tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8070362.post5047529839807089920..comments2023-11-02T19:19:15.129+05:30Comments on Death Ends Fun: ClayDilip D'Souzahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08221707482541503243noreply@blogger.comBlogger16125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8070362.post-68965120087553723032009-09-23T11:02:16.458+05:302009-09-23T11:02:16.458+05:30I am not arguing anything -- if you are, good luck...I am not arguing anything -- if you are, good luck.<br /><br />And short of calling your last question silly, I'd ask you to re-read the comment thread which you don't seem to have. I have nothing to add.Sapathannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8070362.post-60315452924091091322009-09-23T00:30:25.610+05:302009-09-23T00:30:25.610+05:30Sapathan, what truly baffles me is what we are arg...Sapathan, what truly baffles me is what we are arguing about. OK, if you want it so: your law and order mention is irrelevant to the discussion of public vs private. <br /><br />But about LKA's opinion on JS's explusion, I already said this earlier on the page: "<i>Not so internal, if he makes his opinion known in public. Still, I'll grant you that there must have been internal goings-on we are not party to.</i>"<br /><br />Well, now what?Dilip D'Souzahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08221707482541503243noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8070362.post-28532983551142159992009-09-22T19:39:34.035+05:302009-09-22T19:39:34.035+05:30Advani is a lier and chiken when it comes to respo...Advani is a lier and chiken when it comes to responsibility. The party is bound to fail when you have leaders who lie on simple facts and give up responsibility.Blueshifthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10192639568580051315noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8070362.post-35651564883035742362009-09-22T16:54:17.482+05:302009-09-22T16:54:17.482+05:30Of me, of course. You are obsessed with LKA from t...Of me, of course. You are obsessed with LKA from the evidence of your blog posts.<br /><br />The irrelevancy of the two issues and my first comment are not contradictory. That has been dealt with already. In case you don't think so, assume the latter part of that comment does not exist. It really makes no difference.Sapathannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8070362.post-30442511534090431342009-09-22T16:21:13.267+05:302009-09-22T16:21:13.267+05:30I'm losing track here. Contemptuous of LKA? Ce...I'm losing track here. Contemptuous of LKA? Certainly. Of you? Not at all, or I would hardly have gone on answering these in this apparent echo chamber, would I have? <br /><br />But baffled at your sudden pronouncement of irrelevancy of the issue you yourself took up for discussion, certainly.Dilip D'Souzahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08221707482541503243noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8070362.post-23076925663276263482009-09-22T15:17:25.757+05:302009-09-22T15:17:25.757+05:30Please do not give evidence to rule out my supposi...Please do not give evidence to rule out my supposition that you are merely contemptuous.Sapathannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8070362.post-58033353037380727262009-09-22T15:13:49.477+05:302009-09-22T15:13:49.477+05:30They are "irrelevant"? I write a post ci...They are "irrelevant"? I write a post citing three examples of a politician's behaviour, and you tell me two of those are irrelevant?<br /><br />Besides, one of those examples figures in your first comment on this page, in your mention of the breakdown of law and order. How come you didn't dismiss it as irrelevant right then, instead of discussing it?Dilip D'Souzahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08221707482541503243noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8070362.post-85655134788516578702009-09-22T14:59:51.328+05:302009-09-22T14:59:51.328+05:30The two other examples are irrelevant to this disc...The two other examples are irrelevant to this discussion [as indefensible as they may be in themselves]. You don't seem to read any of my comment in full. Or, not understand.<br /><br />I will give you the benefit of the doubt and think you are being merely dismissive of me and not totally incapable of comprehension.Sapathannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8070362.post-21443983434502800652009-09-22T14:49:31.337+05:302009-09-22T14:49:31.337+05:30Not so internal, if he makes his opinion known in ...Not so internal, if he makes his opinion known in public. <br /><br />Still, I'll grant you that there must have been internal goings-on we are not party to.<br /><br />What about the other two examples?Dilip D'Souzahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08221707482541503243noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8070362.post-20202954043104456072009-09-22T14:44:51.524+05:302009-09-22T14:44:51.524+05:30This, is internal.
"The Times of India repor...This, is internal.<br /><br />"The Times of India reports that LK Advani did not want Jaswant Singh expelled from the BJP. But it happened anyway.<br /><br />Funny, I thought iron men were expected to stand up for things they believe in. Not merely mutter about them when it's too late."Sapathannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8070362.post-48952128702765266172009-09-22T14:33:11.393+05:302009-09-22T14:33:11.393+05:30I cited three examples: LKA did not want JS expell...I cited three examples: LKA did not want JS expelled, LKA thought Dec 6 <br />92 was the "saddest day" of his life, and LKA did not know about JS travelling to Kandahar. <br /><br />Which of these three, can you tell me, constitutes "an internal struggle in a political party"?<br /><br />At least for me, these are all public political positions LKA has taken that help me form an opinion of the man.Dilip D'Souzahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08221707482541503243noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8070362.post-42737835745612076942009-09-22T13:54:10.770+05:302009-09-22T13:54:10.770+05:30Public posture in matters of national import -- ye...Public posture in matters of national import -- yes. In matters of an internal struggle in a political party: no.<br /><br />Not because the essence of the debate -- which may be construed as free speech limits -- but because a reasonable person expects a reasonable party politician to be subject to whatever silly internal rules/ equations the party has. It has no bearing on me in terms of judging that individual. Just as you are not personally answerable if the Govt of India carries out a policy which you do not approve of. That you think so is merely amusing and besides the point here.Sapathannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8070362.post-31869551519569060352009-09-22T13:40:50.931+05:302009-09-22T13:40:50.931+05:30go ahead and write blog posts against every single...<i>go ahead and write blog posts against every single common criminal</i>.<br /><br />I don't know about every single one, but I've written about plenty of criminals. Ridicule, like beauty, is in the eyes of the beholder; the chance of copping some is not something I particularly take into account when writing about criminals.<br /><br />You mean standing up, in the cases I cited, does not imply a public posture? Why on earth not? For one thing, the failing to stand up is done in public; by your logic, should that have been done in private too? For another, it's the public posture of my leaders that lets me form opinions about them. You have some other way of forming your opinions about them?Dilip D'Souzahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08221707482541503243noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8070362.post-79726488269885340642009-09-22T13:31:27.959+05:302009-09-22T13:31:27.959+05:30Heh! In that case, go ahead and write blog posts a...Heh! In that case, go ahead and write blog posts against every single common criminal. Or, pick any at random. Or, pick one against whom you have an agenda, which in this case maybe political. And be subject to ridicule -- simply because you make no non-trivial case for anything.<br /><br />And when you do that, please stick to first person singular. I am scared of your use of "us" -- others might actually think you speak for me.<br /><br />And who ever called Advani a Statesman or a leader? Yes, reason expects you to cite a source which is not partisan propaganda. <br /><br />Secondly, why should standing up mean a public posture? In what is essentially an internal issue of a political party of which neither I nor, one presumes, you, are a member?<br /><br />Yes, you could extend my analogy and ask me what my point is. I agree, nothing more than amusement and bafflement that you have none.Sapathannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8070362.post-79355963858647917552009-09-22T12:05:48.115+05:302009-09-22T12:05:48.115+05:30Sapathan, here's my idea of what makes a state...Sapathan, here's my idea of what makes a statesman/leader: that they stand for what they believe in. They have the courage of their convictions. They are true to themselves.<br /><br />Of course there are hardly any political leaders who measure up to that, and that's the point. Still, it doesn't stop us from searching for one who will try to get close. It should never stop us from reminding our leaders of the standards we expect from them.<br /><br />By no means do I absolve the govt (at the time, PVNR's govt) for a breakdown of law and order. There's plenty that shames PVNR in my mind, this being top of the heap. But so what? If a political movement causes such a breakdown, should its leaders escape responsibility too? <br /><br />Or, if we see such a movement causing mayhem, should we nod our heads and look the other way, saying hey, it's just a political movement, let them do the vandalism they want to do?Dilip D'Souzahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08221707482541503243noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8070362.post-48998173354846043922009-09-22T10:32:35.880+05:302009-09-22T10:32:35.880+05:30I don't understand.
What do you want him to s...I don't understand.<br /><br />What do you want him to say? Why does it matter? How does it matter? And if at all it did, and in a way you want it to, would you change your judgment? As in, you seem to hold him against what is essentially propaganda material of his party, which no politician ever lives up to. And why is a political movement ever responsible for breakdown of Law & Order and not the government? By this yardstick, you should absolve most governments of inefficiency and blame the wrong-doers of each instance for everything in all societies. Which, will only result in a Stalinist State.<br /><br />In short, what's your point?Sapathannoreply@blogger.com