We as a nation give too much of an importance to myths. John F Kennedy obsered that the greatest enemy to truth is very often not the lie, deliberate, contrived and dishonest but the myth persistent and persuasive. By that yardstick the defence in favor of our PM is weak and hinges upon a myth which needs to be exploded. 

When the office of profit controversy broke out. Sonia not only gave up her post of Chairperson of NAC- despite a legislation specifically exempting her office from the purview of Office of profit, she also resigned as Member of Parliament and won an election afresh seeking a mandate. That is an example of probity in Public life. 

Palaniappan Chidambaram when the scam of faked Bankers' receipt broke out managed by Fairgrowth Financial Services Ltd, a brain child of late Ratnakar one of our most dynamic bankers of yester years, submitted his resignation for having held promoter quota of shares. Though it may be argued that Chidambaram never expected his resignation to be accepted, which Narasimha Rao did much to his dismay, he set highest standards in probity in Public life.

Now tell me, If the PM who was in the knowledge of whatever was happening right under his eyes for two whole years, chose to remain silent is not guilty of dereliction of duty? How can be allowed to escape stating that he had coalition compulsions and how can his perceived integrity come in the way of judging by his monumental inaction. I still do not believe that there has been a robbing of exchequer as is alleged, but still if Raja is guilty PM is equally culpable., We can not have two standards for both of them. PM should have volunteered to quit owing up moral responsibility.. That is what Lal Bahadur shastri did and what TTK was forced to do.

Till such time PM clears his name, this insinuation will continue and congress should not cry over this citing his unimpeachable integrity and all that stuff. That has to be demonstrated and not preached. Is the PM listening? If you can threaten to walk out over Indo US nuclear deal and resort to unfair means to manage a majority in Parliament, this time also, you could have threatened when the crisis first surfaced By not doing so, the PM has exposed his complicity- even if he may not be a beneficiary