Threats to Obama Continue

By Nadia Ahmed

President Obama has been in office for approximately ten months. That is not nearly enough time to change the nation from the topsy-turvy state it was in, to a perfect utopian country in which everybody is at peace with each other and all is well.

If people have problems with Obama’s proposed policies towards health care, education, immigration, or abortion, they should voice that opinion. They should articulate their arguments, hold debates, or possibly join organizations that fight for their desired causes.

What Americans should not do is what Arizona pastor Steve Anderson did on August 22, 2009. Anderson publicly declared his wish for Obama’s death, claiming that Obama is set out to destroy the country and that his death would “save the nation.”

Anderson furiously preached to his congregation, “Why should Barack Obama melt like a snail? Why should Barack Obama die like the untimely birth of woman? Why should his children be fatherless and his wife a widow?” He goes on to say “Well I’ll tell you why…” and ends with a distasteful comment on Obama’s views towards abortion.

Anderson’s words are malicious and downright dangerous. They provoke more anger and mistrust within a nation that is already hotly divided. He is also inciting hate within his congregation – a group of people who believe his words and are willing to act on them.

Even if one’s views on homosexuality and abortion rights differ from those of our leaders, using such language is despicable, and possibly a sign of racism. How many of our previous presidents had Americans calling for their death? Has Obama even been in office long enough, or done anything substantial enough, to arouse so much anger?

Everyone has different opinions. Our job as Americans is to express our views— sensibly and respectfully. President Obama has at least three more years left in office. Let us make the most of these years and work together, discuss issues rationally and civilly. We don’t have to always agree – the beauty of a democratic system is that we are entitled to our opinions and granted free speech – but we do need to adhere to that self-same system that gives us our rights when it comes to our elected government and leaders. Disagree all you like, but at least have the dignity to respect the individual elected by a considerable majority of Americans to be our President.

Nadia Ahmed is a Communications Intern with CAIR-Chicago

A Nation Divided

Presumptive Republican Presidential candidate Senator John McCain and presumptive Democratic Presidential candidate Senator Barack Obama are neck-and-neck as the season draws us into Party Conventions, debates, and soon, Election Day.

Researchers continue their scramble to analyze political stance and opinion an candidates scramble to mobilize support. A recent Reuters/Zogby poll indicates that McCain is leading Obama 47 percent to 41 percent. A LA Times/Bloomberg poll indicates that Obama's lead from the past few months has dropped, where the Pew Research Center pegged Obama at 46 percent to McCain's 43 percent, a shift from Obama's one 48 percent lead against McCain's 40 percent. With the fluctuation of political opinion, only one thing is certain: American are still largely, fairly equally, divided in choosing their leader.

This data come at the heels of Senator McCain's rounds of aggressive ads and the positive reviews about this talk at the Saddleback Forum last weekend. Additionally, it picks up on the preparation for the Party Conventions within the next few weeks and speculation about "veeps".


One of the major criticisms about the media's coverage of the election process was its imbalanced focus on Senator Obama, sometimes advantageous for Senator McCain who could slip past the sidelines unnoticed, though other times at his expense, for example when people are more interested in Obama's VP selection than McCain's. As Politico reads Obama's tea leaves and NY Times reports a tight-lipped McCain when it comes to prospects, both candidates work to sharpen their messages in preparation for the last leg of the race.

The selection of a running mate could very well be the deciding facto for either of the candidates, as they each seek to unite this divided nation in their favor. With options like Hillary Clinton and Joe Binden for Obama, and Mike Huckabee and Charlie Crist for McCain, among many others, the choice is not an easy one. We won't have to wait much longer, though, as they have both resolved to announce their VPs soon (and strategically, right after one another!), in what is likely to be another media frenzy that will simultaneously influence and be influenced by opinion polls.

Let's just that one of them truly an provide the unification this nation so desperately needs.

Unemployment Rates Increase

The US unemployment rate hit 5.7% in July, the highest it has been in over four years. With the economic situation worsening, the nation is still vulnerable to a recession.

While companies have cut workers for the seventh month in a row, the rate is still better than man analysts had expected. Although US productivity is holding strong, indicating the inflation could possibly come down once energy and commodity prices stabilize, and some sectors are steady, the US labor market looks bleak.


As the presidential candidates duel it out in Florida today, they both agree that wages have deteriorated and recognize the unemployment situation. But while one focuses on middle-class aid, the other looks to tax cuts.

Democratic presidential candidate Senator Barack Obama plans to announce today an economic plan that would introduce a windfall profits tax on oil companies to pay for rebate checks to families and individuals to help with the increasing energy costs. He also supports a stimulus package, including funds for developing infrastructure, which could save over a million jobs.

Presumptive Republican presidential candidate Senator John McCain's focus lies on cutting taxes, such as the federal gas tax and the corporate tax. McCain's Jobs for American Plan keeps taxes low "...to create good jobs here in America, and give American workers renewed confidence in their economic future." He also supports lifting taxes and other government-imposed burdens from small businesses, working to make American more competitive so as to create more jobs.

The issue of unemployment often comes on the heels of the nationwide immigration debate.

While many claim that the immigrant community - often specifically blaming undocumented immigrants - take US jobs, the relationship between the immigration and unemployment is much more complicated and affected by many more variables. Others are concerned about restrictive immigration laws that hinder the nation's ability to maintain professionals from abroad and compete internationally. With unemployment on the rise, budget gaps are expected to only further deepen in cities like New York.

Unemployment in Chicago is hard-hitting close to home, with some sources reporting a rate of over 7%. Hopefully the next President will be able to address the issue of unemployment and turn our economic frown upside down.

Playing Cards

An interesting piece was posted in the New York Times Caucus blog today, regarding the Presidential election and the increasingly aggressive debate between presumptive Republican and Democratic nominees, Senator John McCain and Senator Barack Obama, respectively. As the McCain camp has recently stepped up its game in ads portraying Obama negatively, Obama's response was that McCain was trying to "scare voters," show them that Obama is not like our past Presidents. McCain's campaign claimed that Obama played the "race card."

This got me thinking about the way our social characteristics are politically manipulated. I certainly believe Senator Obama has played the "race card" during his campaign, appealing to voters' sympathy regarding racial discrimination. Just as Senator Clinton played the "gender card." And Senator McCain perhaps plays the "veteran card." President Bush, too, has often played the "faith card" during his administration. Many times, they called out one another's cards, playing them out again themselves!


These identity cards are used for many different purposes. Often they serve as mobilizing forces, rallying people around a shared identity, or emphasizing the importance and historic nature of a certain identity having greater value or potential in a leadership role when it historically could not. Sometimes the card is used to falsely accuse another of being racist, sexist, or intolerant of a characteristic, generally for a personal advantage. Other times they expose a genuine prejudice for a person's own political advantage, for example. Perhaps most disturbing, is when the identity card is used to devalue or minimize the existence of prejudice.

Professor Randy Pausch spoke true when he said, "We cannot change the cards we are dealt, just how we play the hand." It is important to use our cards as a tool for positive change rather than for a personal gain. It is important to use them to expose injustices and prejudices rather than to cloak them. Let's hope we can get away from politics as usual and see some real change.

Obama's Muslim Liaison

The newly formed position of Muslim Liaison on presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Senator Obama's campaign has been filled by Mazen Asbahi. As the National Coordinator for Muslim Affairs, Asbahi will head the campaign's outreach efforts to American Muslims and Arab Americans. Asbahi is a corporate lawyer in Chicago and will be based at the campaign headquarters here.

Amidst concerns that Senator Obama has been distancing himself from the American Muslim community and his mishandling of the claims that tie him to Islam, this is a positive step in reflecting the true inclusive values that the Senator espouses. While likely also a political ploy, it is still comforting to know that the campaign is making a solid effort to engage the American Muslim community, reaching out to a diverse nation of voters.

The Muslims Public Affairs Council summed up the importance of the step: "The inclusion of a Muslim American voice in the presidential campaign reinforces the principle of pluralism in the electoral process. MPAC is confident that Mr. Asbahi will encourage Muslim Americans to be civically engaged. MPAC encourages the presumptive Republican nominee, Senator John McCain, to form a similar Muslim outreach program or appoint a liaison to the Muslim American community." Should Senator McCain reach out to American Muslims in a similar matter, we can truly say that our nation's leaders are engaging and valuing the diversity, the greatest asset in this country.

I can only hope, however, that the Mr. Asbahi will serve as a true liaison between the American Muslim community and Senator Obama, rather than being a substitute for him to appease American Muslims. The position should not replace the engagement and relationship that is necessary between our leaders and the citizens, but rather work to make the link stronger.

Iran Running out of Time?

US officials are calling for Tehran to respond to the EU and UN Security Council proposals that would ultimately make Iran suspend its enrichment of uranium. The international stalemate with Iran has been long-standing, as Tehran says it wants to perfect enrichment to generate fuel, while critics fear the development of arms.

Iran wants to increase cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency “in accordance with [their] legal obligations,” said chief delegate Ali Ashgar Soltanieh. However, he questioned the IAEA’s probing of weapons allegations, claiming it to be outside of its domain, and a threat “fabricated and forged…by the US”. The IAEA’s report from May said that Iran may be withholding information and that Tehran continued expanding its uranium enrichment program, despite the UN Security Council’s retaliatory sanctions.

A package of incentives was discussed last week, in a meeting between Iran, the P5, Germany, and the EU, offering Iran access to technology for nuclear power plants that would take care of fuel supply and address their security concerns. The “freeze-to-freeze” negotiation, where Iran would freeze its uranium enrichment program and the international community would freeze its sanctions, would build confidence and the lay the groundwork for more substantive future negotiations.

Iran has less than a week to respond and US leaders are encouraging a quick reply, especially with the threat of more sanctions under their belt. Many believe that Iran is buying time until the US change in administration, as it is sure to play a large role in the foreign policy work of the next President.

Senator Obama has in the past said that he is willing to use military force to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, but also insists on direct US talks with the country. In a press conference in France today with President Nicolas Sarokzy, he urged Iran to accept the UN and EU proposals.



Senator McCain’s foreign policy frustrations include the determination to continue disengagement with Iran. While he has said he is opposed to regime change, he has joked to “bomb-bomb-bomb Iran,” maintaining that Iran is a threat to Israel.

Peace in the Middle East

While we can hope Senator Obama makes peace with the color green (see post below), we hope also that our next US President can make peace in the Middle East, particularly in regards to the drawn out Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

The LA Times did a great job of recognizing and explaining 10 key points about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict that our next leader will have to deal with:

1. The current political climate is stable and more inclined to positively engage in the peace process than historically.


2. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict, tensions with Iran, Syria, Lebanon, and the War in Iraq are all interdependent on one another. Peace in one are can encourage the peace process in others; hostility in one area can breed problems in another.


3. Israel and Iran are openly threatening one another.


4. The American commitment is necessary within the Arab-Israeli peace process, as – and I’m adding this point – we are on the one hand aggressors in the region, and yet mediators for peace.
   
5. The last comment from the above point leads nicely into this one: it must be recognized that America’s customary preference of Israel when it claims to be a fair mediator undermines its legitimacy and the peace process for both Palestinians and Israelis.


6. Another tie – expanding Jewish settlements into the West Bank despite pledges to freeze them have been counterproductive to the peace process between Israel and Palestine, as has the US’s tendency to look the other way when it happens.


7. Israeli-Palestinian talks generally lack promise, and leaders should hold steadfast in their pursuit of peace rather than give into frustrations.


8. Engaging Hamas is crucial, but it is necessary to do so without giving their radical tactics credibility.
   
9. Engaging Syria is also important, with the US as a facilitator.


10. And finally, Richard Bordeaux recognizes that Mid East tours are often conducted as political ploys and those affected by the Israeli-Palestinian conflict recognize this, not expecting much of a change in the political tension. Senator McCain and Senator Obama need to be prepared for a long road ahead that awaits in the Middle East for whomever should win, and need to be committed to the peace process.
    
    
    Senator McCain visited the region in March, while Senator Obama is there now. Both candidates are fervent in their efforts to show off foreign policy skills as the US Presidential race carries on.
    
    [Pictures – Top: Senator Obama meets with King Abdullah II in Amman, Jordan, today. Above: Senator McCain with Senator Joseph Lieberman at the “Hall of Names” during their visit to the Yad Vashem Holocaust Museum in Jerusalem this March.]

Economy on the Rise

No, that’s not the US economy, which is still facing many problems including rising oil prices, the subprime mortgage crisis and the housing bubble, increasing unemployment and underemployment, affecting nearly every country in the world with the interdependent global market. Debate on economic issues is on the rise among our Presidential contenders, Senator John McCain and Senator Barack Obama.

McCain has reverted to his original pledge to balance the budget within his potential first term in office. “The near-term path to balance is built on three principles: reasonable economic growth, comprehensive spending controls, and bi-partisanship in budget efforts…In the long-term, the only way to keep the budget balances is successful reform of the large spending pressures in Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid,” the McCain campaign says in a policy paper that was released today (pg 4). The kinds of reforms, however, have yet to be spelled out.

“The McCain administration would reserve all savings from victory in the Iraq and Afghanistan operations in the fight against Islamic extremists for reducing the deficit. Since all their costs were financed with deficit spending, all their savings must go to deficit reduction.” With the new timetable for US withdrawal that Iraq may agree with, this is possible. But, that’s assuming either of the cases is thought a victory, and on what terms.

According to the NYTimes, “fiscal analysts who have examined his economic plans say that his calls to extend the Bush tax cuts while cutting corporate and other taxes would likely increase the deficit.”

The Democrats eagerly seized his pledge, calling it unrealistic. Obama’s campaign is working to emphasize economic issues as “a discussion on economic security for American’s families,” pushing his proposals that aid families and provide more direct benefits.

The battle between McCain and Obama continues as economic issues come to the forefront of this election for the time-being. When Bush first came into office the budget was in surplus. Our ridiculous deficit now demands attention, as do other issues that are significantly affecting our economy, but the solution is not so easy.

Flip-flopper?

Democratic Presidential contender Senator Barack Obama recently was reported to possibly “refine his Iraq timeline”.

Since 2002, Obama had been staunchly opposed to the War in Iraq, calling it a “dumb war” at an anti-Iraq War Rally in Chicago on October 2^nd, 2002. Unable to vote on the Congressional Joint Resolution that authorized the war, Obama was dismayed that many Democratic leaders supported it. He had called for a withdrawal of troops to begin last year, and encouraged diplomatic dialogue with the infamous Iran and Syria. In early 2007, Obama introduced the Iraq War De-Escalation Act, hoping to remove troops by March of this year. While Obama has not supported funding cuts to the war, emphasizing the responsibility of the US to essentially clean up the mess it has made in the nation, his promise to have all combat brigades out of Iraq within 16 months of potentially serving as President has been especially appealing to voters.

Obama has recently announced a trip to Iraq for later this month, intending to meet with American military commanders to assess the situation in the nation. “I’ve always said that the peace of withdrawal would be dictated by the safety and security of our troops and the need to maintain stability. That assessment has not changed,” he said at a campaign stop in North Dakota. “And when I get to Iraq and have a chance to talk to some of the commanders on the ground, I’m sure I’ll have more information and will continue to refine my policies.”

Obama’s remarks were immediately criticized by the GOP, with accusations of his trip being a political stunt in the election against Republican contender Senator John McCain, and a reverse of his position in the Democratic primary campaign. The flip-flopper charge which worked so well in the 2004 Presidential Election, completely damaging John Kerry’s campaign against President Bush, has been stealthily making its way back into this election.

Whether Obama’s “refinement” of the Iraq timeline is a weakening of his position and break of his promise and trust, or if it is a political maneuver to gain more moderate and conservative votes, or if truly is a representation of his thoughtful foreign policy skills will be seen. Maybe it's time I refine my thoughts on this “Change we can believe in”…?