After observing CRI commentators on twitter (not your website, which I deeply respect as a good source of information and a platform for informed discussions) some questions have aroused in my mind. I would be glad if you can spare some time to clarify. I would try to make it brief by putting it in 3 points.
1) Why does CRI tend to drift towards established Left. To be more specific, CPM led left-front in Bengal which did immeasurable damage to right in India, not by their limited political power, but by infiltrating Govt. machinery and other institutions of high importance like Women’s commission, planing commission, human rights commission and virtually all educational institution. The only challenge they ever faced was from Mamata Banerjee in 2001 and 2011. In 2011 she was able to convert the rifts and cracks in left ranks into warring factions. This cooperation with the dissidents in the left ranks was a tactical necessity rather then a strategic choice. On the other hand CRI seamed to be lenient towards CPM and viciously critical of Ms.Banerjee at the sensitive moment just before elections (which theoretically only could have helped the CPM led left).
2) CRI seems to be falling in the same trap by distributing politically motivated mockery(links of western liberal media) of the opponents of Obama before the coming elections of 2012. If Obama causes the downfall of America economically (and militarily), which he seems to be doing, it will not be a good news for India. Silence can also be an option.
3) Although diversity of opinion and self-criticism is a part of deliberation to achieve excellence, I don’t know how endorsement of murky elements help in achieving that. Does engaging with established anti-Hindus serve any purpose. Distributing their opinion gives them a certain amount of respectability and causes confusion in the Right. They again and again abuse Hindu sentiments and trivialize our loved symbols. This must be kept in mind.