Rahul Gandhi - Will he ever be ready?

Once again Rahul Gandhi has decided not to play an active part in the politics and current ruling party. After much discussion and expectation, he has said that he would work for the betterment of the party overall and not take any "minister" position. there can be three ways to look at it. Either Rahul Gandhi thinks that he is contributing more to the party as his current role. Or he is afraid to play active part in politics. Or he wants to delay his entry to politics for some reason, The first scenario, in my point of view is quite unlikely as his earlier work to manage the party and improve its image has not worked the way he has expected. So probably he has some new strategies in mind which he thinks are going to work and are better than the old ones.
The second scenario is I think possible as after the death of Rajiv Gandhi, none of the Gandhi family has accepted any ministerial position. Or probably Rahul himself is not interested in doing this work.
In the third scenario, which is most expected may be Rahul wants to try each of his management technique before he jumps into politics. but I think all the image cleaning or improvement in the work  which he intends to do can be done in a better way if he himself play part in some ministry. If Rahul himself plays a ministers role there will be multiple benefits. One, will get exposed to real "politics" that a politician has to face. Two, if he does well, he can improve his party's image and three, he can prepare himself for the big role that he is expected to play in future for UPA.
The only thing that I want to ask Rahul Gandhi is ready to play the role or if he ever will?

Innocent or Brazen!

These days every other politician is been named in some corruption charge. It started with India Against Corruption (IAC)'s charges against UPA Govt. Ministers, going to BJP and then it backfired on them. Now every Tom, Dick and Harry in politics has a corruption charge in his/her kitty. and whats more is that every politician has got this favorite dialogue "If charges are proved, I shall quit". First Gadhkari and now this Adhir Ranjan Chowdhury, MoS in Kolkata. Sometimes I wonder if they all know that proving of charges is going to take enough time and during which we can easily serve, so a lot more corruption, accumulate more wealth and may be if investigation goes against me, I can easily use some money out of this to save my soul.
Its not just about how brazen these politicians have become, who are involved in such petty things, it also how slow our judicial work (our courts) and investigation work (the CBI!!) has become. Its the mixture of all this that has reduced the credibility of all the politicians (good or bad) and confidence of people in our chosen parties!

Walk the talk!

The visit of British High Commissioner, James Bevan to Gujarat is a little unexpected. For the last 10 years they had banned Gujarat and the CM, his visits and their investments for the state, since their 4 citizens were killed in the 2002 riots. Though it is obviously difficult for a country (which actually itself is surrounded all over from economic problems) to ignore a state like Gujarat (which is attracting a lot of investments due to its high rate of growth in most of the sectors), but the way the 2002 riots have been ignored or not worked properly on, ideally it did not make any sense to lift the ban and go ahead with them.
I am not a judge here or a person who has got any insights on how much involvement Mr. Modi actually had in the communal riots but, if he had, isn't it so easy for a person to get away with  whatever he has done, however heinous it might be?
The bans by some big nations on any country or state for anything bad or wrong it has done are imposed to show how the actions by some particular state/nation are condemned strongly. If in the period of 10 years any influential country can lift the ban from any nation(without having valid reasons to do it), then how can we expect nations like Israel or Sudan or Iran to change their positions. Or how can we ensure Assad will do what is expected!
I feel that countries should be more responsible in  words and  actions.

Toilets in all schools - Is that enough?

The Supreme Court has ordered all schools to have toilets within 6 months of time. Though it its definitely a welcome attempt, I have realized (from my experience) it does not work to its fullest of intention.
The Govt. of India scheme known as "Nirmal Gram Puraskar" wherein all villages get a monetary award who are able to maintain cleanliness in the village including proper sanitation facilities in households, schools, anganwadi centres and other public buildings. Though monetary benefit makes them work towards the cleanliness and sanitation, the toilet facilities are still not proper. Even though toilets are constructed, they lack the water facility and sewage systems. Due to all this the students are not able to use these facilities and are forced to go outside.

SC's order is very important but it is also important to see how well it is being implemented and is actually useful, not just to comply with the orders.

Please be responsible

Though it is yet to be confirmed whether Sonia Gandhi's medical expenditure is spent from exchequers money but it may not come as a surprise if it were true. Sonia Gandhi is head of the ruling party and it is very well possible that that members (or may be Sonia Gandhi herself) assumed that all the money for her surgery or medication should come from people's money. I am sure its not just Sonia Gandhi but many other politicians or senior party members (by senior I mean those who are powerful or those who are to be pleased within a party) who are using exchequers money
It is a valid point raised by the journalist in picture. But now he is backing out from the authenticity of such claim. either he is afraid to accept the fact or he is just one of the irresponsible journalists, who just publish articles for the sake of it and not to uncover the truth. The Editor of the magazine has also shamefully said that many papers have published the story and why is his paper being discussed as if indirectly saying "I just published it because it was already published in so and so paper and I have no information or source of my own".
Mr. Modi on the other hand, has also quoted something from a newspaper, for which he had no surety of authenticity. and he has also said that if proven wrong he would apologise even though he is no proof of what he has claimed.
In this episode there are so many irresponsible parties who do not understand what they have claimed. I don't know who is right or wrong but one thing I know for sure, please people do not misuse your position.