Big Night In (Bushes Set the Table for a Rare Treat; Official Banquet for India PM Manmohan Singh)

washingtonpost.com ^ | Monday, July 18, 2005 | Roxanne Roberts

[indcons]

There's a big black-tie dinner at the White House tonight. President Bush will don a tuxedo and might even stay up past 10. This is, as they say in Texas, rarer than hen's teeth.

The dinner for Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh (technically an "official" instead of "state" dinner because Singh is head of government but not the state) is notable as one of the few grand parties of this administration. The White House has hosted only four state dinners since Bush took office in 2001; the last one was held in October 2003 for the president of Kenya. It's a big deal for India, and for the White House.

"The symbolic and the diplomatic importance of an event like this is inversely proportional to the frequency," says former deputy secretary of state Strobe Talbott. "The less often they happen, the more important they are."

State dinners were traditionally the most sought-after invitation in Washington, the gold-plated stamp of diplomatic and social approval. World leaders routinely got the red-carpet treatment until 2001, when Bush began substituting informal lunches for black-tie dinners. The first lady hinted earlier this year that she intended to host more stately events during the second term and hired a new social secretary (but no new chef yet). But nothing has changed, and if the next four years look anything like the past four years, formal entertaining at this White House is a thing of the past.

[dennisw]

That is one White House dinner I would have really liked an invitation to :)

[retrokitten]

while lotus blossom, mango, chocolate-cardamom and cashew ice creams will bring up the dessert, along with a Mer Soleil 'Late' 2001.

[indcons]

'Bush most India-friendly US President'

Same here..... If I had known that Congressmen could give out passes for the PM's address to Congress, I would have requested my Congressman for one. Sigh!!

[indcons]

[retrokitten]

LMAO!

[FUrMama]

wrong!
They can not eat kosher either.

[FUrMama]

Wrong!
Tibetians, Afghans, Arabs, Non Sikh Indians like haryanvi, up,mp etc wear turbans. some do so in religious ceremonies...other out of living in harsh conditions, jobs.

[FUrMama]

He most likely is.
Singh is a lastname it can bee seen in Rajputs,Haryanvi jutts and and jaats,Nepalis,Uttar pradesh, uttaranchal, regions of india.

[FUrMama]

The namesake

[FUrMama]

Nope!
eg. Siddhu(hindu and sikh), bedi(haha founder sikh and not singh)

[FUrMama]

who man mohan !
He has a beard, not a long one, dont know if he trims...but its visible cause its gray!

[FUrMama]

There is a somewhat antiquated hindu-sikh animousity, but for the most part it has died down.
The roots go back to partition of indian sub continent, when disproportionately more sikh lost property in west punjab.
It also had to do w/ the congress party of India's temporary support of bhindrawale (and now seen as moderate
tohra).
And not to forget tha jansanghi(BJP) and kushwant singh like
(formerly west punjabi's) demand of another state.
Punjab included Himachal,Aryan also.
So its a complicated plot...

[FUrMama]

They take middle names... although a lot of them
have taken middle names like "Badal"(cloud)

[CarrotAndStick]

They can not eat kosher either.

Excuse me, but I've forgotten what the topic was. Could you please remind me? Thanks.

[The Red Zone]

Sikhs and meat

It appears that there's nothing in the religion itself prohibiting consumption of beef. But many are vegetarian by custom, and others will not eat beef because of their Hindu neighbors.