Feeling Good
Beena Sarwar May 17, 2004
#96 Posted by rsridhar on May 20, 2004 10:41:10 pm
re: #84 by tahmed32
You are right in saying that BJP did not do justice in not accepting Sonia Gandhi as the PM. It should have been clear to them that if congress won, Sonia being the leader of congress would be the natural choice. The other allies of congress seem to have no problems.
I think it is better this way. If Sonia had insisted on becoming PM, it would have created a lot of friction within the country and a lot of energy would have been wasted on this issue. The nation needs to move on. Sonia Gandhi did India proud by renouncing her claim, something few politicians in India today are capable of doing.
Sridhar
You are right in saying that BJP did not do justice in not accepting Sonia Gandhi as the PM. It should have been clear to them that if congress won, Sonia being the leader of congress would be the natural choice. The other allies of congress seem to have no problems.
I think it is better this way. If Sonia had insisted on becoming PM, it would have created a lot of friction within the country and a lot of energy would have been wasted on this issue. The nation needs to move on. Sonia Gandhi did India proud by renouncing her claim, something few politicians in India today are capable of doing.
Sridhar
reply to this interact
write a new interact
add to favorites
flag objectionable content
#95 Posted by HP on May 20, 2004 10:41:10 pm
#89 by AlephNull
``I do however have suggestions for another substantial project that I believe is both worthwhile and doable. ``
I am working on it. Just can`t seem to find time to finish it. -:)
#94 Posted by tahmed32 on May 20, 2004 10:41:10 pm
mohar #88 I am sure that everything you say is true: i.e. many Indians other than BJP found sonia gandhi unacceptable; she was largely an unknown quantity; many people may be averse to having a single family provide a third prime minister to India.
However, the above do not change the fact that she would have been normally considered to be the prime minister (being the nominee of the party that won the right to form the government, not to mention the face of the INC during the election campaign). She had been named by INC as the PM, and the allied parties had agreed to her in name as well - in other words, despite your above points, the fact is that it was only the irresponsible behavior of BJP leaders (the president said they would start a nation-wide strike, the BJP health minister said she would shave off her hair and drop out of the seat she was elected to in parliament, and the party said no one would attend the swearing in ceremony accept for the token presence of ABV) that came in the way.
And certainly the constitution can be changed in a democracy. But by that reasoning you can do anything by claiming that the constitution will be changed accordingly in due course.
I am not questioning Sonia Gandhi`s decision - that was in fact a sound practical move on her part I think that took away the thunder of the BJP politicians and gave her and INC a good deal of moral credibility.
However, the above do not change the fact that she would have been normally considered to be the prime minister (being the nominee of the party that won the right to form the government, not to mention the face of the INC during the election campaign). She had been named by INC as the PM, and the allied parties had agreed to her in name as well - in other words, despite your above points, the fact is that it was only the irresponsible behavior of BJP leaders (the president said they would start a nation-wide strike, the BJP health minister said she would shave off her hair and drop out of the seat she was elected to in parliament, and the party said no one would attend the swearing in ceremony accept for the token presence of ABV) that came in the way.
And certainly the constitution can be changed in a democracy. But by that reasoning you can do anything by claiming that the constitution will be changed accordingly in due course.
I am not questioning Sonia Gandhi`s decision - that was in fact a sound practical move on her part I think that took away the thunder of the BJP politicians and gave her and INC a good deal of moral credibility.
#93 Posted by tahmed32 on May 20, 2004 10:41:10 pm
mohar: that should have been ``fourth prime minister`` in my previous post, not ``third``. Sorry.
#91 Posted by sadna on May 20, 2004 4:48:50 pm
AlephNull #89
``I do however have suggestions for another substantial project that I believe is both worthwhile and doable. ``
And that is..? Not mass tonsuring to keep us from tearing our collective hair out, hopefully??
``I do however have suggestions for another substantial project that I believe is both worthwhile and doable. ``
And that is..? Not mass tonsuring to keep us from tearing our collective hair out, hopefully??
#90 Posted by mohar11 on May 20, 2004 4:48:48 pm
#87 by sadna
That could explain why some pakistanis are very excited to see Sonia as PM.
That could explain why some pakistanis are very excited to see Sonia as PM.
#89 Posted by satyamvada on May 20, 2004 4:05:51 pm
funny...tahmed is now preaching democracy to Indians : )
tahmed - give me the url where it says economic sanctions against Pakiland was
lifted because of the nuke explosions. Show me the evidence that IMF and WB
withdrew sanctions after the nuke explosions ! ( NOT after 9/11)
Being the head of the largest party does not necessarily mean one should
be called to become the PM ( that is a convention - not a rule ) .
Also in a democracy - The constitution can be changed - as and when the legislators
decide to do so and have the numbers to do so.
The Constitution is a document that ``We the people of India ...give ourselves this
constitution`` so it is not some holy book. Look up the preamble of the constitution
If you want to lecture respect for the constitution - then J&K is an
integral part of India, Uniform civil code is recommended, the directive principle
states that cow slaughter should be banned etc etc ....
Without knowing much - dont lecture Indians.
You were again lecturing Indians about BJP boycotting the swearing in ceremony.
That happens all the time. legislators walk out ( sometimes they are thrown out
by the Speaker - if they create a ruckus ) Big deal. So what if people walk out...
Infact, the elected reps have tremendous freedom to say what they want in the
assembly. The only thing that happens is that the remarks get expunged.
Your bluster while being absolutely ignorant is amazing.
#88 Posted by concerned1 on May 20, 2004 4:05:51 pm
will of the people?
congress placed its own candidates in 417 seats (out of 543) and won 145 seats, which means that indian voters rejected congress in 272 seats or in 65% of the seats contested by it...so what exactly is the will of the people? that wherever congress is pitted directly against its opponents, 2/3rd majority of the indian voters is against congress...and shall we say by extension sonia gandhi (if she was expected to be their pm choice)? the total vote won by the congress is even less...28% as opposed to 26% by bjp...
the upa is simply a post-poll alliance to keep nda out of power. the alliance members have in this election fought against congress at state level with disagreements over pretty much everything...talk about minimum common programme...not common minimum.
the nda had declared that they would decline to form the govt if they got anything less than 240...even if they were the single largest party...for they will take a number less than 240 as a mandate against them.
rajiv gandhi declined to form the govt in 1997 when the congress was the single largest pary with 197 seats...he realized that the mandate was against his party.
nda/bjp is the single largest party in karnataka assembly where congress has suffered heavy losses and its chief minister has resigned...yet the congress is NOT taking it as a mandate against it and is keeping the horse-trading process alive...
congress placed its own candidates in 417 seats (out of 543) and won 145 seats, which means that indian voters rejected congress in 272 seats or in 65% of the seats contested by it...so what exactly is the will of the people? that wherever congress is pitted directly against its opponents, 2/3rd majority of the indian voters is against congress...and shall we say by extension sonia gandhi (if she was expected to be their pm choice)? the total vote won by the congress is even less...28% as opposed to 26% by bjp...
the upa is simply a post-poll alliance to keep nda out of power. the alliance members have in this election fought against congress at state level with disagreements over pretty much everything...talk about minimum common programme...not common minimum.
the nda had declared that they would decline to form the govt if they got anything less than 240...even if they were the single largest party...for they will take a number less than 240 as a mandate against them.
rajiv gandhi declined to form the govt in 1997 when the congress was the single largest pary with 197 seats...he realized that the mandate was against his party.
nda/bjp is the single largest party in karnataka assembly where congress has suffered heavy losses and its chief minister has resigned...yet the congress is NOT taking it as a mandate against it and is keeping the horse-trading process alive...
#87 Posted by sadna on May 20, 2004 4:05:51 pm
PS to mohar11
btw, such accusations are likely to be manifestations of the foreign accusers` own racism, namely that they do not trust the `brown` indoos so they greatly prefer that a woman of white European extraction have control over India`s nuclear weapons. It may still happen in future, but it is NO ONE but Indians` own business to decide.
btw, such accusations are likely to be manifestations of the foreign accusers` own racism, namely that they do not trust the `brown` indoos so they greatly prefer that a woman of white European extraction have control over India`s nuclear weapons. It may still happen in future, but it is NO ONE but Indians` own business to decide.
#86 Posted by mohar11 on May 20, 2004 4:05:51 pm
#84 by tahmed32
BJP is not only one who says sonia is unacceptable. A lot of Indians think so. Including some congress members themseves, until recently that is. That`s why congress didn`t declare her as the PM candidate before election.
And there is good reasons for that - she has never been forth-coming on major issues. Nobody knows what her views are on anything. She can hardly speak without notes. She has always been a palace-dwelling person - not very accessible to people. Being foreign-born, she starts with a handicap .... and on top of that, being a reluctant politician and being a non-communicator makes people uncomfortable. I mean - why would indians (or any other country for that matter) pass the nuke button to somebody they hardly know.
Her lack of interaction is most likely intentional - because she never wanted such political roles in the first palce. The coterie inside congress begs her all the time - because these folks have no standing on their own - they want to piggy back to power. That`s why you see her as the face of INC.
The other reason is - aversion to dynasty. If You take out her last name - she is nothing. Dynastic politics is totally against the New Indian ethos - it goes against what a progressive India wants to achieve. I mean why would she be the face of grand old party of India - just because she married Rajiv? These critical roles should be based on merit and experience.
In terms of votes - last time she got 114, the worst ever for congress. This time she got 30 more - which was on account of the debacle of TDP in Andhra. It was a vote against Naidu, the CM - not FOR Sonia.
So she has done the right thing by not accepting the PM post. Her objective is to keep the party in tact so that her children could inherit it one day. So it was good decision.
BJP is not only one who says sonia is unacceptable. A lot of Indians think so. Including some congress members themseves, until recently that is. That`s why congress didn`t declare her as the PM candidate before election.
And there is good reasons for that - she has never been forth-coming on major issues. Nobody knows what her views are on anything. She can hardly speak without notes. She has always been a palace-dwelling person - not very accessible to people. Being foreign-born, she starts with a handicap .... and on top of that, being a reluctant politician and being a non-communicator makes people uncomfortable. I mean - why would indians (or any other country for that matter) pass the nuke button to somebody they hardly know.
Her lack of interaction is most likely intentional - because she never wanted such political roles in the first palce. The coterie inside congress begs her all the time - because these folks have no standing on their own - they want to piggy back to power. That`s why you see her as the face of INC.
The other reason is - aversion to dynasty. If You take out her last name - she is nothing. Dynastic politics is totally against the New Indian ethos - it goes against what a progressive India wants to achieve. I mean why would she be the face of grand old party of India - just because she married Rajiv? These critical roles should be based on merit and experience.
In terms of votes - last time she got 114, the worst ever for congress. This time she got 30 more - which was on account of the debacle of TDP in Andhra. It was a vote against Naidu, the CM - not FOR Sonia.
So she has done the right thing by not accepting the PM post. Her objective is to keep the party in tact so that her children could inherit it one day. So it was good decision.
#85 Posted by AlephNull on May 20, 2004 4:05:51 pm
Those who are attempting to enlighten Tahmed sahib may want to review prior discussion on the following boards:
The Constipated Faujiz - from #125/#131 onwards.
The Nuclear Noose Around Pakistan’s Neck - from #33 onwards
Some Burning Questions - from #97 onwards.
Tahmed sahib’s opinions and beliefs on the subjects of nuclear weapons and missiles in the subcontinent, desirable configuration of power in the subcontinent, India’s great power ambitions, etc., India’s attempts to acquire a ‘deep-blue-sea navy’ (sic), etc. tend to make their appearance on a regular basis in the middle of discussion of not-directly-related subjects. The ensuing debates while often most hilarious have not resulted in altering either his delusional assessment of the overall situation or his hopelessly addled grasp of factual detail.
The task of educating Tahmed on these subjects is not easy. In the past, harimau, mohar, bongdongs, myself, several other people, have tried and failed. The conclusion I’ve reached is that these beliefs of sahib’s are essentially religious in nature. They are deeply ingrained into his mentality. They are held without evidence, or in the actual presence of contrary evidence, like the tenets of revealed religious faith. They are a basis for sanctimonious sermonizing but are not open to debate or alteration. To make matters even more difficult for the would-be educator, Sahib seems to have no grasp of logic, suffers from poor memory, has abysmal reading comprehension. Serious remedial treatment in these areas might be a prerequisite for further education.
For those who nevertheless wish to persist in this endeavour, I would suggest a couple of warm-up exercises. You may find even these to be surprisingly difficult.
(1) Try conveying to sahib that it is incorrect to refer to a person as a ‘Hindutva’, irrespective of that person’s behaviour or opinions. This is a matter of grammar/vocabulary, not a debatable assessment of a complex situation, so one would think it would be easy. It has been tried before – the meaning and connotations of the word were explained to him in detail – but he seems to have clean forgotten those lessons, and after a couple of years of using the word inappropriately, to the amusement of Indians, has not yet caught on.
(2) Try conveying to sahib that, contrary to his oft-repeated statements on Chowk, the BJP was not ruling India for a ‘decade’ – a ‘dozen years’ – ‘fifteen years’. Sahib has not yet completely assimilated this easily verified fact of contemporary historical chronology despite repeated attempts to educate him.
In my opinion progress at a deeper level is likely to be very difficult without radically remaking sahib’s mentality and personality – deprogramming him, undoing decades of state brainwash and his own wishful thinking. At his age it may be more humane to let him be. I do however have suggestions for another substantial project that I believe is both worthwhile and doable.
The Constipated Faujiz - from #125/#131 onwards.
The Nuclear Noose Around Pakistan’s Neck - from #33 onwards
Some Burning Questions - from #97 onwards.
Tahmed sahib’s opinions and beliefs on the subjects of nuclear weapons and missiles in the subcontinent, desirable configuration of power in the subcontinent, India’s great power ambitions, etc., India’s attempts to acquire a ‘deep-blue-sea navy’ (sic), etc. tend to make their appearance on a regular basis in the middle of discussion of not-directly-related subjects. The ensuing debates while often most hilarious have not resulted in altering either his delusional assessment of the overall situation or his hopelessly addled grasp of factual detail.
The task of educating Tahmed on these subjects is not easy. In the past, harimau, mohar, bongdongs, myself, several other people, have tried and failed. The conclusion I’ve reached is that these beliefs of sahib’s are essentially religious in nature. They are deeply ingrained into his mentality. They are held without evidence, or in the actual presence of contrary evidence, like the tenets of revealed religious faith. They are a basis for sanctimonious sermonizing but are not open to debate or alteration. To make matters even more difficult for the would-be educator, Sahib seems to have no grasp of logic, suffers from poor memory, has abysmal reading comprehension. Serious remedial treatment in these areas might be a prerequisite for further education.
For those who nevertheless wish to persist in this endeavour, I would suggest a couple of warm-up exercises. You may find even these to be surprisingly difficult.
(1) Try conveying to sahib that it is incorrect to refer to a person as a ‘Hindutva’, irrespective of that person’s behaviour or opinions. This is a matter of grammar/vocabulary, not a debatable assessment of a complex situation, so one would think it would be easy. It has been tried before – the meaning and connotations of the word were explained to him in detail – but he seems to have clean forgotten those lessons, and after a couple of years of using the word inappropriately, to the amusement of Indians, has not yet caught on.
(2) Try conveying to sahib that, contrary to his oft-repeated statements on Chowk, the BJP was not ruling India for a ‘decade’ – a ‘dozen years’ – ‘fifteen years’. Sahib has not yet completely assimilated this easily verified fact of contemporary historical chronology despite repeated attempts to educate him.
In my opinion progress at a deeper level is likely to be very difficult without radically remaking sahib’s mentality and personality – deprogramming him, undoing decades of state brainwash and his own wishful thinking. At his age it may be more humane to let him be. I do however have suggestions for another substantial project that I believe is both worthwhile and doable.
#84 Posted by sadna on May 20, 2004 11:29:28 am
mohar11 #79
I would not bother about nonIndians calling Indians racists. Who gets to be India`s Prime Minister is Indians business and absolutely no one else`s.
In this TOTALLY sovereign matter about who will lead the nation, command the nuclear button and have the highest authority to decide matters of peace and war, it is for Indians to live up to our own Indian standards and not any busybody foreigners`.
I would not bother about nonIndians calling Indians racists. Who gets to be India`s Prime Minister is Indians business and absolutely no one else`s.
In this TOTALLY sovereign matter about who will lead the nation, command the nuclear button and have the highest authority to decide matters of peace and war, it is for Indians to live up to our own Indian standards and not any busybody foreigners`.
#83 Posted by tahmed32 on May 20, 2004 11:29:28 am
satyamwada: And I rebutted your ``point by point`` rebuttal, and in doing so also pointed out your ignorance of simple facts like the lifting of economic sanctions as a result of the May 1998 nuclear explosions (which, in your ignorance) you claimed in your ``rebuttal`` was after 9/11. Your calling such easily verifiable facts to be bullsh!it, but that doesnt make them so.
#82 Posted by tahmed32 on May 20, 2004 11:29:28 am
mohar #79 I think I am quite right in saying that in declaring Sonia Gandhi to be unacceptable as PM on account of her national origin, BJP politicians have in fact shown their lack of respect for the constitution and for the will of the Indian people. I say this because:
The simple fact is that the electorate knew that Sonia Gandhi was the head of the INC, and she was also the face of the INC (I watched the Indian TV covering the election campaign and there was no question about that). And no one inside or outside India has challenged the fact that even ABV conceded - namely that INC won the most seats in the elections AND that it enjoys enough support from other parties to form the next government.
No amount of hair-splitting can change this fact. Every BJP top politician other than ABV, is no better than our religious party leaders - democracy is OK with them as long as they get to be in power. By hook or by crook. I am sorry to say, but ABV is the only one among BJP leaders who has demonstrated that he understands the importance for national leaders to show respect for the constitution.
The simple fact is that the electorate knew that Sonia Gandhi was the head of the INC, and she was also the face of the INC (I watched the Indian TV covering the election campaign and there was no question about that). And no one inside or outside India has challenged the fact that even ABV conceded - namely that INC won the most seats in the elections AND that it enjoys enough support from other parties to form the next government.
No amount of hair-splitting can change this fact. Every BJP top politician other than ABV, is no better than our religious party leaders - democracy is OK with them as long as they get to be in power. By hook or by crook. I am sorry to say, but ABV is the only one among BJP leaders who has demonstrated that he understands the importance for national leaders to show respect for the constitution.
#81 Posted by mohar11 on May 20, 2004 9:05:42 am
tahmed
//...shameless and racist manner in which the BJP politicians then chose to reject the will of the Indian people as expressed through the Indian constitution..//
``Will of People``: congress got 142 seats - BJP 139. congress - 28% .... BJP 26%(all approx) - So mandate is against BJP for sure. But there is NO mandate FOR any party. So there is no unified ``Will`` of the people - the ``will`` is fractured.
Constitution: as have been pointed out recently - there are clauses in constitution which throws Sonia`s eligibilty for PMship into serious question. One of them is The clause on Reciprocity - since italy wouldn`t allow an India-born to run for office - India, by law, wouldn`t allow an italian-by-birth to do the same.
++++
On your charge of racism - I am not sure Sonia being white was ever held against her. Actually - it was the opposite - many people feel that it is an advantage for her, in a nation obessed with ``fair`` skin. ....... In fact - like somebody said - if Sonia had been of african-descent - we wouldn`t talking about her right now. Congress party wouldn`t be paying this kind of servility to a dark-skinned foreign-born woman.
So issue is not her race or her religion - only the fact that she was foreign-born - which is a legitimate issue .... many countries would object in similar fashion.
//...shameless and racist manner in which the BJP politicians then chose to reject the will of the Indian people as expressed through the Indian constitution..//
``Will of People``: congress got 142 seats - BJP 139. congress - 28% .... BJP 26%(all approx) - So mandate is against BJP for sure. But there is NO mandate FOR any party. So there is no unified ``Will`` of the people - the ``will`` is fractured.
Constitution: as have been pointed out recently - there are clauses in constitution which throws Sonia`s eligibilty for PMship into serious question. One of them is The clause on Reciprocity - since italy wouldn`t allow an India-born to run for office - India, by law, wouldn`t allow an italian-by-birth to do the same.
++++
On your charge of racism - I am not sure Sonia being white was ever held against her. Actually - it was the opposite - many people feel that it is an advantage for her, in a nation obessed with ``fair`` skin. ....... In fact - like somebody said - if Sonia had been of african-descent - we wouldn`t talking about her right now. Congress party wouldn`t be paying this kind of servility to a dark-skinned foreign-born woman.
So issue is not her race or her religion - only the fact that she was foreign-born - which is a legitimate issue .... many countries would object in similar fashion.
Interact Index
Latest Interacts
- Kedar_sathe: You know you goody... Pleas For Sanity as
- tahmed32: zang #301: dont ever... India-Pakistan: Empathy, grief in
- Kedar_sathe: If you feel so... Pleas For Sanity as
- jang: tahmed..this is a stanard... India-Pakistan: Empathy, grief in
- Kedar_sathe: majumdar, Hindus did not... The Future of Indo
- Kedar_sathe: No chance at all.... The Future of Indo
- BJ2: Ayesha, glad you had... I Am A Pakistani
- tahmed32: #296 parthaab: as our... India-Pakistan: Empathy, grief in
