frankly speaking

by Guest Mon Jan 27, 2014 2:25 pm

http://www.timesnow.tv/Frankly-Speaking-with-Rahul-Gandhi---1/videoshow/4446831.cms

by garam_kuta Mon Jan 27, 2014 2:41 pm

hey trace ! thanks for the reco on the krud kutter, works beautifully. i wanted to thank you probably an year ago but had forgotten and was reminded of it over the w/e when i used it for one of the tawas.

by confuzzled dude Mon Jan 27, 2014 3:35 pm

Where is part 2? BTW, there was nothing frank in part 1, he was beating around the bush.

by Guest Mon Jan 27, 2014 4:00 pm

GK, sure np. glad it worked.

cd, i saw posts on my FB by 3 or 4 different people ROFLing while watching this interview. So I thought let me watch it, so I googled it. But obviously I can't watch it at work. Will do later. Part 2, no idea. if you google rahul gandhi times now, it has the transcript of his interview.

by Guest Mon Jan 27, 2014 4:27 pm

This Rahul fellow has no clarity of thoughts. He can't follow directions. Can't understand the questions and even he does, doesn't know what to and how to answer them. He just memorized some cliches and goes around in circles with them, like 'the system is not working', 'the system is hurting people', 'change the system' 'taking democracy to each and every house hold', 'empowering women'...yada yada. Not one question has been answered straight to the point. Pathetic! Can't believe how anyone can think that this dimwit can lead more than a billion people.

by truthbetold Mon Jan 27, 2014 4:38 pm

Kinnera
but rahul is a secular leader. so his inadequacies must be tolerated for the greater good. so says pseudo secular intellectuals.

by Guest Mon Jan 27, 2014 5:03 pm

truthbetold wrote:Kinnera
but rahul is a secular leader. so his inadequacies must be tolerated for the greater good. so says pseudo secular intellectuals.

These pseudo secular hypocrites are the ones who'll ruin the country.

by Guest Mon Jan 27, 2014 7:00 pm

CD the other videos are on the same page in the 'related videos' section.

by MaxEntropy_Man Mon Jan 27, 2014 7:28 pm

Tracy Whitney wrote:CD the other videos are on the same page in the 'related videos' section.

thanks for posting these links. i will watch them. but what is your opinion of rahul gandhi?

by MaxEntropy_Man Mon Jan 27, 2014 7:34 pm

what does shehzyadah or sherzadah mean?

by FluteHolder Mon Jan 27, 2014 7:34 pm

May be Rahul is Mr.Sarah Palin ? Smile

by Guest Mon Jan 27, 2014 7:40 pm

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
Tracy Whitney wrote:CD the other videos are on the same page in the 'related videos' section.

thanks for posting these links. i will watch them. but what is your opinion of rahul gandhi?

I could not watch beyond part 2. Opinion is not a favorable one. He is definitely not ready to be the PM. I was a kid who knew nothing when his dad began accompanying IG in political scene and I remember people making fun of him. But he got by coz I guess the PM post was handed to him on the platter, and the journalists of the time were not this brutal as Arnab Goswami here. Also, to think of it Rajiv Gandhi was atleast *something*, a decent pilot in his own right. He atleast had *some* visions for the country and he executed them too (computers), and when he died he was just about maturing as a politician/leader. And he was so so handsome and charming. This one has shown nothing so far. Don't even see the hope of him maturing into anything. Also too bad no one trained him to atleast SMILE in a tv interview.

by Guest Mon Jan 27, 2014 7:41 pm

FluteHolder wrote:May be Rahul is Mr.Sarah Palin ?

Others are also reminded of Sarah Palin. Smile

https://such.forumotion.com/t19682-rahul-flunks-1984-2002-test#138931

by Guest Mon Jan 27, 2014 7:42 pm

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:what does shehzyadah or sherzadah mean?

shahzada i think means the prince but is used in general to denote a spoilt brat of a big dad who will inherit e'thing.

by MaxEntropy_Man Mon Jan 27, 2014 7:44 pm

i've watched about 12 mins of the interview. he comes across as evasive, rambling, scared, idiotic, and often at a loss for words.

by MaxEntropy_Man Mon Jan 27, 2014 8:34 pm

i wish people would stop adding -gate to words to mean scandal, but i guess it's hopeless and here to stay. anyway two twenty minute videos are enough to confirm what i already knew. this guy is a dumbass. not only that he is an evasive and rambling dumbass. both choices are horrible. hemlock or cyanide, pick your poison. i liked the interviewer. i understand that in a panel format he shouts his nuts off and shuts everyone up, but in this format he is pretty solid.

by Guest Mon Jan 27, 2014 8:36 pm

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:i wish people would stop adding -gate to words to mean scandal, but i guess it's hopeless and here to stay. anyway two twenty minute videos are enough to confirm what i already knew. this guy is a dumbass. not only that he is an evasive and rambling dumbass. both choices are horrible. hemlock or cyanide, pick your poison.

Why do you think modi is cyanide?

by MaxEntropy_Man Mon Jan 27, 2014 8:38 pm

Kinnera wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:i wish people would stop adding -gate to words to mean scandal, but i guess it's hopeless and here to stay. anyway two twenty minute videos are enough to confirm what i already knew. this guy is a dumbass. not only that he is an evasive and rambling dumbass. both choices are horrible. hemlock or cyanide, pick your poison.
Why do you think modi is cyanide?

we've gone over all this many times before. i have nothing to add to my prior views about modi.

by confuzzled dude Mon Jan 27, 2014 8:42 pm

Tracy Whitney wrote:CD the other videos are on the same page in the 'related videos' section.

Thanks. I've watched the rest.

I thought he redeemed & bounced back a bit later on but he is not articulate enough, looks scared, overall failed to make an impression. But at the same time I'd like to know how Modi would've answered point blank questions about 2002. Is such an interview available?

by Guest Mon Jan 27, 2014 8:46 pm

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
Kinnera wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:i wish people would stop adding -gate to words to mean scandal, but i guess it's hopeless and here to stay. anyway two twenty minute videos are enough to confirm what i already knew. this guy is a dumbass. not only that he is an evasive and rambling dumbass. both choices are horrible. hemlock or cyanide, pick your poison.
Why do you think modi is cyanide?

we've gone over all this many times before. i have nothing to add to my prior views about modi.

Rahul Gandhi had no clear cut, convincing answer to any question that pertained to Modi. I am sure everyone else who is accusing Modi of the post-Godhra riots and believe him to be a cyanide are on the same boat as Rahul. The hypocritical pseudo secularists!

by Obnoxious Mon Jan 27, 2014 8:47 pm

After watching that interview I really felt sorry for Rahul Gandhi! He is an absolutely no qualifications, nor any aptitude and is being forced to be a leader.

by Guest Mon Jan 27, 2014 8:50 pm

Obnoxious wrote:After watching that interview I really felt sorry for Rahul Gandhi! He is an absolutely no qualifications, nor any aptitude and is being forced to be a leader.

If he has even a bit of a conscience, he'd bail out and let another qualifying one in his party take over.

by MaxEntropy_Man Mon Jan 27, 2014 8:51 pm

Kinnera wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
Kinnera wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:i wish people would stop adding -gate to words to mean scandal, but i guess it's hopeless and here to stay. anyway two twenty minute videos are enough to confirm what i already knew. this guy is a dumbass. not only that he is an evasive and rambling dumbass. both choices are horrible. hemlock or cyanide, pick your poison.
Why do you think modi is cyanide?

we've gone over all this many times before. i have nothing to add to my prior views about modi.
Rahul Gandhi had no clear cut, convincing answer to any question that pertained to Modi. I am sure everyone else who is accusing Modi of the post-Godhra riots and believe him to be a cyanide are on the same boat as Rahul. The hypocritical pseudo secularists!

how so? i like neither of them. how is that hypocrisy?

by MaxEntropy_Man Mon Jan 27, 2014 8:55 pm

i have no hope for the congress party. i don't like the dynasty and those outside the dynasty are sycophants, of questionable integrity or a combination of both. at the moment their best choice, flawed as he may be IMO is chidambaram.

by Hellsangel Mon Jan 27, 2014 9:04 pm

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:i have no hope for the congress party. i don't like the dynasty and those outside the dynasty are sycophants, of questionable integrity or a combination of both. at the moment their best choice, flawed as he may be IMO is chidambaram.

Coz he is Tamil?

by MaxEntropy_Man Mon Jan 27, 2014 9:06 pm

Hellsangel wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:i have no hope for the congress party. i don't like the dynasty and those outside the dynasty are sycophants, of questionable integrity or a combination of both. at the moment their best choice, flawed as he may be IMO is chidambaram.
Coz he is Tamil?

no. and i am not going to dignify idiotic digs like that with a response anymore.

by confuzzled dude Mon Jan 27, 2014 9:11 pm

Kinnera wrote:
truthbetold wrote:Kinnera
but rahul is a secular leader. so his inadequacies must be tolerated for the greater good. so says pseudo secular intellectuals.
These pseudo secular hypocrites are the ones who'll ruin the country.

Right! we need saviors like Dubya, Bin Laden, Saddam, Gadaffi, Idi Amin, NaMo and Advani to save the country from monstrous muslim grip.

by Hellsangel Mon Jan 27, 2014 9:12 pm

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
Hellsangel wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:i have no hope for the congress party. i don't like the dynasty and those outside the dynasty are sycophants, of questionable integrity or a combination of both. at the moment their best choice, flawed as he may be IMO is chidambaram.
Coz he is Tamil?

no. and i am not going to dignify idiotic digs like that with a response anymore.

You don't have to respond, Il Professor-ai, given that your biases are fairly familiar to everyone here.

by MaxEntropy_Man Mon Jan 27, 2014 9:15 pm

Hellsangel wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
Hellsangel wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:i have no hope for the congress party. i don't like the dynasty and those outside the dynasty are sycophants, of questionable integrity or a combination of both. at the moment their best choice, flawed as he may be IMO is chidambaram.
Coz he is Tamil?

no. and i am not going to dignify idiotic digs like that with a response anymore.
You don't have to respond, Il Professor-ai, given that your biases are fairly familiar to everyone here.

ok.

by Guest Mon Jan 27, 2014 9:15 pm

confuzzled dude wrote:
Kinnera wrote:
truthbetold wrote:Kinnera
but rahul is a secular leader. so his inadequacies must be tolerated for the greater good. so says pseudo secular intellectuals.
These pseudo secular hypocrites are the ones who'll ruin the country.
Right! we need saviors like Dubya, Bin Laden, Saddam, Gadaffi, Idi Amin, NaMo and Advani to save the country from monstrous muslim grip.

I think you are a muslim from kadapa. The thing is, relax. Pseudo secular congress with its vote bank politics has done quite a bit of harm to muslims. The bjp in power isn't any threat to muslims. Don't get so paranoid.

by Guest Mon Jan 27, 2014 9:17 pm

confuzzled dude wrote:
Tracy Whitney wrote:CD the other videos are on the same page in the 'related videos' section.
Thanks. I've watched the rest.

I thought he redeemed & bounced back a bit later on but he is not articulate enough, looks scared, overall failed to make an impression. But at the same time I'd like to know how Modi would've answered point blank questions about 2002. Is such an interview available?

XH is saying he came on that too. Let me find out more. Meanwhile, this.

by Guest Mon Jan 27, 2014 9:22 pm

http://www.timesnow.tv/The-Narendra-Modi-interview/videoshow/4411875.cms

by confuzzled dude Mon Jan 27, 2014 9:25 pm

Kinnera wrote:
confuzzled dude wrote:
Kinnera wrote:
truthbetold wrote:Kinnera
but rahul is a secular leader. so his inadequacies must be tolerated for the greater good. so says pseudo secular intellectuals.
These pseudo secular hypocrites are the ones who'll ruin the country.
Right! we need saviors like Dubya, Bin Laden, Saddam, Gadaffi, Idi Amin, NaMo and Advani to save the country from monstrous muslim grip.
I think you are a muslim from kadapa. The thing is, relax. Pseudo secular congress with its vote bank politics has done quite a bit of harm to muslims. The bjp in power isn't any threat to muslims. Don't get so paranoid.

Hahaha! I'm Reddy, Muslim, YSR Bhaktha & Congress Chamcha, just short of 6 avatars.

by confuzzled dude Mon Jan 27, 2014 9:36 pm

Tracy Whitney wrote:
confuzzled dude wrote:
Tracy Whitney wrote:CD the other videos are on the same page in the 'related videos' section.
Thanks. I've watched the rest.

I thought he redeemed & bounced back a bit later on but he is not articulate enough, looks scared, overall failed to make an impression. But at the same time I'd like to know how Modi would've answered point blank questions about 2002. Is such an interview available?

XH is saying he came on that too. Let me find out more. Meanwhile, this.

Thanks. In this case Tiger Arnab looked like a lamb, may be he was scared that he might meet Ehsan Jafri's fate if asked NaMo tough questions.

by Guest Mon Jan 27, 2014 9:39 pm

confuzzled dude wrote:
Tracy Whitney wrote:
confuzzled dude wrote:
Tracy Whitney wrote:CD the other videos are on the same page in the 'related videos' section.
Thanks. I've watched the rest.

I thought he redeemed & bounced back a bit later on but he is not articulate enough, looks scared, overall failed to make an impression. But at the same time I'd like to know how Modi would've answered point blank questions about 2002. Is such an interview available?

XH is saying he came on that too. Let me find out more. Meanwhile, this.

Thanks. In this case Tiger Arnab looked like a lamb, may be he was scared that he might meet Ehsan Jafri's fate if asked NaMo tough questions.

hmm. never thought this could be one interpretation of their dynamics. interesting.

by Guest Mon Jan 27, 2014 9:45 pm

Tracy Whitney wrote:
XH is saying he came on that too. Let me find out more. Meanwhile, this.

He nailed it!

by Guest Mon Jan 27, 2014 10:42 pm

Tracy Whitney wrote:
confuzzled dude wrote:
Tracy Whitney wrote:
confuzzled dude wrote:
Tracy Whitney wrote:CD the other videos are on the same page in the 'related videos' section.
Thanks. I've watched the rest.

I thought he redeemed & bounced back a bit later on but he is not articulate enough, looks scared, overall failed to make an impression. But at the same time I'd like to know how Modi would've answered point blank questions about 2002. Is such an interview available?

XH is saying he came on that too. Let me find out more. Meanwhile, this

Thanks. In this case Tiger Arnab looked like a lamb, may be he was scared that he might meet Ehsan Jafri's fate if asked NaMo tough questions.

hmm. never thought this could be one interpretation of their dynamics. interesting.

When there is conviction and clarity in one's thoughts and actions, then courage and confidence is reflected in that person and the person nails it straight. When that is lacking, the person is seems scared, rambles foolishly, evades the questions and goes around in circles parroting the same irrelevant things over and over again. We've seen that in Palin and now in Rahul.

by Guest Mon Jan 27, 2014 10:48 pm

Kinnera wrote:
Tracy Whitney wrote:
confuzzled dude wrote:
Tracy Whitney wrote:
confuzzled dude wrote:
Thanks. I've watched the rest.

I thought he redeemed & bounced back a bit later on but he is not articulate enough, looks scared, overall failed to make an impression. But at the same time I'd like to know how Modi would've answered point blank questions about 2002. Is such an interview available?

XH is saying he came on that too. Let me find out more. Meanwhile, this

Thanks. In this case Tiger Arnab looked like a lamb, may be he was scared that he might meet Ehsan Jafri's fate if asked NaMo tough questions.

hmm. never thought this could be one interpretation of their dynamics. interesting.

When there is conviction and clarity in one's thoughts and actions, then courage and confidence is reflected in that person and the person nails it straight. When that is lacking, the person is seems scared, rambles foolishly, evades the questions and goes around in circles parroting the same irrelevant things over and over again. We've seen that in Palin and now in Rahul.

We saw it most of all in this remarkable interview:

by Kris Mon Jan 27, 2014 11:54 pm

Tracy Whitney wrote:http://www.timesnow.tv/Frankly-Speaking-with-Rahul-Gandhi---1/videoshow/4446831.cms

>>>I feel sorry for this guy in some ways. You get the feeling this whole political business is being thrust on him. Something of this nature would have worked 20 or 30 years ago, but India is also getting savvy and asking tough questions of its politicians. If congress wants to be in the game, it needs to be able to talk specifics on what it can do instead of expecting people to follow a dynasty.

by FluteHolder Tue Jan 28, 2014 2:39 am

A comment from Hindu on the interview.
-----
He is the dumbest politician I've seen in my lifetime. Came to give an
interview by just preparing for lines:
1.Empowerment of people
2.Reduce pain of people
3.Change the way politics is being done in the country
4.Repeat lines 1-3
from: Subham
Posted on: Jan 28, 2014 at 09:43 IST

by Maria S Tue Jan 28, 2014 9:45 am

Frankly speaking..

I don't follow Indian politics these days- have no fondness or preference for any national politician..

So..after all the terrible reviews I read bombarding the Fb feeds, my expectations were so low..watched 10 mins of the interview, and Rahul Gandhi was better than I expected..he looks older, seems sensitive and soul searching, like talking to a Therapist- wondered, if he would reach for some tissue when is eyes get moist with the self-examination!

He is obviously not a brilliant and charismatic politician..nor does he come across as a cunning, ruthless leader who knows it all. He seems like a reluctant public figure.. like Prince Charles, a good-hearted and sensitive guy living in the shadow of his mother.. likes to wander among the commoners..dress up and dance with them..and reluctantly wear the crown, if it ever happens *With Congress not popular at this time..the Prime Ministership does not seem imminent..may be down the line.

He also reminds me a lot of MGR, another decent person in real life (who evoked a lot of jealousy of his political rivals)..not very articulate or eloquent, just repeated standard politician lines which appeal to the masses..and it may work with the average person in the masses (*may be not in this election cycle)..who may not follow all political interviews and expect politicians to offer smart, intellectual-even right answers to the right questions..they usually vote with gut feelings at the polls with a sense of voting for the lesser of evils and not disrupting their daily lives.

Frankly speaking..

I was more intrigued by the interviewer-never seen him before...have only saw a parody of him and apparently a frequent lady lawyer guest in his shows, a few days ago..and it was quite funny to me!
When Indians- argue in English so enthusiastically (like historically in this forum, exhausted..wanting to have the last word) with our many accents and linguistic talents..esp. men vs. women..it's kind of amusing and adorable..had to post this!

by Guest Tue Jan 28, 2014 9:58 am

Hi M, I see what you mean. Yes, his interview does evoke sympathy. I can see his parents being reluctant, but he has been around more than they were before they joined active politics. He is so not capable of leading the nation, willing or not, even with his entire cohort of congressis. Someone like me with zero interest in politcs, and who goes by gut feeling, even I can see that.

by Maria S Tue Jan 28, 2014 10:15 am

Sure Tracy.

He certainly does not seem ready to take on the mantle of leadership..and it's up to the people-parties of India to decide that!

From the historical perspective and personality traits..it's interesting to see how people behave and govern, deal with unexpected problems- when they become leaders in politics, business, teams, even office management etc..the prophecies, predictions, the styles of leaderships..interesting to read and observe:)

It's a bad weather day..am off today..came by to see how you are all doing.
"Frankly speaking"..did not seem like a political thread..so it was the first one, I clicked here!

Looks like you are all doing well and active..am sure it's quite cold in most places!

by Guest Tue Jan 28, 2014 10:31 am

ya i know what you mean. i was fine at work but I inconsitently sucked in interviews. Not much lately though as I gain expereince with time.

by confuzzled dude Tue Jan 28, 2014 10:38 am

Rashmun wrote:

We saw it most of all in this remarkable interview:

That's hilarious. Perfect demonstration of "paani pilaya na usko" (as they say in Hyd lingo). NaMo, clearly displayed his dictatorial tendencies there, unfortunately he is born in India (wrong country), had he born across the border he would've ascended to the heights of Zia Ul Haq already.

by Hellsangel Tue Jan 28, 2014 10:53 am

Karan Thapar? This guy?

The son of this guy?

In March 1936, Thapar married Bimla Bashiram, the eldest daughter of Rai Bahadur Bashiram Sahgal and granddaughter of Rai Bahadur Ramsaran Das. Bimla Thapar was a sister of Gautam Sahgal, whose wife Nayantara Sahgal was a daughter of Vijayalakshmi Pandit and niece of Jawaharlal Nehru. General Thapar and Smt. Bimla Thapar had four children, of whom the youngest is the prominent journalist Karan Thapar.

.....

He was head of Indian army during the Sino-Indian War, and resigned in disgrace from India's loss.

by Guest Tue Jan 28, 2014 11:03 am

Hellsangel wrote:Karan Thapar? This guy?

The son of this guy?

In March 1936, Thapar married Bimla Bashiram, the eldest daughter of Rai Bahadur Bashiram Sahgal and granddaughter of Rai Bahadur Ramsaran Das. Bimla Thapar was a sister of Gautam Sahgal, whose wife Nayantara Sahgal was a daughter of Vijayalakshmi Pandit and niece of Jawaharlal Nehru. General Thapar and Smt. Bimla Thapar had four children, of whom the youngest is the prominent journalist Karan Thapar.

.....

He was head of Indian army during the Sino-Indian War, and resigned in disgrace from India's loss.

If Thapar is evil personified, Modi should not have agreed to give an interview to him. Once he agreed to do the interview modi should have seen it through instead of running away like a shameless coward when faced with tough questions.

by Hellsangel Tue Jan 28, 2014 11:16 am

KT with JJ

http://www.bbc.co.uk/tamil/highlights/story/2004/09/printable/040930_jayainterview.shtml

KT: My aim, Chief Minister, was to get to the core of the misunderstanding. You said that the press…

JJ: Your aim seems to have been to put as many unpleasant questions as possible and try to provoke me.

KT: Not to provoke you but to put to you the questions that have been discussed for the last three years and which in many ways may be responsible for the electoral adversity…

JJ: Haven’t you asked all of your questions? Have you got anything more to ask?

KT: I have come very close to the end of this interview, I have only one last question. Are you confident that you can see your electoral low point over with, and that you will win in 2006?

JJ: Wait and see. I told you already I don’t believe in astrology. I can’t predict what will happen in the next elections but you will be around I suppose. Wait and see what happens.

KT: Is that a yes, you will win?

JJ: I said wait and see.

KT: Chief Minister, a pleasure talking to you on HARDtalk India.

JJ: I must say it wasn’t a pleasure talking to you. Namaste

by Hellsangel Tue Jan 28, 2014 11:34 am

Here is a Comrade CD special:

by smArtha Tue Jan 28, 2014 11:41 am

NaMo definitely was on the back foot during those times and seems to be slowly opening up to talk about the riots only in the recent past after some favorable observations/verdicts in the courts. Even now what he says or doesn't say regards the riots fills news for at the least a week.

In contrast to that RaGa had no such vehement and strong opposition from the media or political circles and he doesn't have the baggage of his own commissions or omissions other than those of his party and family.

by Sponsored content