“First the Saturday people, then the Sunday people”

Legal Insurrection
"A phrase I read for the first time today, but which explains how the fates of Jews and Christians are intertwined."

"I’m surprised I had not heard the phrase in the title of this post before today.

"Though I’m certainly familiar with the concept, it’s one we’ve explored here many times when discussing (i) that the heart of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is the inability of Muslims to accept any non-Muslim entity in the Middle East, but particularly not a Jewish national entity; (b) the plight of Christians in the Middle East who are on the receiving end of what would happen to the Jews in Israel if Israel ever lost a war; and (c) the Islamist-Leftist anti-Israel coalition, in which useful Western leftists are oblivous (at best, giving them the benefit of the doubt) to the threat they would be under if forced to live under the rule of their coalition partners as they demand of Israeli Jews.

"I got to the phrase in a round-about way. First, I saw Martin Kramer’s Tweet linking to his Facebook post:

Exactly 40 years ago, Commentary published Bernard Lewis’s landmark article, “The Return of Islam.” Remember, in January 1976, the Shah was still firmly on his throne, the Muslim Brothers were nowhere to be seen, and there was no Hamas, Hezbollah, or Al Qaeda. So how did Lewis discern the “return”? He saw that regimes, including secular ones, were beginning to invoke Islam. This, he surmised, must be a reaction to a more profound trend. Perhaps the most prescient article ever written about the Middle East." . . .

 "Then I read through (skimmed parts) of Lewis’ Commentary article, The Return of Islam (Jan. 1, 1976), which is quite long.

"The central thesis of the article is that the West completely misunderstands the nature of the conflict, seeking to put it in the types of “left” and “right” disputes that dominate Western politics:"

The article referred to is posted next to this one in the Tunnel Wall:  "The Return of Islam"; prescience from forty years ago

"The Return of Islam"; prescience from forty years ago

BERNARD LEWIS / JAN. 1, 1976

Chris de Burgh Crusader live in Glasgow

"From the beginning, Christians played a leading role among the exponents, ideologists, and leaders of secular nationalism. As members of non-Muslim communities in a Muslim state, they occupied a position of stable, privileged, but nevertheless unmistakable inferiority, and in an age of change even the rights which that status gave them were endangered. In a state in which the basis of identity was not religion and community but language and culture, they could claim the full membership and equality which was denied to them under the old dispensation. As Christians, they were more open to Western ideas, and identified themselves more readily in national terms. The superior education to which they had access enabled them to play a leading part in both intellectual and commercial life. Christians, especially Lebanese Christians, had a disproportionately important role in the foundation and development of the newspaper and magazine press in Egypt and in other Arab countries, and Christian names figure very prominently among the outstanding novelists, poets, and publicists in the earlier stages of modern Arabic literature. Even in the nationalist movements, many of the leaders and spokesmen were members of Christian minorities. This prominence in cultural and political life was paralleled by a rapid advance of the Christian minorities in material wealth."

A quick run-down of Donald Trump's positions

Ed Straker  "ConservativeReview.com, which is edited by conservative talk show host Mark Levin, has emerged as a great ranking service for politicians. Recently the site ranked the positions of Donald Trump based on his public comments. Since everyone knows that Trump has spent most of his adult life as a liberal but has since recanted nearly all of his former positions, I am going to give him the benefit of the doubt and exclude any quotations over one year old. Everything you read below has come from Trump's own plush lips in the past twelve months:" . . .  Read more.

"Except for immigration, foreign policy, and energy, all of Trump's contemporary positions are more identifiable with liberal positions, which is not surprising, considering he has spent most of his life as a liberal Democrat.  Now, if you're a conservative and immigration is your number-one issue, you can still justify a vote for Donald Trump.  But Ted Cruz is almost as good – promising to build a wall, oppose amnesty, and enforce the law –  and he's much better on just about every other issue."

Americans not who Obama wants us to be

O.C. Register

A banner depicting a manipulated image German Chancellor Angela Merkel and President Barack Obama is carried at a demonstration Oct. 7 in Erfurt, Germany, initiated by the Alternative for Germany party against the uncontrolled immigration and asylum abuse.

"Have you noticed the incongruity lately? Barack Obama has taken to telling us that, “This is not who we are.”

"The presidential rebuke usually comes as a scolding for doing things that we do precisely because they are things that actually represent who we are. This appears to annoy the president to no end.

"Obama recently scolded opponents of his plan to flood the country with Syrian refugees because, he said, “That’s not who we are.”

"Of course, he’s wrong. That’s precisely who we are, as evidenced by the overwhelming public opposition to his intention to admit unvetted and largely unvettable foreigners into our nation from places on Earth where anti-American sentiment is rampant. Deadly rampant, which everyone but the president seems to intuitively grasp.

"The U.S. has long had policies that limit admission to the country by foreigners based on their nationality, ethnicity and yes, even their religious affiliation.

"One may disagree with one or more of those preferences, or applaud them as reasonable and necessary, but to deny they are not based on “who we are” is simply disingenuous." . . .

Kentucky State Democrat LEAVES The Party and Joins GOP…I Cannot “Support Obama’s Policies”

Courier-Journal:  Rep. Jim Gooch latest Democrat to switch to GOP
 In a move that further weakens the Democratic Party's tenuous control of the Kentucky House of Representatives, State Rep. Jim Gooch  has switched his party affiliation from Democrat to Republican.
. . . "Gooch said that in his final year as president Obama will belittle Kentuckians "for not understanding the 'true science' behind climate change. We will be told that 'climate change' is the biggest threat to our nation and our planet."

Proud Conservative  . . . "Rep. Jim Gooch sent a resignation email to House Speaker Greg Stumbo and House Minority Floor Leader Jeff Hoover stating this decision is “a personal one, free of any negotiation for personal benefit to me.”

"Gooch has openly stated that he “cannot support any of the Democrats running for President.”

"He went on to say, “At a recent political gathering Speaker Stumbo acknowledged that the Democrat party was the ‘Party of Barack Obama’. I deliberated that thought and I came to the conclusion that I could be a member of the party of Obama, but that I cannot be a member of the party that supports Barack Obama’s policies. The majority of Democrats do support his radical agenda.' ” . . .

CBS WYMT covers Googh here.