tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8212356.post116360810663829131..comments2023-11-19T00:42:48.156-08:00Comments on balancing life: You don’t need to be a rocket scientist.....Sunilhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07776658071546232685noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8212356.post-1165205555565458282006-12-03T20:12:00.000-08:002006-12-03T20:12:00.000-08:00Having a learned president and prime minister is a...Having a learned president and prime minister is a matter of prestige in the whole world. When I visited the Indian Consulate in Chicago, seeing the pictures of Dr.Kalam and Dr.Singh made me feel proud of what India is at this moment at the top level.<BR/><BR/>The other system below is rotten (ministers, MPs, local govts etc etc).Anil Saldanhahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12379622198295708185noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8212356.post-1164442077319388232006-11-25T00:07:00.000-08:002006-11-25T00:07:00.000-08:00sunil, I have to disagree with you on this matter...sunil,<BR/> I have to disagree with you on this matter. The president cannot really refuse to adminster the oath of office. The appointment of a cabinet is one of the primary responsibilities and powers of the Prime Minister, and refusal by the president to <BR/>recognize this has very problematic implications. Also, as pointed out, the president<BR/>does not have an elected mandate, while the PM has. I do agree that the president can <BR/>and probably should advise and counsel though. On the matter of returning bills, the <BR/>last couple of Presidents, Kalam included have exercised this authority, and done so <BR/>wisely. If such authority is used too often, the deterrent effect of such an act will <BR/>reduce, and Parliament will be less inclined to take it seriously. <BR/><BR/> With regard to the appointment of Governors, at least since Indira Gandhi's days this <BR/>has been an issue of politics. I partially agree with you that the president can exercise<BR/>his advisory capacity on this matter. <BR/><BR/> Finally, when a President takes it upon himself/herself to go directly to the people <BR/>over a matter of politics, his/her office is exposed to the same criticism and attack <BR/>as any politician, and the nature of the office is unsuitable for such exposure. A <BR/>president is most effective behind the scenes. <BR/><BR/> On these matters, I think Kalam is pretty good, at least better than some his predecessors.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8212356.post-1163955232345283012006-11-19T08:53:00.000-08:002006-11-19T08:53:00.000-08:00silly gora needs to know... what does "FSM" mean?silly gora needs to know... what does "FSM" mean?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8212356.post-1163696680910947732006-11-16T09:04:00.000-08:002006-11-16T09:04:00.000-08:00heh...sorry Vishnu. Which reminds me to crib...a ...heh...sorry Vishnu. Which reminds me to crib...a lot of my readers now use rss feeds or bloglines etc to read my posts. The result is that I miss out on a lot of nice discussions (its a pain to comment if you're reading through feeds...I'm guilty also, I read a lot of blogs through feeds, and hardly comment now) :-)Sunilhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07776658071546232685noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8212356.post-1163694191954459142006-11-16T08:23:00.000-08:002006-11-16T08:23:00.000-08:00vishnu.....long time since you visited :-)Well, I ...<I>vishnu.....long time since you visited :-)</I><BR/><BR/>Well, I read your posts via RSS feeds. So, I don't have to visit unless I have a comment!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8212356.post-1163687463611389502006-11-16T06:31:00.000-08:002006-11-16T06:31:00.000-08:00vishnu.....long time since you visited :-). I act...vishnu.....long time since you visited :-). I actually agree that the president is a kind of emergency lamp. I'll elaborate on that replying to Abi's comment.<BR/><BR/>Nitin....I agree. The president's job is interesting. He <I>does</I> have power, and the person entrusted with that job is expected not to abuse it but to use it wisely. I cannot recall a single Indian president who has done that. Abi....the idea is not to hijack power. That infact is not what this is all about. It is precisely to protect democracy and prevent the abuse of democracy that the president should act. A weak, pliable president will not act effectively in the appointment of governers (for example, agreeing to the appointment of strongly partisan governers, Buta Singh springs to mind right away, who will not act independently according to the constitution, but will act according to the party they support), or may be exploited during say the declaration of emergency (Fakruddin Ali Ahmed comes to mind immediately). Strongly partisan presidents will not act independently. Again, I'm not advocating that the president decide who is a criminal. But, if the president uses his power wisely, he can state strong opposition, and using appropriate channels make his views clear. This (in a democratic system) will make it much harder for a party in power to abuse its power. Perhaps my post did not make that clear, but the president has that critical role to check the abuse of democratic power, and most Indian presidents have largely failed in that.<BR/><BR/>Surya, Abi, I think we all agree that we <I>don't</I> want an all knowing president. That in fact was the title of my post. No superwomen or supermen. We need strong, independent (non-partisan) leaders committed to democracy, with a good understanding of the powers of the president and the constitution.Sunilhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07776658071546232685noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8212356.post-1163663064119360522006-11-15T23:44:00.000-08:002006-11-15T23:44:00.000-08:00Nice to see a good 'political' post here! I rememb...Nice to see a good 'political' post here! I remember being particularly excited when Abdul Kalam became President - I guess I expected him to do a whole lot of things, having been impressed by his books and previous accomplishments - but somehow nothing happened, and it kind of slipped into the background.<BR/><BR/>I tend to agree with Abi though, I am not sure the president can or should actually use power in some of the ways you mentioned. But I do agree should and can do more.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8212356.post-1163660915267002922006-11-15T23:08:00.000-08:002006-11-15T23:08:00.000-08:00But, Sunil, the President is not directly elected ...But, Sunil, the President is not directly elected by the people. For him to stick to his own vision of what a law should be like (particularly if the law has been passed by the Parliament -- the actual seat of popular will), would be a travesty of democracy. Thank FSM our Constitution does not allow this dangerous hijacking of powers by the institution of the Presidency.<BR/><BR/>You are also not right to claim that the President can sit on a piece of legislation for as long as he wishes. He cannot. It's a time-bound procedure, and our current President utilized the available time in full, before he signed the law related to the "Office of Profit" issue recently. (It was passed by the Parliament, sent back by the President, passed again by the Parliament, and he sat on it for as long as he could, and eventually did sign it).<BR/><BR/>I'm also not sure I agree with your views of the current President's "trusting" nature. Looks can be deceiving! To many of us, he is a serious hawk who propounds strange theories of political power (particularly in the realm of foreign policy related to how a country "earns the respect" of other countries) and economic development, all the while posing for pictures with cute little children.<BR/><BR/>Giving the President the right to decide who is a criminal is also dangerous. We have a way of deciding (operationally) who can and cannot participate in an election. It's of course a pity that this set of criteria depends on a judiciary that's unable to come to fair decisions in a reasonable time. But, to fix this "problem", you are looking for solutions in the wrong place. <BR/><BR/>I agree with the broad thrust of your post: there are ills in our system, and we should look for ways to rid our country of these ills. My humble suggestion to you would be to look for ways within our democratic system, and for ways to strenthen our democratic institutions. But, please (please, please, please!) stop asking for an all-knowing, FSM-like Superwoman or Superman (or, SuperWiseStatesPerson!) as President (or, for that matter, any other functionary). The road to dictatorship could also be paved with noble intentions!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8212356.post-1163645192211570052006-11-15T18:46:00.000-08:002006-11-15T18:46:00.000-08:00Sunil,This is very well-written post. But remember...Sunil,<BR/><BR/>This is very well-written post. But remember, he was an engineer and a project manager before he became president. He may not even have dreamt that he would occupy a political/constitutional office. <BR/><BR/>His main failing, in my mind, is that he does not understand the art of using power. <BR/><BR/>Ditto for Manmohan Singh.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8212356.post-1163618885122815422006-11-15T11:28:00.000-08:002006-11-15T11:28:00.000-08:00Reminds me of what Venkataraman said; that the pre...Reminds me of what Venkataraman said; that the president was designed to be an emergency lamp, or something like that.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com