<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Pratibha won, nation lost </b>
Pioneer.com
Swapan Dasgupta
A few hours after the voting in the presidential election, a Congress MP rued that despite Pratibha Patil's inevitable victory, this was an event that wasn't going to produce any winners. Almost every party or formation has emerged from the exercise diminished. The Congress could not get its preferred candidate Shivraj Patil into Rashtrapati Bhavan because of the Left veto; the Left failed to secure the nomination for its chosen man Pranab Mukherjee because the owner of the Congress Party was uncertain about his loyalty; <b>the BJP was confronted with the irritation of one important section working against Bhairon Singh Shekhawat because it wanted to show LK Advani his place; the NDA suffered the ignominy of the Shiv Sena going over to the other side and the Trinamool Congress abstaining;</b> and the fledgling UNPA couldn't conceal the disarray in its ranks on polling day.Â
The biggest loser, of course, may well be the nation. India has ended up being burdened by a President who, despite the victory of gender equality, may prove to be a colossal embarrassment - especially if a dodgy past is constantly excavated.
In a narrow political sense, however, the presidential election has been an unqualified success for the Congress and UPA. Contrary to initial whispers, the UPA constituents held together and were bolstered by an unflinching Left. Indeed, the election for the President and Vice-President prompts the conclusion that the Communists have, for all practical purposes, decided to cement a longer-term relationship with the Congress. Of course, there will be friendly clashes in West Bengal and Kerala, and occasional one-upmanship battles over policy and personalities. However, fuelled by its ability to acquire the commanding heights of influence, the Communists will do nothing to jeopardise their policy of creeping acquisition. The suggestion that the BSP may replace the Left as the pillar of outside support seems far-fetched. No one in the political class really trusts Mayawati to be an enduring friend.
The Congress' biggest success in the Presidential poll has been to set up some constituents of the UNPA as agent provocateurs. This is not to say that all the constituents of this formation are insincere about their anti-Congressism. The AIADMK leader J Jayalalithaa, for example, has been steadfast in her opposition to Sonia Gandhi. It was no accident that she encouraged her MLAs to subvert the UNPA's policy of abstention and vote for Shekhawat.
The same degree of sincerity was not that apparent in the Samajwadi Party. <b>There is enough credible evidence to suggest that the SP leadership has cynically used the UNPA as a protective ring to cut deals with the UPA Government in order to save its leadership from inquiries and harassment</b>. Organising the UNPA's denial of support to Shekhawat appears to be its first gesture of goodwill towards the Congress after the UP election. The unilateral announcement of Rasheed Masood as its Vice-Presidential candidate is its second thank-you gift to the ruling coalition. Masood will play an invaluable role in dividing the anti-UPA vote.
A similar policy appears to be followed by Farooq Abdullah who seems to have joined the UNPA only to argue against any support for Shekhawat. However, the National Conference's approach was dictated by political considerations - the need to woo the Congress away from the PDP. There is no suggestion that the Abdullahs were pursuing a personal agenda.
These and other contradictions in the UNPA will come to the surface in the coming days. <b>The TDP, for example, will have to think long and hard about whether it can bank on the Left's support in Andhra Pradesh and the INLD will have to decide whether it can afford to go it alone. </b>
In a normal situation, the NDA would have been the clear beneficiary. However, it can hardly hope to capitalise on openings if the BJP devotes most of its energies in warding off internal subversion from those who like to be the big fish in a modest aquarium.
The past few weeks have shown that the Opposition has a surfeit of compromised leaders.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Kaun ban gaya Prez
<!--emo&:argue--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/argue.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='argue.gif' /><!--endemo--> NATIONAL INTEREST Prime Minister Mayawati, backed by the comrades, no kidding
Shekhar GuptaPosted online: Sunday, July 22, 2007 at 0000 hrs Print EmailThatâs one plausible version of the scary summer of â09. Congress is bought out by the Left , the BJP looks so much like a loser that all its allies have walked away. The Big Two have left the field , for a coalition of the extremely willing to rush in Shekhar Gupta
If somebody compiles a selection of the most hypocritical political statements in our six decades since Independence, the Leftâs argument, that the Republic must have a âpoliticalâ President, but a ânon-politicalâ Vice-President, will rank right on the top. Of course, it could come back to haunt them five years from now when India has to find a new President. It would also blight the prospects of a perfectly decent gentleman like Hamid Ansari, unless the argument is, by then, that he has successfully completed his political apprenticeship while running the Rajya Sabha.
So breathtakingly audacious is their argument, and so remarkable the absence of any effort by Congressmen to counter it, despite murmurs when speaking off the record, that it only confirms the most important single fact that characterises the current political arrangement: that this UPA formulation represents the most stunning leveraged buyout of a government in our political history. The Left has simply leveraged its 60-odd MPs to hijack not just the tone and the agenda of this government but also the lawmaking ability of this Parliament (which is why so many bills supported by a wide majority of MPs canât be passed).
So the Left rejects the first, second and third choices of the Congress for President and forces it to select a regional lightweight who brings in her wake controversies that could dog her entire Presidency and even become an issue in 2009. But it forces on the UPA its own first choice for Vice-President, albeit a much, much better one. You can now imagine how much better this will make the Left look in comparison as the Presidential choice of the Congress battles her way through controversies, unprotected by party spokesmen, proxies and handlers post July 25, while Hamid Ansari shines â and you can have no doubt about that, whatsoever. Give it a year or so, and people will have no doubt who made a better choice, who was wiser of the two and finally who, the Congress or the Left, at least had the freedom to choose.
This is the most weighty question this turn of events has left over the evolving balance of power in our national politics. And its shadow will hang over every political development, every new equation or alliance or arrangement in the run-up to 2009. From a point where both the Congress and the BJP had seemed to be growing, slowly, tantalizingly, building the promise of building rival coalitions with stronger cores in 2009, both are now weakening. The Congress, because it has suborned its political instinct to its desperation to hang on for two more years, and for its continuing nostalgia for the âminority voteâ, and the BJP for the utterly bull-headed, management of its politics by a leadership that looks intellectually, morally and even conceptually bankrupt today. In fact, it looks so much like a loser, that practically all its allies have walked away to bide their time on the sidelines as the game is set up for the big final in the summer of 2009.
You ask any senior Congress or BJP leader in private what they foresee in the next Parliament, and you find a unanimity which is scary: a non-Congress, non-BJP coalition of many, probably headed by Mayawati, certainly backed by the Left. This Presidential election has set in motion the churning for the big one a little too early in the tenure of the incumbent. Such a great pity, the two big parties who should at least provide the notion of a centre of gravity in our politics, now look so hopelessly punch-drunkâ one in defeat, the other, funnily in victory.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><i>Note: Constitutional expert P.N. Lekhi added that never in the history of India has such a tainted person become the President of the country.</i> http://www.asianage.com/presentation/leftn...unity'.aspx
<b>'Highest office brings immunity'</b>
By SONAL KELLOGG
New Delhi, July 21: President-elect Pratibha Patil, who was accused of being allegedly involved in various criminal activities during the campaigning in the run-up to the elections, has now gained immunity from all cases till she remains in office, according to legal experts.
Commenting on this issue, senior Supreme Court advocate Rajiv Dhawan said,<b> "Under Article 361 of the Constitution, no proceedings can be constituted against the President. But what is extremely odd is that anyone who is accused of any criminal activity would continue to remain in power and not resign from office."</b>
He said the bane of India has been that "we have failed to develop healthy conventions". He said, "Everything cannot be reduced to the law. If we have health conventions, it would stop the perpetuation of politics of shamelessness."
Another legal expert, Supreme Court advocate Prashant Bhushan, said that "no proceedings can be held either in civil or criminal cases while the President is in office."
Ms Patil was accused of irregularities in the Cooperative Bank for Women which she helped to establish and which carries her name.
The cooperative bank was closed down by the Central Bank in 2003 under the weight of its bad debts, amid accusations of financial irregularities by its managers.
The employees union has taken Ms Patil and others to court, claiming loans, meant for poor women, were instead used by her brother and other relatives and not returned.
She was also accused of trying to shield her brother in a murder inquiry.
Constitutional expert P.N. Lekhi added that never in the history of India has such a tainted person become the President of the country.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
A day after UPA-Left candidate Parathiba Patil's election as President, the BJP today lashed out at the UNPA (United National Progressive Alliance) for the stand it adopted in the poll and for the comments made against Bhairon Singh Shekhawat.
"The UNPA made uncharitable comments against Shekhawat, who received kudos from all. People who abstained from voting should do some soul searching," BJP senior leader M Venkaiah Naidu said, addressing the Karnataka unit office bearers executive meeting held here on Sunday.
Rebuking UNPA for not supporting Shekhawat, he reminded them that it was these parties who had supported the same candidate in the Vice-President election. "At that time he was a good candidate. How can he become bad now, they should explain."
UNPA leaders should explain what purpose was served by abstaining from voting and the cause it served for the non-Congress forces, he wondered. He also took a dig at those who sought to espouse the cause of women, questioning why these forces had not supported Lakshmi Sehgal, who contested against APJ Abdul Kalam in the last election.
"Yes, we have lost the election. But we have put Congress in the dock here. It is our victory", Naidu said.
Before the actual elections there were tallies based on the relative strength of the two groups- UPA & NDA that showed that the difference was marginal. However the actual elections showed large difference showing that there was massive cross voting. NDA should think this over as to why and how this happened?
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Â
<b>Protocol goes for a toss as Pratibha takes oath </b>
Pioneer News Service | New Delhi
Advani pushed to fourth row
Others also humiliated
Conventional protocol went for a six in Parliament during President Pratibha Patil's oath-taking ceremony. The most glaring of it was the sight of Leader of Opposition LK Advani sitting in the fourth row behind officials and Chief Ministers.
<b>"This is breach of parliamentary protocol and there is no precedence like this," former Union Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad told mediapersons. </b>
<b>The front row in the Central Hall of Parliament was occupied by Sonia Gandhi along with Tamil Nadu Chief Minister Karunanidhi, Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Mayawati and Punjab Chief Minister Parkash Singh Badal, CPI (M) leader Sitaram Yechury, CPI general secretary AB Bardhan along with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and former Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee</b>.
<b>While Yechury is the first time MP in Rajya Sabha, Bardhan is not even a member of any House.</b>
Union Ministers Pranab Mukherjee, Sharad Pawar and Lalu Yadav, who were first seated in the second row, later crossed over to the first row.
<b>Even Election Commissioner Navin Chawla was seated ahead of BJP senior leaders Arun Jaitley and Ravi Shankar Prasad. </b>
<b>Senior parliamentarians like Najma Heptullah and SP leader Amar Singh were seated in the last rows, even Rahul Gandhi, the first time MP in the Lok Sabha, was seated ahead of the two. </b>
Strangely, Bihar Chief Minister Nitish Kumar was seated next to former Bihar Governor Buta Singh who dissolved the State Assembly when Nitish was about to stake claim for Government formation.
The Lok Sabha Secretariat makes the sitting arrangements on instructions from the Government.
<b>"Two BJP leaders, Vajpayee and Rajnath Singh, were already sitting in the first row and we were instructed to make place for the allies of the Government along with the Prime Minister and the UPA chairperson," </b>a Lok Sabha Secretariat official told The Pioneer.
While all the leaders were waiting for the swearing-in ceremony to begin, UP Chief Minister Mayawati stole the show and she moved in different corners of the Hall greeting and accepting congratulations from MPs across party lines. Mayawati spent considerable time with UPA chairperson Sonia Gandhi while many others were just passing by her.
Interestingly, while Mayawati talked to Home Minister Shivraj Patil and Human Resource Development Minister Arjun Singh separately, Railway Minister Lalu Yadav standing beside them was completely ignored by the UP Chief Minister, even though Lalu tried to greet her.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Congress is thinking that they will stay forever.
07-26-2007, 03:23 AM (This post was last modified: 07-26-2007, 03:31 AM by ramana.)
Has anyone figured out the amount of cross voting? And who were the perpetrators? If NDA doesn't do a due diligence they can be written off. Early estimates showed the diff was under 60K but the election results with quite few absentations show that the margin was ~ 300k. So what gives?
I think Shiv Sena and lot of stupid MLA wrote "Jai Ram" "Jai Sai Ram" etc on paper, which endup in void kitty.
Advani hater within BJP voted in favor of Patil.
In all previous election, except 1969, elected president always had above 89% of votes.
Patil was able to manage only 65%.
<b>I did not receive papers on Afzal's mercy plea: Kalam</b><!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->'Regarding Afzal Guru, I have not received any papers from the ministry concerned so far,' Kalam said, while responding to a question asked during an interview to India Today magazine on requests for clemency for persons facing the death penalty, including Guru, which had been pending with him.
Kalam, who had sent Guru's mercy plea to the home ministry for its views, went on to say, 'If <b>the papers had come to me, I would have processed them for their worth.' </b>
......
On concerns voiced by some political parties that the Indo-US nuclear deal will compromise the country's strategic capability, Dr Kalam said: 'We have to take the thorium route since we have large reserves of it available...Our scientists can lead to thorium-based nuclear reactor for energy production. I believe in them.'
<b>Candidly admitting that he was concerned over the quality of political discourse in the country and the lack of focus on certain critical issues, he said development was not being talked about as it should be</b><!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Ansari is Left but still right
Swapan Dasgupta
In the past, I have made harsh comments about the brazenness with which the Congress and the Left, acting in tandem, burdened India with a Head of State who is not a model of rectitude. Fortunately, the shrill but unavoidable controversy surrounding the President of India may have had a beneficial side-effect. In naming the candidate for Vice-President, the Left - which seems to have emerged as the new certifying authority - and the Congress didn't make the same mistake.
Hamid Ansari, Minorities Commission chairman, is almost certain to be elected Vice-President. The numbers are decisively ranged in favour of the UPA and Left, and the Samajwadi Party, which is fast crafting out a role as the Congress' Trojan horse, has ensured that Najma Heptullah will not get all the Opposition votes. Whatever little chance the Opposition had of banking on cross-party Dalit MPs ended abruptly after some BJP leaders decided that Ansari's candidature did not warrant serious opposition.
It was not a wrong decision. Ansari's candidature may have been mooted by CPI(M) general secretary Prakash Karat for reasons that have as much to do with symbolism as with ideological compatibility. But that is no reason to dismiss it with disdain. Given that the UPA and the Left had decided to "reserve" the Vice-President's post for a Muslim - a decision that seems to have all-party blessing - Ansari was an edifying choice. Dignified, measured and charming - attributes that may or may not serve him well as chairman of an increasingly boisterous Rajya Sabha - Ansari has served India well both as a career diplomat and, since retirement, in various other capacities. A few years ago, I had the privilege of working with him in the Indo-British Round Table and can vouch for his intellectual erudition.
This may be a reason why I was somewhat taken aback by an interview he gave to Outlook last week. In that, Ansari was critical of the US invasion of Iraq and India's vote in the IAEA against Iran's nuclear programme. Per se there is nothing extraordinary or undignified in Ansari's position. His criticism of the US matches the liberal critique of the Bush Administration and his position on Iran is shared by a large number of Indians, including many in the BJP. Moreover, Ansari has every right to hold these views.
What I find somewhat disconcerting is that Ansari chose to air these views after he was named as UPA's candidate Vice-President. How Ansari views the world and India's foreign policy may form an important input in the larger process of decision-making. However, as the holder of a Constitutional post, he is not expected to proffer his personal views to the wider public. Just as a serving diplomat loses the luxury of having personal views, the President and Vice-President, too, are prisoners of well-established protocol.
It is important for Ansari to stress his bi-partisan credentials for two reasons. First, the Left and UPA have communalised the Vice-President's post as one for which only Muslims need apply. Though Ansari is in no way responsible for this perverse decision, it is important that he transcends the circumstances of his election. He must take exceptional care to not be compartmentalised as a "Muslim" Vice-President; he must see himself as India's Vice-President.
Finally, in its new role as the arbiter of correctness, the Left has sent unmistakable signals to the country that the road to personal advancement lies in joining the "progressive" bandwagon of the Left. Ansari, for example, was chosen because his views broadly correspond to the editorial positions of The Hindu newspaper. Would the Left, for example, have even considered a Muslim in the mould of the late MC Chagla?
Karat is a clever man who has done as much as former CPI general secretary P C Joshi to enhance the intellectual appeal of the Left. At the same time, he has triggered a dangerous trend that violates the pluralist ethos of India. It is now up to Ansari to restore the balance.
<!--emo&--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo--> Prez and VicePrez elections are over; so, this discussion is concluded from my side:
In Conclusion:
Thanx all for around 7600 views of this blog and around 2 1/4 century comments on it.
Now that Pratibha ji has won,
we all stand behind her as 1 nation
and we equally hope that she will not let us down.
Though election was contested on partisan political divides yet it's our ardent hope that she will rise above party politics to continue the good work as is expected from a Prez.
âIf Om Namah Shivay is why I didnât become president, then itâs certainly a great blessingâ</b> <!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->But why didnât I become President? I want to revisit that. Bardhan (CPI general-secretary A.B. Bardhan), a very senior man for whom I have high regard, said the first objection the Left had was that I am the son of a maharaja, and second, that I am the founder of the Virat Hindu Sammelan.
Iâm not comparing myself, but Ashoka, too, was the son of a maharaja, Buddha was, Ram was. Second, from the age of 18, Iâve thrown my lot with democratic politics, spearheading the transition from feudalism to democracy. When the issue of (the abolition of) privy purses came up, I stood by the government in which I was a minister. Iâm the son of a maharaja as a result of whose signature J&K is a part of India.
(As to the second objection) I have said Iâm interested in Hinduism, I have a PhD on Sri Aurobindo, and Iâve been lecturing on Vivekananda and Aurobindo across the world. The Viraat Hindu Sammelan was set up during the time of the mass conversions in Meenakshipuram, in South India. So it was a sort of social reform movement to see why the unfinished social revolution in Hinduism has got stuck. The national movement itself flowed from Hindu social reform. Social reform is important, and it was simply a platform for me. I have also been working on the interfaith movement and I needed some organisation for that.
........
Iâve never been apologetic about this. If Om Namah Shivay is the reason I didnât become president, then certainly itâs a great blessing, because I wonât exchange my Om Namah Shivay, as Arjun says in the Bhagwad Gita, âeven for the sovereignty of the three worlds, what then for this land.â
None of them would qualify. I donât know if there is an atheist among them. Even Dr Manmohan Singh is a devout Sikh. And I think all the others have their own religious beliefs. In India 99 per cent of the people are religious. <b>By census figures, people who write âno religionâ or âagnosticâ are less than one per cent</b>. This time it was the question of numbers, which Congress did not have. So the support of the Left was needed. So it laid down the parameters and called the shots. But I donât think that the âanti-religiousâ definition of secularism of the Left is sustainable.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--emo&--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' /><!--endemo-->
People of Malcha village in Sonepat get their hair shaved on Thursday as a mark of protest for not compensating them for the land on which Rashtrapati Bhavan stands. These people claim to be the original owners of the land. â PTI photo
High Court
Forbes has S Gandhi on the most powerful list again. But they list her as <b>President of India</b> <!--emo&:omg--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/omg.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='omg.gif' /><!--endemo-->
straight from source: Forbes list on Forbes website
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Rank Name Occupation Country
1 Angela Merkel Chancellor GermanyÂ
2 Wu Yi Vice premier ChinaÂ
3 Ho Ching Chief executive, Temasek Holdings SingaporeÂ
4 Condoleezza Rice Secretary of State U.S.Â
5 Indra K. Nooyi Chairman, chief executive, PepsiCo U.S.Â
6 Sonia Gandhi President India <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Some Indian media has fixed it in their reports, but one can see why Forbes can mistake her to be President of India.
It just shows editorial board had no clue about her. Sonia must be jumping like a monkey. <!--emo&:bcow--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/b_cowboy.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='b_cowboy.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<b>Kalam, Shekhawat still homeless </b>
New Delhi: More than a month after demitting office, former President APJ Abdul Kalam and ex-Vice President Bhairon Singh Shekhawat continue to wait for new homes that are yet to be readied by the authorities.
--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo--> 
--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' /><!--endemo-->