tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13001834.post3244690368509620877..comments2024-01-13T18:08:41.591+05:30Comments on drisyadrisya: Fishing in troubled watersdrisyadrisyahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03210422252612711325noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13001834.post-235078843300616312008-06-18T08:53:00.000+05:302008-06-18T08:53:00.000+05:30Anonymouse - Its not just my problem, its a Nation...Anonymouse - Its not just my problem, its a Nation's problem that I have written about.. And you really think some one like Modi who has withstood all the vicious attacks on him by the media needs my protection ? <BR/><BR/>Definitely not to the extend to which you are protective about yourself, having written the comment as anonymous<BR/>---------------------------<BR/>Rohit <BR/><BR/>b) I am surprised you didn't get the point. They would be antagonized not at the issue itself, but for "their state" being blamed ... Once the alliance with SP is solid, then Congress may go full fledged attacking UP ( as it is being ruled by BSP), but until then.......drisyadrisyahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03210422252612711325noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13001834.post-47709434894969668152008-06-17T22:15:00.000+05:302008-06-17T22:15:00.000+05:30Dude,a) If it so clear to you, what can I say..:)b...Dude,<BR/><BR/>a) If it so clear to you, what can I say..:)<BR/><BR/>b) And you really think SP or BSP care about falling sex ratio in UP that they would be antagonized?<BR/><BR/>Anyway, thanks for the space. tcAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13001834.post-65117655783852577202008-06-17T18:56:00.000+05:302008-06-17T18:56:00.000+05:30Dude,What is your problem?Now you have to give eac...Dude,<BR/><BR/>What is your problem?<BR/>Now you have to give each and every reason of what Dr. Singh do. <BR/>The context in which he spoke is right and issue is grave. If steps are taken thats good. <BR/>Why you are so protective about Modi?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13001834.post-69739694693364932892008-06-17T17:39:00.000+05:302008-06-17T17:39:00.000+05:30a) You are free to draw your own conclusion, so am...a) You are free to draw your own conclusion, so am I. Its quite clear to me that he was playing politics. <BR/><BR/>c)Obviosuly there is no need for him to spell out BJP while talking about Gujarat. And you yourself has commnended the efforts by Modi. If it were such an important conference and if the PM had a grain of sincerity, don't you think he should have ssaid something positive about the efforts ? As per Delhi, he would have added it just to appear balanced.... ( I am not going into speculations of sheila dikshit being not in the good books of sonia) . And for UP, well, Congress always hopes to form an alliance with one of SP ( more likely) of BSP , so why would they want to antagonise them ?drisyadrisyahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03210422252612711325noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13001834.post-9018318393853068342008-06-17T11:06:00.000+05:302008-06-17T11:06:00.000+05:30Dude,a) It was pretty clear to me what he saying. ...Dude,<BR/><BR/>a) It was pretty clear to me what he saying. <BR/><BR/>b) You are again confusing the issue. The PM is talking about 0-6 years sex ratio; the map you has the overall sex ratio. You are right, however, in one aspect that quoting latest figures may be more useful. <BR/><BR/>c) Chimanbhai belonged to JD though he was supported by the Congress. Anyway, your point seems to be he is deliberately picking out opposition ruled states; on what you basis do you draw this conclusion? I don't see him blaming BJP and he criticizes Delhi which has been ruled by Congress for 10 years. And Congress has not been in power in UP for close to two decades so he should have no problems blaming UP.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13001834.post-525433691810404812008-06-17T06:16:00.000+05:302008-06-17T06:16:00.000+05:30Its actually 927 in 1991 and 933 in 2001. May be M...Its actually 927 in 1991 and 933 in 2001. May be MMS is quoting all figures for 1991, and quoting them ( wantedly or not) as 2001 figures <BR/><BR/>If the report is correct, then either MMS is deliberately manipulating figures to suit his politics, or he has a memory disorder which anyway would make him unfit to be PM, among other factors of course. Catch-22 for himAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13001834.post-64852267366972819802008-06-17T06:03:00.000+05:302008-06-17T06:03:00.000+05:30a) Either the report or the PM himself puts it in ...a) Either the report or the PM himself puts it in such a way to make look those states are the worst. And that doesn't justify him quoting a 7 year old figure !<BR/><BR/>b) As per the graph I have linked, if the overall India figures quoted is 927 in 2001 , the corresponding figures that he quoted for the states are wrong... for example he quoted 883 for Gujarat but the graph shows 901-950. where is the consistency ?<BR/><BR/>c) Check your facts. Congress was in power in Gujarat till 1995. Keshubhai Patel of BJP then ruled till 1996 before Shankarsingh Vaghela (now with Congress) split the party and ruled 1996-97 as "Rashtriya Janata Party" , I believe with Congress support. Some Parikh- again RJP with Congress support - ruled 1997-1998 . 1998 onwards it has been BJP againdrisyadrisyahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03210422252612711325noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13001834.post-41483315304399207722008-06-17T05:34:00.000+05:302008-06-17T05:34:00.000+05:30Dude,That's nonsense. Now it amazes me that I am d...Dude,<BR/><BR/>That's nonsense. Now it amazes me that I am defending Manmohan Singh, but you forced my hands... <BR/><BR/>a) Dr Singh is arguing there is no correlation between economic prosperity and improved sex ratio. It shouldn't surprise anyone; South Delhi has one of the worst sex ratios in India. That means states like UP are automatically excluded. as they are much less developed than Gujarat and Punjab. <BR/><BR/>b) Dr Singh is talking about sex ratio among 0-6 year olds which is a predictor of future sex ratio. Naturally, there is a difference between male-female sex ratio and 0-6 sex ratio; they capture different demographics. <BR/><BR/>c) Incidentally, BJP has been ruling Gujarat since 1990. BJP was in power in Gujarat even before Modi. <BR/><BR/>d) Modi has taken some important steps to improve the state of girl education; in my opinion the most important factor in stopping female infanticide. I commend him for that.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com