That phrase, initially coined by British statesman Sir Winston Churchill, was intended as an aid in achieving an aim that could not be otherwise addressed. Churchill made his statement referring to the international crisis of the second world war and the need to unite and bring countries of the world together by establishing the United Nations.

Churchill’s phrase was co-opted by Obama’s Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel as an opportunity to use a crisis as a shield in addressing a political opportunity. Since that time, we have seen that concept used over and over again, not to achieve goals for the people, but to achieve political aims. Its politicization is disgusting!

It seems to be getting more disgusting every day as tragedies that strike the hearts of tens of millions of Americans are politicized and the crisis of those tragedies are being used by many on the left in an effort to gain a political advantage and/or to diminish or oust the duly-elected President. Working together to find a solution that would benefit the people has been ignored in favor of possible political gain.

The Aug. 6, 2019, issue of the NY Times newspaper had an above-the-fold headline that read: “Trump urges unity over racism”. A number of Democrat leaders, especially those who were among the presidential hopefuls, took great offense that the newspaper would print anything that was favorable to the President. They pressured the paper to take down the headline, even though it was an accurate representation of President Trump’s speech. Sadly, the Times caved in and took the headline down prior to subsequent printings. It is evident that the so-called Democrat leaders don’t want a “unity” solution; they want to keep the tragedy as a bat with which to bludgeon the President ... even though he is seeking a solution and they are not.

Many on the left and in the media have immediately placed blame for the shootings/massacres on President Trump. I have yet to hear any responsible Democrat make a statement asking for unity in seeking a solution that the people would find acceptable. Instead, we even have one local educator writing essentially that those who don’t agree with the left’s point of view “lack consciousness” and “accept fascist propaganda as true and accurate.” I guess if you didn’t vote for Secretary Clinton, that means you.

Another local “educator” who is calling for the President’s impeachment claimed that the President “... puts on a solemn, fake face of concern for the dead and wounded In El Paso and Dayton, pretending for his audience that his hate speech has not had this repercussion of emboldening racists or just angry persons with guns who can copy cat.” I read her letter looking for the word “solution” but couldn’t find it.

The mass shooting issue is extremely complex and needs to be addressed. Many on the left simply jump to conclusions without seeking out the facts. They ignore the fact that one of the shooters was, according to the press reports, a “leftist.” The other was labeled an anti-immigrant. As part of the complexity are some very difficult issues. For example:

• If a neighbor, a teacher, or friend think a person may do some harm, how can they report that to the authorities and have their identity fully protected? Obviously, if the person they report is unstable and he or she finds out the name of who reported them, is the life of the person who reported them at risk? (Possibly for the rest of their life?)

• How legally, can a physician communicate private medical knowledge about a patient? Would the physician’s life possibly be at risk?

• If you were the one that reported a person who was unstable, would you ever feel safe for the rest of your life until that person passed away?

• If a person knowingly makes a false report about someone simply because they don’t like them, and the charges prove to be false, what recourse does the innocent victim have? And, what kind of punishment is imposed on the one who made the claim?

• What kind of background check is necessary to ensure the person is mentally stable?

• How often should background checks be performed and updated on people who have been licensed?

• What kind of “home security” should be required for gun storage? Are there alarm systems that are activated each time the storage device is opened? Can that device also send a telephonic signal to local law enforcement for verification of ownership, etc.?

• What unannounced home inspections can be performed to determine if weapons and ammunition are securely stored? And, that a thorough search of the business or residence be conducted to ensure there are no other weapons or ammunition unsecured?

These things are the proverbial tip of the iceberg. We’re faced with a serious issue that needs in-depth research to find the appropriate answers. And, we need unity!

Recommended for you

(0) comments

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.