The Patriot Post® · Reader Comments

Editor’s Note: Each week we receive hundreds of comments and correspondences — and we read every one of them. What follows are a few thought-provoking comments about specific articles. The views expressed herein don’t necessarily reflect those of The Patriot Post.

Re: “Biden’s Never-Ending Student Loan Emergency”

“Agreed, student loan debt incurred should be paid by the student, but without the usury/interest on the loan. If that portion, which is harmful, must be repaid, then colleges/universities should cover it. They were the overchargers of the cost of an advanced education, especially ones that were totally useless like feminine studies, etc. So they should have to eat the portion that was unfair to begin with. Persons must repay their own loans, but institutions/banks/et al. need to stop their usury. Either provide the loan without it, or don’t provide the loan.” —Ohio

“Why don’t we forgive automobile loans? People use their automobiles to drive to work. What about people who paid off their college loans and what about parents who took second jobs to finance their children’s college programs? The college loan problem began when the government took over the program. That is when the price for college began to increase and colleges and universities began to employ more administrators. This, on its face, is so unfair and wrong.” —California

Re: “Dems Threaten Filibuster, Promise Permanent Election Chaos”

“The first ‘nuclear option’ took place on April 8, 1913, when the 17th Amendment was ratified. All disjunction and partisanship in the Senate stems from that. Until and unless the 17th Amendment is repealed, nothing — I repeat, NOTHING — will reform the Senate. Senators need input from their respective state legislators to perform their duties as intended in the original Constitution.” —California

Re: “False Attacks Won’t Fight Climate Change”

“There are many hard science papers which show clearly that man-made and agricultural CO₂ in effect saturated before the 1940s. That is, doubling the present amount of CO₂ would have almost zero effect. This doesn’t mean disaster: Arid regions are greening as a result, since CO₂ is essential to plant life, and plants adapt to aridity by reducing the openings in their leaves to reduce water loss — but only if they can still get enough CO₂. This is shown in satellite imagery since the ‘70s. The net result is that those who believe in junk models (which never make correct predictions) are taking us for suckers who cannot see that they are invariably wrong. Ask our representatives, 'Just how do you know?’” —Tennessee

Re: “A Republican Battle Royale in Georgia”

“I still contend that America needs a robust absentee voter ballot system that will vet all voters of every county of the U.S. The system would ensure that every vote is valid for a given location and that location only. It would also ensure that all votes are only by valid eligible voters who are alive, and the counts must not exceed the population of eligible voters. There are probably other factors that need to be considered!” —Michigan

Re: “Senator Cruz Details Grounds for Biden Impeachment”

“I’ve witnessed one serious near-impeachment (Nixon, ‘74), one serious real impeachment (Clinton, '98), and two faux impeachments (Trump, '19 and '21). Now I candidly ask: What’s the difference? The only impeachment of any significant difference was the near-impeachment of Nixon. Most will recall Nixon resigned (displaying a remnant of integrity) rather than face a virtually certain impeachment. Clinton completed his term. At most, his apparent authority was reduced. But since he was a lame duck, did impeachment make any real difference? As for Trump, he remained as effective as possible given the animus of the news and social media elite. So if Biden is impeached, how would it help the U.S.? It might empower the Left in 2024.” —Missouri

Re: “Monday Short Cuts”

“We should all agree with Aaron Rodgers on this one. There are many issues I do not agree with him about, but on this one, he is right. Almost all scientific advancements have come from questioning the thinking of the day. The questioning of science should not have stopped on January 20, 2021. From the Wuhan flu to perceived 'cures’ for global climate change to any subject you choose, current science needs to be challenged.” —Washington