Praise for the Gadkari's team by LiC?

Am I dreaming or has the LiC gone soft on BJP?
(Thx to sudhir for pointing it out)

In allocating generous space to women at various levels in the party hierarchy, the BJP has shown that gender justice need not become hostage to legislative battles. Team Gadkari also scores in bringing a blend of experience and youth to the table. Old hands expectedly dominate the party's parliamentary board while a fair sprinkling of young people, drawn from diverse social backgrounds, have made it to the lower echelons of power.

There's a lot of praise for Arun Jaitley,

In the event, Mr. Gadkari has proved that he has a better grip of politics and party affairs than most of the veterans. The confidence has begun to show — especially in Parliament where Arun Jaitley and Sushma Swaraj have emerged as formidable team leaders. It was at Mr. Jaitley's instance that the Women's Reservation Bill came to be debated before being put to vote in the Rajya Sabha. His speech in support of the Bill reflected bipartisanship of a kind sorely lacking in Indian political discourse. More importantly — without prejudice to what this newspaper thinks about the BJP's disintegrative political programme and ideology — it came across recently as a sober party capable of making its point skilfully, without resorting to drama and bad behaviour.

Of course any praise to the "right wing" BJP must be tempered with criticisms of the RSS and it brings the pinata out for trashing as usual. But all in all, a reasonably balanced editorial by LiC, compared to previous standards.

Blaming the BJP for the J&K Unrest

The Hindu strongly criticizes the Sangh Parivar in its editorial today for the flare-up in J&K. Compare the difference in language to previous editorial comments on this issue (see this one for example). Note also the claim it makes in the editorial today.

Hindutva leaders in Jammu claim that the revocation of the land transfer is an affront to Hindu ‘religious rights’ — a claim as bizarre as that of Islamists who claimed the transfer was part of a conspiracy to alter Kashmir’s Muslim-majority character.

It is not as bizarre as it sounds. For one thing, the land transfer was originally agreed upon owing to the reasonableness of the request. The opposition to the transfer was no doubt bizarre but once the transfer was revoked under pressure from the Kashmiri far right, why is it so unusual to suggest that it was not an affront to minority Hindu rights? If the majority in Kashmir did not hold the key to power in the state, would the government have revoked it nonetheless in deference to a regional sentiment? Let us take an easier case. When Mulayam Singh announced a 27% OBC quota throughout the then-undivided UP, a strong anti-quota agitation was launched in Uttarkhand. The result? Absolutely no concession. Mulayam refused to even consider the idea of lifting the quota in response to it. The reason the reverse happened in this instance is precisely because of the power that Kashmir enjoys. And when that power is used to advance a xenophobic agenda, why do the minorities not have a right to resist? They most certainly do.

It is a reflection on the Bharatiya Janata Party’s cynical political agenda that it refused to call for calm or endorse Governor N.N. Vohra’s appeals for dialogue. BJP leaders must reflect on the grave implications of the course they have taken in India’s most troubled and vulnerable State.

Of course the BJP which has no base in Kashmir is not going to endorse a call for calm if nothing is conceded by the government. If you want change, asking people to calm down amounts to endorsing the status quo. Its that simple. Yes, the state is vulnerable but does pandering to extreme and false propaganda of the kind witnessed recently in Kashmir make it any less vulnerable? The Islamist far right will declare victory and become emboldened to demand even more. Where does that leave anyone?

The Hindu is out advising and criticizing everyone it can find - BJP, PDP and the Congress. All except the venerable Left are of course to blame (the lone CPI(M) MLA Mohamed Yusuf Tarigami has surprisingly not been getting the big coverage he got earlier in The Hindu).

Neena's ESP

We mortals have normal sensory powers. Super secularists like Neena are a rare breed. They posses microscopic eyes, super sensitive ears and ESP that allow them to see "differences" even when an entity stands united.

Commenting on the NDA's reaction to the budget, Neena says

The one refrain that emerged from the different voices in the National Democratic Alliance.....

She hears "different voices", but as is the case with her, goes on to contradict herself in the next few lines.

While conceding that there were aspects in the budget that were welcome — loan waiver for marginal and small farmers, changes in direct tax slabs benefiting the middle class — the BJP leaders dismissed these as election year sops

.

Note: All BJP leaders spoke in one voice. No "different voice" here.

Leader of the Opposition L. K. Advani was joined by Janata Dal (United) president Sharad Yadav and Shiv Sena leader Anant Geete in pointing out that nothing had been done for those who had taken money from money-lenders at exorbitant interest rates.

The NDA partners too echoed the BJP's stand.

The other point on which the NDA leaders were united was that interest on credit to the farming sector should have been reduced to four per cent (from the current seven per cent).

Neena herself says "united" , so where is the "different voice" that she heard in the opening line?
Does Neena need urgent ENT attention?