'Hindu nationalist' an matter of conjunction.

Was watching the debate on 'Nationalism' by the usual intellectuals on TV[ndtv] late last night.

As usual each one presented their exalted high sounding views that was simply beyond my comprehension which is limited to viewing Nationalism as a feeling of oneness of all the people living within  or have the memory of living within well defined boundaries[ie after indep] with common culture, common aspirations, common urge to preserve and defend it against external aggression , common pride,common economic angst's,common vexations and irritations and common problems.
A famous lyricist and poet [javed] said pretty much the same though in a very contrived and complicated manner and took exception to modi using the term 'Hindu nationalist' to define himself ,as against a more acceptable sentence like 'Hindu and nationalist' since the former connoted ultra nationalism based on religion specially from one coming from a organisation which is viewed as such, courtsey msms .The precedent of using this conjunction 'and' was set by the current westernised cm of J&k in a emotional speech several years back ,defining himself --his religion[islam] and his commitment to this country and therefore such a phrase is naturally more acceptable to elite secularists.

Without disparaging Modi's linguistic abilities,vernacular or otherwise ,more so the former,or sound patronising, it is my observation and view that since he did not have the luxury of studying in oxford , Cambridge and so on nor in institutions that would teach the nuances of grammar ,he may not ,unlike those born with a silver spoon and sophisticated tongue , know the art of  tossing around words in English nor the mine field  of its hazardous interpretations, as those well versed in it know and do not hesitate to deploy their mastery over their vocabulary to nit pick and score one up on their rivals.`

White washing.

After a lusty discussion by all the well known intellectuals the blue eyed boy of the scam fighting party came to the grand conclusion that though corruption of upa 2, as his network survey revealed ,is an issue ,had the governance been good enough like checking the price rise so as to keep it within reachable limits and if the economy was handled in a way that would bless every one with expendable income ,corruption on high places wouldn't have mattered  much to voters.

I deduce the following from the anchors take---

1. upa 2 is dogged by inept governance, that is the aged sardarji has failed , therefore corruption which is nothing but a part and parcel of political life ,was blown out of proportion .So the prime accused is the pm and co.
2. The visuals that were flashed on one half of the screen during this discussion where that of the worthies of coalition partners facing the music for helping themselves liberally to the goodies.so it was they and not the lily white members of the grand old party who have tarnished its reputation.

OK there is truth in this take but the following q's would have also risen in the mind of the voters which was brushed away,like--

If governance is the main issue then why wasn't a no nonsense tough person put on the helm instead of continuing with the pliant old guard?
.It  then follows and raises the suspicion that  the failure to do so could be deliberate since such  person  sticking to his no nonsense stand would be biting the hand that feeds it.

This is a clear case of 'thodu donga' a Telugu phrase meaning co thieves where in the liability is shared and absolution ,  none .