect of the legislation.

Since the Presidency was sworn in on transparency and accountability premise, it’s important to exemplify the pledge through action in the critical moment of public frustration.

Therefore, I request the authorities not to evade the issue any longer and be forthright in their response to the press and the public on the “insurance industry” favored health care reform.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

President’s Statements on Health Care Legislation

April 5, 2010

By Padmini Arhant

Hon. President Barack Obama

Dear Mr. President,

Thank you for your letter on the health care legislation.

I deeply appreciate your kind remarks and present the main content of your letter for public reference.

“We succeeded where seven presidents did not.

We mobilized and organized. We helped secure the dream of our nation’s founding.

Our success marks a new season for our country – one in which mothers, fathers, sons and daughters no longer live in fear of a system that works better for the insurance industry than it does for ordinary people.

What we have done here is remarkable. It is historic. And many believed this day would never come.

With all the punditry, with all of the lobbying, with all of the game-playing that too often passes for governing, it’s been easy, at times, to doubt our ability to finish the job on health insurance reform.

We would not fall prey to fear. We would not settle for an easy way out. We would not stop until we passed this reform.

We passed this reform for 5th-grader Marcelas Owens, whose mother died because she didn’t get the health care she needed after she got sick, lost her job and her health insurance. Marcelas’ message to Congress was simple: “Finish health care reform. No other kid should lose their mom because they don’t have health care.”

We passed this reform for Ryan Smith, a small business owner with five employees. Ryan was doing his part to provide health insurance to his employees, but cannot keep up with rising health care costs.

We passed this reform for Natoma Canfield, who wrote to tell me that she could no longer afford her health insurance policy. Since losing her health insurance coverage in January, Natoma has been diagnosed with Leukemia and is fighting for her life.

And we passed this reform for my mother, who argued with insurance companies even as she battled cancer in her final days.

In Marcela, Ryan, Natoma, my mom and so many other Americans, we are reminded of what this fight was about. It wasn’t about politics. It was about doing the right thing, and taking care of the hardworking people that make our country great.

Now we need to begin the process of implementing these historic changes.

To ensure a successful, stable transition, many of these changes will phase into full effect over the next several years.

But for millions of Americans, many of the benefits of reform will begin this year – some will even take effect this week.

Small businesses will receive significant tax cuts, this year, to help them afford health coverage for all their employees. Seniors are going to receive a rebate to reduce drug costs not yet covered under Medicare. Young people will be allowed coverage under their parents’ plan until the age of 26. Early retirees will receive help to reduce premium costs, and children will be protected against discrimination on the basis of medical history.

But we’re not stopping there.

Uninsured Americans with pre-existing conditions can join a special high-risk pool to get the coverage they need, starting in just 90 days. And Americans with insurance will be protected from seeing their insurance revoked when they get sick, or facing restrictive annual limits on the care they receive.

We’re also making investments to train primary care doctors, nurses, and public health professionals, and we’re creating state-level consumer assistance programs to help patients understand and defend our new rights. These changes will benefit all Americans.

We did it…And America is better for it.”

Sincerely,

Padmini Arhant

Happy Easter

April 4, 2010

By Padmini Arhant

Easter Sunday is a moment to rejoice Lord Jesus Christ’s resurrection to life.

It’s a joyous occasion to realize the power of love and truth revealed by the son of God, Lord Jesus.

Lord Jesus Christ touched upon many hearts and the lord continues to be the radiant light for all those who seek the lord’s grace in life.

Happy Easter!

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Pesach or Passover Seder

April 3, 2010

By Padmini Arhant

The important Jewish festival that commenced on March 29 and observed until April 6, 2010 is symbolic to freedom.

A family celebration that involves a traditional meal set in a neat order known as ‘Seder.’

Passover is mainly focused on the suffering endured by the Jewish people in the biblical and modern times with a commitment to revive hope, redemption and faith.

It’s particularly related to “God freeing the Jewish people from slavery in Egypt, led by the prophet Moses,” and,

The twentieth century holocaust – a horrific crime against humanity that should never happen again to any human being anywhere in the world.

Religious occasion is a moment to rejoice and reflect on the meaning of life.

Human beings have tremendous ability to transcend negativities and prevail in promoting freedom, equality and peace.

Renouncing violence is the beginning of the end of human tribulation.

Universal love and peace is the core message to the world in conflict with one another.

“Chag Pesach Sameach” / “Happy Passover” to the Jewish families in the United States and across the globe.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Afghan War after Troops Increase

April 1, 2010

By Padmini Arhant

The latest on Afghan war after adding more troops to the nine-year-old battle, a contentious debate that was dominant last year.

Associated Press – Sunday, March 28, 2010.

By Sebastian Abbot – Thank you.

“Troop deaths rise in Afghanistan – Numbers soaring as U.S. adds soldiers

Kabul – The number of U.S. troops killed in Afghanistan has roughly doubled in the first three months of 2010 compared to the same period last year as Washington has added tens of thousands of additional soldiers to reverse the Taliban’s momentum.

Those deaths have been accompanied by a dramatic spike in the number of wounded, with injuries more than tripling in the first two months of the year and trending in the same direction based on the latest available data for March.

U.S. officials have warned that casualties are likely to rise further as the Pentagon completes its deployment of 30,000 additional troops to Afghanistan and sets its sight on the Taliban’s home base of Kandahar province, where a major operation is expected in the coming months.

“We must steel ourselves, no matter how successful we are on any given day, for harder days yet to come,” Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said at a briefing last month.

In total, 57 U.S. soldiers were killed here during the first two months of 2010 compared with 28 in January and February of last year, an increase of more than 100 percent, according to Pentagon figures compiled by the Associated Press.

At least 20 American service members have been killed so far in March.

The steady rise in combat deaths has generated less public reaction in the United States than the spike in casualties in the summer and fall, which undermined public support in the United States for the mission here.

Fighting typically tapers off in Afghanistan during the winter but peaks in the summer.”

————————————————————————————————–

War Strategy Assessment – By Padmini Arhant

The troops increase to Afghanistan was a national debate last year with mixed reaction from all sources.

It’s important to emphasize that there wasn’t an overwhelming public support to the additional troops deployment in Afghanistan.

There were many reasons for the lack luster response.

Among them, the most relevant ones being:

The U.S. and allies’ nomination of President Hamid Karzai as the head of the government for second term defied the Afghan people’s will.

Notwithstanding, the international outrage on the fraudulent general election that led to the opponent, DR. Abdullah Abdullah’s withdrawal from the election.

Another factor is the U.S. occupancy in Afghanistan approaching a decade and the constantly changing ‘purpose’ behind the mission remains intriguing until now.

After much deliberation, President Barack Obama decided to approve the request from the defense high command and argued, “It’s not an easy decision to do so.”

Indeed, pledging the troops’ lives to succeed in the targeted goals is never a simple action.

However, a prolonged war provides enough evidence to consider winding up the operation or at least minimize the troop level by supplementing with diplomacy and peaceful negotiations.

Peace and diplomacy could have prevailed with a democratically elected government. It was thwarted by the U.S. endorsement of an unpopular candidate.

Further, the explanation for more troops involved the U.S and NATO efforts to restore political stability in Afghanistan and terminate the Taliban/Al-Qaida activities.

The irony is, the Afghanistan political situation under the U.S. backed Karzai government shows no improvement in governance, despite the incumbent Afghan President being the U.S. foreign policy designates’ choice.

Similarly, the shift in the U.S. and Afghan government’s strategy towards Taliban insurgents appears to be a new approach to win the militants on their side with cash payments and abandoning the poppy fields eradication – the main source of income for the Taliban forces.

An action that is widely criticized by the human rights groups against narcotics in Afghanistan.

As predicted, the tension between the Karzai government and the U.S. administration has surfaced confirming the mistrust in the relationship.

While the political stalemate between the authorities in Kabul and Washington persists, the mounting U.S. casualties in the Afghan war cannot be ignored.

Troop withdrawal from Afghanistan and Iraq is no longer a choice but an immediate requirement to end the procrastinated occupation in foreign lands.

Divestment from wars to social and economic development in these regions must begin to reflect the sincere commitment to bring hope and opportunity in a society deprived of normal existence for decades.

Substituting the combat troops with Peace Corps eliminates the tragic loss of lives on all sides.

In addition, the peaceful atmosphere would deter terror recruitment and foster an environment for the youth as well as others to build their nations towards a positive direction.

Now is the time for the U.S. authorities in the White House, Pentagon and the State department to relinquish failed policies that is proved a liability claiming precious lives and contributing to the rising deficit.

War leads to grief, revenge and destruction.

Whereas, peace is an eternal bliss.

I convey my condolences to the families of the fallen heroes and pray for the early recovery of the wounded brave hearts.

Your sacrifice makes freedom possible for all.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Federal Program Evaluation on Mortgage Refinance and Foreclosures

April 1, 2010

By Padmini Arhant

Please refer to the details laid out in the preceding articles from other news organizations published on this website under the title ‘Mortgage Refinance and Foreclosures.’

Information is also available in the article, @www.mercurynews.com

“By Sue McAllister – San Jose Mercury News, Saturday, March 27, 2010 – Thank you.

“Titled – Debt Relief – Mortgage program: Who will benefit?

Answers to how the federal plan will work and whom it will help”
———————————————————————————–

Program Evaluation – By Padmini Arhant

Making Home Affordable program targets the vulnerable homeowners on the verge of losing their homes.

Mortgagees who are unemployed, underwater and delinquent in their payments could seek assistance upon they meet the criteria.

Aligning mortgage debt with the asset value in order to help people retain ownership is a prudent measure to stabilize the struggling housing market.

It’s evident from these news reports that the program is well intended but the burden rests on the taxpayers through,

Federal Housing Administration insured loans absorbing the entire risk on potential loan default,

And,

Incentives to lenders to reduce principal value for the underwater and unemployed customers provided from the TARP funds…

The finance sector responsible for the subprime mortgage crisis is exempt from any liability.

On the contrary, they are being coerced with the federal funding that appears to be inadequate to rescue the vast majority from foreclosures and loan qualifications.

Federal programs or reform requires oversight to ensure the rules adherence by the industry.

Again, an independent / non-profit consumer rights agency is appropriate to avoid the conflict of interest.

As stated by the consumer advocates, the bankruptcy procedure for loan modifications is more reliable than the service offered by the federal partnership with lenders.

When a particular method is not yielding the desirable results, it is best to choose the option with a positive outcome.

Since the rules are ignored by the industry, setting consequences for non-compliance is an effective approach to limit the program failure.

If the borrowers are subject to terms and conditions then it should be applicable to the lenders as well.

Finally, the program would be beneficial with the banks accepting a fair share of monetary obligations in the principal reduction and the refinancing structure, having been the beneficiary of taxpayer bailout.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

« Previous PageNext Page »

PadminiArhant.com