With The Mid-Term Elections Over, Mystery Awaits For Both Parties

A divided government is the ultimate result of the long-awaited, long-promoted 2018 mid-term elections that mostly concluded on Tuesday, November 6 (a few races are still undecided).

Come January, Democrats will have majority control of the House of Representatives, after winning 25-plus seats. And, Republicans will continue leading the Senate, though with a bigger margin.

Sounds like a recipe for gridlock, right? In these hyper-partisan times, sure. That would be the conventional wisdom. But there could be some proverbial wrenches that can be thrown in the mix. Here are a few takeaways from the competitive, hard-fought mid-term elections.

Florida remains an albatross for Democrats:

While former Tallahassee Mayor Andrew Gillum, a Democrat, put up a spirited campaign against the far-right victor, former Rep. Ron DeSantis, Gillum falling short of winning proved to be a major disappointment. This is the same state that ultimately cost Al Gore the 2000 presidential election, due to a handful of votes and “hanging chads.” Both DeSantis and GOP Senate candidate, Rick Scott, a former governor, appear to have eked out wins (Scott’s is still technically too close to call in his race against Democrat Sen. Bill Nelson). Even the passionate advocacy from survivors of the mass shooting at a Parkland high school failed to help Democrats sufficiently on Election Day.

Mitch McConnell’s A Genius: 

When Barack Obama became president, the Kentucky senator’s single-minded goal was to make Obama a one-term president. He ultimately failed on that front, but he succeeded in putting up a nearly impenetrable GOP firewall that limited many legislative and political gets for much of Obama’s term, including getting Merrick Garland, a moderate Republican, a hearing for the Supreme Court vacancy left by the death of Antonin Scalia. Looking back, it looks like McConnell had incredible foresight. After Trump got elected, McConnell’s other main goal of getting more conservative judges on the bench has worked, with the ultimate prizes of Neil Gorsuch and most recently, Brett Kavenaugh, appointed to the country’s highest court, not to mention a bunch of federal judges in the lower courts. With a bigger GOP cushion in the Senate, there will be less need to negotiate or dicker, weakening the power of Democrats further in the Upper House and leaving such moderates as the Tuesday Group and Blue Dog lawmakers less influential.

Opportunism Works: 

Whether it was Ted Cruz embracing former foe Trump, Joe Manchin voting for Kavenaugh, Trump’s incessant demagogury, or seemingly misleading ads about immigrant caravans posing a threat, integrity is a value best left for a bygone era. Now, it’s all about results and expediency, and if that means having no shame, so be it. Those who voted their conscience on Kavanaugh’s nomination, particularly Democratic North Dakota Sen. Heidi Heitenkemp, ultimately suffered the consequences.

Democrats Regain in the Rust Belt and in Governor’s Offices:

The big example here was in Wisconsin, where it looks like Gov. Scott Walker, a once-rising conservative hero, will be unseated. Also, Democrat Tammy Baldwin won the Senate seat. Wisconsin was one of the the so-called Rust Belt states that went Republican in the last presidential election, something it hadn’t done since Ronald Reagan’s re-election landslide way back in 1984. Also, Connor Lamb, a conservative Democrat was able to secure a redrawn Congressional seat in Pennsylvania, a state that hadn’t gone red in the presidential election since 1988. Democrats also enjoyed other nice victories, winning some unlikely governorships in Kansas, Colorado and in Maine, which most recently was led by conservative Gov. Paul LePage.

Republicans, however, made their own stands in being elected chief executives in reliably blue states, such as Vermont, home to Bernie Sanders, and Connecticut, where residents had grown exhausted with tax-and-spend Gov. Dannel Malloy and the Nutmeg State’s ailing economy. Perennial Connecticut office seeker Ned Lamont falls short…again.

Trump Could Be The Ultimate Dealmaker

There were hints he could be an unlikely ally for Democrats early in his presidency, when Republicans were all over the place on immigration, and Sen. Chuck Schumer and Rep. Nancy Pelosi provided a somewhat sensible plan. Trump ultimately balked, but now with the Democrats having real powers, and Trump ultimately being more pragmatic than ideological, the trite phrase of politics makes strange bedfellows may be reinforced….again.

Tariffs Didn’t Hurt 

 

For months, media have been focusing how Trump’s protectionist-like trade policies, particularly in the form of higher tariffs on everything from soybeans to Chinese-made steel, were driving up their operational costs. But as with most things involving Trump, conventional wisdom need not apply. Rural America embraced Trump’s Republicanism overwhelmingly. The $12 billion bailout for farmers who were negatively impacted by his trade policies probably helped the decision-making process.

Ultimately…This WASN’T a wave election

Unlike in 1994, when a huge tax increase by Democrats under then-President Bill Clinton brought about Newt Gingrich and the Contract of America, and in 2006, when Democrats took over both houses of Congress after voters became exhausted with George W. Bush’s cowboy diplomacy and the war in Iraq, Democrats only gained partial power this time around. Yes, it’s a big victory taking over the House, which will supply them with subpoena and investigative powers. But Trump’s loyal constituency, coupled with his ability to dwarf the rudimentary news cycle with his Wag-The-Dog like Tweets and dog whistles, remain alive and well. He might be slightly dinged, but the armor is still strong enough to withstand whatever is thrown at him. Democrats have to be careful with not getting too immersed in things that future voters could deem as self-serving fishing expeditions.

Here starts a two-year campaign for the 2020 presidency ….for both sides.

Trump Demands Congress to Embrace Immigration Reform in Primetime Speech

In his first State of the Union speech, President Donald Trump sounded more restrained than usual, but no less different in his determination to see major policy changes. That was particularly the case in regards to the long-standing, controversial issue of immigration, a subject that helped him win the presidency but also contributed to the recent, short-lived government shutdown.

 

In his nearly 90-minute primetime address, which also included the usual laundry list of self-congratulatory accomplishments similar to past speeches from other presidents, Trump eventually touched on the hot-button immigration issue, saying that “glaring loopholes” had led to dangerous undocumented immigrants, including members of the notorious Latino MS-13 gang, to cross the American border, bringing along with them violence and drugs. The president used this example as the rationale to change immigration laws.

 

“My duty is to defend Americans, to protect their safety and families….because Americans are dreamers, too,” Trump said, appearing to use the word dreamers in a different way than how it’s been used by many Congressional lawmakers.

 

In the current political lexicon, “dreamers” is the shorthand for children of undocumented immigrants who came to the United States at a very young age and have practically lived much of their whole lives in America, working and going to school here.

 

Many of these dreamers are facing deportation unless Congress can enact comprehensive immigration reform legislation. That’s because one of the programs that was implemented by former President Barack Obama, the Deferred Action Childhood Arrivals, or DACA, is set to expire shortly. DACA is estimated to be protecting some 800,000 people.

 

Democrats and some moderate Republicans have been debating legislation and scenarios where many or all of the dreamers, among other young undocumented immigrants, can remain in the states.

 

Trump last week introduced immigration reform legislation and reiterated it during his speech, describing it as “a down-the middle compromise.” Along with providing a “path to citizenship” to some 1.8 million dreamers over a 12-year period, contingent on them completing various education and work requirements, Trump’s plan also calls for his signature proposal of a full-length wall on the Mexican border, ending the visa lottery program, and accepting more immigrants based on skills and professional qualifications rather than family connections (derisively referred to in some circles as chain migration).

 

The president said that the present “outdated immigration rules,” particularly the visa lottery program, have outlived their usefulness, and oftentimes counterproductive, given some recent domestic attacks.

 

“In the age of terrorism, these programs present risk,” Trump said.

 

He implored Congress to finally pass comprehensive immigration reform, something that last happened some 30 years ago, when Republican President Ronald Reagan signed legislation that provided amnesty to some three million undocumented aliens.

 

“This Congress can be the one that finally makes it happen…that puts America first,” Trump said.

 

In presenting a human face on the dangers of immigration laws remaining unchanged, Trump mentioned and introduced a Long Island family whose kids were brutally murdered by MS-13.

 

“Three-hundred-and-twenty-million hearts are breaking for you,” he said.

 

Trump then implored Congress to “close the deadly loopholes, fix our immigration laws” and provide more reinforcements to border guards and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).

 

While immigration illicited some of the strongest responses from both sides of the aisle, GOP lawmakers enthusiastically applauded the litany of accomplishments that Trump citied.

 

Among the things Trump mentioned include:

 

*Creation of 2.4 million new jobs, including 200,000 in the manufacturing sector.

 

*Passage of the $1.5-trillion Tax Reform and Jobs Act that will yield to bigger paychecks starting in February and has already lead many employers to issue bonuses to employees (no Democrats voted for the bill, citing that it would add considerably to the deficit and federal debt)

 

*Relocation of corporate funds to the United States, from companies like Apple and Exxon, which enables the federal government to collect tax repatriations;

 

*Record-low unemployment rates among the African-American and Hispanic populations;

 

*The up-until-recently red-hot performance of the Stock Market, which has increased the value of many retirement and investment portfolios;

 

*Deregulation;

 

*Appointment of conservative judges on Circuit Courts and the U.S. Supreme Court Justice Norman Gorsuch;

 

Still, Trump pointed out some other areas where he wants to see results. They include:

 

• a $1.5-trillion infrastructure bill

 

• Streamlining the permitting process to move forward on construction projects

 

• More vocational education, workforce development, and job training programs

 

• Paid Family Leave

 

In the meantime, Congress faces a Feb. 8 deadline to adopt a budget. If both parties don’t come to an agreement, the federal government could shut down again.

Building strong relationships and faith are the keys to combatting the ‘fire’ of bigotry, hatred and racism

PISCATAWAY, NJ – Speakers delivered the themes of unity, greater interfaith dialogue, and taking action with great conviction and passion at Muslim’s For Peace’s 1o^th annual Prophet Muhammad Day, held on Sunday afternoon at the Busch Campus of Rutgers University.

However, not everyone in the audience shared the sentiments of this year’s keynote speaker, Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-Hawaii), who apparently raised more than just eyebrows when she met last month with Syria’s President Bashar al-Assad, whose country has descended into chaos during the last six years of a bloody civil war that has included extremist groups like ISIS and Al Nusra. More than a half-million people have been killed and millions more displaced.

Shortly after she took the podium, a few protestors from the crowd of some 800 people who packed the multipurpose room yelled “Shame on you!” and “Is it OK to see 500,000 individuals killed?” Others claimed that al-Assad’s brutal regime killed some of their own relatives.

It didn’t take long, though, before several other individuals stood up and started chanting “Tulsi!” “Tulsi!,” Tulsi!” The protestors were quickly escorted out by Rutgers Police and others who volunteered in the event’s security operations.

Not all Syrians were opposed to Gabbard, though. After he remarks, one Syrian family in the audience approached the three-term congresswoman and thanked her for her efforts in ending funding for ISIS. The family said they had lost four of their cousins to ISIS.

During the brief protests, Gabbard remained resolute. Later in the program, she said that the United States, financially and principle-wise, cannot afford to fight additional “counterproductive regime-change wars.”

Rather, she said the United States must be serious about devoting its resources to strengthening and rebuilding its own communities.”

She said “the dark cloud of religious bigotry” can only be eradicated through love and great respect and tolerance among different faith communities. Gabbard, who is Hindu, said that it’s only through that mutual respect that people who value peace can defeat the extremist groups, who are driven by fear and insecurity.

“Anyone who does not know love does not know God because God is love,” she said. “God is one, no matter what we call him.”

“Everyone has a right to follow their own spiritual path. If not, there can’t be a foundation for peace,” she added. “Religious leaders must stress that a loving relationship with God can only happen by freedom of choice.”

Gabbard said that when societies fail to cultivate the idea of love, they descend into great darkness and suffering. She cautioned though that even in a free society, people are not immune to religious bigotry. She called for embracing the concept of “Aloha!”

“The dark cloud of religious bigotry can only be eradicated by love,” she said. “We must act. We must stand with these brave souls for peace.”

“Let us be inspired, and live in peace and freedom from fear. Let us truly be aloha, with our words and actions.

“Your gathering here today bolsters this effort!”

Her remarks received great applause and adulation, as they started chanting her name again.

PRESIDENT GABBARD?

When a question came up about rather she’d run for president, Gabbard was coy, saying only, “I’m so grateful to the people of Hawaii, to be their voice in Washington.”

However, a reporter spotted a few “Tulsi 2020” bumper stickers in the lounge area outside the Multipurpose Room.

She also opposed Donald Trump’s executive order of a Travel Ban from six predominantly Muslim countries.

“We should be looking at whether they share the commitment to the principle of religious freedom. We should denounce a blanket ban.”

She said it’s more important than ever to have an “interfaith unity based on intrinsic respect for one another.

“It’s powerful and necessary, especially in these challenging times we are facing.”

MEHDI HASAN

Another speaker at the event, Al Jazeera journalist Mehdi Hasan provided a powerful pep talk to the community, urging them to not become complacent or demoralized with President Donald Trump in power.

The harshly critical views of Muslims by Trump, members of his Cabinet and his supporters have become known in recent months. Embattled Attorney General Jeff Session called Islam “a toxic ideology.” State Department Secretary Rex Tillerson was on record for saying that he has no problem with creating a registry that would track Muslims, something Trump had called for in his campaign. And, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich called for testing every person who’s Muslim and have him or her deported if they believe in Sharia, or the system of Islamic laws.

Earlier this month, Oklahoma lawmaker John Bennett, a Republican, handed out a questionnaire, asking Muslims, “Do you beat your wife?” He distributed the questionnaire after a Muslim group asked to meet with him at his district office.

Hasan said it’s during these difficult times that the community must rise up and recognize this as an opportunity to inform or enlighten the skeptics and cynics.

“It is in our darkest moments we must work hardest to see the light,” Hasan said, citing similar quotes from Martin Luther King Jr., Archbishop Desmond Tutu and Prime Minister Winston Churchill.

“We have a chance to explain what Muslims really believe. People want to know more about Islam,” Hasan said. “It’s our job to show them the real Islam…to stand with truth, equality and justice.”

BUILDING RELATIONSHIPS

The most effective way in instilling greater tolerance and broadening the views of skeptics is not by unleashing a series of facts and figures. Rather, Hasan advocated for fostering and nurturing strong personal relationships. It is what sociologists call “the Contact Theory,” he said.

“I’m not saying it’s going to be easy, but don’t despair.”

Another speaker, Imam Mustafa El-Amin, urged a similar approach.

“Build good loving relationships,” he said, adding that relationships and a strong faith in God are the only ways to extinguish the “fire of bigotry, hatred and racism.”

Hasan quoted Mahatmas Gandhi, who once said “the way you make a difference is to engage in the world around you.”

“SPHERE OF INFLUENCE”

While journalists can play a role in shaping views and opinions, Hasan believes that for the part, they’re not as influential as some many think.

He believes the bigger sources of influence are arts and culture, areas which few Muslims in general pursue, and are often discouraged to do so by their parents. He called for instilling a greater appreciation for the liberal arts.

“We don’t have enough novelists, architects and playwrights.”

Hasan said there have been some bright spots during this seemingly discouraging period. There was greater voter turnout among Muslims. There have been signs of greater tolerance and respect for different faiths, such as when the Jewish community helped Muslims in Texas whose mosque was torched. He also mentioned progress in politics and government, such as the ascension of Rep. Keith Ellison and a Somali state lawmaker, both from Minnesota.

Before we expect the world to respect Muslims in general, Hasan cautioned we must work on ourselves to make sure we don’t prejudice or discriminate against others and that we don’t just blindly support one group of people over another for sectarian purposes.

“We demonize other people. We need to check our biases.”

Another speaker, Rabbi Marc Aaron Klein, also called for continuing dialogue amongst the different faiths.

“We share one soul and that’s why we’re here today,” Klein said.

“We believe in the power of prophecy. If one is in need, it is in our need to give.”

He was grateful for the support the Muslim community has shown toward the Jewish community in the wake of the desecrations of several Jewish cemeteries.

“You can’t have peace for one unless you have peace for all.”

Obama warns of complacency and intolerance as threats in Farewell Address

Barack Obama began his extraordinary journey to the presidency with a simple catchphrase: Yes We Can!

After eight years that were marked by some major accomplishments, as well as tumult and intransigence stemmed partly from hyper-partisanship, the president capped off his Farewell Address with those same words: Yes We Can!

“Change only happens when ordinary people get involved, get engaged and demand it,” he said from his adopted city of Chicago, where he got his start in politics and activism as a community organizer. “You made me a better president and a better man.”

Obama’s hour-long speech was at times emotional, but it mostly served as a cautionary forewarning of the dangers and threats facing the country. However, it wasn’t so much about the external threats he was referring to, such as terrorism and climate change, which he touched upon and mentioned some progressive measures his Administration took in combatting both of them.

Rather, the other major threats could arise within America’s borders, particularly among its citizens and in the way government functions and prioritizes.

He said the tendencies for some people to fear an increasingly diverse country, to deny facts that challenge rigid ideologies and to believe that government has failed them by not doing more to increase access to education and opportunities to help them keep pace in an increasingly technological and interdependent world, pose some of the biggest problems.

While race relations have improved from prior decades, he admitted that the nation is “still not where we need to be.

“Race remains a potent and often divisive force,” he said.

He said it’s time for people to accept that the nation is becoming more racially diverse. If not, “we will diminish the prospects for our children because those brown kids will represent a larger and larger portion of our American workforce.”

He acknowledged this transformation in hearts and minds won’t be simple and will require time.

“Hearts must change. Social attitudes take generations to change.”

He suggested empathy be a part of the process and cited the fictional character Atticus Finch, who had said a person cannot truly understand the travails of a minority “until you climb into his skin and walk around in it.” Finch was the lawyer representing a black man in the Deep South in the classic novel, “To Kill a Mockingbird.”

The president also suggested open-mindedness as an essential ingredient for a functioning democracy, something that has become complicated over the years with the advent of advocacy media and various movements inspired by social media.

“It’s become safer to retreat into our own bubbles,” he said. “We’ve become so secure in our bubbles.”

Obama said it was important to take the pragmatic, problem-solving approach that the country’s Founding Fathers followed and rely less on ideologies, especially when facts challenge them. Doing otherwise can be perilous, he said.

“It’s not just dishonest,” he warned. “This selective sorting of the facts…It’s self-defeating.

“Without a willingness to admit new information, we’ll keeping talking past each other,” he continued, adding that it would make finding common ground and compromise impossible.

Also essential to maintaining a vibrant democracy is courage.

“Let’s be vigilant but not afraid. We must guard against the weakening of the values of who we are.”

Such values have helped the nation see major changes in the last eight years. They include:

*The passage of the Affordable Care Act (commonly, or derisively, known as Obamacare”) that has provided medical insurance to 20 million Americans.

*Carrying out an attack that killed Al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden back in May 2011;

*Saving the auto industry from bankruptcy

*The dismantling of Iran’s and Syria’s nuclear program

*Marriage equality

He admitted there have been shortcomings during his eight years, something that is not entirely surprising given the history of the nation’s political system.

“Yes our progress has been uneven. But working democracy has always been hard, sometimes bloody. But the long sweep of America has been marked by forward motion…to be embraced by all, not by some.”

While he admitted that the Islamic State terrorist group (also known as ISIS and ISIL) remains a grave threat in an increasingly unstable Middle East – which some have attributed to his decision to withdraw troops from Iraq too soon and not doing enough to aid Western-backed rebel groups in Syria who were also committed to taking down that country’s dictator Bashar al-Assad – he proclaimed, ”ISIL will be destroyed.”

Some of the things that can make for a more promising country for those who feel left out include greater education opportunities, updated safety nets and creation of unions to prevent unfair hiring and income inequality.

Despite the setbacks, the president said the level of cynicism hasn’t risen to the level of fundamentally changing the values of the nation, giving the example of the upcoming transfer of power to his successor, Donald Trump, a Republican.

He mentioned that it’s those values that helped America remain the influential nation in the world and not become like Russia or China, each an example of “a big country that bullies smaller neighbors.”

“Potential will only be realized if our democracy works,” he said. “We need to restore our sense of common purpose that we so much need right now.”

Time to rethink U.S. relationship with Saudi Arabia, activist says

SOMERSET – On the 15th anniversary of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, a prominent peace activist speaking at a Muslims For Peace Interfaith event called on the United States to end military interventions and reevaluate its relationship with Saudi Arabia, a country whose repressive policies and support for terrorism is antithetical to American values and interests.

“There was a deal made with the devil,” said Medea Benjamin, who recently wrote a book entitled “Kingdom of the Unjust: Behind the U.S.- Saudi Connection,” and is a co-founder of Code Pink, a women’s peace organization. “What kind of ally is this that the U.S. has?”

Benjamin spoke at an interfaith event at Masjid-e-Ali in the Somerset section of Franklin Township. The event was organized by Muslims 4 Peace. Some 150 guests attended, hearing thoughts and ideas from leaders of the major faiths.

Benjamin, who is Jewish, said that throughout much of its history, the United States has, and continues to, turn a blind eye toward Saudi Arabia. The U.S. has yet to strongly condemn the Middle Eastern kingdom for its apparent support of, or at the very least, its duplicity toward, terrorism networks. This remains the norm, even though 15 of the 19 individuals involved in the jetliner attack on the World Trade Center Twin Towers on Sept. 11, 2001, were Saudis.

“We don’t question why they’re a U.S. ally with a repressive form of Islam…We should go after the people who attacked us. Instead, we were talking about invading another country,” Benjamin said, referring to the invasion of Iraq in 2003.

She said Wahabbism, a strict interpretation of Sunni Islam, is the basis of the Saudi state and described the sect as dangerous. Wahabbis, or a similar group known as Salafis, have attacked Shia mosques and gatherings in several countries, such as Iraq. In Saudi Arabia, Shias, along with women and migrant workers, are frequent targets of repression and persecution. Gross human rights violations are common, and the kingdom leads the world in the number of executions, many of which are done through beheadings.

Even though Congress passed a law in 1998 that would place sanctions on nations that openly practice religious intolerance, Saudi Arabia was issued an “indefinite waiver” from that law in 2004, according to Benjamin.

On top of that, the U.S. continues to sell weapons to the kingdom, some of which were used to repress uprisings in countries like Bahrain, a Shia-majority country ruled by a Sunni royal family, and Yemen, an impoverished country where the Houthis, an offshoot of Shia Islam, are fighting for power. Saudi Arabia also funds several Sunni rebel groups opposed to the Syrian regime led by Bashar al-Assad, a Shia Alawite.

“They are propping up the military industrial complex of our country,” Benjamin said.

Recently, two senators, Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Connecticut) and Sen. Rand Paul (R-Kentucky), sponsored a resolution opposing a proposal to sell $1.15 billion worth of weapons to Saudi Arabia. Sixty-four members of the House of Representatives also support a similar resolution. Yet, President Barack Obama threatens to go ahead with the sale, and he also intends to veto a bill that would allow families of 9/11 victims to sue the kingdom.

Benjamin, who supports Green Party candidate Jill Stein for president, said she believes the dynamics of the U.S.-Saudi Arabia relationship will remain unchanged if either of the two major party presidential candidates – Republican Donald Trump and Democrat Hillary Clinton – is elected. Both candidates continue supporting massive militarization, she said.

“We need to cut the military budget. (We need) a massive reorientation of how we spend the money and how we act internationally,” she said.

The longtime peace activist and author said countries are liberated not through bombing campaigns, but by the will of the people and them rising up to autocratic regimes. She said Tunisia, which launched the promising but largely unsuccessful Arab Spring, is a relatively successful example of a country that did just that. And, Benjamin pointed out, the United States wasn’t involved a lick in that fight

In countries where the U.S. has intervened in some military capacity – Iraq, Libya, Syria, Yemen, etc, – the results have been chaotic.

“Look where we are today,” she said.

The U.S. military interventions have only bred new terrorist networks, according to Benjamin. “It’s only grown. The U.S. military response is not the solution. When are we going to learn?”

Other guests at the event also stressed that spreading peace and hope, not bombs, is the solution.

Rabbi Debra Smith, or “Reb Deb” as she is known, recalled how Sept. 11, 2001, started out as a cloudless morning that was abruptly disturbed and humanity was shaken.

“The blow was sudden, swift, and beyond understanding”

Still, Smith was optimistic. “People will gain strength through prayers. Your suffering will heal, your prosperity will return.”

She then said her own prayer: “Eternal One, we call out to you…Let them play where bullets don’t fall like rain…Stop the rivers of blood in our street.”

Franklin Mayor Phil Kramer said he had a simple reason for attending the Muslims for Peace event.

“I wanted to spend the day with loyal patriotic Americans. So, I chose to be here,” he said before taking his seat. His remark was met with thunderous applause.

Rev. Robert Moore, who heads the Coalition for Peace Action, said the terrorist groups fighting in the name of Islam are anything but Islamic.

“They were motivated by ideology and hatred. Their actions should not be construed as Islamic,” he said.

He said the best antidote to such groups and their dark way of thinking is to have groups that counter such thinking, such as Muslims for Peace.

“That’s what authentic Islam is about,” he said.

Moore added: “We are all precious…Muslim, Christian, Jew, gay, straight. Every human being is precious. Pray for unity and love and peace.”

Dr. Pervez Hamdani, president of MFI, urged people to “pray to God for those who’re misguided” since “they are also the victims of what they’re practicing.”

“Ideologies do not have boundaries…They’re just like viruses,” the physician added.

Hamdani said the solution is to provide education to people around the world. He expressed disappointment at President Obama for not being more aggressive in holding Saudi Arabia accountable.

“Mr. President, with all due respect, you knew who was doing all this. I wish you would have stopped this. ”

All of the speakers extended condolences to families of the victims of the 9/11 attacks.

As Dr. Alex Khirazi said: “Victims’ pain is our pain. Let us pray there’s peace and brotherhood in the world.”

Sanders strikes a more aggressive tone, but Clinton holds her ground in latest debate

On the same day that the AFC Divisional and NFC Divisional playoff games were broadcast, there was a third football game that aired in the evening, though it may have looked slightly different: The NBC YouTube Democratic Presidential Candidate Debate.

 

The three candidates sparred over the major issues, laying out a progressive vision to reform the economy and tax policy to create more upward mobility opportunities for working- and middle-class citizens they hope to win over in the weeks leading up to the pivotal Iowa caucuses and the New Hampshire primary. 

 

Also in the debate, which was moderated by NBC News journalists Lester Holt and Andrea Mitchell, the candidates also called for a more cautious foreign policy that would limit the use of American ground troops in Middle East conflicts, particularly the bloody civil war in Syria and the various proxy wars currently playing out in the region. 

 

Former Secretary of State /First Lady Hillary Clinton often found himself on the defensive after her main rival, U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont, who criticized her ties to Wall Street.  At times, he implied Clinton would be limited in her ability to adopt policies that would lessen the already huge influence of many of the large investment banks through big campaign contributions. 

 

“Can you really reform Wall Street, when they’re spending millions in campaign contributions and speaking fees,” Sanders said. He called for adopting a 21st Century Glass-Steagal Act, which is intended to keep the activities of investment banks and regular consumer banks separate. The act was essentially repealed in 1999, under President Bill Clinton, husband of the current frontrunner.  

 

Long-shot candidate and former Baltimore Mayor Martin O’Malley echoed Sanders’ sentiments, saying that Clinton enjoys “a cozy relationship with Wall Street.”

 

Sanders later said Clinton had received $600,000 in speaking fees from investment bank Goldman Sachs. 

 

Clinton didn’t specifically address Sanders’ charge. She only said that the Dodd-Frank Act currently provides Congress with the tools to prevent big banks from enlarging and keep reins on other areas of the financial industry.

 

Sanders suggested that major changes were need in the “corrupt campaign finance system” to bring about the major changes that are embedded in his policy proposals. 

 

“[This is about] whether we have the guts to stand up to the private insurance companies and their money and the pharmaceutical companies,” Sanders said. “Congress is owned by big money.” 

 

Health Care

 

Clinton also slammed Sanders for his “Medicare for All” health care proposal that would essentially replace the Affordable Care Act. She pointed out that Sanders has introduced the bill, basically as single-payer health insurance bill, in Congress nine times to no avail. She said the best way to approach expanding access to medical insurance is to build on the success of ACA, which thus far has provided medical care to 18 million residents. 

 

“We finally have a path to universal health care,” Clinton said, who admitted individual health care costs need to decrease. “To tear it up and start over, I think is the wrong direction.” 

 

Sanders disputed Clinton’s claim, pointing out that he helped write the landmark ACA, which was passed in 2010. However, he said more needs to be done to provide people with medical insurance, calling it “a right.” He said there are still are some 29 million Americans who lack health care and millions more who are underinsured.   

 

For a minute, Sanders echoed Walter Mondale, the hugely unsuccessful 1984 Democratic presidential candidate who lost 49 out of 50 states to Ronald Reagan, when he admitted taxes would have to be increased to reduce health insurance premiums. However, the savings in health insurance premiums would far outweigh any tax hikes, according to Sanders. 

 

O’Malley said the best way to curb health care cost hikes would be to set up a system where medical providers are reimbursed more for the overall quality of the care rather than the fee-for-service model that is largely the status quo.  

 

Gun control

 

All called for a comprehensive gun control, closing the gun show loophole and instant background checks, which President Obama called for in a recent, teary press conference. Sanders has been targeted by Clinton for his past votes on gun control, but Sanders proudly pointed out the National Rifle Association gave him “a D-minus” on their recent report card on the most gun-friendly lawmakers. Sanders said he got such unfavorable marks despite representing a heavily rural state with “no gun control.” 

An October 2015 issue of The New Yorker states that while Sanders has voted in favor of a semi-automatic assault weapons ban and instant background checks, he also had voted against the 1993 Brady Bill because of the required five-day waiting period to obtain a gun. Also, he voted in favor of allowing guns at national parks and on the federally-run Amtrak trains.

 

O’Malley said it’s possible to adopt gun control laws without depriving the Second Amendment. He said he was successful maintaining that balance as mayor. 

 

“We didn’t interrupt a singe’ person’s hunting season,” he said. 

 

All also called for reforming the criminal justice system that often times puts African-Americans at a severe disadvantage by improving race relations, strengthening community policing, and providing treatment for drug addiction instead of overly punitive jail sentences.

 

 

Climate change

 

All called for addressing climate change by supporting policies that would create more incentives to use alternative energy, including wind and solar power.

 

“Climate change is real,” Sanders declared. “It’s already causing major problems and would make bad problems worse.” 

 

O’Malley said he has a policy proposal that would have all forms of energy derived from “clean” sources by 2050. 

 

 

Iran and Syria

 

All of the candidates supported the nuclear deal negotiated between Iran and the Obama Administration that would lift sanctions under the conditions that their nuclear facilities would be regularly inspected to prevent the production of weapons of mass destruction. 

 

All of them ruled out sending American ground troops to Syria, saying it’s best to go the diplomacy route to remove the Syrian dictator, Basher Al Assad. Sanders ,for one, called the idea of sending troops “an unmitigated disaster,” adding that doing so would mean not learning the lessons of the Iraq War, which he voted against authorizing. 

 

He suggested that neighboring Muslim countries, particularly Qatar and Saudi Arabia, should be sending their military forces to squelch the quagmire and bloodshed. 

 

“They’ve got to put some skin in the game.” 

 

Economy and Jobs

 

On the issues of stimulating the economy and job creation, all called for policies that are unlikely to receive bipartisan support in Congress: hiking the minimum wage, investing in more green and shovel-ready jobs to repair aging infrastructure, free community college, and raising taxes on investment income. 

 

The Iowa Caucus is on Feb. 1 and the New Hampshire Primary Feb. 9. Both states show a very tight race between Clinton and Sanders. While Sanders has demonstrated strong support among college-age and young adult voters and progressives, often delivering his message at rallies in filled-to-the-rim arenas, he still struggles to resonate with minority voters, particularly blacks and Hispanics. It is for this reason that many analysts say that Sanders’s strong support currently in New Hampshire and Iowa is a bit misleading, and not indicative of his true level of support nationwide. That’s because those two states are nearly entirely Caucasian, and not reflective of the much more larger and diverse states that will hold primaries later in the calendar year.

Obama optimistic about taking on current and future challenges

Striking an optimistic — and realistic –tone, President Barack Obama devoted his final State of the Union speech as a visionary prescription plan of sorts on how to address significant economic and national security issues in a way that’s effective, fair and doesn’t diminish the nation’s standing.

He spoke about the ever-evolving economy that while effective in creating jobs, has also shed a lot of middle-class jobs in the U. S. that moved overseas or became automated. Still, he said this wasn’t a sign that America was losing its standing, adding that anyone who makes such a claim is “peddling fiction.”

This megatrend is bound to continue, if not gain speed.

“The pace of this change will only accelerate,” he said.

He quoted Abraham Lincoln, saying “We did not adhere to the dogmas of the quiet past.” Instead, Obama said the “(American people) made change work for us. We emerged stronger and better than before.

What was true then can be true now.”

He said the American people have overcome great challenges before because of a strong work ethic and a zest for discovery. It’s because of the hard work and innovation that the country was able to accomplish much during his eight years as president. They include helping end the Great Recession, the creation of 14 million private sector jobs, more clean energy technology, support for laws allowing same sex marriage in several states, and adoption of the Affordable Care Act that helped provide medical insurance to some 18 million Americans.

Still, he said more needs to be done to help people climb the economic mountains, make college more affordable and enable people to retire with sufficient savings. On the last item, Obama stressed the need to strengthen, and not weaken, Social Security and Medicare.

He reiterated that powerful corporations and investment banks have only been enabled by Congress to make decisions that have put ordinary Americans in peril while the wealthy peoples prospered even more.

“Food stamp recipients did not cause the financial crisis, recklessness did,” he said.

“It’s not families watching tonight that avoid paying taxes through offshore accounts.”

Foreign Policy

On foreign policy, Obama said the United States cannot afford to be isolationist nor a nation-building policeman.

He said wars the United States have gotten involved in recent history bore this out.

“We can’t rebuild every country. It’s a recipe for quagmire that ultimately will weaken us,” Obama said. “It’s the lesson of Vietnam. It’s the lesson of Iraq … We should have learned it by now.”

Obama said a patient and disciplined strategy is needed in approaching the Middle East and other areas of the world that see seismic changes. He gave the example of the nuclear deal with Iran and lifting travel restrictions from long-embargoed Cuba as examples. The president made no mention of the 10 American sailors arrested by Iran today after their boats travelled through the Persian Gulf. Their current state is unknown.

He dismissed the claims from some (a not so –veiled reference to Republican presidential candidates) that the United States has been weakened among the community of nations.

“The United States of America is the most powerful nation on earth…period,” he said to applause, adding that the world nations call on the U.S. for assistance first and foremost.

While the enemy has morphed from evil empires to failing states, he cautioned people to not exaggerate the degree of the threat. He referred to ISIS a bunch of “fighters stacked behind pickup trucks.”

“They do not threaten our national security,” he said. “That’s the story ISIS wants to tell. We do not need to build them up.”

Obama said a disciplined military approach is being taken in addressing Syria, where a civil war that has been taking place since 2011 has taken nearly 300,000 lives.

Obama has been criticized for not doing enough to stanch the bloodshed and overreliance on airstrikes, of which there have been 10,000.

If members of Congress want America to take a more aggressive role, Obama made a suggestion: “Take a vote” to authorize the use of military force.”

He slammed the suggestion that he wasn’t committed to fighting terrorism.

“Just ask Osama bin laden.”

Bipartisanship

He admitted that the rancor and suspicion has gotten worse since he was first elected president in 2008. He hoped in his remaining months, there can be more cooperation to get things done.

“This can’t be my task alone.”

But he said citizens need to play a more active role to change the political tone in the nation.

“If we want a better politics, it is not enough to change (elected officials),” he said. “We have to change the system to reflect our better selves.”

He said politicians can do their part by adopting true campaign finance reform redistricting Congressional districts in a way that avoids gerrymandering.

Regardless of the challenges of making the country more equitable, wealthier and educated and safer, the president believed the people will succeed.

“I believe in change because I believe in you.”

As his last SOTU, Obama, admitting the great difficulty he has had with gaining legislative accomplishments, did not lay out any policy proposals on issues dear to him. Still, he said he hoped to see progress in the near future on hiking the minimum wage, pay equity, and free community college for the first two years.

Foreign policy, ISIS dominates latest GOP debate

The war on Islamic State, and how specifically to fight the terrorist group, among other national security  and foreign policy issues – domestic terrorism and mass shootings, Syria, Iran, immigration –  took center stage at the Republican presidential primary debate Tuesday evening.

The CNN debate displayed two starkly different foreign policy philosophies. One is characterized by giving law enforcement organizations enhanced surveillance tools, military interventions designed to topple evil anti-U.S. regimes and instill democracy, which was a hallmark of the first term of former President George W. Bush. The other is marked by relative avoidance of military actions and addressing the root, but often complicated, causes that have arguably created the various problems and brutal enemies abroad.

The debate was spirited, and while long (two hours), it flowed relatively smoothly with moderators Wolf Blitzer, Dana Bash and Hugh Hewitt at the helm, effectively following up with questions that the candidates failed to answer sufficiently on the first attempt. Many candidates gave solid performances. Here is an assessment:

Donald Trump

The longtime front-runner, Trump remained his outspoken, confident self, refusing to back down on his controversial proposals of banning all future Muslims from entering the United States, shutting down Inernet access in parts of the world and hardline immigration policy. He didn’t make the big waves as he had in prior debates, as another candidate, Ted Cruz, has recently siphoned some of the attention. Trump’s big declaration yesterday evening was that he intends to remain in the Republiclan Party primary and not run as a third-party cndiate. He didn’t hog the limelight as the questionsing was better spread than in other primetime debates. He did seemed to lose it toward the end, when he said the billions of dollars that were spent on the wars in Iraq and elsewhere could have better been spent on a modernized New Deal-like (or Great Society, depending who you ask) program that would fix U.S. infrastructure and services. Another presidential candidate said he sounded more like Barack Obama than a Republican.

Jeb Bush

Desperate for a positive performance, the meek former Florida governor finally got one with a steadfast performance where he panned Trump’s policies, particularly the one on banning the entry of Muslims. He stated that ISIS needs to be defeated in Iraq and Syria, and wants a stronger U.S. military force,  a no-fly zone inserted in Syria and arming the Kurds (a move that is doubtful to be supported by Turks). Bush also delivered an effective one-liner against his biggest rival/critic by telling Trump that “you’re not going to insult your way into the presidency.” Still, with all the media attention on his campaign virtually non-existent in the past few weeks, and with one poll having him down to a lowly 3 percent, a third Bush presidency appears a pipe dream at this point.

Rand Paul

Clearly stating that regime change hasn’t worked, and that it has only strengthened terrorist groups who pose a much bigger threat to the United States than the brutal secular dictators ( Saddam, Qaddafi, Mubarak) that were essentially bulwarks, Paul made clear he doesn’t believe Syrian dictator Basher al-Assad should be removed. If he is, Islamic State will control Syria, as it already controls large swaths of it. He chided the other candidates for wanting to “start World War III.” He called for a more realistic foreign policy, and less of a Woodrow Wilsonian-utopian one. As another prescription, Paul said under his administration, the U.S. would no longer provide weapons to “the allies of ISIS,” although he didn’t say specifically who they are. It’s believed some of those allies are Saudi Arabia and Qatar. Paul also wants to beef up border security.

Ted Cruz

Like Paul, Cruz also believes the United States would have been better off leaving former Middle Eastern dictators in place, as the vacuum created by their removals has given Islamic State literal ground to plan and attack the U.S. Still, that doesn’t mean he would be hesitant to use military might. He called for ratcheting up the air bombing campaign to wipe out ISIS. He slammed President Barack Obama’s current approach as nothing more than a “photo-op foreign policy.” Cruz also called for suspending all refugees form nations where terror groups are in control, which undoubtedly are ones populated with Muslims. He insisted though that it’s not a war on the Islamic faith. “It’s a war on a theocratic ideology that seeks to murder us.”

He seemed indifferent to the perception that his policies lack compassion, stating simply that “political correctness is killing people.” He also defended his vote against reauthorizing the controversial phone metadata program, saying it was too invasive on privacy rights.

Marco Rubio

Rubio remained polished and gave detailed answers, sounding very much like the policy wonk that he is. He went after Ted Cruz at length on his vote against reauthorizing the phone meta data program, saying it hampers law enforcement organizations’ abilities to readily access data that could assist in thwarting future  attacks, similar to the ones that took place in San Bernadino and at the Boston Marathon. He refused to dismiss ISIS as a gang of thugs, calling it “the most sophisticated terror group” that’s effectively used social media to recruit disaffected individuals. He called for a ground force to defeat ISIS, predominantly made up of Sunni Arabs, but with American special operations officers embedded. He also called for modernizing, and spending more, on the military, particularly the Air Force. Rubio was hit hard for his involvement in the bipartisan, but unsuccessful Gang of Eight immigration reform legislation from two years ago. Still, Rubio reminded potential voters he policy proposals include adding 20,000 border agents and more fencing.

Chris Christie

Impassioned, if not angrier than ever, Christie slammed Obama and in conjunction, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for their “reckless” approach to foreign policy. He called Obama a “feckless weakling.” He said the U.S should keep a close eye on the growing influence of Iran, and making sure it doesn’t become too powerful, especially in the wake of the nuclear deal.  He said he’d have no hesitation in shooting down Russian planes that enter a no-fly zone in Syria, similar to Turkey a few weeks ago. He said it would be “a stupid move” on Russia’s part to take such an action. Reminding again and again that he is a former U.S. attorney who prosecuted war criminals following the 9/11 terrorist attacks, Christie said he would restore portions of the National Surveillance Act  and the Patriot Act in order to have more actionable intelligence to prevent future attacks.

John Kasich

Sticking with his adult-in-the-room, Reagan Republican image, this fading throwback candidate provided some details on preventing future attacks. He said the U.S. intel agencies need better capabilities of de-encrypting phones and other technology to stamp out potential terror threats. He called for a massive military build up, similar to the first Persian Gulf war, in order to prevent Iranian influence in the region and to prevent the creation of what he called a “a Shia crescent’ He called for toppling the Assad regime, saying he’s the incubator for ISIS. Despite the spectacular failure of arming rebel groups that could have theoretically taken down the Syrian regime, Kasich believes the U.S. could still identify moderate forces in Syria willing to take over a post-Assad Syria.

Ben Carson and Carly Fiorina

Nothing earth shattering by either and too few turns at bat to have much of an impact.

Musharraf says he hopes to restore order in beloved Pakistan

NEW YORK – Calling the current suffereing of Pakistan, “a terrible law and order problem” stemming from government inaction, former Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf said the upcoming election will serve as “a make or break moment” on whether Pakistan can lift itself from its current state of darkness.

 

“We can’t just sit back and watch,” he said before hundreds of attendees at a speech in Queens, New York. “There’s a leadership problem.” He cited government inaction as the reason for rampant sectarian violence in areas like Baluchistan, Quetta and Karachi, with the people responsible for the slaughter claiming to do it “in the name of Islam,” he said.

 

Musharraf said such acts go against Islam’s teachings. “I don’t think I’m a better Muslim (than them). But they cant say they’re a better Muslim than me, either” he told a raucous crowd in Urdu.

Musharraf, who served as president from 1999 to 2008, said the root cause of the problem is from weak leadership and corrupt political parties who’re playing a behind-the-scenes role in the killings innundating Pakistan. Much of the killings are the result of people being influenced by the Taliban and gang warfare, he said.

 

Musharraf said the sectarian violence, among other longstanding problems Pakistan faces, can be abated by focusing mostly on economic development issues.

He left open the door for a possible return to the political arena of the nation he served in Uniform for over 40 years, but said there must be popular support from the ground up for his political party, the All Pakistan Muslim League.

 

He urged supporters to take action in restoring Pakistan to a state that resembles founder Quaid-a Azam’s vision. “If we don’t try, I have a feeling the status quo will remain for five more years,” he said. “We must have the urge, the determination, the courage, the conviction,” otherwise the ills that aile Pakistan will continue unabatted.

 

Best fix to save Social Security: apply the tax to entire earnings

How long have we been hearing that Social Security is bound to go broke unless some fundamental changes are made?

A long, long time, it seems.

From this author’s recollection, it seemed to have started in the 2000 presidential election, when Vice President Al Gore, who ran unsuccessfully for president that year, pledged he would put Social Security in a “lockbox.” Of course, that did not happen because, technically, he was not elected, even though he got a larger portion of the popular vote. We all know what happened, so I won’t rehash.

But basically, for years, Social Security was being treated more as a piggy bank than as a trust fund for its intended purpose.Surprisingly, there are no laws in place forbidding this practice of dipping into trust funds to pay for other things. 

Privatization of Social Security was proposed by the ultimate winner of the 2000 presidential election, George W. Bush. However, the idea  was unpopular, and remained unpopular even after he was re-elected in 2004. The “political capital” that Bush said he earned via his re-election, was apparently insufficient to change the minds of enough people.

Still, give the man credit for at least presenting the issue as one that is bound for historic troubles. Here’s is the problem with Social Security as we currently know it:

By 2033 it is projected that the vastly popular government-run retirement program will have exhausted the surplus it collected the prior three decades . What odes that mean for you? It means you might be one of those individuals who may not receive full benefits. That’s because by then, the administration will only have enough to pay 75 percent of its beneficiaries. Of, course, everyone will have to get a benefit check, but the benefits may not be as generous (of course, that’s a subjective term) as they are now.

Howe was this problem created? Government mismanagement is part the reason, but the problem largely stems from smaller share of workers people taxed, at least when compared to the Baby Boom era (1946-1964)….and a lot more retired persons to support. The ratio of actual workers to retirees has shrunken considerably over the past five decades, from 4.9 workers for every retiree receiving Social Security checks in 1960, to 2.8  workers for every beneficiary in 2011. That is, in a word, huge!

That is, if everything remains as is. Obviously, things can’t remain the way they are. So what is a Congress to do. 

Various solutions have been thrown around on how to close the shortfall. They include: taxing a larger portion of a person’s income, raising the retirement age, increasing the payroll tax.

Of these, the first option seems to be the most effective, in cutting down the largest portion of the shortfall. How does this work? Good thing you asked.

Presently, the first $110,100 of your income is taxed for Social Security tax collection purposes. For example, if you earn $1 million, the Social Security tax rate of 6.4 percent only applies to the first $110,100 of your salary is taxed for Social Security purposes. The remaining $889,900 is basically exempt for Social Security tax purposes.

However, if all of that $1 million is considered for Social Security taxation, there would be more revenues for that program. But, the way the system is currently set up, the employer would also have to match that amount.

Let’s say you’re not a millionaire, but you make a cozy salary of $200,000. Presently, you pay $6,826.20 in Social Security taxes, based on the 6.2 percent tax rate that’s applied to the first $110,100. If your entire salary is applied for Social  Security tax purposes, you would pay $12,400 in Social Security taxes (based on that same 6.2 percent tax rate). That is a $5,574 tax hike, essentially for both, you, and your employers.

Granted, it is probably not a popular or welcome path to embark on. However, going this route would make a substantial difference, eliminating 72 percent of the shortfall.

One must remember there’s a relatively small portion of workers who’d be affected by this change, considering the median income is still in the $50,000.

And, let’s remember, Social Security does more than provide a consistent stream of income for senior citizens. It also supports individuals with disabilities, children whose working parents died (Rep. Paul Ryan went to college with the help of Social Security).

It’s a relatively simple fix. Now, we need some bold politicians to make it happen.