Last week, Barack Obama, a freshman US Senator from Illinois and an African-American, decidedly took the Iowa caucues, winning by comfortable margins over his closest rival. Who would have thought that even Democrats in Iowa, an overwhelmingly white, rural, and homogeneous state would choose an African-American as their potential nominee to be President of the United States? It is truly a historic moment.

Barack’s victory is a testimony to the lengths that this country has gone since its days of slavery, where people can now come together to choose someone so different from them racially because of the merits of his message. Although the Iowa victory is a huge boost for the Obama campaign, the fight has only just begun. Winning in Iowa is no guarantee that the party will nominate him for the White House.

But this fight will bring out the anti-Muslim forces in earnest. We will once again hear the whispers that Obama is a "Muslim plant," that he "trained at a madrasa," that his first name sounds a lot like "Osama," and his middle name is the same as Saddam's. Those whispers will now become louder. If Obama continues to win, they will become shouts of alarm.

Cynics may try to "swift boat" Obama with his Muslim heritage and try to smear him with the sins of extremist Muslims. What they did with Senator John Kerry in 2004, they can do it with Obama in 2008. If they ran an overtly racist ad against Harold Ford in the 2006 Tennessee senate campaign, they can do something similar to Obama in 2008. Politics is a dirty business. If Obama continues to take state after state, the gloves will come off, and things will get ugly.

Herein lies the opportunity for Barack. If he truly wants to unite the nation, if he truly wants to be an agent of "change we can believe in," then he should stand up - when the attacks about his "Muslim ties" come - and repudiate the attacks. But he should do it in a different way than he has in the past. Imagine a response like this:

Now, recently there have been some accusations against me that I attended a "madrasa," when I was a young boy. Some have even accused me of being a "clandestine Muslim," a "Muslim plant" seeking to capture the White House. Yes, my middle name is "Hussein," and there is nothing wrong with this. Now, I have said many times that I am not a Muslim, I am a Christian, who is devout and proud of his faith.

Yet, this does not mean that there is something wrong with being a Muslim. Islam is an honorable religion, the basis of a glorious civilization that has given the world some of its greatest gifts. Muslims comprise one-fiftth of the world's population, and millions of our fellow Americans derive comfort from the Muslim faith. Indeed, there are those who claim to be Muslim who have attacked our country, who have committed inhuman acts of violence in the name of their religion.

But, these people defile the religion of Islam, and they do not represent the overwhelming majority of Muslims, across the world and here in America, who are peace-loving, law-abiding citizens who want what everyone else wants: to live in peace and security. It is high-time that we as Americans, citizens of the greatest nation on earth, to repudiate and reject the politics of division, fearmongering, and hate. We can do better as a nation, and let us start today.

A bold statement like this would be a huge step forward for interfaith relations in America. It could deal a convincing blow to the forces of hatred and fear in America. If delivered with sincerity, people across the political spectrum would be receptive.

In his autobiography, The Audacity of Hope, Obama notes that “we are no longer just a Christian nation. We are also a Jewish nation, a Muslim nation, a Buddhist nation, a Hindu nation, and a nation of nonbelievers.” But when the whispers of his Muslim heritage first surfaced, Obama remained almost completely silent, and it was truly disappointing. An opportunity to encourage fellow Americans to be more open-minded was lost. When the whispers emerge once more, Barack's opportunity should not be lost again.

Obama has a Dog's chance in Hell of becoming president. Phooee. Obama who? Just goes to show the intellectual bankruptcy, media dominance and empty sloganeering of the US electoral process.

And this whole Muslim thing is a little fooolish wont you say. Afterall it is a Christian nation, because the whole freaking "multi-faith" country can't get together and out vote a handfull of church-going fundamentalist christians who single handedly re-elected a war mongering bufoon. And this Obama freak is going to "unite the country." What a farce.

I have to disagree absolutely about there being future shouts of alarm at obama's islamic "ties".
obama in particular has aides who handles answering questions and putting out info on his behalf-

remember hillary and the kindergarten ambitions of obama?
or the cocaine debacle?
she let her aides take the fall for those- they actually may have damaged her so badly that it may be why she lost in iowa.

americans are not up for a whisper or negative campaign this time-
republicans too- look at the beating romeny took over his negative campaign towards huckabee-
he also lost the iowa caucus- (numbers wise)

they already put their foot in to test the waters on the osama/obama line

and quickly withdrew when they saw the overwhelming reaction of american voters reject that tack.
the negative swift boat campaign is so strong i the american psyche this time, that when you wrote "swift" response- we all know what that refers to-

and what about alan keyes? if im not mistaken, hes an african american who also ran for president.


the thing i worry about, when i see muslims going for obama becausethey magine that because he is black, and has some muslims in his family- he is going to be more sympathetic to muslims and his foregin policy will reflect that-

look at the records - not what you hope or imagine.

obama sold his soul to AIPAC at the beginning of his campaign, and rolled over 180 degrees for the israeli lobby over the "palestinians have suffered more than anyone " statement

it morphed immmediately (after outrage from AIPAC) into, palestinians have AND ISRAELIS
have suffered BECAUSE THE VIOLENT ACTIONS OF THE PALESTINIAN LEADERS. (instead of being a criticism of israeli treatment- it became more blaming of the palestinians for their own troubles)
http://www.aipac.org/Publications/SpeechesByPolicymakers/Barack_Obama_-_AIPAC_Policy_Forum_2007.pdf

because obama has these muslim connections- he will (and already HAS) distanced himself from muslims more strongly-

and will have to prove his loyalty to christian america by actualy going the other extreme- because he'll be watched so closely that he will have to go a little to the right wing goosestep- any perceived sympathetic responses on is part toward muslims will be readily pounced on by the right-

now my problems with obama has nothing to do with his blackness- or his muslimness(which doesnt really exist as he so vociferously states)

my problems have to do with- HE NEVER ELABORATES WHAT THE CHANE WILL BE TOWARDS-

health care? insurance companies? no plan- or rather, a bad hillary copy thrown together quickly for iowa caucus-

immigration? silence

economy? nothing
nafta? staus quo
as far as being a constitutional scholar- not one word about the civil liberties that were taken away by the patriot act-

the war?
basically in line with the other front runners- out by 2013-

its great to make apromise you dot ahve to keep-who knows who will be in office n 2013? it will be the next prez's problem.

vote on the war in iraq? abstained (he didnt vote)

foreign policy? instead of giving us an idea of what he will do- hes actually pointing the finger outward to cheney and runsfled saying that they have experience but look at what theyve done!

i dont care what theyve done, i want to know what obama will do!

yes, obama had some great harvard training as a public speaker
yes, hes got the preacher yelling from the mountaintops thing down

but what is he actually saying?

he doesnt have the experience or solid plan of a joseph biden

he doesnt have the populist message of bringing down the corporations of a john edwards

he doesnt have the strength of a ron paul who calls for a return to real constitutional law

he doesnt have the real change and plans for change of a denis kucinich

we know what he wants to change FROM-
but what is his message to change TO?

i cannot figure it out from his speeches-

there is the politics of substance, and the politics of style- and so far- all weve gotten from obama is style.

so weve seen 2 frontrunners lose to their competition BECAUSE of their negative campaigning- (hillary and mitt)

obviously, that is going to work well this time-

and the primaries stil have a few months to go-
whoknows, maybe gore will throw his hat into te ring before may- and ride a crest of a wave if the current dems continue to disappoint us with their silence(as obama disappointed you)
its a very very long time til november-

i have to say, my point was just quickly made on c-span washington journal-
the aide for obama is being interviewed and questioned (it is a national call-in show)

a caller asked if obama was a muslim-
the aide said, "no, hes a presbyterian".

the caller said, OK" and moved right on to another question without a beat, apparently satisfied obama is not a muslim.

these guys are slick, they know no one has the patience or attention span to listen to qualifying explanations.

simple answer- no- hes a presbyterian.

if obama makes it to summer debates- there will be republicans, easily sacrificed for the cause- who will try to swift boat the islamic issue-

but its not going to stick, and i anticipate more stenorian preaching from the pulpit to solidy obamas christianity in the near future

lets see if obama can maintain his bounce

muslims, you really really need to take advantage of your voice!

go register and vote!

>>> muslims, you really really need to take advantage of your voice!
>>> go register and vote!

Yes, I remember the same sloganeering at the ISNA conference some years back. At that time, the Muslims were all hot for George Bush Jr. "O he is going to legitimize faith based schools" "Hallelluja" "Halleluja" "Vote for Bush" was the cry. They even had a whole stall set-up with Bush's picture all over it.

Well, a whole lot of good he did to the Muslims!!!!

Now its Obama. "Obama: the Muslim savior" "Obama Zindabad" "Go Muslims, go Obama".

Idiot American Muslims. Better luck this time.

What I would like to see from the IAMs (Idiot American Muslims) is a MUSLIM CANDIDATE. Someone whose agenda is banning of alcohol, adultery punishable as a crime, jailing of pornographers, return to the gold standard for the American dollar, fiscal responsibility by Government. That sort of thing.

Sort of fringe candidate (as dubbed by the media, which has the most to lose) like Ron Paul for example. Who all SFTs (Stupid Fat Americans) consider to be a loonie. But who is passionately supported by all real patriotic and peace loving Americans who actually have some sense of fiscal responsibility and international knowhow.

Will this Muslim Candidate actually get elected. Probably not. But herein lies the fallacy of the IAMs. They rather sleep with the devil in order that he may print a postage stamp with their name on it, so that they feel "part of the society". "O look, he he he, we Muslims are part of America." Giddy. "O look look , son, daughter, you are an Ameican Muslim, heigh. We are so happy. Now write a letter to your senator who just killed 10,000 Muslims in Iraq last month, and thank him for the postage stamp. May Allah bless his soul." Yada yada yada.

The whole point of telling America what is right and what is wrong and what is good for them and what is not apparetnly completely escapes the IAM crowd. They are so Uncle Tom, they are stuck trying to get self respect and acceptance in the status quo. QPA (Quite Pathetic Actually).

And as a footnote, you would be SURPRISED how many people will appreciate the honesty and sincerity of such a Muslim Candidate. Afterall, he/she/it is only promoting good family values and responsible adulthood unpopular as some of the medicine is. Help will come from the most unexpected of quarters. Americans are stupid, but not as stupid as IAMs.

where are you posting from hajibaba?

you really have a negative view of americans, in general, and muslim-americans in particular.

the issues in america are a great deal more complex than your very simple ideas.

some of the issues facing the candidates today are special interest groups and lobbies.

lets start with your first premise-
banning of alcohol-
we wont even mention that the temperance experiment of prohibition of alcohol banning was a miserable failure- it also inspired a new black market industry run by the mafia.

you seem to be mixing moral legislation with the economy as a platform.

but getting beyond that- the stupid fat americans have been protesting outside of fox news stations because ron paul was excluded from the republican debates in new hampshire last night.

thats america hajibaba-

we already have a far right religious coalition in america-
they elected george bush, remember?

i guess youre unaware of the freedom of press and speech in america too-
the public forum that would exclude some and embrace others, is specifically anti-american.

youre suggesting that a muslim candidate that jails pornographers (not to mention, who decides what a pornographer is?) would be welcomed by americans?

where does that stop? who else do we arrest then because we dont like their speech?

fiscal responsibility is something that the clinton admin actually accomplished, leaving a surplus in the governemt that was quickly eaten up and turned into a deficit by the republicans WHO ARE TRADITIONALLY THE FISCAL RESPONSIBILTY PARTY!

return to the gold stanard? well, every election cycel we get a candidate who proposes that- and while i agree- it doesnt seem to happen, does it?

if youll notice, that was the strength of ron paul i listed above- return to constitutional law.

while obama is a constitutional scholar, he however VOTED FOR THE PATRIOT ACT-
one of the reasons i listed above that i question obama's leadership or strength to go against the tide of establishmentarianism

do you have a television?
are you in america?
turn on c-span, or msnbc-

i dont believe you even know the positions of the candidates to understand or critique them

john edwards- strongly against special interests and lobbies- probably wont get elected because of that position.

(which is exactly what you seem to be calling for in the hypothetical muslim candidate)

or the solid 'international know how' of a joseph biden is going completely unnoticed.

its as if you havent listened to one stump speech from one candidate- yet feel compelled to critique what you dont seem to understand to begin with.

as far as mocking the get out and vote comment-
its about the most purely american statement any citizen can make!
and you think it is somehow the property of muslims??????

but mostly, i underestimate your politcal analysis in general if you start out by saying obama has a dogs chance( the american expression is snowball btw) in hell of winning.

the granite state, and iowa are not supporting your analysis.

no candidate should run on the strength or weakness of their faith. A Muslim candidate who wanted to curtail freedoms for any American would be just as scary to me as the far right candidates.
Muslims are such hypocrites (just like the far right) when it comes to these issues. They want freedom of religion when it benefits them, yet when they have the power they want to curtail and deny freedom of choice to others.

"i guess youre unaware of the freedom of press and speech in america too-
the public forum that would EXCLUDE SOME AND EMBRACE OTHERS, is specifically anti-american.
youre suggesting that a muslim candidate that jails pornographers (not to mention, who decides what a pornographer is?) would be welcomed by americans?
where does that stop? who ELSE do we arrest then because we dont like their speech?"


does this sound in amy possible way like someone who is trying to

1)curtail freedom of expression? or
2)uphold freedom of expression?


the answer is "2"

i am a muslim, clearly have some clue about what my constitution means-
and am offended for other muslims (and myself) at blamket accusations of hypocrisy

oops- i didnt make it clear-
those are my own unsolicited words from the above post quoted there

I should have made my statement more clearly (I am Muslim as well). <"Some" Muslims are such hypocrites (just like the far right) when it comes to these issues. They want freedom of religion when it benefits them, yet when they have the power they want to curtail and deny freedom of choice to others.> Pertaining to the statements made by hajibaba.

oops my bad- sorry about that- i can hardly be upset if your responding to hajibaba when i did the same thing myself

actually, ithink your post is a bit more reasonalbe than mine (certainly less reactionary)
peace

Yes. The Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) would be considered a hypocrite by y'alls definitions as well. Being that he was preaching against the Meccans freedom to practice their religions in Mecca.

Yes. The Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) would be considered a hypocrite by y'alls definitions as well. Being that he was preaching against the Meccans freedom to practice their religions in Mecca.
- Posted by hajibaba on January

What a ridiculous, misinformed statement. The Prophet was an InterFaith pioneer, who treated people of all faiths with respect and kindness. He only fought back against those who tried to deny Muslims their right to worship and live in peace. Maybe you'd would find the atmosphere in Saudi Arabia more suited to your disposition.

>>> The Prophet was an InterFaith pioneer <<<<

O Yeah. He captured the enemy Meccan city. Then he went and destroyed all their idols in their Holy places. Thats called interfaith, eh?

It's obvious that hajibaba is a troll, pay no attention.

I see that freedom of speech has it limits here. Danial calling Hajibaba a troll. Hajibaba does have a point. Mohammed did destroy the religious practices of the Meccans because he believed that Allah gave him the right to do this. Technically, there really is no freedom of religion in Islam by Mohammed's actions, so much for "Interfaith pioneering." The Qur'an is very clear when it states that Islam is the only true religion. It "tolerates" the other two monotheistic religions but relegates their followers to being "second class citizens" as dhimmis. Where are "equal rights" then? The mission is to make the world Islamic. As for denying muslims the right to worship and live in peace. Mohammed had that when he went to Medina. Look at it from the Meccan's point of you. He wanted to eliminate the practice of their religions. The polytheism contributed to the financial center because the people of the caravans passing through would pray to their various deities. Yes, Mohammed and his followers were expelled but wouldn't you want to expel those who were threatening your livelihood? History is written by the victorious. I'll take the Constitution and Bill of Rights any day.

ND youre presenting an argument that seems benign enough- but actually makes some pretty serious negative implications.

i have heard and seen the exact same points made- and this sounds like it came right off faithfreedom.com

i cant rebut right now- as its late-
but i will be happy to engage you point by point if you come back in here and accept
peace

>>> I'll take the Constitution and Bill of Rights any day. <<<

Thank you ND. Unfortunately, so would peace4all and Mrs.A. So y'all are in the same boat actually. But unlike yourself, the others are a trying to live a two-faced hypocrisy while pretending otherwise. Classic Americana.

Like I always tell my equally confused ultra-religious mother. If the Prophet came today and knocked at the door, she'd probably not let him in thinking he was an "extremist" or "belonged in Saudi". Its not the Prophet y'all are following, its your own idealized version of him.

Dear Mrs. A

My comments do not come from the website you site. My comments come from my academic study of Islam, reading both muslim and non-muslim authors alike for over 10 years. In addition, my comments are influenced by conversations with both muslims and non-muslims living in the Islamic world.

>>> I'll take the Constitution and Bill of Rights any day. <<<

Yes ND. Interesting that you frame the argument in terms of a FREE world under the Bill of Rights and a UNFREE world under the Islamic system of things. And what has your Bill of Rights done for peace in this world may I ask????

The United States and Europe export billions and billions, possibly trillions in Weapons across the globe. They supply weapons everywhere, to people they know to be brutal abusive dictators and often give them away free as aid too if one cannot afford them. So while you live the good life under the Bill of Rights, most people suffer under wars and death and mayhem as a result of weapons made by people living FREELY under the Bill of Rights.

Why does your Bill of Rights not protect other people from weapons manufactured by you with your own hands???

I would argue its better to live peacefully with your "Freedom of Religions" curtailed then to live under a "Bill of Rights" while being surrounded by death and destruction. As the Prophet (pbuh) has said, killing one person unjustly is as if you have killed all of humanity.