heartattack

Hello Ladies and Gentlemen

Welcome to the second edition of DFL Indian Premier League. We are here in South Africa for the opening day of the DFL IPL and this year promises to be even better than the last.

The atmosphere today was electrifying, the crowds, great. In the words of my fellow commentary team, this IPL has been a roaring success even though only 2% of it is actually over.

Time now to thank our sponsors – DLF, Citibank, Vodafone, Hero Honda, Kingfisher.

It was a day of the underdog. Mumbai Indians beat favorites Chennai Super Kings and Bangalore Royal Challengers beat the current Champions Rajasthan Royals.

Unlike the run blitz in the opening games of the IPL last year, this year saw relatively low scoring games. There were far fewer DLF Maximums this year than last year. I think this year is gonna be like that as the pitches in South Africa are not as flat as their Indian cousins. My advice to teams is to not strive for DLF Maximums all the time. Instead, try for Citi Moments of Success.  It’s a much better strategy this year.

Time now to thank our sponsors – DLF, Citibank, Vodafone, Hero Honda, Kingfisher.

Even the television broadcast of the IPL is gonna be different this year. Last year, people complained about lack of TV time prioritization with the cricket match often eating into their commercials. So this year the team has clearly allocated times for each segment of the broadcast. This allocation is illustrated below.

Hopefully this will put the complaints to rest.

Time now to thank our sponsors – DLF, Citibank, Vodafone, Hero Honda, Kingfisher.

Another addition to IPL this year is the 7.5 minute mandatory ’strategy’ break after 10 overs every innings. Teams are supposed to get together and strategize the next 45 minutes of play. Now this is important, especially if you have patients of short term memory loss in your team who need to be reminded every 45 minutes what needs to be done.

Let me assure you that the purpose of this break is not to put more ad slots in the game. BCCI would never jeopardize the fun of the game for commercial gains.

On that note, time now to thank our sponsors – DLF, Citibank, Vodafone, Hero Honda, Kingfisher.

Another interesting addition to the DLF IPL is the ‘Bollywood Star’ contest. In every game, a committee would choose a girl from the crowd as a potential bollywood star and after sleeping with each one of them after some competition, declare a winner who would get to star in a film with SRK i think. Now this is an excellent idea. Not only would it ensure that every woman in the crowd would give a smile as fake pretty as Shilpa Shetty’s, it would also add meaning to something cricket cameramen always did anyway – focus on a pretty girl in the crowd. Win win!

So yes, the DLF IPL promises to be wonderful for the 3 Bs – BCCI, Bollywood, and Businesses .. and yeah, of course, cricket

To conclude, time now to thank our sponsors – DLF, Citibank, Vodafone, Hero Honda, Kingfisher.

Let’s say you live in a beautiful house! You have the prettiest woman in the world as your wife, and two adorable kids. Things are not safe in the city and so you and your neighbours decide to appoint a “neighbourhood watch committee” to look after the neighbourhood’s security and keep the local goons out.

But, what happens is that the neighbourhood watch committee joins hands with the local goons. The goons break into your house at night, break your legs, rape your wife, and abduct your kids, probably to sell them off to the guys who run begging rackets.

How would you feel? Betrayed? The very people you trusted to protect you from evil actually joined hands with the devil to make your life hell!

As sad as that may be, every 4 years some of us are betrayed the same way by our political parties.

Take for example, in 1997 Uttar Pradesh state elections,  some of us voted for the Bhartiya Janta Party not because we thought they were any good (In fact they had as many jokers as any other party), but to ward off the evil called Mayawati. But what happened? BJP joined hands with Mayawati’s BSP and the fat bitch became the Chief Minister of the state.

So my question is, is it fair to allow these parties to join hands with whoever they want? Is it fair for, let’s say, Samajwadi Party, to criticise the Congress party throughout their election campaign and then join hands with them just because Congress is the only party that has a real chance at forming the government?

Is it fair for the Right Wing Congress to join hands with the Left Parties and subjecting the country to a tug of war of policies at the top?

It defeats the very purpose of democracy when the political parties are not forced to obey their ‘pre-election’ stand after the elections.

Mulayam Singh Yadav, when questioned by CNN IBN recently on whether he’ll support Congress or not said that “I’ll decide after polls”. Why…. Why? Why? Why? How would the Congress party be any different after polls? So let me rephrase Mr Yadav’s words a little to reflect their right meaning

“Well, I would like to be the Prime Minister. But if my party and my allies are not able to get enough seats to have a real chance at the government, I’ll support whoever has the chance because power is all I care about”

So to follow up with the Right to Reject that I proposed in my previous post, I suggest that to make the democratic process more fair all coalitions be announced before the elections.

Thanks to the Congress-BJP rivalry, the country has pretty much 2 power blocks – the UPA (Congress + allies) and the NDA (BJP + allies). All political parties must decide to join one of the two blocks before the elections. If they choose to stay independent, they can, but then they would not have the choice to join the UPA or NDA after the elections. They have the choice, however, to make whatever slime cocktail they want to make among themselves.

To those who feel it makes no sense, I’ll be happy to hear why! Note that I’m not proposing a bi-party system. It’s just not possible to have that in India. If you look at it, it is more of a tri-coalition system. The system allows every vote to have the impact that the voter intended to have.

Yes, I agree this is still not foolproof. If SP and BSP do not decide to join any of the major two coalitions, then they can still form a coalition and the voter who voted for SP to keep BSP out is betrayed. To that, all I have to say is vote for a UPA or NDA affiliated party if all you want to do is to keep BSP out [better still, hope that the right to reject becomes a reality]. The important thing, however, is that there IS a way. In our existing system there isn’t.

But let’s not forget that such a system would let fewer and fewer parties to sit on the fence like they are happily doing now! They’ll have to take a stand, and stand by it throughout the course of the election and more importantly, AFTER it! So the next time I tie a lemon and chillies on my doorstep to ward off evil, at least I can be assured that they won’t end up in the devil’s lemonade!

Let’s say no to these humpty dumpties. Unlike the story, they don’t fall! The nation does!

There has been enough said and written about the current crop of criminals politicians we have. A lot of us educated ones feel no one is deserving enough to be voted for. So we, of course, abstain from voting and get a (false) satisfaction that we, at least, did not partake in the election of a rodent.

But of course, by not voting, we are in a way helping the most evil of the evils. Because any vote FOR a competing candidate is a vote against the most evil one. That’s how the math works.

But sometimes, I don’t blame these people; thinking about the upcoming elections, I often ask myself who among the bunch of jokers we have as candidates do I want to vote for. Well, I’m always without an answer. One thing I know for certain, however, is who I do not want to lead this country – The blob of shit called Mayawati … a woman who’s convoy contains 36 cars, who spends millions on her statues around the capital, and has a Nazi salute for a greeting. More on the bitch in another post maybe..

So the only thing that motivates me to go to vote is to prevent her (that’s mighty polite of me to use ‘her’ to refer to Mayawati, ‘it’ is a better article) from winning.

But then, who among the competing candidates do I vote for? Logic says her toughest competitor. But that may not be easy for the common man to determine. If let’s say 100,000 of us vote for, say Congress, with the sole purpose of defeating Mayafatty, and eventually fatty wins by 90,000 votes with Samajwadi Party at #2, the 100,000 votes of ours have been wasted.

It is therefore, I suggest that the right to elect must be complimented by the right to reject. As a voter, I should be allowed to vote FOR a candidate, or vote AGAINST one. Voting against a candidate would mean – “I don’t care who wins as long as it’s not him/her.”

So how do we decide the winner in such an election? Simple.

Case 1: If there is at least one candidate that has a net positive number of votes (i.e. FOR Votes – AGAINST votes) – The winner is the candidate with the highest net number of votes.

Case 2: If no candidate has a net positive number of votes – There is no winner. The seat is considered void and not included in the final counting of the seats. This is because we can’t let a net negative candidate represent us. It is better to be not represeneted than to be represented by a pig in whites whose participation in the house will bring more harm than good. 

Of course, what if there are too many of such void constituencies? Of course, there should be a tolerance level set. So if, say more than 1/3rds of our 500 odd seats are void, then elections would have to be reheld countrywide (you cannot have re-elections in just these void constituencies as voters are likely to be influenced by the results of the other constituencies). Furthermore, the rejected candidates in the void constituencies must not be allowed to stand for elections from the same constituency for the re-election to give the voters new choices.

Why I think the right to reject is better for democracy?

• People who abstained from voting for the lack of a deserving candidate can now participate in the democratic process.
• Void seats will keep away more evil people from the parliament than the current system does. Agreed it would raise the chances of a hung election which is a costly prospect, but the cost of a bad government is a lot higher.
• It would not require of the minorities to unite and decide on a common candidate to defeat an opressive incumbent. The minority groups can, independently, fight the incumbent by rejection.
• Questionable practices like bribing the voters, or inflammatory statements against a particular group would get their due in the voting process.

Obviously, cynics are quick to argue that our democratic process does people to choose to go to the voting venue and not vote for anyone. True, but it’s not enough because our electorate system does not consider the % of people who voted. In fact, this ‘going to the voting booth but not voting’ compliments the right to reject very well. If the net number of people who do not vote for anyone is higher than the highest net positive candidate, the seat should be void.

–

So what do you think? I know the right to reject will not fix everything, but it does fix a lot. Keeping the bad guys out is as important as letting the good ones in ..! So until that happens, I hope that some political party puts up a plant for elections. At least, when I vote for it, I know it’ll do no harm ..