America's First Muslim President

Muslim Americans helped elect George W. Bush, but now they're leaving the Republican Party in droves. It didn't have to be this way.

BY SUHAIL A. KHAN | AUGUST 23, 2010

As a Muslim American and a Republican who served in the Bush administration, I always believed that the anti-Muslim backlash was the work of a small number of cynical bigots, not the view of the vast, fair-minded majority of Americans. But as the 2008 election picked up steam, participating in the political process came at a great moral cost, and entailed considerable heartache. At Republican campaign rallies, harsh statements about "Muslims" and "Arabs" were ubiquitous. Rod Parsley, an influential evangelical pastor in Ohio and an early McCain supporter, urged Christians to wage a "war" against the "false religion" of Islam (McCain eventually rejected Parsley's support). Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, when asked about putting a Muslim American in his cabinet, replied that he "cannot see that a cabinet position would be justified" based on the percentage of Muslims in the country.

If the Republican candidates treated Muslims as the enemy, the Obama campaign treated them like untouchables, keeping the Democratic candidate's Muslim supporters at arm's length throughout the election. When prominent Muslim and Arab Americans such as Ellison and Democratic Party superdelegate James Zogby volunteered to campaign for Obama in key states such as North Carolina and Iowa, they were told to stay away. "A lot of us are waiting for [Obama] to say that there's nothing wrong with being a Muslim," Ellison lamented.

Instead, the campaign treated "Muslim" as an insult, classifying the much-circulated false claim that Obama practiced the religion as a "smear" to be debunked on the campaign's website. A Muslim American campaign staffer resigned when a reporter for the Wall Street Journal, Glenn Simpson, asked about his religious background. At a rally in Detroit in June 2008, Obama campaign volunteers removed two Muslim American women who were seated behind the podium where the candidate would be speaking (campaign higher-ups later apologized for the incident). Only retired Gen. Colin Powell seemed willing to stand up to the fear mongering. "Is there something wrong with being a Muslim in this country?" he asked in a TV interview days before the election. "The answer is no. That's not America."

Despite the cold shoulder from Democrats, most Muslim Americans, like my mother, sided with Obama -- and voted in record numbers, particularly in electorally crucial swing states such as Florida, Michigan, Ohio, and Virginia. And though many American Muslims have grown impatient with the Democratic administration's lack of progress on issues such as civil liberties, peace between Israel and Palestine, and the unfair treatment of Muslim charities, they remain firmly in the Obama camp. Why wouldn't they? Since the so-called "Ground Zero mosque" controversy erupted last month, New York Republican gubernatorial candidate Rick Lazio has blasted the mosque's "terrorist-sympathizing" imam; Gingrich has made statements equating Islam with Nazism.

On every issue and by every measure, Muslim Americans should vote firmly with the GOP. But they won't until the party finds leadership willing to stop playing to the worst instincts of its minority of bigoted supporters. I'm not convinced that's impossible -- for one thing, it's happened once already, in the GOP's relationship with Hispanic voters. Republicans lost the broad support of Hispanics -- who, like Muslim Americans, tend toward social conservatism -- for several elections starting in 1994, when California Gov. Pete Wilson supported the passage of Proposition 187, a ballot initiative that sought to block illegal immigrants from accessing health care, public education, and other social services. But with Bush's vigorous outreach efforts in 2000 and 2004, Hispanic support for the GOP climbed back up to 45 percent -- only to crash again in 2008 amid the rhetorically charged debate over immigration reform.

There are similar rays of hope for Muslim Republicans. Former Bush administration solicitor general Ted Olson, who lost his wife Barbara on 9/11, declared on Aug. 18 that "people of all religions have a right to build ... places of religious worship or study, where the community allows them to do it under zoning laws ... we don't want to turn an act of hate against us by extremists into an act of intolerance for people of religious faith." New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, an up-and-comer in the national conservative movement, recently warned against "overreacting" to the threat of terrorism and painting "all of Islam" with the brush of terrorism. "We have to bring people together," he said. Let's hope that thoughtful voices such as Governor Christie, and not those who rely on mistrust and fear, win the day.

PAUL J. RICHARDS/AFP/Getty Images

 

Suhail A. Khan serves on the board of directors of the American Conservative Union and as chairman of the Conservative Inclusion Coalition, an organization dedicated to the political involvement of Americans of all ethnic, racial, and faith backgrounds.

JKOLAK

11:21 AM ET

August 24, 2010

"As a Muslim American and a

"As a Muslim American and a Republican who served in the Bush administration, I always believed that the anti-Muslim backlash was the work of a small number of cynical bigots, not the view of the vast, fair-minded majority of Americans."

I didn't grow up around Muslims, and I don't know any Muslims. As suggested in the article, I always assumed it was a legitimate religion on par with Christianity and Judaism.

Obviously we can't judge the majority by the terrorists any more than we would want Christians or Jews judged by a few bad examples.

What concerns me are the growing reports on Sharia law, making Islam not just a religion, but also a political system which is incompatible with democracy and Western values.

I just finished reading Malcolm Nance's book, "An End to Al-Qaeda". He is very insistent that real Islam is not what the terrorists represent it to be. He talks about the centuries of Islamic scholarship and jurisprudence. Presumably this all means that while Islam is not led by a central leader, at least people with scholarly and religious credentials have a reasonable consensus about what the Qur'an does and does not say.

So we would expect educated people to know whether or not Islam is compatible with the West, and whether or not Islam dictates that the world submit to Sharia law.

It is not encouraging that many Islamic nations are hateful towards Israel, and even have laws against Israelis being in the country.

So, what I would like to hear from you, as an American Muslim, is how you feel about stealth Sharia and what it means to be a moderate Muslim. Are Muslims who do not conspire to overthrow democracy with Sharia just moderate because they do not know what the Qur'an says, and not fully living their religion, or is mainstream Islam really legitimate? Is the Qur'an really a book that is compatible with Western Civilization without needing to impose Sharia?

 

SKATER60

10:09 AM ET

August 25, 2010

Islam and optional violence

I would ask that you read the information on this web page and see whether it is accurate or not:

http://www.islam-watch.org/Others/Does-Koran-Incite-Violence.htm

It seems that in Islam violence is optional depending on circumstances. If this is true then Islam is to be feared and not respected.

Christians have also been violent (and still are). But nowhere in the teachings of Jesus is violence called for or allowed. In fact just the opposite is demanded by Jesus. I would suggest that most Christians are NOT followers of Jesus as they claim to be, myself included. His message of compassion, forgiveness, tolerance and mercy are too difficult and counter-intuitive. "If someone strikes you on one cheek, offer him the other as well." Yikes!!! I can't do that can you?

So, after all the theological "BS" on all sides, it basically comes down to this: WHO ACTUALLY IS GOD? And then: who best mirrors that Great Spirit? Is it Mohammed or Jesus or Buddha or... who ???

It ain't me, that's for sure.

 

END0910

7:40 PM ET

August 25, 2010

Sharia

Sharia is a moral code of conduct for Muslims and is meant to guide their decisions on how to live their lives. But to speak of sharia as a singular, monolithic entity is false. Unlike Catholicism, there is no singular authoritative hierarchy which decides what is and is not in line with Islamic theology. Instead, there are a number of schools of religious thought, or paths, which Sunni Muslims can follow. As you note, instead there are "people with scholarly and religious credentials" who "have a reasonable consensus." But even then no one is bound to follow their decisions unless the decisions are made in a legal court.

Gallup polls show that the majority of Muslims in predominantly Muslim countries favor free speech, and many favor democracy as a form of government and they generally see no contradiction between religion and democracy. In fact the Qur'an is used to support this claim. Many Muslim thinkers who write in favor of democracy point to the Qur'an's support for shura, or consultation, as an early indication of democracy's compatibility with Islam, or even Islam's mandate of democracy. Many Western commentators like to point to the lack of democracies in the Middle East as evidence that Muslims don't want democracy. What they fail to mention is that, as is the case with most authoritarian governments, the leadership does not rule with the consent of the people. Just as many Egyptians (or Jordanians or Syrians) are dismayed by the lack of political freedom in their country as Westerners are.

While most Muslims, according to these same Gallup polls, favor democracy, they do not reject sharia. But neither do they want a theocracy. They would prefer that sharia play an advisory role when making laws. This is not surprising since a similar percentage of Americans want religion to play a similar role in the formation of their laws (46% want the Bible to be a source of law, 9% want it to be the only source of law; 42% of Americans want religious leaders to have a direct role in writing legislation).

As for sharia being oppressive and brutal, this again depends on the interpretation. Islamic courts are often used to PREVENT stonings and the like in some countries where these practices persist in rural regions due to the continuance of indigenous practices. Only Saudi Arabia legally requires the niqab for women, while in most other Muslim countries no form of coverage is legally required. Many interpretations of Islam not only do not require full facial coverage, but some don't require coverage at all. And again, just because sharia says something should or should not be done does not mean that it is legally mandated by the state. But then again, the lack of a single religious hierarchy means that Islam can be interpreted more strictly. Ruollah Khomeini was a credentialed religious leader and scholar but still interpreted Shi'a Islam in a way that gave us today's Islam Republic of Iran. Even though many of his peer scholars disagreed with Khomeini's interpretation, the difference was that Khomeini managed to gain control of the state, thus giving him the authority to put his interpretation into practice.

As for the fear that the majority Muslims want to make sharia the sole law in the United States, this claim is ridiculous. They already don't want it to be the sole source of law in predominantly Muslim countries. Many of Khomeini's credentialed peers disagreed with his interpretation of Imami Shi'a Islam which declared that religious leaders should lead the state. In fact for most of Iran's history, the religious leadership played a quietest role in the state's political life. In Sunni empires, religious leadership and political leadership remained separated from each other in practice if not in theory.

So does sharia support democracy and if not, are Muslims who do support democracy therefore lapsed Muslims? It depends on your interpretation. Some say democracy is mandated by the Qur'an, some don't agree. But many Middle Eastern Muslims are today struggling for increased political and intellectual freedom in their own countries, and in places like Egypt they are struggling for free and fair elections for the first time after a long history of government-sponsored election fraud. (For more in formation on the polling data used, see "Who Speaks for Islam?" by Esposito and Mogahed, Gallup Press, 2007)

 

BHARAT

1:05 PM ET

August 24, 2010

Muslim Eyewash

It is an everyday sight of someone trying to convince that Islam is a peaceful religion, it means peace and so on. In my humble opinion, none of these efforts will work, unless Muslims publicly denounce those portions of Shariat that incite violence against non believers. They must also publicly denounce those portions of shariat that deny to women the very basic right to breath out of burqa.
Unless hostile content is removed, every attempt to convince the world at large that Islam is peaceful religion, is an eyewash and nothing but making ignorant Americans foolish. It is just like convincing the scapegoat that either there will be no sacrifice or the sacrifice will not be painful. Barack Obama may have wooed Islamic voters, but in the process, he is compromising American interests.

 

BHARAT

12:58 PM ET

August 24, 2010

Peaceful history of Islam

Can the peace preacher tell us any period in history when Muslims have been kind to non believers. It can safely be learnt from history that Muslims have remained peaceful at any place only till they have been few in numbers. As soon as Muslims gained numbers, they have destroyed civilizations and made hell at every place on earth. So rather than preaching peace to the victims i.e Americans and the world at large, it would be appreciable to preach peace to Muslim brethren.

 

TRABANDO

9:56 PM ET

August 24, 2010

Bharat, You might wanna read

Bharat,
You might wanna read up on Muslim Spain..That's 800 years of prosperity, tolerance, and knowledge. You might wanna also find out how Islam spread to countries like Indonesia, Malaysia and the Phillipines.. So many atrocities were committed in the name of Islam just like they were committed in the name of Christianity and what not...It's all about how you wanna look at things when you get up in the morning. If you wake up and say "life Sucks," you will only see negative things..In other words, it's how you want to view Islam..Things are more nuanced and complex than one would like them to be.

 

BHARAT

4:14 AM ET

August 25, 2010

^^^

Shahrukh Khan and Nizamuddin have got nothing to do with sainthood and these things are off the topic. The issue is why to tell lies to the world that Islam is peaceful when the truth is contrary. I'm not preaching for or against any religion. Christianity has actually been irritated to retaliate by crusades.

 

BHARAT

1:11 PM ET

August 24, 2010

George Bush and Obama

George Bush was a bitter medication and Obama is a sweet poison. The choice is clear.

 

BUDAHH

1:52 PM ET

August 24, 2010

Where is the moderate voice of Islam, we want to hear it.

with the political islam, the jihadist and a bunch of Raidcal of clerics are representing Islam today in the eyes of the world and their voice is sounding a lot louder than any other.

When you have a lot of Religous leaders who don't condem suicide bombings and for some reason are quiet because of fear or lack of will it does not present islam in a positive light.

The imams in Saudi Arabia, PAkistan, gaza, Iran, Egypt, Lebanon, Gulf States and even in Europe are the ones that Al Jazeera chooses to put on the T.V screen so what do you think people will think about Islam?

I disagree with the quote"the unfair treatment of Muslim charities" it unfortunately was proven that a lot of chraties were raising money for terror groups under the umbrella of Islamic charity

 

AVNER STEIN

3:00 AM ET

August 25, 2010

Christianity and Islam

The Crusades were a response to Islamic imperialism. Christinianity did not start as a religion of war.

Jesus was a peace-maker.

Mohamed, other the hand, was a warrior and killed thousands himself. He enslaved the Jewish residents of Medina, he massacred Christians, he married a child and raped her.

This man, the father of Islam.

And you guys really wonder why the Islamic world is such a cesspool?

Name me ONE enlightened Muslim-majority state.

ONE. I DARE YOU.

Oh right, Turkey...sure.

 

BLUE LANTERN

5:27 AM ET

August 25, 2010

Actually you're wrong

I'm a world history student concentrated in Middle Eastern history, and I can safely say that you are very wrong. Palestine under Muslim rule was a peaceful time. Far peaceful then any of the region's succeeding governing entities. All Christians, Jews, and Muslims lived in a period of tolerance and happiness contrary to what you say. The European Christians set out on the Crusades which were essentially a campaign of greed. The Europeans saw something that they wanted, and they tried (and failed) to take Palestine from the Muslims.

Also Kosovo is a Muslim state that is "enlightened".

You're so full of it. Muhammad did none of those things, but he did marry the girl. He did nothing to the girl until she was older, and even then he did not rape her.

 

COUNTCHOCULA1011

6:24 AM ET

August 25, 2010

Reply

"Jesus was a peace-maker"

Well apparently his followers never got that message, because there sure as hell hasn't been much peace throughout Christian history.

 

COUNTCHOCULA1011

6:38 AM ET

August 25, 2010

Crusade apologists

I also think it's highly amusing that all the Crusade apologists a la Robert Spencer out there always conveniently ignore the crusades that the popes launched in the Baltic regions. Apparently there were Muslims in places like Lithuania who just wouldn't leave the poor innocent Christian monarchs alone! boo hoo!

 

BHARAT

6:17 AM ET

August 25, 2010

George Bush

George Bush cannot be called a villain because the victims of his bombs eventually turned out to be Muslims. It was the failure to Muslims to remain a peaceful lot that American bombs came hunting for them. George Bush targeted only nations like Afghanistan and Iraq. He never suo motu branded Muslims as terrorists.
Was it George Bush who prompted Mohammed Atta to get training in Germany and blow away WTC. So if you misuse the privilege, the inevitable consequence is your getting branded appropriately.

George Bush did only what a patriot should have done. Punish those people, who insulted his nation. If Obama takes sides or assuages the feelings of those who insulted America, his patriotism is questionable.

 

COUNTCHOCULA1011

6:39 AM ET

August 25, 2010

...yeah

Except for the fact that Iraq never posed a threat to the US, so yeahhh....and btw: I don't know where you're from, but us Americans tend to not consider a country "insulting [our] nation" as a valid excuse to kill them; otherwise we would have invaded France a long time ago.

 

NYC

2:31 PM ET

August 25, 2010

Muslims cannot support pols as usual

Given polls that show millions of uninformed americans think our president is a Muslim, not sure why this piece is entitled "America's First Muslim President." Not do I understand why the writer asserts that Muslims should naturally vote republican, if not for the bullying of the demogogic Right.

Politics and media have been allowed to defame our community leaders-- the Cordoba mosque is only the latest in a long series. What Republican elected official besides Christie (and Mayor Bloomberg) is standing up for our rights?

Of two main issues important to any faith community, Family values is not at all monopolized by Republicans -- and Human rights/Civil Liberties as issues are often more clearly supported by progressive Democrats and sometimes classic conservatives.But those in power in Congress --here one CERTAINLY must include the Republicans-- serve the interests of big business and multinationals that have outsourced jobs and promote the false religion of capitalism without checks or balances--and in the process they are despoiling the earth.

No, Muslim Americans CANNOT support "politics as usual" or identity politics or the other usual blandishments.

The Right is in fact poised to take over the whole of the Republican party and its friends at Fox push us ever to division, to a society with ever widening and obscene gap between the rich and poor both at home and abroad. Muslims will engage in the process of buidling our world -- but hopefully wisely-- may God grant that we not be corrupted--or is it too late?

 

JORDANC

4:47 PM ET

August 25, 2010

Count

"otherwise we would have invaded France a long time ago."

Ha. I actually laughed out loud when I read this. Thanks

 

STLSYCLYW

11:41 AM ET

August 26, 2010

try again

Apparently the Count forgot that the USA wasn't just insulted on 9-11. Over 3000 American countrymen/women were murdered...most of them civilians. That prompts a response a little larger than just some diplomatic brouhaha.

 

END0910

2:05 PM ET

August 26, 2010

Pay attention, STLSYC

The Count was talking about Iraq, not 9/11. He said that Bush invaded countries who insulted us, i.e. Iraq. He did not say that 9/11 was merely an insult. Of course it was much more than that.

 

STLSYCLYW

11:46 AM ET

August 26, 2010

count

Of course if you're gathering your intel from movies like "Green Zone." You may buy into the speculation that we made up everything to go into Iraq. Of course lets focus on the blame game 7 years after instead of seeking wise solutions to progress in that area of the world.

 

ASHRAFVAHEDNA

5:11 AM ET

August 29, 2010

Moderate Muslims?

I have been following the latest stories surrounding the proposed mosque building in NYC in earnest and it is surprising to me that the GOP still manages to paint Islam with the same ideologies as those of Al Qaeda and the Taliban.

As a Muslim who practises the Sufi way of Islam, I completely support the idea of free speech and democracy. These are the principles that have seen Muslims even elect a Caliph after the passing of Prophet Mohammed. However, the wahhabi/salafi school of thought has always tried to stifle the minds of the citizens and restrict women in their ambitions. Sufi Islam has always been against such thinking and is built on a foundation of love. Women have as much of a right to speak and become pioneers as men. The Prophet's wives have been the narrators of Islamic tradition and have also led expeditions.

The wahhabi school was invented by uneducated, ego-maniacal Arabs in the middle of the desert. Whereas, Sufi Islam was practised throughout the ages and even in Andalusia and Baghdad (cities that were known for their Islamic and scientific contributions). The greatest Islamic thinkers were Sufi in nature. Any place that has seen a rebellion against a tyrannical leader, even if the ruler were Muslim, the Sufis have been involved.

Just to put things into perspective - The mosque, if a symbol of love and togetherness, should be built and if financed by wahhabi-loyalists, is not worth it.

The Sufis love and respect other religions (as seen by the Sufi saints in India) and expect the same from others. The belief is that only love and spirituality can draw one closer to God. Not guns and bombs!! And certainly not people who kill thousands of innocents to get their voice heard!!

 

DANIELLA

1:29 PM ET

September 21, 2010

President Obama didn't

President Obama didn't campaign as a Muslim, because he is NOT a Muslim. Some people in his family are Muslim, and he was given his middle name by his Muslim father. Beyond that, Barack Obama is no more Muslim, in fact probably quite a bit less muslim than Kareem Abdul Jabaar or rezultate live Muhammed Ali . Do you have problems with them too because of their digi chosen religion?