What’s the Point of Conservative Commentary? A few weeks ago, I was perusing my Twitter timeline when I came across a tweet that gave me some pause and a nugget to chew on. It was posted by a gentleman some of you may be familiar with: Terry Schappert. Terry is a retired U.S. Army Special Forces veteran who appears on Fox News from time to time. He also hosts a very entertaining show on the Outdoor Channel calledHollywood Weapons. I’m a longtime fan of Terry. I enjoy his insight and good- natured wit, and I very much appreciate his many years of honorable service to our nation. I also consider him a friend, though we’ve never met in person. We know some of the same people, share similar critical views of liberalism, and at some point we became acquainted on social media. He was also kind enough to provide me with a blurb for one of my novels, which I was very thankful and honored to receive. So when Terry weighs in with a serious point on an issue, I tend to give it some thought. And last month, he tossed this one out: I respect and appreciate the work of many conservative writers and pundits, and if your goal was to make money and write for other conservatives, you succeeded. If your goal was to stem the tide of encroaching leftism in America, you failed miserably. Now what? — terry schappert (@terryschappert) March 15, 2019 As a conservative writer myself (though for me it’s not so much a profession as it is an interest), the statement certainly caught my attention. And I assume, based on some occasional back-and-forths the two of us have had on Twitter, that the tweet was at least in part directed at me. The main point of contention is that Terry has a far more favorable view of President Trump and his reliable defenders than I do. As you may have guessed, I don’t agree with Terry’s tweet, nor do I really even agree with the premise. And I say this fully cognizant that the man I’m calling “wrong” could likely kill me 37 different ways with a stick of chewing gum. *gulp* But while I disagree with Terry’s assessment, I do understand where he’s coming from (and why many others assuredly agree with him). So, I figured I’d go ahead and address his points in a column — one that ended up being far longer than I had planned it to be (sorry, folks). Conservative writers and pundits were some of Donald Trump’s sharpest critics during his 2016 presidential campaign. They fought him tooth and nail during the election on everything from his temperament, to his lack of knowledge and experience, to his big-government ideas, to his reckless and conspiratorial rhetoric, to his chronic dishonesty, to his utter lack of personal decency. But in the end, their vocal opposition wasn’t enough to stop Trump electorally. He went on to win the Republican primary, and then the presidency. And since then, he has maintained a very impressive approval rating among his party (not so much the country) while continuing to take slings and arrows from conservative skeptics and critics on television, radio, and the Internet. Of course, these people’s numbers aren’t nearly what they used to be. A lot of longtime media-conservatives have done an about-face on Trump — many of them because they recognized the very real career risks of approaching this presidency from any angle other than fawning adulation — even when Trump and his agenda stand in direct violation of the principles they spent years and even decades defending. Still, most of those who remain skeptical and critical continue to hold (and voice) the same views on policies, ideology, and standards of conduct that they did prior to the election. And they have remained a source of frustration for the Trump faithful, even as folks like Mr. Schappert deem them largely irrelevant to both the conversation and the advancement of conservatism in this country. Again, I understand that perspective. But let me attempt to redefine the argument a bit, while addressing why I think the premise is flawed. In regard to the tweet, let’s knock out the easiest part first. Pretty much no one gets into writing conservative commentary for the money. If someone genuinely believes in and understands the societal advantages of conservative principle and practices (to the point that they’re engaged enough to actually write about it), they’re certainly smart enough to also realize that there’s not a lot of money in it. Sure, there are exceptions to the rule — primarily in the realms of television and radio where conservative sensibilities often take a backseat to partisan commiseration and fearmongering. But that’s a topic for another column. Secondly, I don’t believe that the typical conservative writer is under the illusion that he or she is going to produce such a phenomenally well-received and influential body of work that it will deal a death blow to the persistent allure of liberalism and liberal sensibilities in this country. No one can do that, including President Trump. In fact, one can make the argument that Trump significantly added to that allure on the political right by running on a populist, big- government platform that often paralleled that of his socialist counterpart in the Democratic party, Bernie Sanders. The fact that Trump is blowing through taxpayer money and racking up national debt even faster than Obama suggests the same. But let’s get back to conservative writing. Most of us get into this field or activity because we’re passionate about the issues and the nation, and because we believe we have something of value that we can offer to the conversation. That’s certainly what drew me in. My first national political piece from back in 2011 can still be found on this very website. It’s a bit rough around the edges, but it tells the story of a closet conservative who felt ostracized in the left-lurching era of Obama, and decided he could no longer remain silent about it. Even Charles Krauthammer, whom many (including myself) consider one of the greatest conservative writers of all time, didn’t start down this path believing he would change the national landscape. “When I went into journalism,” Krauthammer told an interviewer back in 2005, “I decided this is what I wanted to do. The point of it was to say what I believed, and I didn’t really care one way or another how people would react.” Krauthammer was never of the impression that he could somehow impose his views on others, nor was that his goal. He believed that putting forth honest, well researched and constructed arguments was a noble undertaking and a service to his fellow man. If those arguments were strong enough, perhaps they would indeed lead to change. At very least, they would enable receptive minds with valuable insight and a path forward, and infiltrate resistant minds with some compelling points to consider. Yes, contrary to popular belief, some liberals do actually read and listen to conservative commentators to get a broader picture of the issues and arguments (not just trash them on social media). Even I (a relatively small name in this genre) have a bit of a liberal following that is drawn to my work and challenged by my reasoning: I follow, and like @JohnDalyBooks. He’s on the other side of the political fence. But that’s why I like him. His mere presence challenges me to look beyond my own beliefs, to see and appreciate the other side of this country. Give this a read. It’s insightful. https://t.co/YPEw8W0WYX — Alice Radley (@StJohnSterling) April 11, 2019 I read your articles. I disagree w/ you on some pts, but I think you also made valid pts that I didn’t think a/b at the time.. — Lisa Wetzelberger (@LisaWetzelberge) October 19, 2017 Sure, my readership — like every other conservative writer’s — is made up mostly of fellow righties. People of similar mind tend to gravitate toward each other, and be more receptive to each other’s views. Does that mean folks like me are just blowing in the wind, preaching to the choir, and not offering anything else of use? It can certainly feel that way at times, but I’ve seen my arguments shared online and repeated enough times on competing television networks (sometimes verbatim and sometimes even credited) to know they’re being considered by a larger, more diverse audience than the keys on my laptop. I’ve also heard from enough strangers (of different political leanings) over the years, asking my take on various topics, to recognize that I’m not simply an entertainer. I also don’t believe that the legacy and influence of someone like a Charles Krauthammer can be written off aspointless because he supported the failed candidacies of John McCain and Mitt Romney, but opposed the successful candidacy of Donald Trump (and remained quite critical of him after the election). Yes, Trump won. And yes, he has ushered in some conservative political victories. That’s a good thing. By all means, let’s give him some credit and add a slap on the back for good measure. But the nature of those victories also illustrates my point. They came not through advocacy or public persuasion on Trump’s part, but rather from many years of blood, sweat, and tears from the conservative movement that forced his political hand.