Who should be the next president of India?

My vote goes for Narayan Murthy. I would have said Abdul Kalam but after he stayed a terrorists hanging he lost my vote.

 

kalam for the 2nd term...or vajapayee's name was suggested...

 

Why should any Indian even care?

Its derogatory for anyone to become a President. Atleast an intellectual.

Sir_Neo, do you have any idea why AK chose to "pardon" our terrorist?


President of India is nothign but a rubber stamp.
He HAS to sign any gazette/official letter/communication coming from the council of ministers or the cabinet.
Wherever in constitution it is written that the President has power to revoke/promulgate ordinance, or judgement, or appointment; he has to do so in "Consultation" with the council of ministers. In practical sense, the consultation means - all the thinking and decision making is in hands of the elected governtment. Heck, our consitutional makers were visionaries.
They wanted the real power to always lay with the people (= elected represnetatives) rather than some elite scientists or administrators.

The terrorist case was another one of the communal politics played out by our ruling party. President was mere puppets in their hands.

Your Narayan Murthy would also have done the same. If not then he would've been FORCED to do it.



LOL.
President of India is a joke.
And thats why I again say: Why should any Indian even care about President? He is jsut like a majestic statue, that can't do anything.

 

^ Pretty much sums it up. He can send back a bill only once. The next time it comes around he has to sign it. Hahaha.

 

Addendum:

He is jsut like a majestic statue, that can't do anything; and the dogs can freely urinate on it.

 

AND birds can shit on it too

 

well, no. He has the choice of resigning if he feels all that strongly against the bill.

 

^ and what does that lead to practically speaking?

 

You know how much I love Albus Dumbledore.



It is the difference between being dragged into the arena or walking into the arena with your head held high. To some people, it might mean the same thing but to me and Albus Dumbledore, it was all the difference in the world.


Well, incorrectly quoted but valid anyway. He has the choice of mantaining his dignity and stepping down or having his name dragged through mud like it was being here.

 

^ Albus Dumbledore? Headmaster is one thing, President is a totally different post. The Headmaster can be the legislature executive and judiciary. President can be none of those.

 

who bothers about the next indian president ..im rather looking for that global warming guy dath i forgot his name now ..to over take bush in the next presidential elections..
an inconvienient truth!! whatta superb and scary documentary.

 

BJR, I agree with you.
But I was talking more in general terms about the post called President of India.

Whether it is APJ or ABV or you or me.
Its a "poo"ey rank, ornamental and of no practical significance to the world.
APJ might have stepped down or lobbied, for whatever cause, the matter is even if he did/didn't do all that, it would've made no difference.


But you are more near to the topic of the thread. :

 

heheh yeah ..and media makes such hype over indian presidential elections.. morons.

 

Media hypes everything.
Thats there business.

But the thing that disturbs me is that common public is so gullible, and basically suckers for such hype.

 

er, no. I wasn't comparing the two posts. I was just quoting one of Albus Dumbledore's principles.

It could have. We never will know, will we? A president stepping down isn't as minor an issue as it should be.


There might not have been a difference in the final outcome but it would still have made a difference. The same difference as there is between being dragged into the arena to certain death and walking in with your head held high to certain death. Arguably, none yet still...

 

^LOL
I did say taht won't continue this further.

But to add: what about this scenario: a soldier in battlefield: head held high, walks into death. - end result nothing significant achieved except a medal.

Soldier in battlefield: intelligently decides there is no point tyring to look like a hero/martyr, makes subtle moves (or may be even lays low) that are not really visible, but may help the army.


Problem with Dumbledore philosophy is that it doesn't generate results.
Anyway what you say is more in terms of philosophically speaking.

 

President was overruled and a CJ that he thought was unfit was appointed acting CJ. kthxbai.

 

The only point I'm trying to make is that the president cannot be absolved of all responsibility for the laws passed simply because he cannot reject the bill more than once. If he passes the bill, it goes to show that he condones it because it is not like he did not have other options (the way most of you were potraying).


Whether resigning from his post is an intelligent decision or not is a choice he alone can make. On paper, it is rather ridiculous to resign because the next president would be chosen on grounds of whether he or she is prepared to accept the bill but then again, our hearts are not ruled by paper.



As for the picture that you presented, you conveniently present the case as that the person who walked into battle with his head held high nescessarily died. The other possible scenario is where he walked into battle and lived to tell the tale is probably the most lucrative of the 3. The 2nd is the path of moderates and has a logical flaw in it which, if I remember correctly, was presented quite well in Home Alone 2.


Fat Middle-Aged Lady: I'm never going to fall in love again. I couldn't possibly take a heartbreak.

Macaulay Kulkin: Well, it's not much use having a heart if you're never going to use it.


Also, think of the 4th case where the enemy over-runs the army and finishes off even the soldiers that lay low who would then probably regret not having fought when they had an even chance.This goes to show that the middle of the road is safer (relatively) yet not nearly as fulfilling. The path of all-or-nothing is always more lucrative yet not devoid of risks. This cannot apply to every situation generally and is modified accordingly. eg- Dumbledore never sought to kill Voldemort because he knew he could not. There is a difference between stupidity and courage. Blind terror can also pass for courage in a fight as was in the case of Harry Potter.


Of course, I call it Dumbledore philosphy because I most recently found it in the Harry Potter series. We used to call it moral science earlier.

 

Hmmm, OK.
IT will do for now.


But am not convinced that your passions should rule your actions. May be they can guide. But the final action ..... ?


PS: I never had moral science, I dont know what you were talking about.

 

What abt lord_neo becoming president of india..