Being Civil with Trump Supporters

(You can also read the article here.)

Like millions of Americans, I was devastated when Hillary Clinton lost the presidential race despite winning the popular vote by 2.8 million. But as days went by and reckless words from President Trump’s uncensored mind began rattling the world, I longed to engage with one or two Trump supporters to see if there was any common ground from which to look at our country as Americans and not as partisans.

The fact that I was a Muslim-American complicated the matter, given the hate-filled rhetoric from the White House. Still, I kept hoping.

The opportunity came during a gathering of a group of amateur photographers in the foothills of San Jose, California. While discussing finer points of the decisive moment, my curiosity was piqued by a fellow-American whom I will call John. John is white, in his mid-sixties and retired. He made his money in real-estate and now spends much of his time playing golf and pursuing his passion for photography. He is also a vigorous Trump supporter.

Although nervous to discuss politics, I told myself that the worst that could happen would be for John to ask me to get lost. I could live with that.

Here is a summary of our conversation.

“Do you think Trump’s policies of deporting immigrants, banning Muslims, and calling media the enemy of the people is good for our country?”

“Well,” he said, looking at me curiously, “Trump is just keeping his word. I admire him for that, don’t you? How many politicians do you know who keep their promises? And what’s wrong with deporting illegals? Isn’t it wrong for them take up jobs meant for the legals?”

Statistics prove otherwise, I told him. Besides, many immigrants do menial jobs that make life easier for Americans like him. “Look at who are serving us here! Hispanics.”

“I am sure they are legal. I have no problem with them,” John replied.

“Do you know any illegals?” I asked.

“I personally don’t know any,” allowed John, “but trust me, they are around.”

It went back and forth like this. John did not budge and neither did I. I raised the Muslim ban issue, reminding him that no one from the banned Islamic countries had committed terrorist acts in America. John was unimpressed.

“We can never be too safe,” he said. “It is right to err on the side of caution.”

“Even if it goes against our values?”

“I don’t think it does. In any case, the president is responsible for keeping us safe by any means necessary.” As he said this, I became aware that John was looking at me with more interest. Next instant, I knew why.

“Are you a Muslim?”

Here it comes, I thought, the moment of truth! For a fleeting second, I recalled what Patrick Stein, one of the conspirators said about the Muslims he was planning to massacre in Garden City, Kansas, in July 2016, fortunately foiled by the FBI: “The only good Muslim is a dead Muslim.”

“Yes,” I replied.

A pause. Then: “Well, you seem like a decent fella!” said John with a smile.

I cringed inside but outwardly I matched his grin. “Thank you,” I said with relief. I told John that most Americans who hold negative views of Muslims have never met a Muslim in their life. “You are the first Muslim I had a conversation with,” agreed John.

While I cannot say with certainty that we parted as friends, I am also certain that John and I did not part as enemies.

What my brief encounter with a Trump supporter taught me was that we should use civility not as a weapon to win arguments but because it is the right thing to do, a tough test for summoning the better angels of our nature.

This in no way diminishes the urgency to save our country from Trump’s disastrous policies, the gerrymandering, the willful policy of suppressing voter rights, banning immigrants by religion, depriving women of their reproductive options, treating media as the enemy of the people, (about which Republican senator John McCain said, “That’s how dictators get started”), rising anti-Semitism and hate crimes, and such. We must sustain the 21st-century version of the movement launched by abolitionist Harriet Tubman, suffragist Susan Anthony and freedom rider John Lewis.

But our fight to win our country back from a would-be dictator will stand a greater chance of success if we use civility for its own sake and as its own reward while interacting with our fellow-Americans who voted Trump to power.

Students Ponder A Grim Future Under Trump

I teach mathematics at a college in Northern California. In the tests that I give to my students, I always include a question that deals with the ‘big issues’ of life, such as, “Name three things that make your life meaningful,” or, “Are you afraid of death? Why or why not?” or, “What are your core values? Are you spending your time in college that reflect those values?”

Students frequently open up to such questions, something that obviously doesn’t happen when they are solving quadratic equations or constructing confidence intervals. Their responses help me better understand them as unique individuals, which help me become a better teacher.

In my recent test, composed a week before Nov. 8 and given on Nov. 10, to two classes consisting of about 90 students, my question was: “If something could happen right now that was highly unlikely, or even impossible, that would make you unbelievably happy, what would that be?”

I never connected the question to the presidential election, whose ‘foregone conclusion’ of Hillary Clinton’s victory I shared with millions of my fellow-Americans.

Was I ever wrong!

Apart from a few students who wanted to win the lottery and a few who longed for one last heart-to-heart with a departed loved one, most of the responses reflected the raw, angry and anguished thoughts they had about Donald Trump’s victory and what it meant for America.

Ruth expressed the common sentiment shared my Mario, Robert, Erik, Aurora and Andrea: “I fear for my safety and for the health of my country with Trump as President. If only the election gave a different result!”

Claudia wrote: “If only Hillary became the president! I am shocked how racist my country is. I had no idea! It saddens me how this country has so much hate in its heart.”

Cristina was outraged that America missed a golden chance to break the glass ceiling. “Imagine, the first female U.S. president! And we blew it!”

Lopez was sure that the reckless Trump will do something that will get him impeached. “A zebra cannot change its stripes,” he wrote. “Trump will be forced out of the White House because of what he does.”

Joanna was wistful: “If only Bernie Sanders ran!” Many students were angry that Hillary did not choose Sanders as her running mate, or that she did not use him as much as she should have in her campaign. “Sanders would have appealed to working-class whites in Pennsylvania and Wisconsin,” wrote Katie. “With Trump, I am scared for my family and friends, for people of color, for women, Muslims, immigrants and disabled and other minorities.”

Trisha was despondent and wished she had done more. “I regret not fighting harder for Bernie Sanders during the primaries. I should have spent more time advocating online, phone banking to other states, and inviting respectful dialog with those who had reservations about Sanders’ policies and positions. If by some miracle the presidency went to Hillary who won the popular vote, I would cry tears of joy. We must get rid of the Electoral College. What a useless relic from the past! Under Trump, we are about to enter a period of legislative uncertainty in terms of environmental protection. We need as many well-informed citizens as we can get who will act on behalf of the planet’s well-being, rather than its potential for profitability.”

The unfairness of the Electoral College weighed on the minds of Alondra, Clement, Sanchez, Zamora and Mendoza. “We brag about our democracy to the rest of the world,” wrote Mendoza, “but look what we have in our own country. A majority of Americans wanted Hillary to be our president. Instead, it’s Trump and his third wife who will occupy the White House!”

Acosta was filled with regrets too. “I regret not calling my family and friends in Florida to vote for Hillary. I regret our country’s decision. If I could make it right, I would ask for independents to be excluded from the ballot. I am also mad at the millions who did not vote. What were they thinking?”

Olivia felt it was more a case of Hillary losing the election than Trump winning it. “Hillary ran a flawed campaign. She spent the last Election Day with wealthy entertainers. That couldn’t have gone down well with angry jobless whites in rural America. I think she became arrogant.”

The theme was echoed by Fisher, Jessica and Clark. “I disagreed with everything Trump said,” wrote Fisher. “But there was no denying he was speaking his mind. With Hillary, it seemed like a production from Hollywood! No spontaneity.”

Liz took a particularly grim view. “My favorite subject is history. And I can tell from my studies that when a nation chooses a very bad leader, that nation is in decline.”

Irene was as heart-broken at Hillary’s loss as everyone else but she also took the long-view. “Hillary’s win would have made us lazy. We would expect her to do everything right and not pay any attention. Trump’s victory means we must prepare for the long fight. We will be more active and engaged. That will be a good thing for our country.”

Most angry was Patrick who would have nothing to do with the logic of working-class whites who voted for Trump. “I belong to a white working-class family here in Silicon Valley. My dad works at two temporary jobs. I have to work part-time to cope with high costs of rent, food, gas. I know what that pain is. But basic human decency counts too. Respect for others count. Respect for women count. Humility counts. How can we elect someone who is against these values? Is it only about money?”

What impressed me most was how impassioned students were about an election they deeply cared about, and how articulate they were, even though they were pressed for time. Don’t forget, this was a test in which they had to work their way through some fairly complicated statistical problems!

How do we move forward? The most eloquent response came from Erica, who wrote: “In my dark days I find strength in the words of Martin Luther King. Last night, after I had cried my heart out, I looked up these words: ‘We must accept finite disappointment, but never lose infinite hope.’”

Honor Killing and Misogyny are Two Sides of the Same Coin

(You can also read the article here.)

We are horrified by honor killings and rightly so. That’s why when Pakistan, a country where the practice is prevalent, passed a tough law against it on October 6, we cautiously rejoiced. Perhaps now the killers of daughters and sisters in societies afflicted with this deadly vice will be brought to justice.

A day later, we learned of remarks Donald Trump made in 2005 to a group of admiring toadies on a studio bus about the apparently irresistible attraction he exerted on women. 

Married in January of that year to his third and current wife Melania, he boasted in language unprintable in a family newspaper how he could grope women at will because of his celebrity status. “When you’re a star, they let you do it,” was how he summed up his ways with young, and always white, women.

Pakistan and the United States are two starkly dissimilar countries, yet the two events show that misogyny transcends both border and the GNP. Treating women as less than human, 

- main reason for honor killing - and treating them as sex objects - main reason for sexual assaults - are, in fact, two sides of the same coin.

Consider the statistics.

In addition to hundreds of thousands of sexual assaults every year, on the average, about 500 women are killed annually in Pakistan over perceived damage to ‘honor,’ which includes marrying against family’s consent, elopement, socializing with men, and ‘crimes’ of passion and ‘immoral’ behavior, as defined by men.

The new law mandates life imprisonment for convicted murderers. It has come under attack from some sections of the clergy who accused the government of trying to impose ‘Western Values’ on a Muslim country. But it has also been welcomed by Pakistan’s Human Rights advocates who hope it will bring about a cultural shift in their society.

The critical test will be whether the government has what it takes to enforce the law in Pakistan.

Although statistics vary, according to a study by the ‘National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey’, with support from the ‘National Institute of Justice,' over a million American women annually are victims of sexual assault, rape or attempted rape. According to another survey commissioned by the Association of American Universities, in four years of college, more than one-fourth of undergraduate women at a large group of leading universities said they had been sexually assaulted.

What adds to these chilling numbers are the victims of sex trafficking who often go undetected and unreported.  According to the ‘National Human Trafficking Resource Center,' in the first six months of 2016 alone, about 4,000 sex-trafficking cases have been reported in the U.S. (Worldwide, the estimate is over 20 million annually). 

One of the main enablers of sex-trafficking is a web-based company called ‘Backpage,’ about which Kamala Harris, California’s Attorney General who is running for the U.S. Senate in the November election, said: “Backpage and its executives purposefully and unlawfully designed Backpage to be the world’s top online brothel.” 

Harris issued a warrant that led to the arrest of Carl Ferrer, the CEO of Backpage, on felony charges of ‘pimping a minor, pimping, and conspiracy to commit pimping.’

It happened on the same day that we learned of Trump’s infamous tape.

“Women’s rights are human rights,” declared First Lady Hillary Clinton at the Fourth United Nations World Conference on Women in Beijing in September 1995.

It is true that our awareness of the violence of honor killing and misogyny since then have increased but real progress in these areas have been painfully slow. Far too many men worldwide, educated and uneducated alike, continue to treat women as chattels and far too many women continue to be victims of men, often paying with their lives. Far too many men take pride in their propensity for objectifying women while denying it outright. We just witnessed this in the second debate between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump when the Republican nominee repeated what has got to down as one of the most Orwellian lies of all time: “Nobody respects women more than I do!”

Honor killings by powerful or conservative families in many poor countries, and sexual assaults by powerful men in many rich countries, with the lucrative business of
sex-trafficking flourishing in rich and poor countries alike, are driven by the same factors of power, lust, cruelty, greed and insecurity. We must use a combination of enforceable law, exemplary punishment and education to ensure that women enjoy the same privileges of freedom, dignity and honor that men like Donald Trump seek to destroy with their action.

Hillary Clinton and the Millennial Vote

“I poured my heart and soul into Bernie Sanders’s campaign,” a 24-year-old student told me. “Now I really don’t care. Clinton and Trump both repulse me.”

Millennials, between the ages of 18-35 and numbering about 76 million, are a powerful voting bloc. But many are still trying to come to grips with the trauma of a Sanders-less presidential election and are thinking of wasting their vote as a protest of some sort. That would be a colossal mistake, for they can play a critical role in propelling Hillary Clinton to victory over Donald Trump in this most consequential of elections.

Why should millennials vote for Clinton? It comes down to the intersection of their passion with Clinton’s policies in three E’s: Education, Economy and Ecology. They should carefully consider where the two candidates stand on these issues, reject false equivalences, and vote accordingly.

Education: The most contentious issue here is the staggering 1.4 trillion dollar student-loan Americans currently carry, a number growing by about $3K every second. Neither candidate has promised to forgive the trillion-dollar debt but during the primaries, Clinton countered Sanders’s assertion to make college free for everyone by saying that his numbers just didn’t add up. However, Clinton has made college affordability – directly tied to student debt - central to her policy. She would give families making up to $125,000 free tuition at in-state public colleges and universities to help middle and working-class families.

If Clinton’s plan does not thrill millennials, they should be even less thrilled by Trump’s because he has offered no details about lowering college costs and reining in student debt. One can still get an idea of Trump’s educational philosophy from his for-profit real-estate training college that defrauded more than 5,000 consumers out of millions of dollars. Even the former Republican presidential nominee, Mitt Romney said, “Donald Trump is a phony, a fraud. His promises are as worthless as a degree from Trump University.”

Economy: What concerns millennials most is how the candidates will address the needs of over 45 million poverty-stricken Americans.

Clinton will invest in creating well-paying jobs in “infrastructure and manufacturing, technology and innovation, small business and clean energy,” and combine that with affordable housing and greater access to preschool and high-quality child care. She has asserted that by expanding Low Income Housing Tax Credits, her policy will help over 11 million American households currently spending more than half their income on rent.

Clinton has not convincingly articulated where the money will come from and what sacrifices Americans will have to make to turn her policy into reality, other than that the rich will face greater taxation. She must offer more details, for nothing turns off millennials more than vague promises and empty rhetoric.

A major reason for Trump’s rise is that he has tapped into the economic angst of a significant number of white, working-class Americans who feel deprived of a decent life because of, as they see it, the flood of immigrants and the vanishing of traditional jobs. But if Clinton is short on details, Trump is even more so, except where, in contrast to Hillary, he has promised to cut taxes for corporations and the wealthy. Leading economists have taken apart his argument that ripping up international trade agreements will help struggling American workers become magically prosperous. Joseph Stiglitz, a Nobel Prize-winning economist, has pointed out how a trade war with China, for instance, will destroy more jobs than it creates.

Ecology: The dictionary defines ecology as ‘relations of organisms to one another and to their physical surroundings.’ What threatens to undo this relation and balance is climate change, manifested most starkly in global warming.

Clinton accepts the scientific consensus on global warming and supports the Paris agreement to reduce carbon emissions, just as she supports the Affordable Care Act and has even proposed to extend it to include an additional 10 million Americans. She has promised to put in place industrial practices that will reduce greenhouse gas emissions by up to 30 percent in 2025 and put America on a path to cut emissions more than 80 percent by 2050.

In contrast, Trump has vowed to cancel the Paris pact if elected president, just as he has threatened to repeal the Affordable Care Act that will cause 20 million Americans to lose medical insurance. He has called global warming a hoax. His exact words: “It’s a hoax. I mean, it’s a moneymaking industry, okay? It’s a hoax, a lot of it.” He also said that action to limit carbon emissions ‘is done for the benefit of China.’

So there you have it, millennials. Trump is flamboyant and monopolizes mainstream media because he can titillate, provoke and outrage. Hillary, on the other hand, is perceived as cold, harsh and angry. But don’t be fooled by appearances. Ask yourself, who is better qualified to get the job done? A demagogue who lies and cheats and is clueless about national and international affairs, or someone who is flawed but who began her life as a young attorney at the Children’s Defense Fund and made the welfare of children and families the guiding light of her life, who is patient, intelligent, and has a proven track record as befits a president? Know this too, that if Hillary Clinton doesn’t light your fire, it may mean that your fire is already lit. The question is: who will keep it alive?

The answer should be obvious: Hillary Clinton will and Donald Trump won’t.

A Muslim-American's Open Letter to Donald Trump

You can also read the article here.

I write this open letter to you as a Muslim American whose loyalty to the United States is at least as unwavering as your obstinacy in insisting that we are the enemy.

Here's the truth, Donald.

150 years after the Civil War, we are locked in another kind of conflict that is yet again revealing the values that define us as Americans. What you have consistently and conclusively proved is that, in every sense of the word, you fall short of these values.

Let me set the context. 

On April 30, 1864, during the dark days of the Civil War, Abraham Lincoln, a Republican, wrote to his general, Ulysses S. Grant to inspire him and rally his troops to preserve the Union. "You are vigilant and self-reliant; and, pleased with this," wrote Lincoln, "I wish not to obtrude any constraints or restraints upon you. While I am very anxious that any great disaster, or the capture of our men in great numbers, shall be avoided, I know these points are less likely to escape your attention than they would be mine. If there is anything wanting which is within my power to give, do not fail to let me know it. And now with a brave Army, and a just cause, may God sustain you." 

Contrast this with your own mocking disdain of veterans like Sen. John McCain, a fighter pilot who endured horrific torture during the Vietnam War. "He's not a war hero," you claimed. "He's a war hero because he was captured. I like people that weren't captured."

But nowhere has your disrespect for soldiers who sacrificed their lives for our country, and their families, been more stark than in your wanton battle of words with the parents of fallen soldier Captain Humayun Khan, killed in the line of duty in Iraq in 2004.

At the Democratic National Convention (DNC) in Philadelphia in July, Khizr Khan, father of Humayun Khan, outraged by your proposal to ban Muslims from entering the United States, demanded to know if you have ever even read the U.S. Constitution. "You have sacrificed nothing and no one," he told you in front of thousands of delegates and hundreds of thousands more watching.

When Khizr Khan pulled out a copy of the Constitution from his pocket and offered to lend it to you so you would know what words like "liberty" and "equal protection of law" mean, you knew it would be one of the most iconic moments in this momentous election. 

You had to respond.

And so you did, in the only way you know how; through a combination of misogyny, ignorance, bigotry, arrogance and vindictiveness that has become your trademark. 

You aimed your derision first at Ghazala Khan, wife of Khizr Khan, who stood silently by, an image of her late son displayed above the crowds before her, as her husband listed your glaring failings.

You insinuated that she was an oppressed woman who was not allowed to speak. "His wife, if you look at his wife, she was standing there. She had nothing to say," you said.

You compared your “sacrifices” in building your business empire to that of Ghazala Khan, a Gold Star Mother, someone who you, in your bigoted ignorance, could never imagine would roar back against your insinuations. 

In an opinion piece in one of America's leading newspapers, she explained that she was silent because she was still traumatized by her son's death. Her husband did indeed ask her to speak but she simply couldn't, and it didn't matter because, as she wrote, "whoever saw me felt me in their heart."

Still, despite your shameful rhetoric and woeful shortcomings, it would be a fatal mistake to underestimate your candidacy. Psychologists tell us that in uncertain times some people are drawn to demagogues who promise them certainty. It was so with Mussolini and it was so with Hitler. 

And one of the fundamental lessons of statistics is that the improbable can happen because the improbable is not impossible.

But I say this with confidence that a majority of Americans will reject your message of hate and intolerance. They will find you wanting in thought, action, habit and character, as defined by Ralph Waldo Emerson: "Sow a thought and you reap an action; sow an act and you reap a habit; sow a habit and you reap a character; sow a character and you reap a destiny."

Donald, come November you will come to understand the wisdom in these words. 

Until then, I want you to know that I join not only my fellow Muslim Americans, but all minorities and mainstream Americans -- white, black, brown, rich, poor, religious, atheist, struggling, striving -- in rejecting your politics of hate and bigotry, and in upholding the values that have made this nation what it is today.

A Blueprint for Muslim-American Activism

(You can also read the article here.)

In his powerful and propulsive speech at the Democratic National Convention (DNC) in Philadelphia last week, former President Bill Clinton made a compelling case for Hillary Clinton’s presidency. 

As a Muslim American, however, I was most captivated when he said, “If you are a Muslim and you love America and freedom and you hate terror, stay here and help us win and make a future together. We want you.”

I heard in those words a blueprint for action that has been missing in the discourse of Muslim Americans. If we can act on this blueprint in this consequential election year, it can empower us to control our destiny and help shape the destiny of our country.

The first order of business for us is to stop wallowing in self-pity.

We cannot help Democrats win and make a future together - the overwhelming majority of the registered voters among the 3 million Muslim Americans are Democrats - if we waste time collecting grievances. Yes, Donald Trump wants to ban Muslims from coming to America. Yes, Newt Gingrich wants to “test every person here who is of a Muslim background and if they believe in Sharia they should be deported."

But for every Trump and Gingrich, there are many more politicians and our fellow-Americans who condemn their bigotry and xenophobia and offer their support for us.

Unfortunately, by focusing more on the former and less on the latter, many of us assume the default mode of passivity. For many Muslim Americans, political activism begins and ends with making an occasional subversive post on social media. It is time we realized that keyboard warriors rarely accomplish anything, while grassroots activists accomplish much, even if at a great cost.

I found it telling that at the DNC, many speakers, including President Obama and Hillary Clinton, quoted and alluded to Theodore Roosevelt: “The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena … who does actually strive to do the deeds … who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat.”

Muslim Americans must refuse to be timid souls (a synonym for grievance collectors) and fence-sitters during this election year and throw themselves whole-heartedly into the arena.

This demands that we engage in the kind of activism that can be cathartic for us and transformational for our country.

This also means that we must do whatever it takes to help Hillary Clinton become the President of the United States even if we have serious disagreements with her on serious issues, because the alternative is too nightmarish to contemplate.

We cannot just talk the talk. We must also walk the walk. Literally. We have to walk the precincts. We have to knock on doors. We have to work the phones. We have to register unregistered voters and organize rallies. We have to train ourselves to be articulate in making the case for our candidate. There are lots of undecided voters out there who can have a disproportionately large impact on the outcome of this election. If each one of us commit to convincing only one undecided or apathetic voter into voting for Hillary Clinton, we can not only help her win, we can also change our mindset about our ability to make our society more inclusive and just.

In today’s America, it is tough to be a Muslim American. Anti-Muslim sentiments, fanned by Donald Trump and his likes, continue to frustrate and frighten some of us. We are numbed by the terrorism of Muslims who give our religion a black eye. Think of the mass killings by Major Nidal Malik Hasan at Fort Hood, Texas (2009), Tsarnaev Brothers at Boston (2013), Mohammed Abdulazeez at Chattanooga, Tennessee (2015), the Muslim Bonnie-and-Clyde-duo of Rizwan Farook and Tafsheen Mailk at San Bernardino, California (2015), and Omar Mateen at Orlando, Florida (2016).

But we cannot use these horrific events as an excuse to sit on the sidelines and watch a demagogue tear apart the social fabric of our country. For inspiration, we need look no further than Khizr Khan, father of Captain Humayun Khan who was killed in Iraq in the line of duty, who challenged Donald Trump at the DNC to read the U.S. Constitution and understand the meaning of words like ‘liberty’ and ‘equal protection of law.’ By this singularly symbolic act, he showed how a Muslim American can influence countless hearts and minds across our nation and around the world.

'Fahrenheit 451' and the Quran Burning Issue

Ray Bradbury’s famous 1951 novel uses ‘451’ in the title to denote the temperature at which book paper burns. Who would have guessed that fateful number would compel worldwide attention in the early 21st-century?

The pastor from Florida (he will remain nameless, for he has had far more than his fifteen minutes of fame already) who threatened to burn the Quran seems to have had a change of heart. He and his flock of fifty will not burn copies of the Quran after all on the ninth anniversary of 9/11.

The pastor is claiming that his decision is based on a quid pro quo: Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf has agreed to move the Not-At-Ground-Zero mosque farther away from Ground Zero, and therefore, he will not go ahead with his planned bonfire.

Imam Rauf has denied any agreement with the pastor. It now appears that this was yet another attempt by the former hotel manager from Gainesville, Florida, to focus media attention on him.

There are two points worth noting about this Quran burning issue.

One is that the pastor and his likes do not represent America and its values, a point emphasized by both President Barack Obama and secretary of State Hillary Clinton. This includes the few thousands who befriended the pastor on Facebook and who mailed him copies of the Quran to create a bonfire.

The other, the more significant point, is that the threat by the pastor to burn Islam’s divine text should motivate Muslims to reflect on their own relationship with the Quran.

Lunatics and extremists have in the past burned, and will no doubt burn again, sacred texts to draw attention to their delusional and psychopathic mindsets. We shouldn’t really get worked up over this.

But where do we Muslims stand with respect to the Quran? Do we not dishonor the Book through negligence and indifference? How many of us dust it off only when a loved one departs the earth? Do we set aside time to read and understand it every day, even if for a few minutes? Does the Quran speak to us equally when we experience both joy and sorrow? And what about those Muslims who, responding to the pastor's threat, incline to violence? Do they not read in the Quran that "Nor can goodness and evil be equal. Respond to evil with doing good deeds to the evil doer. Then will he, between whom and thyself was hatred, become as though he was thy friend and intimate!" (41:34)

The Quran is a guide for the living and not a trope for the dead. The power and the beauty of the Quran becomes manifest only when it becomes an intimate companion to the living.

Some of us have a habit of acquiring multiple copies and translations of the Quran. We proudly display our “collection” on the shelves in our personal libraries or on our smartphones. But when it comes to actually studying the Book with seriousness and concentration, on or off Internet-enabled gadgets, suddenly time becomes scarce.

In contrast, there are Muslims who can afford only one copy, and a tattered one at that from overuse, that they study with awe and reverence every day. They read and they ponder and they give thanks for all the blessings they enjoy from the Creator, even if these blessing are not apparent to their affluent co-religionists.

In these challenging times, Muslims must remain patient, respond to what is bad with what is good, and rely on God for help and guidance. That is the surest way to defeat fanatics and extremists.

Falling off the "Bridge to Nowhere"

Concerned Americans are worried that John McCain's V.P. choice, Sarah Palin, may snare enough women voters, particularly from among Hillary Clinton supporters, to deliver the White House to the Republican Party in the November election. While the possibility exists, it is remote and likely to get remoter as Election Day approaches.

To suggest that women will vote for Palin because she is a woman is an insult to all women. Gender issues may make headlines but is never the deciding factor in any election. "McCain must think we are idiots," was a refrain heard from Clinton camp around the country.

With soaring prices of essentials and lack of affordable healthcare for millions of Americans, suggesting that voters will line up for Palin because she "electrified" a partisan crowd with a prepared speech is condescension at its worst.

Critics and commentators invariably underestimate the sturdy commonsense and the fundamental fairness of ordinary Americans. The average American can distinguish between style and substance with a clarity he or she is rarely given credit for. Palin's speech did not sway voters whose elemental concerns - food, housing, job, healthcare - the governor of Alaska found too lowbrow to mention in her speech. Her mocking, sarcastic remarks on Barack Obama may have drawn laughs at the convention laugh but outside, it angered and alienated many Americans.

Right-wing outlets like The Wall Street Journal and Fox News would have us believe that a single speech written for her by Republican operatives has magically transformed Sister Sarah into a combination of Margaret Thatcher, Joan of Arc and Laura Ingalls. This is laughable. Americans are not only not falling for it, they are finding it breathtakingly arrogant and offensive.

McCain's choice of Sarah Palin ("a bridge to nowhere", in the words of columnist Ellen Goodman) was a cynical and ruthless attempt to grab women voters. The ploy has failed even if the polls show a temporary surge for McCain-Palin. There will be a new dawn in America on November 5 and Democrats will be cheering.

Obama by a Landslide

TIME magazine (May 19, 2008) analyzes the mistakes Hillary Clinton made in her quest for the democratic nomination. There are vague statements like “She misjudged the mood,” “She didn’t master the rules,” and so on. At best, this is Monday-morning quarterbacking. It would have been more relevant to identify why Barack Obama won the nomination (Hillary Clinton will undoubtedly concede in the next few days). There are many reasons: excellent grassroots organization, intelligent use of Web 2 technologies to spread the word, stirring speeches to inspire Americans, particularly the young. But one factor contributed to Obama’s nomination more than any other, and that was his opposition to the Iraq war when everyone, including Hillary Clinton and John McCain, competed to jump onto Bush’s bandwagon. He opposed the ‘rash war’ in Iraq in 2002 and never wavered in his judgment. This made him the candidate of substance that voters had been pining for, as opposed to candidates whose views were dictated by the shifting political wind.

There is an unfortunate tendency by pundits and Clinton loyalists to attribute Obama’s ascendancy to race. “Obama won the democratic nomination because blacks voted en masse for him,” has been the refrain heard from opposing camps. This is blatant racism. Nowhere is there any recognition that African-Americans voted for Obama because they decided that he was the better candidate on issues and policies. Nowhere is there any acknowledgment that if Hillary Clinton offered better choices and options for Americans, blacks would have voted for her. In fact, that’s how the campaign began, with blacks backing Hillary more than Obama. But as the campaign progressed, voters began to see that one candidate remained true to his principles, while the other resorted to race-baiting and polemics. A difficult choice it wasn’t.

I was surprised by the attitudes of my fellow Americans of sub-continent origin (India, Bangladesh, Pakistan). “Americans are not ready for a black president,” many of them insisted. On probing further, it became clear that what they meant was that they found the idea of a black president unacceptable. Probing further still, I came to the conclusion that this was due to a strange and curious combination of racism and narrow world-view. I don’t know about other states but certainly in California, many Americans who migrated from the Indian sub-continent are bitter that Hillary Clinton's chances of winning her party's nomination has dwindled to zero.

As for those Clinton loyalists who assert that they will not vote for Obama in November, I think the feeling will pass. The passions are still raw but six months offer enough time for reconciliation and closing of ranks. I have no doubt that once Obama formally wins the nomination, Hillary Clinton will urge her supporters to vote for him.

So what will happen in November, 2008? Here is my prediction: Barack Obama will defeat John McCain, increasingly seen as Bush III or the Son of Bush, by a landslide to become the 44th president of the United States of America.

Unstoppable Obama

With eight straight primary victories against Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama has caught the wind on his sail for good. There is no stopping him now as he surges ahead of his rival in what started out as a keenly-contested race.

Analysts are attributing many factors to Obama’s success – more money, more grassroots support, more sophisticated use of the Web, more this, more that.

They are, however, missing the most important factor: Obama has captured the imagination of Americans like no presidential aspirants in recent memory. Neither Ronald Reagan nor Bill Clinton comes close. The only apt comparison is with John F. Kennedy and his mythical, magical evocation of a new frontier.

It is now beyond Hillary Clinton to overcome Obama’s x-factor advantage. Hillary Clinton represents variations on the theme of "what is" but Obama represents a bold and new version of "what is possible." And as the poet Robert Frost may have said, that has made all the difference.

Hillary's Stunner in New Hampshire

How did Hillary Clinton pull the stunner in New Hampshire last night? Even though pundits and pollsters were busy eating crow, they took turns to "explain" Clinton's victory. Two words summed up their analysis: "race" and "gender."

Nonsense. Race, gender (and ethnicity) played no role in this primary.

There are four reasons why Hillary won.

First, it is in the American character to root for the underdog. With polls predicting a thumping victory for Obama, voters felt inclined to vote for Hillary. If Hillary swept the senator from Illinois in Ohio and polls were predicting a repeat for her in New Hampshire, it is most likely that Obama would have won in the Granite State.

Second, for the first time since she began her campaign, Hillary came across as a vulnerable human being instead of a micro-managed robot. Count on seeing the video in which she tears up many more times before this race is over. People like that. Yes, they admire guts and determination and straight talk, but they admire genuine emotions even more.

Third, Hillary spoke more substance on issues that mattered to voters in New Hampshire than Obama. There was no block voting; more women flocked to her because she addressed their concerns.

Finally, voters were fed up with the certainty of pompous pundits and pollsters. Let's teach these buffoons a lesson or two, many of them said to themselves as they stepped into the booth to register their feelings.

A hard-fought campaign is the fire through which presidential mettle is forged. No one can predict at this point who will win the democratic nomination but one thing is certain: the democratic nominee will be the next president of the United States.