The real reason why SP won in Uttar Pradesh - Analysis - DNA:
Francois Gautier is honest in his analysis and tells the truth, unpleasant to many. Akhilesh's coronation as UP CM is not going to change the nature of Samajwadi Party and BJP, in order to woo Muslim voters, loses the Hindu votes also.
Monday, March 12, 2012
World's Richest Politicians
World's Richest Politicians:
If rich people come into politics and remain rich it could be understood, but if people take to politics to make money it is not only immoral but the very anti-thesis of what politics should be. Sonia Gandhi will have to explain how she manged to make so much money.
If rich people come into politics and remain rich it could be understood, but if people take to politics to make money it is not only immoral but the very anti-thesis of what politics should be. Sonia Gandhi will have to explain how she manged to make so much money.
Friday, March 9, 2012
India's Congress Party Loses Election in Uttar Pradesh for Pandering to Muslim Voters - NYTimes.com
India's Congress Party Loses Election in Uttar Pradesh for Pandering to Muslim Voters - NYTimes.com:
The politics of pandering has done immense harm to India and sooner the political parties realize this better will it be for the future of the country and their own future. Pandering to sectarian demands is showing its effect on society and polity.
The politics of pandering has done immense harm to India and sooner the political parties realize this better will it be for the future of the country and their own future. Pandering to sectarian demands is showing its effect on society and polity.
Thursday, March 8, 2012
Women in politics: India ranks 105th in world - Indian Express
Women in politics: India ranks 105th in world - Indian Express:
This is simply because Indian politics is so much dirty; our women will have to carry long brooms to clean it; and politics being the game for people with leisure, women in India find it difficult to enter politics.
This is simply because Indian politics is so much dirty; our women will have to carry long brooms to clean it; and politics being the game for people with leisure, women in India find it difficult to enter politics.
Wednesday, March 7, 2012
India a superpower? Unlikely, says LSE study - Indian Express
India a superpower? Unlikely, says LSE study - Indian Express:
We can appreciate that India is not a super power; we can also take in our stride that it is not likely to be one; but from these statements how does it flow that India should not aspire to be one? With historians like Ramchandra Guha included in the group, this type of study is not surprising.
We can appreciate that India is not a super power; we can also take in our stride that it is not likely to be one; but from these statements how does it flow that India should not aspire to be one? With historians like Ramchandra Guha included in the group, this type of study is not surprising.
I Paid a Bribe and Similar Corruption-Exposing Sites Spread - NYTimes.com
I Paid a Bribe and Similar Corruption-Exposing Sites Spread - NYTimes.com:
Anxiously waiting for the tipping point.
Anxiously waiting for the tipping point.
Monday, March 5, 2012
Column: Is the judiciary ruling India? - Analysis - DNA
Column: Is the judiciary ruling India? - Analysis - DNA:
Arvind Radhakrishnan, who has written this article, teaches law, but he has failed to understand the basic reason for the people's distrust of the executive and the legislature and its trust in the judiciary. It's right that politicians will have to play politics, but the politicians will have to understand the limit of their politicking. From 1950 the politicians began to play politics with the Constitution and began to violate its spirit, its provisions and unabashedly resorted to reckless amendment of the Constitution. No wonder that when in 1967 the Supreme Court ruled in the Golaknath case that Parliament could not amend Fundamental Rights, people generally welcomed this. In Keshavanand Bharati(1978) case the SC came out with the "basic structure" theory, which said that though Parliament has the power to amend any part of the Constitution, it could not amend the basic structure of the Constitution. In the Minerva Mills case(1980) the SC reiterated its position. The politicians took the Constitution for a ride when they had the requisite majority in the Parliament and State Legislatures. Had not the judiciary stepped in, the politicians would have thrown constitutional provisions and propriety through the window as is evident in the case of federal structure, governor's role, meaning of secularism etc. As the guardian of the Constitution it is incumbent upon the Supreme Court to interpret the Constitution in the spirit of our founding fathers.
Arvind Radhakrishnan, who has written this article, teaches law, but he has failed to understand the basic reason for the people's distrust of the executive and the legislature and its trust in the judiciary. It's right that politicians will have to play politics, but the politicians will have to understand the limit of their politicking. From 1950 the politicians began to play politics with the Constitution and began to violate its spirit, its provisions and unabashedly resorted to reckless amendment of the Constitution. No wonder that when in 1967 the Supreme Court ruled in the Golaknath case that Parliament could not amend Fundamental Rights, people generally welcomed this. In Keshavanand Bharati(1978) case the SC came out with the "basic structure" theory, which said that though Parliament has the power to amend any part of the Constitution, it could not amend the basic structure of the Constitution. In the Minerva Mills case(1980) the SC reiterated its position. The politicians took the Constitution for a ride when they had the requisite majority in the Parliament and State Legislatures. Had not the judiciary stepped in, the politicians would have thrown constitutional provisions and propriety through the window as is evident in the case of federal structure, governor's role, meaning of secularism etc. As the guardian of the Constitution it is incumbent upon the Supreme Court to interpret the Constitution in the spirit of our founding fathers.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)