Once upon a time, K Jana Reddy's speechs were difficult for journalists to comprehend due to his lack of clarity. Journalists would murmur among themselves to understand what he was saying and, based on their interpretations, would write something.
Eventually, Balakrishna took that spot. Known for his speeches lacking substance and being irrelevant to the occasion, his out-of-context remarks became amusing, and people eventually got used to them.
Now, Pawan Kalyan seems to have taken a similar position continuing the legacy of above two poineers.
Even during the Jana Sena Formation Day event, his speech failed to impress.
Observing his speech, it reveals that he often referenced numerous names and concepts to appear well-read, but his lack of context and inability to articulate effectively make him an unimpressive speaker.
Today, his comments on Tamil Nadu politics seemed irrelevant, and his support for Hindi education appeared aimed at impressing BJP leaders.
He also made a statement that irked TDP media: "naalugu dasaabdaala charitra galigina TDP ni nilabettaam".
Though this statement didn't go well with TDP people, this doesn't mean he insulted Chandrababu Naidu, because he praised him with several metaphors and similes.
Many are questioning the implementation of the "Super Six" promises from the manifesto. A diplomatic approach would be to acknowledge the state's financial turmoil and promise to fulfill them once resolved. Yet, he didn't address this crucial governance aspect.
Ignoring state governance and rambling on unrelated topics has frustrated his party members.
To sum up, Pawan Kalyan's speech on Jana Sena Formation Day lacked direction. While poetic lines and famous quotes are his habit, the speech went on aimlessly.
He praised Chandrababu with KGF-level elevations, and then drifted into childhood memories and his film career.
His speech lacked politically significant points. He touched on the trilingual principle, Sanatana Dharma, and secularism but with no coherence.
The audience and leaders on stage listened silently, unable to respond. He even mentioned Pakistan, Bangladesh, and regional issues without any logical connection.
At times, he praised Islam, urged Hindus to learn from them, and criticized Tamil Nadu’s decision-making.
He failed to address Jana Sena’s future, its achievements, or its share in power. The speech left common workers confused and directionless.
Once again, Pawan proved to be a poor and uninteresting public speaker, the only party president in India lacking clarity and direction in his speeches.
Sudhir Varma, USA