By the same logic Sonia Gandhi has one son and one daughter, she should stay neutral.

What Sonia Gandhi means is that, Lalu's 7 daughters are good for nothing and can come up only through reservations and not by merit and hence he should support the bill.It proves the point that these reservations are for the daughters of politicians and their relatives.

The common man is worried as where from he is going to get his next meal.He is least worried whether women gets increased reservation or not.

Lalu should know that this is a God sent opportunity for his family ladies (7 daughters 1 wife). In addition to them, Lalu could contest the elections. If they all win by God's grace, Lalu with 9 MP seats could threaten any party and become an important looter of the public exchequer (important add the phrase: "in the name of secularism and alliance with like minded parties").

Lalu is a prudent man. He must have calculated the great risk in having 33% reservation. He is already in minority at home.

Sonia Gandhi is illogical in her statement about Laloo. Any woman who believes in equality will not support any form of reservation. The same way, any competent and able SC/ST/OBCs will not support caste based reservation either. Laloo's daughters may not support such gender based reservation for a different reasons as compared to Laloo's political compulsion in opposing this bill. Indian Govt is unable to deliver justice to women and backward people and that's why they are so eager to implement such reservations that make division among people and take a huge, long term toll on overall development of our society.

He has named one of his daughter as MISA the controversial emergency law imposed by Madam Indira Gandhi,=.