Rahul Gandhi hardly responded convincingly in his maiden interview>he was evasive on issue of Ashok chavan and Virbhadra Singh.Similarly he was not having any logical reply on issue of Gujrat riots Vis a vis Sikh riots of 1984 Most of time he was talking of women empowerment without any reference and context.
In India, all these debates, interviews do not mean much. People vote based on symbols like sir names, Aam Admi etc. Over and above most of Indians are linguistic, casteiests etc. None sees national agenda, corruption, merit, previous performance etc. If not for rouge Indian voters, corrupt parties/leaders would not have survived several decades. That (people) decide whether a country in advanced or (morally) backward. Yadha Praja..Thatha Raja (s).
Rahul spoke of rule of law which needs to be followed be it in 1984 riots, Virbhadra case or Adarsh scam. He allows the judiciary to do the talking. But when asked about NaMo getting clean chit in 2002 riots, he only says Modi was involved. How is it that he respects rule of law when it involves his party and not when BJP is involved? Do we need a PM who doesn't respect court judgements? No.
Do not agree with dynasty rule, as our is secular democracy, even if Rahul has advantage of being Gandhi family, all congressmen are accepting him as their leader, why not should be seen with plus point.
Re: Dynasty
by sanjay sss on Jan 28, 2014 10:35 AM
Dynasty is not a disqualification. There are political dynasties in TN, Maharastra, Punjab, UP ,Rajasthan etc. What is the qualification of Vasundhra Raje Scindia if not dynasty. Why it is aligning with SS in Mumbai and Akali Dal in Punjab, Naidu with AP.BJP has one rule for itself and another rule for others.
Re: Dynasty
by SREEKUMAR SREEKUMAR SREEKUMAR on Jan 28, 2014 12:31 PM
All congressmen are accepting Rahul Gandhi as leader because (a) Clever congressmen want a puppet on top so that they can quitely continue the loot (b) being a Nehru family member, there would not be any dispute otherwise there would be conflict in the party.
Again proves that it would have been better had Congress been disbanded in 1947 after the independence. At least the incapability of many of the so called Giants of Congress would not have become public. Here we see painfully the decline and fall of Congress after independence. Now the Pary is at bits nadir. Better disband it now, before the leaders of the party who are embodiments of Duryodhana of Mahabharatha start canibalising with the country.
