Can’t resist sending this ball to the fence

It doesn’t take a Ripley

Natwar Singh has a question:

The Congress is a big party. It was formed in 1885…Do you believe the Congress, which belongs to leaders like Mahatma Gandhi, Jawaharlal Nehru, Sardar Patel and Rajendra Prasad can sell oil for money? [IE]


11 thoughts on “Can’t resist sending this ball to the fence”

  1. I think Nutwar answered it himself. None of the luminaries he named are alive. Just the cronies of those luminaries successors.

  2. Where are the members of beloved monarchy? Doesn’t Sonia count too with her immense sacrifice? When you have to rely on people dead over 50 years to make you look good, you know you’re in deep crap.

  3. what gall these politicians have….they lie with such straight faces.
    the nut-wars of this world are the scum of the earth..selling oil for money is chump change…given a chance, a seasoned pol can sell his/her soul, country, family, anything that will propel their careers or generate revenue. illicit and unethical are scarce to be found in the successful pols dictionary
    politics has truly become the last refuge of the scoundrel…..and i believe that this scoundrel lies dormant amongst most of us and awakens when it smells the first whiff of power. once awakened, it will cease only when one is….dust to dust, ashes to ashes.

  4. nukh, the bribe thing is the price of doing business in the absence of transparency. In the US they’re called “campaign contributions”, legalized and taxed (which lowers the cost – lower risk). What galls me is this guy makes his money, but does not deliver the service and is *DUMB* to top it off. That’s a nasty combo – corrupt, incompetent AND stupid.

  5. I read his quote yesterday and was profoundly disappointed that he didn’t put Rajiv Gandhi in there. In fact notice the absence of any non-partition struggle leaders. What is he implying? Indira, Rajiv, Sonia etc. are/were corrupt?

  6. Nitin,

    The INC of 1885 was not a political party but a platform for all Indians to acquire a stake in governance and on the question of well being of all Indians. This platform gradually came at the helm of the national movement for freedom. Socialists, communists, liberals, show boy Muslims like Maulana Azad, All kinds of ideologies were part of the INC, held together by a single conviction, National Freedom.

    Leaders like Madan Mohan Malviya of the Hindu Mahasabha were part of the INC. It was only in 1937-38, that a resolution was passed at the behest of Gandhi to remove all Mahasabhaites from the Congress.

    Post 1947, the INC became a political party competing with the communists, the Jana Sangha and other political formations. Since then onwards, there have been thousand of fissions in the party with the latest one being the NCP of Sharad Pawar.

    No one institution or political party can lay claim to the legacy of the INC, which led the National movement for independence. It is only very disgraceful, embarrassing, nuisance creating monkeys who would lay claim to the legacy of pre-independence INC, a legacy that belongs to all Indians, as their own.

  7. S Jagadish,

    What the kind gent implies is even worse than your conclusion.

    The implication here is that of all the fissions that has taken place in the INC, from Shaymaprasad Mukherjee breaking away to form the Jana Sangha to Rajaji forming the Swatantra Party, it is only the J. Nehru line that is the rightful heir to the INC – led National movement.

    The implication here is that the entire national movement was a big bloody Gandhi party and those not swearing allegiance and deep devotion to “The Family” are all uninvited bloody gatecrashers.

    India’s fate would have been different had Nehru’s daughter married a Daruwala.

  8. Pankaj

    India’s fate would have been different had Nehru’s daughter married a Daruwala.

    Or, perhaps, a Contractor.


Comments are closed.