Muslim Baptized – A.P. Fans Flames of Hatred

The Chicago Sun-Times carries a story from the Associated Press about a Muslim who converted to Catholicism at yesterday’s Holy Saturday Vigil at the Vatican. From the story:

Italy’s most prominent Muslim, an iconoclastic writer who condemned Islamic extremism and defended Israel, converted to Catholicism Saturday with an Easter vigil baptism by the pope.

An Egyptian-born, non-practicing Muslim who is married to a Catholic, Magdi Allam infuriated some Muslims with his books and newspaper columns. He titled one book, Long Live Israel.

The story includes some criticism from Yahya Pallavicini, vice president of Coreis, Italy’s Islamic religious community, ”If Allam truly was compelled by a strong spiritual inspiration, perhaps it would have been better to do it delicately, maybe with a priest from Viterbo where he lives.” That’s fine. Baptism by a pope with Vatican Television zooming in for several closeups during the ceremony is a bit out of character for the vast majority who entered the Church this weekend. Although, for a Catholic, it is certainly an incredible honor to even attend a papal mass.

What bothers me is the last line of the story, which includes no citation or source information at all:

There is no overarching Muslim law on conversion. But a widespread interpretation of Islamic legal doctrine says converting from Islam is apostasy and punishable by death — though killings are rare.

What a horrible way to end a story on a man’s baptism at the Easter Vigil in Rome. What “widespread interpretation of Islamic doctrine” could they possibly be referring to? The Sunna of the Prophet? The Sharia? What? Tell us exactly!

This one sentence is horrifying and irresponsible. Yes, there have been a few Muslims on the fringe who have acted badly in the past and done terrible things, but the overwhelming vast majority of Muslims find peace at the core of their faith, and they live in peace. Throughout history, Jews and members of other faith backgrounds have been treated far better by Muslims than they were by Christians.

This characterization is insulting, especially at a time when we need to continue to building bridges with our Muslim brothers and sisters.

Five Years Later….

What can I say? I’m told by some that 3,992 American soldiers dead in Iraq is not a bad number. After all, there were many more people killed in World War II.  I should just accept that number.  Is that a just comparison?  Is the war in Iraq at all just?

But this one really irks me….

We have spent $504.01 BILLION in Iraq so far. And John McCain tells us we should not be concerned about that.

The truth is, I am concerned, and you should be concerned also.

When you look at Wall Street, consider the fact that we have spent over $504.01 BILLION so far in Iraq, and we can’t afford that.

So far, we have lost this many soldiers’ in Iraq: 3,992.

Thus far, our Commander-in-Chief, George W. Bush, always sympathetic to the losses of the soldiers, has attended this many funerals: 0.

The Iraqis have lost 1,183,173 people, according to Just Foreign Policy. If you prefer more conservative estimates just based on news reports, then we’re looking at these figures: 82,249 – 89,760.

Our National Debt at this instant is: $9,391,442,204,727.53, according to the U.S. National Debt Clock. When you visit, the figure will no doubt have increased. If anyone has a more accurate source for our National Debt, I’m all ears.

So, here we are. I’ve heard from young people who have commented, “At least we’ve lost fewer lives than in World War II.” And somehow I’m supposed to understand what that really means.

The sad and sorry fact is, whoever wins the Oval Office in November will have to deal with the aftermath of a President who pursued a horrible policy for personal reasons. That’s it. There were no facts to back up any of the claims of this White House administration.

Policy for personal reasons — and we’re at war.

And we’ve only begun to pay….

Obama and the Complexity of Race

Barack Obama in PhiladelphiaNo doubt we will be studying this one for years.

In a 38 minute speech to supporters in Philadelphia, PA, this afternoon, Barack Obama delivered the quintessential statement on race relations in America.

He did not strike me as a giant. The cameras zoomed out slightly, Barack stood dwarfed by the two tall American flags behind him. He looked small — not the towering Obama who filled the screen at the 2004 Democratic Convention. Here, I saw man standing alone, lifting up a critical discussion on race that recently had become bogged down in careless rhetoric. I saw a man struggling with race issues so complex they have confounded this country at every turn.

It was perhaps the most intelligent and compelling discussion on race this generation has ever heard.

With one stroke, Obama embraced his former pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright and his white grandmother, two people separated by the chasm of race, yet very similar:

As imperfect as he may be, he has been like family to me. He strengthened my faith, officiated my wedding, and baptized my children. Not once in my conversations with him have I heard him talk about any ethnic group in derogatory terms, or treat whites with whom he interacted with anything but courtesy and respect. He contains within him the contradictions – the good and the bad – of the community that he has served diligently for so many years.

I can no more disown him than I can disown the black community. I can no more disown him than I can my white grandmother – a woman who helped raise me, a woman who sacrificed again and again for me, a woman who loves me as much as she loves anything in this world, but a woman who once confessed her fear of black men who passed by her on the street, and who on more than one occasion has uttered racial or ethnic stereotypes that made me cringe.

These people are a part of me. And they are a part of America, this country that I love.

They are a part of all of our families. We all have a Rev. Wright or a grandma, aunt, uncle, cousin or parent whose racist rhetoric makes us cringe. Sometimes they go too far. Sometimes they speak a truth in a way that wouldn’t sit well with many if we captured them on video and put them on You Tube.

Perhaps we’ve even been the Rev. Jeremiah Wright or that white grandma, caving in to our own fears and slamming those different from us in our exasperation.

Today, something happened that was different. Barack Obama presented to us in 38 minutes the complex problem of race in America. He took the silly discourse of the past few weeks and elevated it to a sublime oratory. In doing so, he elevated us all in the process.

No doubt some Republicans and extreme conservatives will pounce, mince the Senator’s words and serve them to their far-right audiences with cries of, “See! I told you he was black!” Obama summarized it well:

Politicians routinely exploited fears of crime for their own electoral ends. Talk show hosts and conservative commentators built entire careers unmasking bogus claims of racism while dismissing legitimate discussions of racial injustice and inequality as mere political correctness or reverse racism.

No doubt they’ve continued the attacks on Democrats, just as they laughed at us as Geraldine weighed in, Hillary countered, Barack reacted, and Rev. Wright sang from You Tube. But their laughter sounds from a lonely island. We argue at times as Democrats because we are at the table. We are having that discussion on race that Obama so eloquently expressed today. With Democrats, race is not about “them”, it’s about “us”. We may not get it right all the time, and, yes, sometimes we sound foolish when we fall, but the Republicans as a party are absent from the table. They’re not even in the same room. Instead, they are observing our dialog from afar. Senator McCain, respected as he is by Republicans and many Democrats, is watching from the outside. McCain’s party is not having this discussion — although they would be wise to start.

We need them on board with us so we can all feel the complexities of these issues together. We will never advance alone.

I’ll close with Jon Stewart, who summarized Obama’s presentation as only he can:

“And so, at 11 o’clock on Tuesday, a prominent politician spoke to Americans about race — as if they were adults.”

And we must continue the discussion — as adults.

Spitzer: “Cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war!”

Now it’s purely political.

Gov. Eliot Spitzer (D) has not been arrested, only implicated. And, yes, it’s not pretty. But, according to the Sun-Times, “a top state Republican” is threatening to call for impeachment proceedings. The “dogs of war” are ready to pounce:

Pressure mounted Tuesday on Gov. Eliot Spitzer to resign because of a prostitution scandal, with a top state Republican threatening to push for impeachment proceedings if the governor doesn’t step down in 48 hours.

The state ‘‘cannot have this hanging over their heads,’’ said Assembly Minority Leader James Tedisco.

The Republicans are making noise, no doubt rejoicing that, this time at least, it was not one of their own involved. Democrats are not doubt rejoicing that Spitzer at least was involved with a woman.

Jon Stewart had his fun this evening, and it was hilarious.

Now, however, it doesn’t matter what really happened. Spitzer must resign. He’s been in seclusion all day, but he cannot survive this one politically.

Larry Craig is still in the United States Senate. We don’t know for how long. I don’t recall hearing many Democrats recently calling for him to step down. But when a Democrat is involved, things are somehow different. Then, the self-righteous right-wing begins screaming for justice. And we usually crumble. We usually do what’s right.

Governor, it’s time to step down.

We Can’t Handle Guns

Yes, the Constitution gives us the right to bear arms. Specifically:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

We could debate endlessly the meaning of “a well regulated Militia” and whether such a thing could exist in this day and age.  We could talk about keeping guns out of the hands of criminals.  That’s all we have to do, after all, right?  We have enough laws.  We just have to enforce the laws we have and all will be well.

We could compare ourselves to other countries.  Canadians have lots and lots of guns, for example. But they don’t shoot each other the way we do.

Why do we shoot each other?  We could debate endlessly.  For all our discussion, it happened again.

Today, Ruben Ivy, 18, a student at Crane High School in Chicago was shot and killed.  The Chicago Sun-Times shows a black jacket laying in a pool of blood on the school’s front steps.

A puddle of blood and yellow police tape remain on the steps in front of Crane High School on Friday evening after an 18-year-old junior was killed and another student was beaten nearby in what police are calling gang-related incidents.

Police are looking for a male juvenile they believe is a suspect.

It happened again.   Our children are killing children.

While we debate once again the merits of gun control, the fact is Ruben Ivy will not be the last young person shot.  When children shoot children, the issues are systemic, and much deeper than guns. Some have suggested adding a $10 tax to individual bullets.

But remove guns from the mix, and what do we have left?  Imagine for an instant that we have removed guns from our streets?  What would be left that is driving our children to kill other children?  What’s going on in the big picture?

I don’t have an answer tonight.  I’m just trying to feel the question more deeply.

Missing Myron Cope

My Dad called this morning to break the news, and it felt like somebody in the family had died. Amazed at my own reaction, I realized how much this incredible talent meant to me and my family. I never even met the man, but he was as much a part of my childhood as anybody else.

Yoi.

Cope was always there. No matter what, Myron would help us make sense of it all, every game, win or lose. Myron gave us the Terrible Towel so we could celebrate, and he let us know when it was alright to bring the Towel to the stadium.

And we followed him religiously. The Steelers were our religion. Even our priests knew that in Pittsburgh, there was the Christmas Season, Lent and Easter Season, and Steeler Season. Period. Some of them even had black and gold stoles.

Rule #1: The Terrible Towel only came to the stadium for the playoffs. That was when we were all but certain we would get there every year. And when the Steelers weren’t so great, Myron was there to tell us why, “Hmmm, haa!”

Rule #2: Listen to Myron.

I waved that Towel to the sky this evening, and I wept inside. And laughed. All day, for some reason, I had Myron’s horrific version of “Deck the Halls” running through my mind.

Double Yoi!

The Terrible Towel

Thanks, Myron.

“Shots Fired!”

I cannot comprehend what it must be like for law enforcement to hear those words. Especially today, in the aftermath of the NIU slayings, the Lane Bryant/Tinley Park slayings, the Kirkwood City Council slayings, etc. etc.

There has been too much blood shed. And I think it has something to do with us.

Ordinarily, I am not one for trashing the 2nd Amendment. I do not think it would be prudent to do so. I am convinced that the problem is not the prevelance of guns, the easy availability of guns, or anything like that. The problem is that, for some goddamn reason, we are too willing to use guns on each other. We are entirely too ready to shoot each other. And this should worry us all.

Yes, I get what Michael Moore was saying in Bowling for Columbine. You may dislike Michael Moore, but don’t dislike him until you’ve actually watched this film. Citizens in other industrialized countries have guns. People around the world listen to music with very disturbing lyrics, enjoy very violent video games, live in poverty, and sex, yes, they have sex.

But they’re not shooting or killing each other at nearly the rate we are.

So what the hell is wrong with us?

Why can we not handle our guns? Why do we have to shoot each other? Why do we have to kill at such an alarming rate per capita compared to people in other industrialized countries?  Why is the United States of America the least safe place to be on Earth outside of a war zone?

Ordinarily, I’m not for gun control. Guns are not the problem, I’m convinced. People in the United States using guns at the rate we do is the problem. And that’s the problem we have to confront.

I don’t have the answer.

I just know that I knew one of the Tinley Park Five, and her loss hurts me deeply.

We have a problem, and we must face that problem honestly.

Why do we shoot so many people in this country?

Barack Prevails

This will most likely be my last post before the weekend.

Wow.  Barack cleaned house over the weekend, and very well may continue to do so this week.  I’ll resist the awful temptation to make predictions.  But I’m incredibly excited.

I’m looking forward to “President Obama.”

I know Republicans who voted as Democrats in Illinois.  Why?  They’re afraid of Barack.  One person in particular told me he hopes Hillary Clinton wins because he believes Republicans can beat her.  Pulled a Democratic ballot for the first time in his life.

And a life-long Republican colleague of mine said he’s seriously considering voting for Barack Obama in the General Election in November, should Barack prevail and win the ticket.  This gentleman is over 80 years-old and has voted for Republicans religiously his entire life.  Quite frankly, I was amazed to hear him say this.

I do not look forward to Bill Clinton back in the White House.  I think his time has passed, incredible as it was.  His place in history is firm.  He was successful.

The time has come for change — positive change, a new direction for this country.

The time has come for Barack Obama.

Yes, we can.

Benazir Bhutto Buried

Benazir Bhutto was laid to rest Friday in Pakistan as unrest continued to spread throughout the country. The government is blaming al-Qaeda and the Taliban, an assertion that is wildly premature. No one from al-Qaeda has come forward to claim responsibility, and al-Qaeda is hardly shy about such admissions. Bhutto supporters allege that President Pervez Musharraf’s government is responsible — an assertion which may also be premature at this point. From this distance, all we can do is speculate.

The larger and more alarming concern is the continued destabilization of Pakistan, a nuclear power. The questions are overwhelming.  Ahmed Rhashid of the Washington Post iterates some of the most compelling:

Her death only exacerbates the problems Pakistan has been grappling with for the past few months: how to find a modicum of political stability through a representative government that the army can accept and will not work to undermine, and how to tackle the extremism spreading in the country.

Was Musharraf responsible? Was al-Qaeda involved? These questions pale in comparison to what may lie ahead for Pakistan. Musharraf does not seem the least bit interested in establishing a democracy, and President Bush should not forget this. Musharraf is no ally — but he must be dealt with. The only route to Afghanistan is through Pakistan, and Musharraf now holds every card in Pakistan.

To his credit, President Bush called on Pakistan to pursue justice in the aftermath of Bhutto’s assassination, and to honor her memory. In a statement, Bush said:

The United States strongly condemns this cowardly act by murderous extremists who are trying to undermine Pakistan’s democracy. Those who committed this crime must be brought to justice. Mrs. Bhutto served her nation twice as Prime Minister and she knew that her return to Pakistan earlier this year put her life at risk. Yet she refused to allow assassins to dictate the course of her country.

We stand with the people of Pakistan in their struggle against the forces of terror and extremism. We urge them to honor Benazir Bhutto’s memory by continuing with the democratic process for which she so bravely gave her life.

He’s right. Musharraf would do well to bring her murderers to justice. Otherwise, Pakistan will be lost to conspiracy theories forever, and someone even more radical than Musharraf may come closer to controlling the country’s nuclear arsenal.

Thank You, Wil Wheaton

Wil Wheaton discusses just about anything on his blog, WWdN: In Exile. The one-and-only former Wesley Crusher is a Democrat, and a smart one at that.

I’ve shared before my dissatisfaction with the Democrats in Congress, their incredible failure to lead, and everyone’s dreams of living on Pennsylvania Ave. Too many of them are infatuated with the presidency, and the new Neverending Story is the campaign. Meanwhile, Congress simply cannot lead.

Hats off to Mr. Wheaton for his clarity. I couldn’t have said it better myself:

It is outrageous that Senators Clinton, Obama and Biden are asking for our votes, but are unwilling to provide leadership now. If they won’t stand up for the principles we all hold dear when they’re trying to earn our votes, how can we expect them to do it once they’re in the White House? Leadership is doing the right thing when it’s risky and when it’s unpopular. (And how depressing is it that upholding your oath of office is risky and unpopular? How doubly depressing is it that the only people who think that — and the only people being listened to — are Joe Klein, the DLC consultants, and the rest of the pundit class?)

Well, as a complete idiot once said: Fool me once, can’t get fooled again.

Amen.

Wheaton says he is inspired by John Edwards, and likes Chris Dodd. Even my Republican friends are saying we need a Democrat in ’08. But we need one who wants to work — not one who wants the White House. Showing leadership over the past several months would have been good, instead of having wet dreams about renting out the Lincoln Bedroom.