Three thoughts

Three very important thoughts cross my mind brought there by my readers who have been very active this week with their feedback.

The first thought is about the PM being under the Lok Pal Bill and that there is a major trap being laid by the Government, for the “civil society”.

Till March this year the Govt kept talking about bringing the PM under the Lokpal Bill. In fact in Jan this year Govt announced that “the Ordinance will "draw heavily" from the Lokpal Bill that is being vetted by the Law Ministry and provide for filing of complaints of allegations of corruption against the Prime Minister, Ministers and MPs with the Lokpal,”. Law Minister Moily was quite vociferous about it

This clearly shows the Govt’s intension of the PM being under the Bill till March 2011, so what changed in March when the Govt suddenly changed its tune?

Obvious, some smart alec in the Govt realised that if a confrontation came head on with Team Anna, something would need to be seen to be given from the Govt side as a compromise.

What better idea to fool the public than to protest to high heaven against including the PM under the bill and then allow it to happen as a compromise ?

Folks, we need to beware of the trap. Throw back the Govts’ words in their face and show them that our memories are NOT THAT SHORT. Any compromise to include the PM under the Lok Pal is not a compromise, its a forgone conclusion.

Have we forgotten Rajiv Gandhi and Boffors ? Was he not PM when accused, so how can the PM be justifiably excluded from the Bill if we are serious about killing corruption ?

The Second Thought is Manish Tiwari and his comments : "If this democracy faces its greatest peril from someone, it is from the tyranny of the unelected and the unelectable"

Very Interesting words: Unelected and Unelectable…..

Unelected….well Manmohan Singh lost his 1999 election from New Delhi and was directly inducted as a PM under the UPA despite the fact he had not on the Lok Sabha Election…….

Unelectable ……wouldn’t you say someone who has lost and election had done so since the People had rejected him, so technically I would say A person who had lost an election is unelectable….

People,  I seriously suspect someone was talking to Manish Tiwari a few mins before the interview where he said such rubbish about the Prime Minister and as people are wont to do , in the hunger for sound bytes and the heat of he moment Mr Tiwari repeated the same words for Team Anna which don’t fit the occasion at all.

The Third thought came when we were discussing Munde and his imminent change of parties.:  Someone expressed a grave concern with our electoral process. He said, when candidates come to us they hand us a manifesto of the party they represent saying they stand for this, that and these policies. They promise that if they come to power , they will do this this and this.

Based upon the combination of the personal achievements of the candidates and the party manifesto from which he is standing, we elect them. Some time later, they decide that the Party they are with is no longer suitable for their personal political ambitions and decide to switch parties. What happens to the pre election manifesto….the pre election promises they made to the common voter.

Let us take the example of Munde. He says he is a BJP person and as such is for the Hinduvta creed, stands for the bringing back of the black money, support Sushma Swarajs’ dance at Raj Ghat as patriotic, etc which stands at the heart of the BJP fundamental creedo.

Tomorrow if for arguments sake he joins the Congress, will he turn around and scream blue murder at Hindu Fundamentalism calling the BJP fanatics and say all kind of nonsense against Sushma Swaraj for dancing at Gandhi’s grave.

What happens to the poor punter who voted for him and believed that Munde actually stood with the manifesto he propagated.

We then discussed that this kind of middle term switching in politics was akin to a horse race, where lets say Jockey Lester Piggot who has a excellent track record sits on a horse A ,  and you bet a large amount on it based upon the combination of horse and rider…..halfway down the race he decides that Horse A is no good and jumps onto Horse B and continues the race.

The question to ask ourselves is if this did happen…..has my bet moved with him ? Of course it hasn’t.

If Piggot did that you would be yelling for his blood, so why are we allowing politicians to do it  silently?