And Manish Tiwari takes issue with Anna Hazare’s birthday celebration expenses???
Hindustan Times: 24-page issue; 14 RG ads amounting to 7 broadsheet pages
The Times of India: 32-page issue; 21 ads amounting to 9 broadsheet pages
Indian Express: 28-page issue; 15 ads amounting to 6½ broadsheet pages
Mail Today (compact): 36-page issue; 11 ads amounting to 6½ compact pages
The Hindu: 24-page issue; 13 ads amounting to 5 broadsheet pages
The Pioneer: 16-page issue; 11 ads amounting to 3¾ broadsheet pages
The Statesman: 16-page isuse; 7 ads amounting to 3 broadsheet pages
The Telegraph: 26-page issue; 9 ads amounting to 3¾ broadsheet pages
The Economic Times: 16-page issue; 2 ads amounting to ¾ of a page
Business Standard: 18-page issue; 2 ads amouning to ¾ of a page
Financial Express: 22-page issue; 3 ads amounting to 1¼ pages
Mint (Berliner): 16-page issue; 0 ads
“A back-of-the-envelope calculation suggests that on May 21, 2010, perhaps Rs 60 or 70 crore were spent by the taxpayer — without his and her consent — on praising Rajiv Gandhi. Since the practice has been in place since 2005, the aggregate expenditure to date on this account is probably in excess of Rs 300 crore.”
AND THAT CONGRESS MEDIA MAN MANISH TIWARY WAS SAYING SOMETHING ABOUT ANNA BEING CORRUPT OVER SOME CELEBRATION HIS FOLLOWERS ORGANIZED ON HIS BIRTHDAY??
“Saala jhooth bolela, kaali dilli ka chhora saala jhooth bolela” was a soulful but rebellious rendition of a Bhojpuri song which found resonance across eastern Uttar Pradesh and Bihar in 1988-89. A rather little-known Bhojpuri singer named Baleshwar Yadav sung this song at the peak of the Bofors controversy and alluded to the involvement of the then prime minister Rajiv Gandhi in the corruption scandal by referring to him as “kaali Dilli ka chhora (lad from black Delhi)”. Given the melodious nature of the Bhojpuri language, this song was certainly coarse. Yet, it struck the chord with the Bhojpuri belt.
Obviously, in people’s court Rajiv Gandhi was held guilty of the Bofors pay-off in 1989 even though in legal parlance he was innocent. That Baleshwar Yadav’s song conveyed a far deeper political message than legal language was evident in 1989 elections when the Congress was decimated in the polls. Though Rajiv Gandhi and his cohorts tried to defend their position by applying legalese, it only made an adverse impact. V P Singh grew in stature and acceptance, not because of application of his superior oratory or logic but because his political idioms were carried to people like Baleshwar Yadav.
Obviously, the government of the day cannot be faulted for its lack of understanding of India’s political history. Prime minister Manmohan Singh is essentially a career bureaucrat whose brush with politics is self-admittedly a fortuitous event. But there is a battery of leaders within the party who know it quite well that the application of legalese and superior logic is bound to recoil on the government. This is significant in view of the fact that the government has marshalled top-notch lawyers in the garb of politicians to defend its position.
Take, for instance, the spirited defence put up by union home minister P Chidambaram, HRD minister Kapil Sibal or law minister Salman Khursheed who have been targeting and attacking Anna Hazare as if they were performing in a court of law. In a series of press conferences, these ministers have given long expositions on constitutional matters related to individual’s rights, role of parliament and judiciary and executive in a democracy.
The Congress has simultaneously unleashed another lawyer-turned-MP, Manish Tewari, to call Anna names and describe him and his associates as “company” quite akin to the D company. There is no doubt that the government and the Congress have jointly unleashed a battery of lawyers to employ their language to demolish Anna Hazare’s campaign, vilify him and neutralise him with their superior skill of logic.
Contrast this with Anna Hazare’s one-liners coming straight out of innocent rusticity prevalent in India. He offered to serve Kapil Sibal and carry a “bucket of water” for him (“Sibal ke yahan paani bharoonga”) if the Lokpal turns out to be ineffective in tackling corruption. He is not ashamed of showing his ignorance about the complex legalese employed by legal hawks, academia or social elites of Delhi. His certain expressions may sound “anarchic” to constitutionalists. But is India not called a “functional anarchy” by the same set of people?
By all indications, Anna’s political project of getting India rid of corruption has found greater acceptance among people despite the superior logic of his opponents. However, it appears quite amazing that the opposition has still failed to assess the mood of people and has been relying more on the prowess of legalese and complex language and less on its political instincts to comprehend this phenomenon. This is evident by the manner in which the principal opposition, BJP, has not been as forthright in its political response as its ally, Nitish Kumar, with regard to Anna Hazare’s campaign.
There are many instances in Indian political history when people rejected sophisticated language of rulers and opted for a coarse and rustic idiom which found resonance with the people. Ramdhari Singh Dinkar’s famous line “Singhasan khali karo ki janata aati hai” (vacate the throne lest people come) was an instant hit during the emergency period though there were cries of “India is Indira and Indira is India” in a very sophisticated English language by Devkant Baruah.
Katrina Kaif apologises for Rahul Gandhi comments
July 20, 2011 11:48:58 PM
PTI | New Delhi
Actress Katrina Kaif has apologised for her comments describing Rahul Gandhi as “half Indian” but said her remarks were taken out of context.
“The comments have been misconstrued. They have been taken out of context. But having said that if I have caused hurt to anyone’s sentiments, I deeply apologise. It was not the intention at all,” Kaif told a TV news channel.
In an interview to a newspaper, the cine star had said, “Am I supposed to be ashamed that I am half-Asian, I mean, no! Rahul Gandhi is half-Indian, half-Italian. So? I am very proud of what I am and I just don’t understand the confusion – as if I’m trying to hide the fact that my mother’s a British. Why would I?”
The actress, who turned 28 recently, said she made those comments without any “malice or real thought” but regretted they were misconstrued by the media.
“I will also request the media not to make a controversial issue out of something which was not meant with any intention or malice or any real thought behind it. That’s all I have to say,” the actress said.
Kaif’s remarks were met with contempt from the Congress, with party spokesperson Manish Tewari sarcastically saying, “Who is she? I do not know. Tomorrow, you will ask for our reaction on the statement of Johny Lever. To what level you want to bring down the level of the political discourse in the country?”
Kaif’s role in Prakash Jha’s ‘Rajneeti‘ also courted controversy as it had some similarities of accent with that of Congress President Sonia Gandhi.
Katrina should have stuck to her guns There was no need to apologize for a factual statement. Look at how touchy Sonia Gandhi’s boot lickers are when it comes to foreign origins of Rahul Gandhi? They are mortally afraid that if public starts thinking about roots of Rahul, shh….., they won’t let him be the Prime Minister of Bharat.
Is it not funny that This bafoon, Manish Tiwari talks abbot lowering of political discourse. Dear, no one can lower it any further than Sonia’s puppy dog, Digvijay Singh.