Select Page

Who loves law enforcement more … Republicans or Democrats?

Who loves law enforcement more … Republicans or Democrats?

The question of who loves police more has become of the hodgepodge of conflicting claims and issues swirling in a pool of hypocrisy.  Both political sides claim to be supportive and protective of “law enforcement” as an overarching generic subject.  It is where each side stakes its claims that makes all the difference.

Most folks would agree that, in general, the GOP has been the party of law and order – tough on crime — and supportive of police and policing.  That is because we are generally looking at community policing – the hundreds of thousands of city, county, and state police officers who “serve and protect” on a daily basis. Unless you are a recluse, you see them every day.

Community Policing

On the issue of community policing, the answer to the headline question is clear.  Republicans win hands down.  The Democratic party takes an adversarial position on community policing. Democrats want to defund the police – although they are divided between those who openly admit it and those who hold the same views but refuse to admit it.  

Americans have seen seemingly endless examples of Democrats juxtaposed to the hundreds of thousands of frontline police on issues of crime and punishment.  You only need to recall Democrat prosecutors not indicting arrestees, open borders, cashless bonds, sanctuary cities, and refusal to turn over arrested illegal aliens to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).  In fact, Democrats have called for the defunding and even the elimination of ICE.  Conversely, Republicans support ICE.  

Democrat mayors order the police to stand down in the face of destructive and deadly force by rioters in America’s most liberal Democrat cities.  Left-wing rioters were allowed to “occupy” portions of the commons in those cities – including a police headquarters in Portland.  Police are forbidden to respond when harassed on the streets, doused in water or even pelted with urine or feces.  More seriously, they are restrained when attacked with rocks, bottles and even Molotov Cocktails.

When it comes to the safety of we the people in our own communities – and the police — Democrats work against the police … period.

Then there are the special instances.

Capitol Hill Police

There should be no controversy over the fact that rabid supporters of President Trump battled and injured members of the Capitol Hill police.  What we had on Capitol Hill was a rare riot by right-wingers.  That put them in conflict with the understaffed and unprepared Capitol Hill Police. 

In many ways, the Capitol Hill Police were left without sufficient reinforcements because the offers of National Guard support from the Defense Department were rejected by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi through the Chief of the Capitol Police, which she oversees, and Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer through the Senate Sergeant-at-Arms.  It was also rejected in writing by Washington Mayor Bowser.  So much for backing your police.

Though it is lost in the media recycle bin, President Trump criticized the attacks on police during the riot – saying “they are our friends.”

Even so, it cannot be denied that an out-of-control bunch of right-wing rioters did attack and injure police.  I often wonder why – when their lives and the lives of others were at risk – the Capitol Police did not use their guns.  Certainly, a number of situations justified the use of guns — and even deadly force — according to policing standards.  Remember the officer being crushed by the door?  He or other officers had every right to shoot those endangering his life.  In fact, a lot of members of Congress and staffers claim in most vivid terms how their lives were in imminent danger.

Democrats and the left-leaning media use this unique incident to counterbalance years of overwhelming animosity to policing on the broadest scale in riots in cities year-after-year.  

National Policing 

The most notable national police force is the Federal Bureau of Investigation.  Democrats tend to be authoritarians – preferring one-party rule and all power resting in a NATIONAL government run by permanently empowered elitists (aka the bureaucracy) as opposed to the federal system of the Founders (in which most power rests with the people in the states). 

Even with that said, they are fickle – shall we say hypocritical – in their love affair with such agencies as the FBI and the intelligence community.

One of the Democrats’ mantras is that Republican criticism of the major national law enforcement institutions, such as the FBI and Homeland Security dangerously undermines public confidence.  Their contention that the national law enforcement agencies are beyond reproach sounds hypocritical when you consider how Democrats and the media allies are going after the Secret Service, Homeland Security and the Department of Defense over missing phone and email records.  They spent years criticizing the Justice Department under William Barr.  

We also hear a lot about the current level of distrust of the national law enforcement community as being unique … unprecedented.  But is it really?

The FBI under J. Edgar Hoover was very controversial. Democrat leaders such as Biden, Schumer and Pelosi are old enough to remember how Hoover maintained files on major political figures for political leverage … blackmail.  

They should also be able to recall the FBI’s conspiratorial compliance with Presidents Kennedy and Johnson in going after Martin Luther King.  King once received an anonymous blackmail letter threatening exposure of his sexual liaisons if he did not “do the right thing” – a suggestion of suicide.  It was latter learned that the information came from FBI surveillance – and that the letter was by Hoover’s second in command. 

In attempting to head off impeachment, President Nixon attempted to weaponize the Justice Department.  That political drama had the wife of Attorney General John Mitchell making drunken midnight calls to reporters – and eventually led to the beheading of the Department in what became known as the “Saturday Night Massacre.”  It was an attempt to get Special Prosecutor Archibald Cox fired.

The point is that those who think the national law enforcement leadership is above reproach – apart from politics — do not know their history.  The national law enforcement and intelligence leadership all serve at the pleasure of the President.  Saying they are somehow independent agencies is like believing in the Tooth Fairy.

Democrats’ current affection for the FBI, Homeland Security and the Department of Justice is because they are doing the Democrats’ bidding.  The fact that the huge federal government can be – and often is – corrupted (including the IRS) is good enough reason to limit the scope and power of the federal government – and keep public-policy decision-making closer to home as the Founders so wisely intended.

Republicans have an uncompromised respect for the general work of the FBI, CIA, Homeland Security, etc.  But it is not unreasonable to be wary of the political leadership of those agencies.


Democrats have been using a couple of unique events to spread the narrative that THEY – and not the Republicans – are the pro-police anti-crime Party.  If you step back and look at the larger picture, it is obvious that their narrative is not true.  Republicans have the backs of the community policy.  Republicans have the backs of the rank-and-file national law enforcement agents.  Republicans remain the law-and-order Party.  And virtually every cop in America knows it

So, there ‘tis.

About The Author

Larry Horist

So,there‘tis… The opinions, perspectives and analyses of Larry Horist Larry Horist is a businessman, conservative writer and political strategist with an extensive background in economics and public policy. Clients of his consulting firm have included such conservative icons as Steve Forbes and Milton Friedman. He has served as a consultant to the Nixon White House and travelled the country as a spokesman for President Reagan’s economic reforms. He has testified as an expert witness before numerous legislative bodies, including the U. S. Congress. Horist has lectured and taught courses at numerous colleges and universities, including Harvard, Northwestern, DePaul universities, Hope College and his alma mater, Knox College. He has been a guest on hundreds of public affairs talk shows, and hosted his own program, “Chicago In Sight,” on WIND radio. Horist was a one-time candidate for mayor of Chicago and served as Executive Director of the City Club of Chicago, where he led a successful two-year campaign to save the historic Chicago Theatre from the wrecking ball. An award-winning debater, his insightful and sometimes controversial commentaries appear frequently on the editorial pages of newspapers across the nation. He is praised by readers for his style, substance and sense of humor. According to one reader, Horist is the “new Charles Krauthammer.” He is actively semi-retired in Boca Raton, Florida where he devotes his time to writing. So, there ‘tis is Horist’s signature sign off.


  1. john fudacz

    democraps are the party of law breakers and perverts ,they need to be removed from this country ! send all democraps to comunist china !where they can be locked up for being suversive to comunist laws !and thats the shit they are trying to push on americans!

  2. frank stetson

    John boldly wants to remove over 40% of the country to Chinese prisons. That’s sinful, illegal, and very, very violent. Or hyperbolic bullshit that no mature adult would condone. Joe condones it though. He’s a whore for unethical behaviors.

    Larry boldly says: “Most folks would agree that, in general, the GOP has been the party of law and order – tough on crime — and supportive of police and policing. That is because we are generally looking at community policing – the hundreds of thousands of city, county, and state police officers who “serve and protect” on a daily basis.” OK, I don’t know who “in general” is, but I am guessing that the same 40% that John wants to exile into Chinese prison camps think Larry is full of shit of this one.

    Further, after January 6th and the unfolding conspiracy, you still want to go with that? After The Big Lie, 60+ failed court attempts to prove the unprovable, a half dozen state-level recounts in a half dozen states done by Trumplicants that all failed to prove the unprovable, you still wanna go with that? After threatening holding back Congressionally authorized financial aid to extort damaging details on a political opponent OR asking for “the favor” of 11,700 votes so overturn a valid election, you still wanna go with that? Or stealing 35 boxes of the people’s papers, hiding them, returning some and saying “no more,” then we find 15 more boxes, 11 sets of classified and some with SCI level classification, you still wanna go with that…… Elephant Talk is just talk at this point.

    Where does “defund-the-fbi” fall into GOP law n order? How about “DOJ – this is war?” Is that the GOP standing firm on law n order.

    Whatta ya gonna do next: the family values party? the just-say-no consortium?

    Here’s a recent view from NPR: not quite Larry’s cup-o-tea, and you can see why:

  3. Dennis McLain

    Democrats are lawless bunch. Republicans want to keep the police funded and democrats have proven they do not. Wait until they call 911 because of a burgler and see what happens after they have defunded them.

    • Clifford mckinney

      Democrats want rid of the police and our guns. Stupid people shouldn’t be in charge

      • Frank stetson

        Well, shit, based on John above and others within, you want to get rid of all Democrats. Violently.

        Then you can do what you do best; play with yourselves. You have a very small chance of success. Very small. If you get my meaning. If you catch my drift.

        Mtg says defund the fbi.

        Tucker declares war on doj.

        Trump wants to declassify all information he takes with him

        Trump lawyers sanctioned.

        Matt Gaetz pedophile goin to jail

        Hawley gives thumbs up to insurrectionists and then runs and hides

        The list goes on and on.

        • larry Horist

          Frank Stetson … it seems your train of thought has gone completely off the rails. Do yourself a favor and stop embarrassing yourself with this drivel. You are starting read like bad bumper stickers.

          • frank stetson

            Really….first it was aimed at John who wants to send all Democrats to Chinese prisons.

            And you have a problem with my post.

            Your train of thought is on the same rails it always is. And you are the party of bumper stickers, can’t handle anything longer than a tweet.

            That’s some moral compass you have, oh Mr., in general, everyone agrees that GOP is law n order party. Some law n order moral compass you have indeed. Then, you are right I listed some of your law n order friend’s bumper stickers. But hey, you from Fl where they think it’s swell that Matt Gaetz to meet with High School students but Big Bird is bad…..

          • Joe Gilbertson

            Actually the Democrats want to bring Chinese prisons to America.

          • frank stetson

            OK Joe, that’s actually a little funny. I do remember the days we could joke like that without Larry’s constant demeaning snarkisms. Could-a added it would save money too not thaw Hunter wouldn’t have to fly Air Force 1 to Beijing to meet with Chinese authorities. Too bad Larry’s such a Debbie-downer harshing any sort of mellow whatsoever, your style of humor here is much better.

            How about this one: to relieve the Chinese-Taiwan tensions once and for all time, we just cede Rhode Island to the Chinese. Now they have even better land and don’t need Taiwan anymore. We don’t lose much, just a state that doesn’t even know it’s not an island. Our tiniest state but 7th in smallest population. Only displace a million. It’s still crowded though so they would probably accept NJ. We can give them Cape May, it will feel like home.

            None of the rest of us will be thrown off much by losing Rhode Island, I daresay no one on PBP has even been there. Nothing is made in Rhode Island, no one even has to drive through it on any trip if we just abandon 95 and use 395 instead. Largest employers are the State and the Fed, that’s a savings. CVS is there but we can just sell them to Amazon. History — ever hear of the Rhode Island Revolutionary Regulars? Nada. It’s a slave state, slave traders too, so civil war buffs won’t be upset. Heck, confederates probably hate explaining it too.

            Famous people: hp lovecraft, g m cohen, ok, they got two. Also, james woods, merideth viera, and harry anderson — they will be “classic stars” soon. Famous spots: Newport —- just move next door to Cape Cod, Well Fleet, and Provincetown, game over!!

            Yeah, I think that might solve the Taiwan problem with no major skin off our economic, cultural or historical noses, once and for all time. Then China can turn it into Singapore and our value-chain will be forever stronger! Win-win. Mission accomplished.

  4. Tom

    Once again Larry, you failed to include stats on “Independents / Non-Partisan” voters which are the largest voting block. Your blogs would be much better if you included Independents / Non-Partisan. Dems will vote Dem. GOP will also vote for its own. But the party that will win will be the party that can attract the Independents / Non-partisans. Now, many of us Independents chuckle at assessments and statements that GOP is the party of law and order and loves the police. IT would be much more accurate if stated as “GOP is the party that respects law and order and loves the police when their actions agree with the GOP and Trump.” Now we Independents / Non-Partisans have little to no voice in the current two party system and rarely get much voice in government – a big mistake by both parties. We Independents / Non=Partisans do respect the police and law enforcement agencies precisely because we have no voice or agenda. Most Independents / Non-partisans are moderates with some leanings both ways depending on the issue because we use fairness and what delivers the greatest good as our guide. We simply look towards these law enforcement agencies to uphold and have fealty to the law regardless of the party of the targeted offender. If you lump Independents / Non-Partisans into this mythical person called “generally” this is a form of misrepresentation of the full truth (as you say “step back far enough, well step back a little more and see us!) and picture, and you are using us to beef up your statements without giving us our due position within your statistics. If you are ignore us and not going to list us in your statistics then do not place us in your “generally”.

    • larry Horist

      Tom …. I hear you and your points have merit. But I think you think of the independents as some sort of third political force … or third party. Half a century of involvement in political analysis has shown me that most independents lean to one or the other philosophies — parties While they do not register with one party or another — they are sympathetic one way or the other. Especially when voting. We have two supposed “independents” in the Senate, but they caucus with and vote with the Democrats virtually all the time. How independent is that? Polls and studies have shown that the vast majority of independents vote mostly with one party or another. Less than 10 percent seem to be switch-hitters at the polls. While there are more registered Democrats in America, the independents tend to break in favor of the GOP. That is one reason why Republicans win against the greater number of registered Democrats. The folks who really disregard independents are those on the left that keep saying it is wrong for Republicans to win elections or have political power simply because there are more registered Democrats. The tend to believe that power should be distributed by the registration numbers compared to Republican registration numbers — as by the actual vote of the people. That argument completely disregards the vote of the independents.

  5. Lyudmila Loseva

    It is hard to believe that the Capitol Hill police are saying that Trump supporters fought and wounded the Capitol Hill police. But there should be no controversy that an unarmed girl, war hero Ashley Babbitt, was shot at close range by these cops, and Rosanna Boyland was bludgeoned to death by them. Cops are killers on the loose. I propose to call the day of January 6 the day of the war hero Ashley Babbitt.

    • frank stetson

      Lyudmila: IMO, Trump killed both those people. “It will be wild.” If it wasn’t for Trump’s Big Lie, his rhetoric, his incitements, they would never have been there, doing that shit, and getting themselves dead. Perhaps if they had followed Trump zealot Hawley and just given a thumbs up and then ran like hell to safety instead of storming the Capitol……..

      • larry Horist

        Frank Stetson. … Trump killed “both”? Who you taking about other than Babbitt — the only person “killed” at the riot. And if you want to play the game of Presidents killing people…. Biden has killed thousand of migrants try to cross his open border — and many more American killed by illegal aliens. How many American helpers did Biden kill in Afghanistan. Oh yeah… and how about all those Syrian migrants Obama killed when he cause the greatest mass migration out of the Middle East since Moses. I am being facetious, of course. But it makes the point.

        • frank stetson

          Oh I am so sorry Larry, I just presumed you actually read your reader’s comments. Ludie mentions “Ashley Babbitt, was shot at close range by these cops, and Rosanna Boyland was bludgeoned by them.” Perhaps you missed the hint when I addressed it to: “Lyudmila:” a trait on yours to respond to things directed to others as if they were directed to the great and powerful…

          And then you launch into your familiar “whataboutism” measuring presidential penis size, this time for murder. But tit for tat: Trump let covid penetrate our boarders, that was inevitable, but he speeded the process through his inaction and improper actions that he continued creating the largest US death count due to disease, ever. He beat the Civil War, AIDS, 1918 Flu, WWI, WWII, Vietnam, and more, much more. Whataboutism that?

          And Trump’s Big Lie rhetoric and it’s ugly Trump Revenge Tour sisters, continue to kill civilians and law enforcement combined. Here’s 54 cases of Trump-inspired violence:

          If you go through the January 6 filings, there are numerous cases of people blaming the incitement of Trump and the blogosphere for their turn to violence erupting at Trump’s rally as he sent them to the Capitol and to hell. These two ladies just caught the wrong end of Trump’s ugly stick. And you sir, should read your reader’s comments, they deserve better attention.

          I am fine with you skipping me; it’s all just demeaning name calling and not even creative at that. So, if you just want to dick about with ad hominem attacks, vapid generalizations, and complete dismissals, yeah —- I can skip that. Just not interesting.

          Again, this started because I said political warfare is not exactly new or born on Trump’s watch. That’s the apparent knot in your knickers which just seems so small. And you can’t even dispute the point. You chose this path instead.