You miss the point, in a big way. I am not suggesting such focus would be good, I am suggesting that if, to use your example, CVE was changed to focus on just baptists because of Westboro, baptists in general would be unhappy, feeling singled out and targeted based on the actions of a tiny few. And they would be justified in feeling that. This is nothing different. Muslims, who by and large are decent, good people(just like any other religion) do not like being singled out as the threat. There is a feeling, and the changes in CVE are part of this, that they are being scapegoated for partisan gain. The problems in the US are not our fault, it is the Mexicans, the Chinese, and those damn muslims.
I don't feel I've missed your point at all. I do think that I haven't been able to articulate my point well enough to allow you to see it - which is my fault, not yours. As happens sometimes, we seem to have fallen into talking to each other rather than with each other. What I call transmission only mode.
A good example of this, is that I was not trying to portray your position as suggesting such focus would be good. Not at all.
Another example is that it's not my understanding that the CVE has identified all Muslims as violent extremists, as would be required for your Baptist analogy would require for Baptists as a whole to be rightfully enraged as you state they would be, but rather that the CVE is only going to focus on Islamist Extremists not all Muslims.
You should know by now that I'm not going to try to defend Trump for anything, yet I will support and defend policies that I feel are valuable and/or required when it comes to securing the life, health, and safety of the American people. Which is why I supported the CVE when Obama introduced it, and why I support it now. Even though the focus has been narrowed (I don't think it's a change as much as a narrowing). It's possible that later on, the focus could expand again to cover other international violent extremists.
Domestic violent extremists, as I said earlier, are already covered under the FBI's program and are not, nor should be, a part of the CVE program. Terrorists that are here domestically that have been radicalized by foreign actors or influence should be, or at least could be, part of the focus of the CVE. Currently internationally, with the exception of small areas and small groups (Christian, Buddhist, Etc.) in Africa, Mongolia, Tibet, and other minor examples that haven't shown a threat to the US, the overwhelming amount of critical warlike violence along with the most obvious threat to the US from violent extremists comes from Violent Islamic Extremists.
That's not racist, or an infringement on their religious freedom, or xenophobic, it's just fact.
Any Baptist that wouldn't be willing to assist in identifying violent extremist Baptists to the FBI should and could be held just as liable for any harm befallen innocent people by the actions of the extremists if the peaceful Baptists knew and did nothing.
The same is true for the overall Muslim community, especially the four groups that have refused to participate in the CVE program for whatever reason they use as an excuse.