Neighborhood Ministries

The recent attempt to assassinate President Trump failed because the guy wasn’t very smart. It is the third attempt against him. It shows the difficulty of securing a public place to protect the President. This is the second assassination attempt at that hotel. The first was against Ronald Reagan. The hotel has to continue business and people are constantly coming and going and it is hard to screen everyone. In addition, the President has to travel from the Whitehouse to the hotel. It is only one more indication that we need a ballroom in the White House. A ballroom in the White House would be a lot easier to secure and not require dangerous travel. In addition, the United States is one of only a few countries that does not have a State ballroom to entertain on  important occasions. Yet liberal politicians call it an abuse of authority. They didn’t say anything when President Obama did extensive non-essential renovations at taxpayer expense. That was OK, but they feel President Trump has no right to build a vitally needed ballroom paid entirely by private donations with no tax dollars.

It is always interesting to listen to Democrats at election time. With the mid-term elections coming up, they have been loudly proclaiming their condemnation of violence in response to the attempted assassination of President Trump. It is in stark contrast to their previous rhetoric after a shooting where they screamed for gun control. It is also in stark contrast to their previous rhetoric where they told their followers not to serve anyone who wore a MAGA hat or shirt and to drive them out of their business. They have proclaimed on national television that President Trump does not deserve to live and someone should take him out. It is consistent with their philosophy that they have written into State and national laws. They first proclaimed that they could not tell if an unborn baby was a person and protected by the Constitution until it could live outside the womb at six months (Roe vs Wade). However, they wanted to continue aborting the child up until birth so they pushed through Planned Parenthood vs Casey in 1992 which proclaimed that the woman had a right to abort the baby if it threatened her happiness right up to birth and they are now pushing to extend that beyond birth for babies that manage to survive an abortion. They have pushed that doctrine ever since. Once you give someone right to eliminate those who get in the way of your happiness, it is just a matter of deciding who that person is. In addition to claiming to want President Trump dead, they have sought to eliminate him legally with attempts to impeach him on fake charges and discredit him and other conservatives through false accusations made public just before an election to alienate their followers so the Democrat candidate can win and then dropped the charges after the election because they knew they won’t stand up in court. However, by then the damage has been done and the candidate never gets to defend themselves against the charges so the public is left with the impression that he is guilty. That philosophy has also been the basis for them pushing euthanasia of the severely sick and critically injured and for denying them medical treatment. It has also been the basis for them pushing assisted suicide for those who are severely depressed. How can we trust them to defend our right to liberty and the pursuit of happiness, if they won’t defend our right to life?

There are two basic concepts of the rule of law today which are competing for dominance. There are those who support traditional views and believe that we need a police force to maintain order, support the right to own guns to protect themselves since the police cannot be everywhere at once, and the need to protect our borders from those who do not share our values and want to impose their values on us. They also believe in a just rule of law that applies equally to everyone and that there should be strong penalties to deter criminals from breaking the law. However, there is a growing belief in America that the violence we see is caused by the fact there are too many guns easily available and people should not be allowed to own guns. They also believe that our police force is racist and should be withdrawn from Black areas, though they don’t say how they will maintain order without a police force or how the average citizen can protect themselves from criminals if they don’t have guns or a police force. The fact is that hundreds more Blacks are killed by other Blacks than by police. Cutting police department budgets to force them to withdraw from Black areas has resulted in criminals taking over those areas resulting in more attacks against Blacks by other Blacks. They also believe that justice should be administered by the courts based on the judge’s prejudices. They feel that criminals are less likely to commit more crimes if you are lenient and aren’t too hard on them and that harsh penalties drive criminals to retaliate against society. However it has been shown that criminals don’t commit as many crimes in areas with strong penalties and commit more crimes in areas where they know they will not get a harsh sentence. A few days in jail or none at all are a small price to pay for what they get from the crimes.

We are seeing more of the same old narrative to create fear and division. While they scream about mass killings, they claim they need to take away your guns to make you safe. It will only disarm you so you can’t protect yourself against criminals who are still armed because they don’t obey laws about not owning guns. They scream about police brutality and claim they need to defund the police to protect you from police brutality, however it means there won’t be any police to protect you from those criminals. They claim they have to stop arresting criminals because it unfairly affects Blacks but it means those criminals will be back out on the streets committing more crimes. They prosecute those who report crimes saying we need to protect people’s privacy  while they do nothing to prosecute those criminals allowing them to continue their crimes. It also makes people reluctant to report crimes out of fear of being prosecuted. It seems like there is a pattern here. Their goal seems to be to encourage crime and violence.

It is interesting to hear the rhetoric of the media and liberal politicians in response to the response of President Trump to the killing of Charlie Kirk. They say he is inciting people to violence. Lets look at the facts. Liberals call on their followers to attack anyone who supports Trump and they should kill him. Those people have not done anything wrong, they just stand in the way of liberals getting what they want. That certainly leads people who have low self control and very few scruples against killing to attack and even kill Trump supporters. The liberal politicians and media  say their followers should riot in the streets to show their opposition to what Trump does. They feel that is all protected by freedom of speech and doesn’t lead people to violence. They say we should take away guns from innocent people so they can’t defend themselves against criminals who hide their guns so they won’t be taken away. They also say we should defund the police so they won’t be able to protect innocent citizens from those same criminals. They also say we shouldn’t punish criminals for minor crimes. We should allow them to go back out on the street where they can commit major crimes. On the other hand, we have Trump who calls on the police to seek out and arrest these people who go around attacking and killing other people, so they can be tried in court and if convicted, should be punished by putting them in jail, where they cannot commit more crimes. Liberals feel that is hate speech and should be banned because it leads people to violence.  The only ones incited to riot by calls for justice are liberals who hate police and the court system. However calling on liberals to attack conservatives does incite liberals to violence. Since it enrages those conservatives who do not like being attacked, it may also occasionally lead conservatives to attack liberals. They bring up examples where someone attacked an abortionist or an abortion clinic while ignoring almost daily attacks against pro-life pregnancy centers and Catholic churches that call for an end to abortion. It is hypocrisy to think that an isolated attack on a liberal is a threat to democracy while almost daily attacks on conservates do not pose a threat.