WRT your first link, it concludes...
"I think it would be premature and possibly even dangerous, frankly, for us to make strong statements in either direction, or a radical policy change, on the basis of these findings," Skowronski says.
"It would be hazardous for those individuals to stop getting the influenza vaccine on the basis of these early signals."
Such signals are so recent that public health officials don't yet know if they are real or scientific red herrings. Until more conclusive evidence is established, annual flu shot campaigns will remain unchanged.
The author of the study is most emphatically not saying people should skip the vaccine.
So, what if people who get the flu vaccine more often are slightly more susceptible to the next strain of the flu turns out to be true? Does that mean the vaccine actually weakens the immune response? No. Correlation is not causation. It could be that people who self-select to get the flu are people who are in situations where they are more exposed to the flu, e.g., nurses and teachers. Much more research needs to be done as the study's author states.
WRT the second link, you linked to a crazy non-physician blogger...
Tim Bolen has been a Crisis Management Consultant in the Alternative Medicine section of the North American Health Care system for over thirty (30) years. He is a long time leader in the powerful North American Health Freedom Movement.
You know that's not real science, right?
So, no, your thesis "that for every medical professional that says that everyone should get the shot, there is one that says those with a healthy immune system does not need it" is not true at all.