When FAIR Isn’t Fair


In “Russia Accusations a Distraction From Gabbard’s Actual Troubling Ties,” (FAIR, Oct. 24, 2019),  Ari Paul claims Gabbard’s alleged pro-Hindutva views are a greater concern than Clinton and MSM’s fabricated Russian accusations—given these charges, as Paul himself admits, are unsubstantiated, it stands to reason that nearly everything would be a greater concern—yet he never specifies what he or his various handpicked, handwringing sources believe Gabbard, in light of her dubious RSS ties, would do if elected president.  Nor does Paul cite much in the way of rebuttal to the accusations, employing instead a heavy-handed, one-sided argument against Gabbard and the nebulous doom that she represents.  As a result, the allegations come across as little more than fear-mongering, as if Paul is manipulating current paranoia about foreign interference in American politics to exploit religious bigotry. 
Not only has the US never had a non-Christian president, but even among Christian sects, there’s a clear bias.  Many worried in the sixties that Kennedy’s Catholicism would make him a puppet of the pope, or more recently, commentators such as Lawrence O’Donnell at MSNBC voiced trepidation about Mitt Romney being a Mormon. Similarly, Bernie Sanders, on those few occasions in which he’s mentioned, is often portrayed negatively by much of the media, which could be construed as anti-Semitism. Since Paul never addresses how Gabbard’s views on India compare to other presidential candidates—or other US politicians, for that matter—it seems it’s mostly because Gabbard is a Hindu that her relationship with India is an issue. 
It’s extremely disappointing that FAIR would take part in what certainly appears to be a smear aimed at an anti-establishment candidate, an all-too common MSM ploy, as FAIR itself suggests.  Upon reading Paul's piece, one wonders if he is equally troubled by Joe Biden’s links to neo-Nazis in Ukraine.

Comments

Nelly said…
Excellent criticism. The FAIR article was disturbing and just goes to show that you can't elevate a publication like FAIR to "trusted" status but you must evaluate each piece it publishes.