I would have accepted Manmohan as a statesman , had he get himself elected through popular vote into the Lok Sabha.
I would have accepted Manmohan as a statesman , had he not resorted to aayaram-gayaram politics & dissolved lok sabha to seek fresh mandate.
I would have accepted Manmohan as a statesman , had he remained graceful like Vajpayee & submitted his resignation ( Remember 13 day government in 1996) only to come back as a morally stronger Prime Minister.
The obvious comparison comes to play a crucial role to decide whether Manmohan is a Statesman. Vajpayee, once in 1996 & again in 1999, made graceful exit once he realised that majority is not with him. He never looked desperate to cling to post of Prime Minister. Manmohan did just the opposite. He has proactively adopted all means, fair & foul, to remain Prime Minister. People of India will deliver their verdict on Manmohan in the same way it has done so on Narasimha Rao in 1996.
RE:PM - A statesman ?
by Orient Mystique on Jul 24, 2008 11:47 AM Permalink
I would like to add a few more situations:
* The country and world would have accepted MMS as a Leader / Statesman, if he had prevented the shameful dissolution of Bihar Assembly based on a subservient governor's report. The world now knows what kind of scriptures were passed by the highest judicial forum of this country on this move. (APJ Abdul Kalam unwittingly became party to this misadventure)
* The country and world would have accepted MMS as a leader / statesman if he had prevented the harafiri / toppling of Govts. in Jharkhand and Goa, instead of passively supporting his party moves.
* All of us would have agreed that he is a statesman, if he had gone ahead with the n-deal (if he was so convinced of its benefits) 18-24 months ago, instead of waiting so long (anyway, elections could not be held for 3-6 months, even if the govt had lost trust vote and normally they were due more or less by the same time!).
Rediff wrote yesterday that Congress might have won the battle but has lost the war.
I wouldn't be surprised if UPA fails in the coming elections (2009), may not be because of the n-deal, but because of the defective policies and priorities which have seen prices skyrocketing, lack of electricity, water, stagnation in agriculture, lack of meaningful reforms etc.
RE:PM - A statesman ?
by Laughing Buddha on Jul 24, 2008 11:49 AM Permalink
refer the definition of a Statesman provided by HP above,then u also will accept Moneyman Singh as a Statesman.
