Your choice for the next goverment of INDIA

[Auberon]

Yes, and as long as we are at it, removing the president too.

You do realise that Presidential Pardon is subject to judicial review right?

Very well, and the appointment of State Governers, Judges of Supreme Court and High Court, members of U and JPSC, Attorney and Auditor General, Election Comissioner shall be done by the PM I suppose?

Diplomatic functions of the Pres can also be dumped on the already overburdened PM I suppose?

Already there is way too much politican interference in defence, but officially making the Defence Minister the Supreme Commander of the Armed forces seems like a good step that ll further boost the force's morale and image.

Also, while we are at it, maybe the nomination of 12 members the President makes to the Rajya Sabha can be directly handled by the ruling party with nil Presidential discretion.

But how about the issuance of ordinances if the House is not in session..maybe that power can be given to the PM too.

But screw all that, those powers are formal already, lets further weaken the already weakened and politicised post of President and remove the post altogether, great.

How about emergency powers? You don't think in times of external aggression or unforseeable national or constitutional crisis, a unitary state will be better able to respond to the challenge? No, I thought not.

None that i can think of, however this is something that can happen in future, i have personally heard BJP leaders going on and on about the bajrang dal, we have to contain this.

Excellent, so you are basing your judgement on something that hasn't happened yet. But either way, at least blaming not UPA but the "flaw in the system" for preventing Afzal's execution. Lets move on -

Ofcourse its their fault, its also my fault and its our fault, we do not import our politicians, and its been 60 years already.

Its you who said - Thats the thing, the problem, we should never assume the functionaries to be flawed, untill that is done we will not be free of these situations.


Is that a self-contradictory statement, make your point clear, are the politicians flawed or not?

Just like congress can not be blamed for the riots in delhi, and BJP can not be blamed for gujarat, sure, all political factions have blood on their hands.

Rhetoric. Don't put words in my mouth. I said cannot be exclusively blamed. Anyway, we are in agreement here now, thought I still don't understand what point you were trying to make?

Thats was the point i was taking about the law that was passed by congress and that its just wrong that government can pass these laws which infringne on the rights of people.
With out that it would not be a problem.

Call a spade a spade put the blame where it lies. In this case and the precedent it sets as the Supreme Court is a Court of Records - squarely at Congress's policy of pseudo-secularism and miniority appeasement.

Yup, i dont trust them to do much good with it, send the issues to the judiciary (and increase its size while you are at it.

Oh man, amendments are already subject to judicial review. It would do good to read up on the basics of Indian political system.

As for sending issues directly to the judiciary, the judiciary is India is the most corrupt of all organs, ask anyone who's been involved in a court case how the system works. You have to take permission from the court to even investigate a case against a sitting judge. They have too much power already. Nevertheless, assuming the judiciary is the best organ -

What you are effectively proposing is a Kritocracy. All issues decided by the judiciary, thats one of the worst forms of government I can think of. Increase the size of the judiciary, give them legislative powers, jeez, whatever happened to DEMOCRACY? I am a citizen of India, the constitution gives ME the power to choose my representatives empowered to make laws on my behalf. I can criticize them , I can remove the from power at the next elections. Criticising the court is Contempt of Court and I cannot remove the judges if I find them unsatisfactory. Taking away from the PEOPLE the power given to them by the constitution to govern themselves and giving it to the Judiciary, I don't know what country you are talking of here but it sure as hell isn't India.

now that Needs, analysis, diplomacy etc. is irrelevant, its a great argument.

Irrelevant as to the credit given for work done. Now if you don't have a counter-point, smilys are great :sharabi:

dont really know, i was not even born back then and the available literature varies a lot in describing the events.dont really know, i was not even born back then and the available literature varies a lot in describing the events.

Kindly expand on your views, or provide a link to some similar online debate.

The revolution of Congress around the family, the emergency, promotion of family loyalists' in ranks, influence of Sanjay Gandhi during Indira's tenure etc. are pretty clear in pointing out the obvious. What literature have you read that suggests otherwise?

 

[Yusuf]

SP has come up with it's manifesto. Will bar English as a medium of education and ban the use of computers in all future projects as it cuts jobs.
So a section of our polity wants to take us back to medeival times in one way or the other

 

[Yusuf]

Our very witty and intelligent CM of Gujarat has put his foot in the mouth, intact both his feet. In his Congress bashing, he compared the party to and old woman who was a burden on the nation. Number one he has insulted all the elderly people of the country and women in particular, number two he has shown his gender bias and last but not the least has indirectly put age as a criterea in this election which puts Mr Advani in a tight stop who says age brings along experience and shouldn't be a factor.

 

[kuku]

Hello there,

You do realise that Presidential Pardon is subject to judicial review right?

Very well, and the appointment of State Governers, Judges of Supreme Court and High Court, members of U and JPSC, Attorney and Auditor General, Election Comissioner shall be done by the PM I suppose?

Diplomatic functions of the Pres can also be dumped on the already overburdened PM I suppose?

Already there is way too much politican interference in defence, but officially making the Defence Minister the Supreme Commander of the Armed forces seems like a good step that ll further boost the force's morale and image.

Also, while we are at it, maybe the nomination of 12 members the President makes to the Rajya Sabha can be directly handled by the ruling party with nil Presidential discretion.

But how about the issuance of ordinances if the House is not in session, maybe that power can be given to the PM too.

But screw all that, those powers are formal already, lets further weaken the already weakened and politicised post of President and remove the post altogether, great.

How about emergency powers? You don't think in times of external aggression or unforseeable national or constitutional crisis, a unitary state will be better able to respond to the challenge? No, I thought not.

My understanding of the pardon is that it is not given on legal grounds, it is given on moral and humanitarian grounds thus the judicial review faces the challenge of judging the process of giving the pardon, it cannot be subjected to judicial review on its merit on violation of procedure may be.

About over burden of the PM and his team, that post can handle more pressure.

The President has no real say in defence, I am not sure that would be in any of the reasons with regards to the morale or the image of the armed forces.

Yes the nominations of the rajya sabha members can be directly handled by the ruling party, and i see no trouble with that.

It’s not like the presidents have been capable enough\to refuse signing them.

Excellent, so you are basing your judgement on something that hasn't happened yet. But either way, at least blaming not UPA but the "flaw in the system" for preventing Afzal's execution. Lets move on -

Yes UPA has the blame, and NDA will do the same thing if they have to, so until this is addressed there is no real difference between the two for me.

Its you who said - Thats the thing, the problem, we should never assume the functionaries to be flawed, untill that is done we will not be free of these situations.

Is that a self-contradictory statement, make your point clear, are the politicians flawed or not?

Right boo boo on my part somehow the never landed in there,
Thats the thing, the problem, we should assume the functionaries to be flawed, untill that is done we will not be free of these situations

Rhetoric.
Don't put words in my mouth. I said cannot be exclusively blamed. Anyway, we are in agreement here now, thought I still don't understand what point you were trying to make?

What rhetoric?
Going back a post or two will help

Digging into past-The party dithered on Ayodhya issue. Remember it was Rajiv Ghandhi who had opened the gates of Ayodhya's disputed structure. Congress was dithering on the issue as it was not sure whose votes it was seeking Hindus or muslims on this issue. And by the time it made up its mind- it was out of the picture.

Call a spade a spade put the blame where it lies. In this case and the precedent it sets as the Supreme Court is a Court of Records - squarely at Congress's policy of pseudo-secularism and miniority appeasement.

Every political faction in India has a equation it has arrived at which gives it the strength to stay, pseudo secularism, nationalism, minority appeasement, all are a part of this.

There is no question about where the blame lies that is obvious, question is if I vote a party into power, would I assume that they will not do the same thing when the situation presents it self (i.e to use this power they have to further their goal to appease their audience), the answer for me is yes they will do the same thing.

Oh man, amendments are already subject to judicial review. It would do good to read up on the basics of Indian political system.

As for sending issues directly to the judiciary, the judiciary is India is the most corrupt of all organs, ask anyone who's been involved in a court case how the system works. You have to take permission from the court to even investigate a case against a sitting judge. They have too much power already. Nevertheless, assuming the judiciary is the best organ -

What you are effectively proposing is a Kritocracy. All issues decided by the judiciary, thats one of the worst forms of government I can think of. Increase the size of the judiciary, give them legislative powers, jeez, whatever happened to DEMOCRACY? I am a citizen of India, the constitution gives ME the power to choose my representatives empowered to make laws on my behalf. I can criticize them , I can remove the from power at the next elections. Criticising the court is Contempt of Court and I cannot remove the judges if I find them unsatisfactory. Taking away from the PEOPLE the power given to them by the constitution to govern themselves and giving it to the Judiciary, I don't know what country you are talking of here but it sure as hell isn't India.

Judicial reviews are not as water tight as you make them sound, if it was so the issue i have would be resolved and in the details judicial review is extremely complex, to the degree that it is not a very powerful balancing tool to the parliament.

The politicians make corruption in other fields seem very insignificant.

We will still have the power to vote, and the representatives you have will also have the power to introduce laws on your behalf, they will however only be implemented after the courts agreement. The representatives will not be able to hide behind anything (to let the laws sneak through), Protecting the rights of a person or a group of people against popular sentiment and government interference.

Of course this is not the India we live in, otherwise why would I talk of this? Its just the views I have on changing the system, and they are not perfect.

Irrelevant as to the credit given for work done. Now if you don't have a counter-point, smilys are great

Its not irrelevant, analysis is still a part of that for me, just plain credit wont do, like the UPA going on and on about its economic progress, I don’t care what great performance they put in, it was a time of global upturn, so that doesn’t count as something they did (in my views).

I do not vote for UPA, NDA, or the third front, I vote my view of the national cause (the good of India), which requires me to have a opinion about the events.
All I can do is laugh when I read a arrogant statement denying me that space to analyse things on myself.

The revolution of Congress around the family, the emergency, promotion of family loyalists' in ranks, influence of Sanjay Gandhi during Indira's tenure etc. are pretty clear in pointing out the obvious. What literature have you read that suggests otherwise?

In terms of the Nehru-Gandhi family
Books on Indira Gandhi, (dhar, somervill etc.)
Several articles in news papers and magazines stretched over a period of time,
(A recent one was party linkages and economic Policy: examination of Indira’s India)
The period is not as large as some point it out to be and political balance has returned to the party.
Indira Gandhi was initially promoted up the ranks becaue of the belief that she could be controlled by the party, one of the reasons for events to unfold the way they did was Gandhi’s lack of control over the Congress party, and she alienated a lot of power balancing elements with in the party to achieve this.

 

[kuku]

SP has come up with it's manifesto. Will bar English as a medium of education and ban the use of computers in all future projects as it cuts jobs.
So a section of our polity wants to take us back to medeival times in one way or the other

I think they will be surprised to know that someone actually made the effort to read it.

 

[Yusuf]

I think they will be surprised to know that someone actually made the effort to read it.

someone has to read so that the world knows what our respected politicians think and know what vision they have for our nation.

 

[Auberon]

SP has come up with it's manifesto. Will bar English as a medium of education and ban the use of computers in all future projects as it cuts jobs.
So a section of our polity wants to take us back to medeival times in one way or the other

You read it too then, their dream plan to cut back on productivity while increasing inefficiency and unemployent at the same time :clever66:

 

[Daredevil]

Our very witty and intelligent CM of Gujarat has put his foot in the mouth, intact both his feet. In his Congress bashing, he compared the party to and old woman who was a burden on the nation. Number one he has insulted all the elderly people of the country and women in particular, number two he has shown his gender bias and last but not the least has indirectly put age as a criterea in this election which puts Mr Advani in a tight stop who says age brings along experience and shouldn't be a factor.

Yusuf, you are misunderstanding what he has told. Here is what he told to the public

Dubbing the Congress as a "125-year-old elderly woman", Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi said the party leading the UPA has become a "burden" on the country and it should "depart" for the sake of saving the nation.

"This 125-year-old elderly woman...can she do any good for the youth?", Modi asked at an election rally here, adding, the Congress cannot change of the face of India (because it's too old).

"The Congress party has become a burden for the country. The sooner it departs, it would save the country," he said.
Modi said India need the "29-year-old young" Bharatiya Janata Party.


Link

Now please tell me what wrong he said. I urge you to read each sentence carefully.

 

[Auberon]

Hello there

Hi

My understanding of the pardon is that it is not given on legal grounds, it is given on moral and humanitarian grounds thus the judicial review faces the challenge of judging the process of giving the pardon, it cannot be subjected to judicial review on its merit on violation of procedure

Your understanding is incorrect. Reading up on Gouru Venkat Reddy case will be helpful.

About over burden of the PM and his team, that post can handle more pressure.

So the PM should be handlig the diplomatic functions of the President as well? Methinks that ll leave him with nil time to deal with issues of national interest, or maybe we should be sending one of his "team" to handle the diplomatic functions of the head of the nation, diplomatic faux pas but still, your view, fine with me.

The President has no real say in defence, I am not sure that would be in any of the reasons with regards to the morale or the image of the armed forces.

Its symbolic, the soldiers are not the soldiers of the DefMin of the ruling party, they are the troops of the Union of India and their Supreme Commander is His Excellency The President of India. Nevertheless, these are minor issues compared to what comes next -

Yes the nominations of the rajya sabha members can be directly handled by the ruling party, and i see no trouble with that.

Along with the appointments of Judges, Forces chiefs, JPSC members, Fin Comm, A and C Gen. etc. ( I am not mentioning governers since I am assuming you've scrapped that system as well). Now then, isn't this hypocritical considering you are actually for lessening the powers of parliament? Or do you see the PM as distinct from the parliament?

Secondly, you want to give legislative powers to the judges while handing over the appointment of judges to the legislature. I can't think of anything more disastrous.

Thirdly, now that you've handed over the Executive, Legislative, Judicial, Financial powers of the Pres to the PM, how about emergency powers? You don't think in times of external aggression or unforseeable national or constitutional crisis, a unitary state will be better able to respond to the challenge? Or will you hand over the power to absolve state assembelies directly to the PM as well?

It’s not like the presidents have been capable enough\to refuse signing them.

And your solution to this is to get rid of the post of President altogether instead of strenghtening it?

Let me think of a couple of instances when even such a nominal post acted in interest of the nation, 1997, Congress claimed for forming govt. after I.K. Gujral's resignation, rejected by the President. 1996, Shankar Dayal Sharma declined to accord assent to two ordinances and in May advised then PM Narsimha Rao to quit following his party's defeat. 1999, AB Vajpayee govt. had to resign but K.R. Naraynan advised the PM to get the 99-00 budget passed before the dissolution of Lok Sabha in the economic interest of the nation and advised other pol parties to co-operate. Result of his effort - budget was passed on 22 April, 4 days before the dissolution of Lok Sabha.

Post of the President shouldn't be politicised, Neelam Sanjeeva Reddy and APJ Abdul Kalam are two Presidents that I can recall off hand who had the support of all parties.

I can think of so many times when a more independent President from a non-political background could have been great, thus I support strengthening the post further.

You on the other hand have some sort of a notion about removing the post altogether and giving more power to the parliament you dearly detest.

Yes UPA has the blame, and NDA will do the same thing if they have to, so until this is addressed there is no real difference between the two for me.

UPA has the blame is a fact, NDA will do the same is your opinion. Its the UPA's fault, not the "system's flaw" as you were trying to prove, even if it was NDA's fault, it would be the party's failure, the system is as best as it can be.

Right boo boo on my part somehow the never landed in there,
Thats the thing, the problem, we should assume the functionaries to be flawed, untill that is done we will not be free of these situations

Which further illustrates my point, its the functionaries who are flawed, not the system. Can't think of a better system myself.

What rhetoric?
Going back a post or two will help

You are doing it again, don't put words in my mouth. I said cannot be exclusively blamed.That was my sole contention. The first post you quote isn't mine.

Every political faction in India has a equation it has arrived at to which gives it the strength to stay, pseudo secularism, nationalism, minority appeasement, all are a part of this.

There is no question about where the blame lies that is obvious, question is if I vote a party into power, would I assume that they will not do the same thing when the situation presents it self (i.e to use this power they have to further their goal to appease their audience), the answer for me is yes they will do the same thing.

Sure, you are entitled to your opinion. Fact remains that in this instance its the Congress's fault starting a very negative trend of different laws for different communities, what other parties may or may not do, what the answer for you is etc. doesn't have a bearing on this case.

Judicial reviews are not as water tight as you make them sound, if it was so the issue i have would be resolved and in the details judicial review is extremely complex, to the degree that it is not a very powerful balancing tool to the parliament.

Your contention was to send issues to the judiciary. The amendments are already subject to judicial review. Do you have any further suggestions?

The politicians make corruption in other fields seem very insignificant.

From what Iv seen the judiciary is more corrupt, inefficient and way less subject to anything punitive.

We will still have the power to vote, and the representatives you have will also have the power to introduce laws on your behalf, they will however only be implemented them without the courts in agreement. The representatives will not be able to hide behind anything (to let the laws sneak through)

What a revolutionary change you've proposed, except that laws already cannot be implemented if the court is not in agreement.

Protecting the rights of a person or a group of people against popular sentiment and government interference.

And how exactly will the rights be protected without "govt. intereference" ?

Of course this is not the India we live in, otherwise why would I talk of this? Its just the views I have on changing the system, and they are not perfect.

Sure, apart from the fact that there is no change that you've proposed so far.

Its not irrelevant, analysis is still a part of that for me, just plain credit wont do, like the UPA going on and on about its economic progress, I don’t care what great performance they put in, it was a time of global upturn, so that doesn’t count as something they did (in my views).

I do not vote for UPA, NDA, or the third front, I vote my view of the national cause (the good of India), which requires me to have a opinion about the events.
All I can do is laugh when I read a arrogant statement denying me that space to analyse things on myself.

My inference was that the govt. claims credit for the work done in its tenure. Denying you space to analyse things on your own, lol, sure champ, whatever helps you sleep at night.

In terms of the Nehru-Gandhi family
Books on Indira Gandhi, (dhar, somervill etc.)
Several articles in news papers and magazines stretched over a period of time,
(A recent one was party linkages and economic Policy: examination of Indira’s India)

The period is not as large as some point it out to be and political balance has returned to the party.

Indira Gandhi was initially promoted up the ranks becaue of the belief that she could be controlled by the party, one of the reasons for events to unfold the way they did was Gandhi’s lack of control over the Congress party, and she alienated a lot of power balancing elements with in the party to achieve this.

The period being referred to was the period of Indira's rise to power and no, I don't think there's still much political balance in the party, Sonia Gandhi's chairmanship and Rahul's rapid assent point out that Congress is still centred around the family.

Second boldened point, I agree with, Indira Gandhi promoted her and her son's personal cronies in the party in her quest for absolute control, and her dissolution of state assemblies, subverting of democracy and autocratic manner are pretty good pointers that she was very reluctant to relinquish power at any point of time, more so than any other Indian politician.

 

[kuku]

Your understanding is incorrect. Reading up on Gouru Venkat Reddy case will be helpful.

That has happened before, with that chautali ji, however he got more guys off then the ones that were made to stay, its not water tight.

Bearing in mind the parameters of judicial review in relation to an order granting pardon by the Governor, when we examine the case in hand, the conclusion is irresistible that the Governor has not applied his mind to the material on record and has mechanically passed the order just to allow the prisoner to overcome the conviction and sentence passed by this court. It is indeed curious to note that the order dated 25.1.1999 clearly indicates that the Governor of Haryana is pleased to grant pardon remitting the unexpired portion of the sentence passed on Siriyans Kumar Jain, confined in Central Jail, Hissa

Along with the appointments of Judges, Forces chiefs, JPSC members, Fin Comm, A and C Gen. etc. ( I am not mentioning governers since I am assuming you've scrapped that system as well). Now then, isn't this hypocritical considering you are actually for lessening the powers of parliament? Or do you see the PM as distinct from the parliament?

Secondly, you want to give legislative powers to the judges while handing over the appointment of judges to the legislature. I can't think of anything more disastrous.

Thirdly, now that you've handed over the Executive, Legislative, Judicial, Financial powers of the Pres to the PM, how about emergency powers? You don't think in times of external aggression or unforseeable national or constitutional crisis, a unitary state will be better able to respond to the challenge? Or will you hand over the power to absolve state assembelies directly to the PM as well?

And your solution to this is to get rid of the post of President altogether instead of strenghtening

it?

Let me think of a couple of instances ........ 4 days before the dissolution of Lok Sabha.

Post of the President shouldn't be politicised, Neelam Sanjeeva Reddy and APJ Abdul Kalam are two Presidents that I can recall off hand who had the support of all parties.

I can think of so many times when a more independent President from a non-political background could

have been great, thus I support strengthening the post further.

You on the other hand have some sort of a notion about removing the post altogether and giving more

power to the parliament you dearly detest.

Selected by a parliament in consensus, and creating a center of power that acts as a counterbalance, Providing them with the power will make the difference, its been observed in other systems.

You assume a president that is free of politics, which is not a absolute in a power hungry political system.

After this discussion i agree to the strengthening of the president post, it will have many of the results i wish for, otherwise their is no point in having him, however that never occurred to me as a possibility due to the nature of the post.

UPA has the blame is a fact, NDA will do the same is your opinion. Its the UPA's fault, not the "system's flaw" as you were trying to prove, even if it was NDA's fault, it would be the party's failure, the system is as best as it can be.

The bas*&%s are exploiting the system, got to contain it.

Which further illustrates my point, its the functionaries who are flawed, not the system. Can't think of a better system myself.

its been like 60 years, and they are our blood. Somethings got to give, they seem to continue on the same path. they will exploit it as long as it can be.

You are doing it again, don't put words in my mouth. I said cannot be exclusively blamed.That was my sole contention. The first post you quote isn't mine.

or letters in your keyboard, what ever, you are the one replying to it.

Sure, you are entitled to your opinion. Fact remains that in this instance its the Congress's fault starting a very negative trend of different laws for different communities, what other parties may or may not do, what the answer for you is etc. doesn't have a bearing on this case.

Why thank you , to have bestowed the great honour of having a opinion to me.
Its the situation that a political party finds itself in, has a effect on them.

Your contention was to send issues to the judiciary. The amendments are already subject to judicial review. Do you have any further suggestions?
[/qutoe]
Yes, one, to give the judiciary powerful, applying across the board, and to deny the politickians the hope of amending their way through it.

From what Iv seen the judiciary is more corrupt, inefficient and way less subject to anything punitive.

I had to give 500-1500 bucks at the ministry of environment and forest across india, for getting a receiving stamp on my clients applications, it started way up at the ministers. As i moved higher up so did the corruption, and this is the poor ministry.

What a revolutionary change you've proposed, except that laws already cannot be implemented if the

court is not in agreement.

Then let us set this in stone, i do not think it is that powerful now.

Protecting the rights of a person or a group of people against popular sentiment and government

interference.

And how exactly will the rights be protected without "govt. intereference" ?

the government is the representation of the twisted majority it has carved out of this sea, with governments interference all we have is a direct representation of that majority singing its tunes.

My inference was that the govt. claims credit for the work done in its tenure. Denying you space to analyse things on your own,

lol, sure champ, whatever helps you sleep at night.

Well considering that this is the "your choice for the next government of India" thread and the topics you were replying to had to do with why in 'my choice in the upcoming elections'1.

One cold beer, dont think you will buy me one.

The period being referred to was the period of Indira's rise to power and no, I don't think there's still much political balance in the party, Sonia Gandhi's chairmanship and Rahul's rapid assent point out that Congress is still centred around the family.

Te questions were about the Nehru-Gandhi family before and after Indira Gandhi, if they limit to the period when Indira Gandhi attained enough control over the congress syndicate, then i agree.
Many political parties have used children of existing leaders to get the advantage, its more to do with establishing the personal appeal.

 

[johnee]

Our very witty and intelligent CM of Gujarat has put his foot in the mouth, intact both his feet. In his Congress bashing, he compared the party to and old woman who was a burden on the nation. Number one he has insulted all the elderly people of the country and women in particular, number two he has shown his gender bias and last but not the least has indirectly put age as a criterea in this election which puts Mr Advani in a tight stop who says age brings along experience and shouldn't be a factor.

yusuf, you are misunderstanding. he simply said that congress is an old party compared to BJP. he was just being witty by comparing congress to 125yr old woman. thats all. to derive so much out of that statement is really stretching it toooo far.
gender bias! disrespect for old! common!:bye:

 

[ahmedsid]

I for one wouldnt want to see the NDA in power, because the UPA I feel did a much better job than the NDA, even though their economic policies werent that different. I am a fan of Manmohan Singh and P Chidambaram, hence I would love to see these guys back in Power.

Another things, Its a fact that when BJP has got the power, The Hindutva brigade, led by the Muthaliks and Togadias and what not, come out into the fore maliciously and cause trouble. These guys are No better than the Taliban and I for one wouldnt want to see the BJP associated with the likes of the Bajrang Dal, RSS or VHP.

The Day, BJP distances themselves from these entitities, that day will be the happiest day of my life because then can the BJP truly focus on Development and Not Religion and Communalism.

 

[Yusuf]

It would be great to have a NPA (NDA+UPA) strung out of those who are forward looking, development oriented, basically best of both parties minus the baggage of RSS,VHP, Muslim vote bank politics etc.

 

[Auberon]

That has happened before, with that chautali ji, however he got more guys off then the ones that were made to stay, its not water tight.

So by water tightness you are implying all pardons get quashed?

Along with the appointments of Judges, Forces chiefs, JPSC members, Fin Comm, A and C Gen. etc. ( I am not mentioning governers since I am assuming you've scrapped that system as well). Now then, isn't this hypocritical considering you are actually for lessening the powers of parliament? Or do you see the PM as distinct from the parliament?

Secondly, you want to give legislative powers to the judges while handing over the appointment of judges to the legislature. I can't think of anything more disastrous.

Thirdly, now that you've handed over the Executive, Legislative, Judicial, Financial powers of the Pres to the PM, how about emergency powers? You don't think in times of external aggression or unforseeable national or constitutional crisis, a unitary state will be better able to respond to the challenge? Or will you hand over the power to absolve state assembelies directly to the PM as well?

And your solution to this is to get rid of the post of President altogether instead of strenghtening

it?

Let me think of a couple of instances ........ 4 days before the dissolution of Lok Sabha.

Post of the President shouldn't be politicised, Neelam Sanjeeva Reddy and APJ Abdul Kalam are two Presidents that I can recall off hand who had the support of all parties.

I can think of so many times when a more independent President from a non-political background could

have been great, thus I support strengthening the post further.

You on the other hand have some sort of a notion about removing the post altogether and giving more

power to the parliament you dearly detest.

Selected by a parliament in consensus, and creating a center of power that acts as a counterbalance, Providing them with the power will make the difference, its been observed in other systems.

You assume a president that is free of politics, which is not a absolute in a power hungry political system.

After this discussion i agree to the strengthening of the president post, it will have many of the results i wish for, otherwise their is no point in having him, however that never occurred to me as a possibility due to the nature of the post.

No , I don't assume that. I hope it ll be so. And I certainly don't hope the post gets abolished and the Cabinet gets even more powers.

The bas*&%s are exploiting the system, got to contain it.its been like 60 years, and they are our blood. Somethings got to give, they seem to continue on the same path. they will exploit it as long as it can be.

That cannot be achieved by changing the system, but by changing the bas*&%s. Unlikely as it sounds, the system is a fine combination of checks and balances ideal for a country like India, no other political system will abe able to function as well.

or letters in your keyboard, what ever, you are the one replying to it.

No sonny boy, I was replying to your post, not the one you quote.

Your contention was to send issues to the judiciary. The amendments are already subject to judicial review. Do you have any further suggestions?
[/qutoe]
Yes, one, to give the judiciary powerful, applying across the board, and to deny the politickians the hope of amending their way through it.

Basically denying the elected legislature the right to amendment and giving the non-elected-appointed-for-life-uncriticisabe-judiciary powers across the board i.e. a Legislative Judiciary.

Dictatorial and Undemocratic, to say the least.

I had to give 500-1500 bucks at the ministry of environment and forest across india, for getting a receiving stamp on my clients applications, it started way up at the ministers. As i moved higher up so did the corruption, and this is the poor ministry.

Why didn't you complain in a court, the harbinger of all that is pure and holy? :blum3:

Then let us set this in stone, i do not think it is that powerful now.
Semantics, what do you mean "lets set this in stone" ? The SC gets this right from the Constitution itself, which stone do you want to set it in?

the government is the representation of the twisted majority it has carved out of this sea, with governments interference all we have is a direct representation of that majority singing its tunes.

And you want to curb this by handing over legislative functions to the judiciary ??

Well considering that this is the "your choice for the next government of India" thread and the topics you were replying to had to do with why in 'my choice in the upcoming elections'1.

One cold beer, dont think you will buy me one.

Iv heard that before, starts with one cold beer , ends with well, I thought I ll just have one, what harm can it do ..

Te questions were about the Nehru-Gandhi family before and after Indira Gandhi, if they limit to the period when Indira Gandhi attained enough control over the congress syndicate, then i agree.
Many political parties have used children of existing leaders to get the advantage, its more to do with establishing the personal appeal.

Yes to the first, not to the extent a party the stature of Congress has done to the second.

 

[johnee]

I for one wouldnt want to see the NDA in power, because the UPA I feel did a much better job than the NDA, even though their economic policies werent that different. I am a fan of Manmohan Singh and P Chidambaram, hence I would love to see these guys back in Power.

Another things, Its a fact that when BJP has got the power, The Hindutva brigade, led by the Muthaliks and Togadias and what not, come out into the fore maliciously and cause trouble. These guys are No better than the Taliban and I for one wouldnt want to see the BJP associated with the likes of the Bajrang Dal, RSS or VHP.

The Day, BJP distances themselves from these entitities, that day will be the happiest day of my life because then can the BJP truly focus on Development and Not Religion and Communalism.

same feelings when we replace UPA with NDA, and RSS, VHP with MIM(& the like).
IMO, congress is single handedly responsible for most of the present day problems we are facing. india's most of the problems are a direct result of the misrule of congress for about half a century. congress has furthered its vote bank politics by dividing india into categories of religion, caste, lang, region........etc.

ahmedji, muthalik has fielded candidates against BJP in karnataka. so, sri ramsene and BJP are actually opponents. just because they talk of 'hindutva', doesnt mean they are related to BJP. just like every party that talks about 'secularism are not related.

when nuke deal happened, I supported MMS wholeheatedly, but after seeing his(and his party's) response to the proxy-war pak is infliction upon us, I have decided that I cant bear to see congress for one more term. and for the first time I have seen India kneeing before US in such a blatant manner, thanx to our 'strong PM'.

 

[ahmedsid]

same feelings when we replace UPA with NDA, and RSS, VHP with MIM(& the like).
IMO, congress is single handedly responsible for most of the present day problems we are facing. india's most of the problems are a direct result of the misrule of congress for about half a century. congress has furthered its vote bank politics by dividing india into categories of religion, caste, lang, region........etc.

ahmedji, muthalik has fielded candidates against BJP in karnataka. so, sri ramsene and BJP are actually opponents. just because they talk of 'hindutva', doesnt mean they are related to BJP. just like every party that talks about 'secularism are not related.

when nuke deal happened, I supported MMS wholeheatedly, but after seeing his(and his party's) response to the proxy-war pak is infliction upon us, I have decided that I cant bear to see congress for one more term. and for the first time I have seen India kneeing before US in such a blatant manner, thanx to our 'strong PM'.

Sir, you were Disheartened by the UPA Governments response to pakistan?? What did you expect, Operation Parakram 2 and waste Billions on it?? Did you want War?? coz if you did, then it is Sad, because all that we built over the years, our Economy our Peoples life, would all be lost in a second. The UPA govt made Pakistan accept its part in the attack. Was the NDA ever able to do this ever??

Which Organisation of the likes of RSS or VHP is with the UPA?? Name it Sir, I am not a Blind UPA follower, but I would like to know.

What is MIM? The Indian Union Muslim league is with the UPA, but do you know that, the IUML single handedly made sure that No temple was attacked in Kerala when Babri Masjid happened, and that too in Muslim dominated areas. I dont support the IUML, especially its name, but I see the good in them. Sir, They dont talk of Cutting Hindu Hands, nor slit throats. For all I know, they are corrupt, just like any other Party, but they are not violence mongers.

 

[johnee]

Sir, you were Disheartened by the UPA Governments response to pakistan?? What did you expect, Operation Parakram 2 and waste Billions on it?? Did you want War?? coz if you did, then it is Sad, because all that we built over the years, our Economy our Peoples life, would all be lost in a second. The UPA govt made Pakistan accept its part in the attack. Was the NDA ever able to do this ever??

Which Organisation of the likes of RSS or VHP is with the UPA?? Name it Sir, I am not a Blind UPA follower, but I would like to know.

What is MIM? The Indian Union Muslim league is with the UPA, but do you know that, the IUML single handedly made sure that No temple was attacked in Kerala when Babri Masjid happened, and that too in Muslim dominated areas. I dont support the IUML, especially its name, but I see the good in them. Sir, They dont talk of Cutting Hindu Hands, nor slit throats. For all I know, they are corrupt, just like any other Party, but they are not violence mongers.

sir,
I was definitely disappointed with this govt's response to the jihadi terrorism that india is facing. there have been bombs going off in every major city of india, wat did UPA/congress do? they continued with shivraj patil who kept repeating that madam sonia had full confidence in him. it took a 26/11 massacare for this govt to admit the mistake and change the home minister.

this is the same UPA that has played politics over anti-terror laws, by catering to their minority appeasement tactics. again, they introduced anti-terror law only after 26/11.
plz do remember that it was ultimately gujrat govt which busted the indian mujahideen group. till then UPA was helpless, but even then they didnt want to lose out on 'minority votes', so they orchestrated 'hindu terrorism' by implicating sadhvi pragya. wat happened to that case? wat happened to col. purohit case? pak has tried to use this very fact against india.

now, coming to the handling of pak post-26/11:
wat do I want?
I certainly didnt want my govt to be exchanging LETTERS with the very nation that is responsible for killing innocent indians in the heart of india. I certainly didnt want my govt to be looking to US to solve our problems vis a vis pak.
you say UPA made pak accepted its part, sir, you are wrong. pak has simply accepted that some of the attackers were pakistanis, and some part of the consipiracy was hatched in pak. then they went on to include india, UK and spain as the other locations where the consipiracy was hatched. recently, zardari said that terrorists of 26/11 were getting support from inside india! now, do you call this success?
well, atleast I dont think so? this govt said 'all options are open', but they have not exercised any option. now, we are back to square one, US/world wants us to resume talks. this is the response of UPA. if another operation parakram was needed, so be it. if indeed war was needed, so be it.
while, when war happens we not only take losses but equally give loses to our enemy, but enduring this terrorism is a one-side way. only we suffer in the present arrangement.
anyway, I was not advocating war, no. there are other means. when MMS had said that pak is a victim of terror like us, I knew he was not worth being PM. he should know that india is the victim of pak sponsored terror. whether pak suffers from blowback of it, is not our concern. infact, we should strive to increase the blowback. we should have made it clear to the world and US, that if you want to continue donating billion of dollars as military aid to pak, then we cant be friends. we should have cut off all ties with pak, as soon as pak refused to deport the masterminds back to india. and manymore.

MIM is Majlis-a-Ittehadul, it is a party in hyd and I know that it indulges in more vitriolic speeches than RSS/VHP ever can. and they support UPA. recently, congress pradesh committed head of AP, had said that he would chop of the head of any person who points at the muslims. which is not different from wat varun gandhi had said. imran kidwai, congress minority cell head, had issued a fatwa against muslims voting for BJP. now, is this not communal politics? why just target BJP or RSS/VHP.

 

[ahmedsid]

sir,
I was definitely disappointed with this govt's response to the jihadi terrorism that india is facing. there have been bombs going off in every major city of india, wat did UPA/congress do? they continued with shivraj patil who kept repeating that madam sonia had full confidence in him. it took a 26/11 massacare for this govt to admit the mistake and change the home minister.

this is the same UPA that has played politics over anti-terror laws, by catering to their minority appeasement tactics. again, they introduced anti-terror law only after 26/11.
plz do remember that it was ultimately gujrat govt which busted the indian mujahideen group. till then UPA was helpless, but even then they didnt want to lose out on 'minority votes', so they orchestrated 'hindu terrorism' by implicating sadhvi pragya. wat happened to that case? wat happened to col. purohit case? pak has tried to use this very fact against india.

now, coming to the handling of pak post-26/11:
wat do I want?
I certainly didnt want my govt to be exchanging LETTERS with the very nation that is responsible for killing innocent indians in the heart of india. I certainly didnt want my govt to be looking to US to solve our problems vis a vis pak.
you say UPA made pak accepted its part, sir, you are wrong. pak has simply accepted that some of the attackers were pakistanis, and some part of the consipiracy was hatched in pak. then they went on to include india, UK and spain as the other locations where the consipiracy was hatched. recently, zardari said that terrorists of 26/11 were getting support from inside india! now, do you call this success?
well, atleast I dont think so? this govt said 'all options are open', but they have not exercised any option. now, we are back to square one, US/world wants us to resume talks. this is the response of UPA. if another operation parakram was needed, so be it. if indeed war was needed, so be it.
while, when war happens we not only take losses but equally give loses to our enemy, but enduring this terrorism is a one-side way. only we suffer in the present arrangement.
anyway, I was not advocating war, no. there are other means. when MMS had said that pak is a victim of terror like us, I knew he was not worth being PM. he should know that india is the victim of pak sponsored terror. whether pak suffers from blowback of it, is not our concern. infact, we should strive to increase the blowback. we should have made it clear to the world and US, that if you want to continue donating billion of dollars as military aid to pak, then we cant be friends. we should have cut off all ties with pak, as soon as pak refused to deport the masterminds back to india. and manymore.

MIM is Majlis-a-Ittehadul, it is a party in hyd and I know that it indulges in more vitriolic speeches than RSS/VHP ever can. and they support UPA. recently, congress pradesh committed head of AP, had said that he would chop of the head of any person who points at the muslims. which is not different from wat varun gandhi had said. imran kidwai, congress minority cell head, had issued a fatwa against muslims voting for BJP. now, is this not communal politics? why just target BJP or RSS/VHP.

Firstly, who is this Congress Minority cell head guy to Issue Fatwas?? You should understand that Fatwas cant be issued by any Tom Dick and Harry (Now a days it can be, as this proves! lol) About the Congress leader telling that he will cut hands off those who point at Muslims, well he was trying to gather his vote bank, who after the Varun Gandhi incident felt insecure. True he is just as cheap as Varun, but You must remember what made him say it, it was the Ploy of Varun that instigated congress to go on the defensive.

I as a Muslim dont like the Congress much, its not only because I am a Muslim, but because I feel All these political parties use the vote bank card and then leave the minorities in the dark

Then, Did you hear about BJP Candidates in Orrisa? Yes its the same Guys who raped Nuns, and Killed Women! Goes onto show that No political party is a saint!

Then, about the Terror, attacks, Yes I am against the Govt not Hanging Afzal Guru, But I am also against the POTA, which was draconian in the least of words! You do know that Muslims do tend to get bracketed in the terror category even if they are innocent. This has to change, then only will a Law like POTA be openly accepted by everyone.

Its not LAW we need, its Implementation which we need. POTA and the likes are just tools in the hands of the Politician to settle Political Scores.

About the UPA govt exchanging Letters- I would say it is better than Exchanging Cold Blooded Terrorists! Yes Pakistan has not be fully won over, but we got them to accept that Pakistani soil has been used. They themselves are in a precarious situation, they cant keep their own house in order, what do u expect them to do? Catch terrorists for Us? They are reeling under the snake bite, of the very snake they gave milk and protein shakes to!

I too was sad with the UPA govts response to 26/11 and the blasts that preceded it. But You should remember that it was during the NDA and POTA days that Indian parliament was attacked! Its was not another crowded market my friend, it was the PARLIAMENT! I can point out attacks during BJP days, but you can say that they were less in number!

Its not about the number of blasts, the BJP says only 40 blasts during our term, more than 200 during UPA! Whats with the number games? Blasts are not statistical tools to be taken out during Elections. Why couldnt Gujrat be immune to Terrorism where BJP and Iron Man Modi is at the helm?? Isnt their Laws and Police who can be beat the crap out of Jihadis?? Or are they just good for Fake encounters?

Coming back to the MIM, how many MPs do they have? Have they torn down Temples? Have they Raped Pregnant women and Nuns?? About Muthalik fielding candidates against BJP, its just the case of Son thinking he is greater than Dad! BJP isnt Fundi enuff for Muthalikji! lol

Lastly, I my friend, will never trust, nor openly Support a Party like you do, because I know, deep Inside its we who Must Reform, then only can we expect these Politicians to do so.

 

[Flint]

I don't support any party.

To support any party, you need to overlook some of their major faults because all the parties have some shortcomings, and I cannot decide what weightage to give each of those shortcomings.

 

[ahmedsid]

I don't support any party.

To support any party, you need to overlook some of their major faults because all the parties have some shortcomings, and I cannot decide what weightage to give each of those shortcomings.

Exactly, no one Part is Pefect, Sadly I believe that Politicians should be Perfect. Someone who came close was Sunil Dutt I believe.

Ignoring the faults of a party or politician is dangerous I believe, but alas there is only so much we can do.