While I greatly appreciate your vast knowledge of our land, there are a few things I'm afraid you've missed: 1) The reason we don't elect leaders on the basis of religion is that we recognize the blasphemous way religion can be used when left to be defined by politicians. Besides, there are important things to be done: water, food, education is probably more important than trying to interpret the history of our faith for political gain; wouldn't you say? 2) We do not elect our leaders based on the color of their skin. Electing Sonia Gandhi is not deference to 400 years of Brutal British rule, it is a testament to a recognition of the 'Indian' in her. Having the right to be Indian is not determined by what religion you were born into, who your parents were, or even where you were born (Mr. Advani comes to mind, as do many of my ABCD buddies)--it belongs to whomsoever sees the commonsense in secular unity over religious division. Secular politics and religious faith are not mutually exclusive. I must agree that to some degree, we do care about what foreigners have to say. After all: why would we give such a nonsensical column any attention were it not written by a French madame?
