Skip to content

Six Detailed Responses To Comments From Our Readers

In this installment of their weekly Sunday Six conversation, PF Whalen and Parker Beauregard of The Blue State Conservative respond to six separate questions and/or comments from our readers over the past few weeks.

 #6: “I am amazed that any Republicans would vote for Biden because they think ‘Trump is mean’ and that they would actually admit to it.” (Comment from a reader regarding the article My Conditional Support For Trump In 2024.”)

"*" indicates required fields

Are you voting in the midterm elections?*
This poll gives you free access to our premium politics newsletter. Unsubscribe at any time.
This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

PF: I did not write the article to which this reader directed their comment; it was written by our terrific author John Eidson. And while John certainly doesn’t need me to defend him, I can’t help but weigh in. At The Blue State Conservative, we welcome a variety of thoughts and opinions. We’re not an echo chamber like so many outlets on the left. As a result, we publish a lot of content with which I disagree; sometimes very strongly. But unless something is blatantly leftist or alt-Right, we publish it, if it’s well-written. This piece by John is one of the few with which I agreed almost entirely.

First, to all our readers, thank you for leaving a comment. It’s important that we’re able to have a debate, and to do so in a civil manner, and comments like this one help further discussions. One thing John didn’t say in his article is this: If Trump doesn’t comply with my stated condition, I’m going to vote for Joe Biden. In fact, in John’s piece he states precisely, “If Trump is the GOP nominee three years from now, I will vote for him without hesitation. But to earn my support in the Republican primary, he will have to change.”

A phrase we hear every four years is, “this is the most important election in our lifetimes,” and I can guarantee you we’ll be hearing that repeatedly in 2024. The thing is, this time that statement is probably accurate. Biden and the other Democrats aren’t just enacting bad policies that will cause some harm down the road, they’re destroying our country. Spending, civil liberties, Afghanistan; everywhere we look, their actions aren’t just problematic, they’re disturbingly destructive. Whichever person wins the Republican nomination in 2024 absolutely must win. It’s imperative.

Is Trump that guy? Can Trump beat Biden, or Harris, or whomever in three years? Of course he can, and I know plenty of you are screaming at your screens about voter fraud right now, but that misses the point. Whoever the Dems nominate in 2024 will be extremely beatable, and yes, we need to take measures to eliminate voter fraud. But we also must have the best candidate running against them. And if Donald Trump continues making Rosie O’Donnell jokes on Twitter at 2:00 AM, or accusing Joe Scarborough of murdering his employee, he will not be the Republican with the best chance.

#5: “Two words – Hammer & Scorecard. Who YOU vote for is irrelevant. Both sides INSTALL whomever they choose to continue the racket. The entire system needs to be torn down. Tryants do not leave willingly.” (Comment from a reader in response to the article “Oh, Yoo-hoo, Stupid Republicans...”)

Parker: This comment is illuminating on a couple of levels. For starters, it absolutely captures the distrust of the bloated bureaucratic and governmental systems that micromanage us all. Between Democrats in 2016 (who, despite the recent FBI revelations of Hillary’s machination, still believe Trump was handed the White House by Putin) and Republicans in 2020 (who have much more reason to doubt the veracity and legitimacy of the results), basically nobody believes the Republic is working for them anymore. The left’s contempt is manufactured and the right’s is real, but either way it isn’t healthy for a nation.

Now in some ways, Democrats have more to gripe about than Republicans when it comes to installing the preferati. Hillary had the 2008 nomination locked up dead to rights until, as then-Senator Biden said, along came an articulate black guy, and in 2016 Bernie Sanders was robbed of a chance to be the major party’s presidential nominee. Joe Biden was hand selected to be the nominee in 2020 because he was the only one who could be sold as a moderate. Donald Trump defied all of the odds and innumerable attempts to squash his primary efforts, but prior to that we got Establishment RINOs in Romney, McCain, Bush 41, Dole, and Bush 41, so there’s that, I suppose.

There are obvious and catastrophic problems within the system, from voting to our preferred candidates and all the way to watching them lord over us, but the comment that the system needs to be torn down is the real reason I chose to respond to it. When people say burn it down, I fear the fallout of that almost as much as I fear the encroaching tyranny. It is easy for spoiled brats in America to think they know better than the Founders, but ultimately they have no vision or ideal of governance on the other end of collapse. I recently wrote an article about the limitations of pure liberatarian theology (and yes, after speaking to enough die-hard Mises folks, I am convinced it is a secular religion) and am neither impressed nor encouraged. 

Once America collapses, that’s it. There is no second chance for rebuilding based on the vision, values, and ideals of the founders. We will devolve into warring, Balkanized tribes who are only poorer as a result of the de-systemization. No one’s life will improve. On the other hand, the only real way forward is reform. The founders prepared the manuscript for about the best possible society imaginable, and it is up to us to return to that simpler construct. Might it take some protest? Some revolution? Some fighting? Perhaps a “yes” to all three; however, upon the conclusion and hopeful victory of such an affair, we must reinstall the original founding systems, not seek the collapse and destruction of this nation entirely.

#4: “I must remember that line; I was feeling the spirit and I don’t need the fun police to come in and micromanage and tell us what we should or shouldn’t be doing. I doubt that the police in Australia will ever be referred to as “the Fun Police” after all the videos I’ve seen of them assaulting people not wearing masks.” (Comment from a reader regarding the article Knuckleheads Of The Week: Anti-Censorship ACLU Censors The Late RBG.”)

PF: This comment was actually directed at one of my “Honorable Mentions” for Knucklehead of the Week last Saturday, San Francisco’s Mayor London Breed, not the ACLU. As you may recall, Breed had been spotted going maskless at a local concert in violation of her own mask mandate. When asked about her clear double standard, she explained, “We don’t need the fun police to come in and micromanage and tell us what we should or shouldn’t be doing. I was feeling the spirit and I wasn’t thinking about a mask.” 

The hypocrisy by Breed was stunning and her bizarre justification of her actions was even worse, but the point about Australia is excellent, and worthy of response. From where Breed is sitting, someone requesting that you mask up or asking you to leave a venue because you refuse to wear a mask is just a nuisance. They’re the ‘fun police,’ and they’re just a buzzkill; trying to spoil the fun. But mandates like Breed’s are much more problematic than that.

Demanding that folks wear masks, particularly when vaccines are available to virtually everyone, is authoritarian. Mandating that they get those vaccines is even more so. And once we start going down that authoritarian path, lines become blurred and priorities shift, and before we know it cops are beating people up and launching teargas at crowds for not wearing masks. It’s the slipperiest of slopes. If we keep bowing our heads and saying, “Aww shucks” every time a government official takes away a bit of our freedom, the insanity we’ve been seeing from Australia will be happening here. 

#3: “Sucks to be discriminated against, eh?” (Comment from a reader in response to the article “Extending The Logic Of No Vax, No Service.”)

Parker: Bill Murray is credited with a quote that serves me well in political debate: “It is hard to win an argument against a smart person, but it’s damn near impossible to win an argument with a stupid person.” I do not pretend to know everything, but guided by basic historical awareness, Biblical morality and plain-old common sense, I feel like I am capable of looking at the world around me and generally figuring out the right answer.

I can’t say the same for this reader.

In response to the obvious, yes, discrimination in the sense of denying equal human rights is bad. So, good job there. I can’t know for certain, but if I had to wager my first kid on the background of this reader, I’d be willing to guess it’s a woke white person. Because of their virtuousness and superiority, they know that a predominantly-white American society used to discriminate against blacks through enslavement and up through the era of Jim Crow. That happened, and it was wrong; it also happened in the past and was corrected for. We can’t do much about fixing the past, but we can ensure a better society moving forward.

Unfortunately, the religion of leftism, with its sects focusing on race, gender, climate change, and in this case, Covid, sees everything not as an opportunity to overcome adversity and forgiveness but as a chance for heinous retribution. 

This comment is also representative of the endless supply of love, tolerance, and compassion that the left so proudly champions. Entire organizations like the ACLU, instituted precisely to defend basic rights and liberty, is a mouthpiece for the left and cares not a whit for the freedoms being trampled upon at the altar of leftism. Individuals like this commenter likewise do not care that rights, privileges, and freedoms are disappearing since the reason(s) for it do not conflict with their own worldview. People like this are sad, pathetic, misguided, and the reason our country will fail.

 #2: “’44,038 Black Children killed in America’s Inner Cities between 1979 and 2013” Ever hear a Democrat cite those numbers? Me either.” (Comment from a reader regarding the article Say Her Name… Dajore Wilson! Say Her Name… Dajore Wilson!.”)

PF: When I wrote this article, I had done quite a bit of digging, and that research was very helpful in enabling me to make my points. But this reader’s comment was an angle that I missed. And while this statistic would have helped me strengthen the case I was making, it’s also absolutely heartbreaking.

For the record, I’m not just taking the reader’s word for it. I checked for sources, and sure enough, it’s correct. I wish the reader hadn’t needed to point out that statistic, and I wish that number had been wrong, but I’m glad it was brought to our attention. It makes the ridiculousness of the Black Lives Matter movement even that much more obvious.

BLM, Democrats, and all their cronies in the leftist media could not care less about black lives. Because if they did, as the reader points out, they wouldn’t be so concerned about the 15 unarmed black folks who are killed by police in a year (and ‘unarmed’ does not mean ‘not dangerous,’ by the way), they would be far more concerned about that number, 44,038. A disgusting, sickening number, and one which should shame every Democrat, particularly those who claim to be working in the best interests of black folks.

Think about how many children that is and try not to cry. There are major league baseball stadiums that can’t fit 44,038 people in it, that’s how big that number is. None of those kids had a chance to grow up. They were all taken away from us in inner cities, run almost exclusively by Democrats. Those lives mattered. The beautiful girl about whom I wrote the article was named Dajore Wilson, and her life mattered. But these radical activists don’t care. For them, it’s all about politics, and these kids are just collateral damage as far as they’re concerned. Please say a prayer for the souls of those 44,038 kids. 

#1: “George Washington mandated his troops be vaccinated against smallpox. Have you seen many cases of polio, measles, diphtheria, hepatitis recently? That’s because if you went to school these are the vaccinations that were mandated: Diphtheria-tetanus-acellular pertussis (DTaP) Inactivated polio vaccine (IPV) Measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) Varicella (chickenpox) Haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib) Pneumococcal conjugate (PCV13) Hepatitis B (Hep B).” (Comment from a reader in response to “Joe Biden Ruling Joe Stalin-Style: True Freedom Won’t Come Easy.”)

Parker: I have to say, PF, you chose the highroad on your responses. You highlighted comments that added to our points; I called out those whose owners are rubbing sticks together but not starting a fire. Everything about this reader’s comment might be factually correct insofar as the mandates really happened under Washington and that schools have many other existing vaccine mandates, but the application of these facts misses the point entirely. 

First, notice how a leftist like this has no problem citing George Washington when it’s in their favor but they would probably also advocate for tearing down his statue because he owned slaves? I am also going to cut out the GW comparison, because that was 250 years ago and limited to just his troops (which I would also have disagreed with back then).

Second, those other diseases mentioned are actually serious. This should also be enough reason for us to end the comparison but let’s keep going.

Third, as it relates to school requirements, there are still religious and medical exemptions. I see that window shutting tightly for Covid-19 vaccines.

Fourth, those are real vaccines; this jab is a therapeutic treatment. Do we mandate TamiFlu?

Fifth, we are referring to a federal mandate affecting all citizens. Does Joe Biden – or anyone –  get to decide what we all do for our most intimate medical practices?

Sixth, why can’t anyone explain why abortion is a choice but vaccination is not? If anything, the “my body, my choice” argument is much more applicable to vaccination than infanticide.

Seventh, for those wanting legal precedence, a left-leaning Supreme Court in the 1990s ruled: “the forcible injection of medication into a non-consenting person’s body represents a substantial interference with that person’s liberty.”

Eighth, I can talk to my doctor about possible side effects for those other vaccines without fear of being labeled an anti-vaxxer. Even broaching the subject of adverse side effects for the clot shot results in instant labeling and attacks.

Ninth, Covid is here to stay regardless of immunization status and arguably with more ferocity as a direct result of mass immunization efforts during the pandemic.

Tenth, either way, get used to it. Turn off the television and get on with life!

Image by Werner Moser from Pixabay