I love my India and want it to be the best in the world. It has the talent and capability. The state has constantly deteriorated in last six decades. The downfall is due to low quality, incompetent and corrupt leadership, unaccountable, equally corrupt bureaucracy and ineffective judiciary unable to fulfil people's aspirations resulting in unparalleled corruption and lawlessness. Drastic changes are necessary to make systems vibrant and responsive to make it an India of every Indian's dreams.
Is it not it a pity, that the worthy spokesmen of the Congress party, try to blunt Anna's Attacks and his apprehensions about change of stand, earlier proposed by standing committee for the Jan Lokpal bill, on Rahul', using some wrong premise and faulty arguments.
It needs to be emphasized and understood that, Firstly, nobody including Anna's group has any doubts about the truth that 'laws can only be made in parliament'. No matter how much, and what, is spoken at the protest site, everyone is clear that legislation would not be passed on the streets or at Jantar Mantar. However, that does not take away the right for an apolitical public debate. Apolitical, since EVERY party or group or individual had the opportunity to express their views. How after all can this be treated as 'turning political'?
Secondly, terming it as 'contempt of or insulting the parliament' by the same worthy spokesman is not understood. Does he imply or mean that debates outside the Parliament on any issue under the sun are prohibited in the Indian context? There are already covert attempts to muzzle the social networking sites on the net. Is this not an effort to do the same at public places? After all what are the ruling party’s intentions?
Lastly, if people from every walk of life, any profession, any religious or non political group have been participating in Anna's rallies, why should politicians of any party be barred, if they wish to express their views on the issue at hand? Anna has done well to allow most opposition parties besides knowledgeable personalities to express solidarity with his noble cause to end corruption in the country. Unwittingly, he has done enough to rub into the indifferent approach of the ruling party, in spite of the written commitment given to Anna.
Even, the United States of America has widely attended, widely televised public debates during their Presidential elections. Would it not be nice to have such events for selecting our President at least, if not the CVC, Lok Pal or a few more constitutional authorities. So, why should the ruling party’s spokesmen be so sensitive to such healthy exchange of views?
Under the circumstances would it not be better, if the ruling party’s spokesmen think carefully, before making illogical comments on a day to day basis. Perhaps they are lacking wisdom to realise the harm they have done to their party’s stature.