101amshantanub
Registered Users (C)
It is clear that sony is not satisfied by the kick on her butt
but may need some THING from opposite side
but may need some THING from opposite side
STOP Sonia becoming PM - Petition
- Thread starter Pungiwalla
- Start date
I just see hypocrisy in your arguments.
If your Indian constitution allows a foreign born to become prime minister, go and change that. If your people chose to elect a foreign born as the prime minister, go and change them. You have no morality or legality in your arguments.
You want to enjoy all the legal benefits of a foreign country has to offer and want to push the envelope as further as possible, but hate to see some foreign born doing the same in your own country. Sorry for you guys.
If your Indian constitution allows a foreign born to become prime minister, go and change that. If your people chose to elect a foreign born as the prime minister, go and change them. You have no morality or legality in your arguments.
You want to enjoy all the legal benefits of a foreign country has to offer and want to push the envelope as further as possible, but hate to see some foreign born doing the same in your own country. Sorry for you guys.
Myday,
Your ignorance is understandable since you do not seem to know much about what transpired.
BTW, the reason a lot of folks do not want Italian born person to become PM is not comparable to your(or any one else's) getting a GC after years of toil and struggle.
While a lot of us are frustrated at the slow speed of getting GC, we are nowhere near even having a thought of becoming President of this country.
Read also in this forum why a lot of folks do not think she qualifies for becoming PM.
FYI, about 73 percent of the valid votes had rejected the Congress, with 65 percent going against its combination with pre-poll alliances, and with the number of seats won as a proportion of the seats contested being higher for the BJP than for the Congress, it's Harry Potter fiction to believe that the Indian nation wanted the Congress to rule over its destiny once again.
Unfortunately, the way coalitions work is the issue.
Your ignorance is understandable since you do not seem to know much about what transpired.
BTW, the reason a lot of folks do not want Italian born person to become PM is not comparable to your(or any one else's) getting a GC after years of toil and struggle.
While a lot of us are frustrated at the slow speed of getting GC, we are nowhere near even having a thought of becoming President of this country.
Read also in this forum why a lot of folks do not think she qualifies for becoming PM.
FYI, about 73 percent of the valid votes had rejected the Congress, with 65 percent going against its combination with pre-poll alliances, and with the number of seats won as a proportion of the seats contested being higher for the BJP than for the Congress, it's Harry Potter fiction to believe that the Indian nation wanted the Congress to rule over its destiny once again.
Unfortunately, the way coalitions work is the issue.
Hmm.. May be you are true about my ignorance. (Amazing that you found out that from a few lines of my post.) I may not be very good at Indian politics and history. But I at least know one vote is counted as one.
The only yardstick we have by which we have to choose the next government is election. Your statistics are great. But with the yardstick (may be a flawed one) that we have, this is what I construe as the mandate of the nation as a whole. (not to mention, BJP considered the foreign origin issue a main pole issue ) Fiction (including Harry potter), science, society all go by some rules and reasoning. Then why not this!
I too share the concern about the sovereignty and security of the nation. But in that haste I wont through the baby out with the bath water as you all try to do. (may be because, you all have the psychic power to read Sonia’s mind and I don’t.)
Just being born in a country does not bestow any exceptional credential for the post of PM. I know the credentials(!) of the past PM’s (Including Indira Gandhi) of the country.
The only yardstick we have by which we have to choose the next government is election. Your statistics are great. But with the yardstick (may be a flawed one) that we have, this is what I construe as the mandate of the nation as a whole. (not to mention, BJP considered the foreign origin issue a main pole issue ) Fiction (including Harry potter), science, society all go by some rules and reasoning. Then why not this!
I too share the concern about the sovereignty and security of the nation. But in that haste I wont through the baby out with the bath water as you all try to do. (may be because, you all have the psychic power to read Sonia’s mind and I don’t.)
Just being born in a country does not bestow any exceptional credential for the post of PM. I know the credentials(!) of the past PM’s (Including Indira Gandhi) of the country.
myday said:
I would have thought it was a mandate if greater than 50% people would have voted for Congress. Even then before elections, it was not declared by Congress who the PM would be(but agreed, it was kind of obvious). Also note that a few years back, Sonia had said that she is there only to strengthen the party and not for any thing else.
Looking back a few years, when she came to India in 1968, she was wedded to an Indian who was the son of that country's Prime Minister.
Sonia did not apply for Indian citizenship in 1968 when she married Rajiv and came to India.
So she was given a certificate in 1968 to reside in India as a foreigner for five years. In 1973, after the first five-year period expired, she again applied for the permit to stay on in India for another five years as a foreigner.
During 1971 conflict, when all commercial pilots were asked to forego their leave and enter service, she asked Rajiv to go on long leave. He was given special permission and they left the country. Throughout the period of the war, they were in Rome.
So she deserted the country with her husband. She returned only after peace was restored, and after India had won the war.
In 1977, when Indira Gandhi was defeated, Sonia sensed the mood of the nation, took refuge in the Italian Embassy and refused to come out of it. She said she was going back to Italy.
After Indira Gandhi lost the elections in 1977. Sonia again applied to stay on in India as a foreigner. In 1968, 1973, 1978- for three five-year terms - Sonia applied for a resident's permit to stay in India. On April 30, 1983, her third five-year permit expired. By that time it was certain that Rajiv was to become the heir to Indira Gandhi.
She lived for 17 years as a foreigner in India. Why did she not opt for Indian citizenship in 1968?
So she qualifies as a recent citizen of India (much more part of her life a foreigner than Indian national) .
Her past does not make it seem like as if she is much more than an opportunist. Run away when the times get tough and run back when they are good.
Ofcourse it is possible that she has good intentions for the country and has changed now and would have made great PM as we are not psychic readers but her past actions do not make a lot of people feel comfortable about her.
There are lot of people in Congress who think she should be PM but they are subservient people with nothing other than their self interests to look after.
Others who think otherwise dare not speak else they will be branded as something evil and booted off the party. Even if someone is thought to be a challenge to her is shunted out.
Does any one now hear of Sitaram Kesri? PV Narsimha Rao? So there is no challenge to Mrs Majesty, both PM and Home minister(two most imp. posts) are weak political entities. Both of them are not even members of Lok Sabha.
I do have a lot of respect for the current PM so my remarks don't mean any dislike for him. I guess we couldn't have expected better option.
I don't see what other educated Indian folks see in making Sonia PM. I haven't heard of any good reasons though.
It is not that I am against Congress, in fact I voted for Congress in assembly elections when I was there last year because it had a good administrator(Sheila Dixit) but this attitude of Congress takes the cake.
I think Congress is now degenerating a lot into privately held political party.
I think she also carries a dual citizenship even now. So giving the most important post to such a person(with such known credentials) is not liked by a lot of people.
Ofcourse it is also true that being born in a place does not prove your credentials automatically but there got to be someone who fits the bill?
san_1 said:
Is it a new news? Congress was never a democratic "party" in true sense. It was always leader dominated "tribe" where grassroot workers follow what leaders command - without questioning their leadership. That's the reason it never able to come out from Nehru dynasty.
my_immig_acct
Registered Users (C)
pralay said:
Do you think there would have been alliance with all the current partners, if she had revealed her intension to be PM if the alliance wins the majority ? Till the results announced, congress was silent about the possible candidate for PM.
my_immig_acct said:
Why don't you ask the same question those parties who made alliance with Congress. It's hyphthetical question to ask what would they do. In states like Kerala, West Bengal Left's major opponent was Congress. Should the left-support in center be cancelled out because their ALL votes were "against" Congress. I know and you know that's that does not make sense. As no party/alliance is majority, something has to be worked out and post-election alliance is the result of it.
my_immig_acct
Registered Users (C)
pralay said:
That's why I mentioned that it's a fractured mandate and some opportunistic post-poll alliance, which clearly is not the mandate people have given. My point is that this can't be construed to be a victory for Sonia's leadership, and is not a justification for Sonia to become the prime minister. The core issue (and of the thread) is the origin.
my_immig_acct said:
Yes, post poll alliance can be opprtunistics. But it's not a new thing in Indian election. It happened five years back to when BJP was not an absolute majority - parties like TC made alliance just get a portfolio. In fact, after 1984 election every govt was formed with a post-election alliance - either as a part of govt or as outside support.
pralay said:
The point with the numbers is that there was no mandate for Sonia to become PM.
Also, I guess it is time you made your position clear with some reasonable reasons.
You started with a quote of Mark Twain about numbers and have put in some points here and there but still no indication of what your view point was regarding this issue.
san_1 said:
I was making my point. And, I don't think I need to express my viewpoint on this issue - because it's not important.
Do I like Sonia as PM? No (she is not a politician at all)
Do I like Laloo or Rabri as CM? No (criminal, no vision)
Do I like Modi as Gujarat CM? No (another criminal - big time)
Indian citizens gave verdict and that's it. As no party got absolute majorty - it's expected that there will be some horse trading, bargain to form a government. It's part of democracy. I don't see reason to whine about it. As Sonia was the leader of party, she is eligible to become PM - there is no constitutional amendment to stop her. So petition for "STOP sonia becoming PM" is a joke and there is no basis for it.
I hope I understand that agrument about right and wrong more important than individual viewpoint.
pralay said:
Indian people gave their verdict, true. It is good to see that there were not 50%(or even close to that) of them asking for Sonia to become PM.
Lot of people thankfully do not think that the petition or something equivalent was a joke. Otherwise Sonia would have been a PM today which would have been a shame( probably for some it would be pride?, don't care?).
Also the reason behind no such consititutional amendment baring such a case was this was not envisoned by our writers of constitution.
Otherwise there is no such bar on ex-foreign national with even one year of citizen ship standing for PM. Does that person make it acceptable to majority? Again thankfully no ( No guarantee though!).
Is there a need for constitution to be amended? YES..