Sotomayor, single payer, engineered immigration conquest, and more

Posted further down in this entry is a miscellany of comments that don’t fit into any of the present threads.

Also, many new comments have been posted in:

Diane Schuler problem solved
Discussion on Joseph Kay and race preferences
If Darwinism is true, can a Darwinian have a desire to remain alive?

Jim C. writes:

re: “Single payer”

I think many of your readers do not understand this term—“100 percent government controlled” better describes the evilness of this plan.

Charles S. writes:

(categorized under general venting)

I am truly tired of hearing the MSM defer to endless polls and their instantaneously analyzed meanings. The last I heard, this country was not founded as a pollacracy.

Robert in Nashville writes:

The link at the bottom of this page leads to others, shows something of the organization behind the process.

Huge philanthropic interests—Ford and Carnegie, Tyson (of course) and Congress—all aligned to work for the never ending denationalization of our land. It reminds me of “The War of the Worlds” movie, with the huge machines taking out one city after another as people fled or hid, helpless.

As someone once said; If it is not a diabolical conspiracy, it is indistinguishable from what one would look like if it were.

Irwin Graulich writes:

While I am not happy about Sotomayor, she is much better than Souter who was an extreme leftist and meshugah!! Knowing Obama, I will take that tradeoff.

LA replies:

Yes. While I have no regard for her and despise what she stands for, at least she seems like a normal human being and personally likable, which makes her a big improvement over the likes of Souter (recessive nonentity), Kennedy (ditto), Ginsberg (shriveled anti-American Communist gnome), Breyer (superficial preening Harvardian), O’Connor (intellectual zero, good little girl). And as many have pointed out, given So-so’s beliefs, her lack of intellectual firepower is a good thing.

Irwin Graulich replies (August 11):

All I can say is thank God that Obama did not select Maxine Waters or Cynthia Mckinney. Remember, George Bush 1 picked David Souter for which Bush deserves waterboarding and capital punishment.

For a leftist, I actually like Obama’s selection. It could have been much, much worse.

Carol Iannone replies to LA (August 11):

Her views on race are clear and well thought out…and noxious.

Stuart L. writes:

I’ve been reading your blog for a while (every day now) and I have to say it’s been a revelation. For me your writings carry the sting of truth and it can be confronting sometimes as I’m not used to it. I don’t feel I have sufficient knowledge to post any feedback but please accept my gratitude for the effort you obviously put into this site.

LA replies:

Thank you very much.

Steven P.. writes:

Concerning your excellent speech “A Real Islam Policy for a Real America,” and the point that liberalism seeks to destroy all natural distinctions via a cult of non-discrimination:

I am reminded of a thermodynamics hypothesis called the “heat death of the universe,” in which all activity ceases in the far future because all matter has acquired the same uniform energy level. In such a future all life is extinguished. Perhaps the analogy is overreaching, but I can foresee the same uniformity and societal death as the inevitable result of liberalism.

I would posit one minor caveat to your thesis, in that liberalism does seem to make a distinction as to Western values espoused by hated “old white men.” I suppose this is just temporary, to be rooted out for destruction as the last impediment to its suicidal agenda.

LA replies:

Yes, I think there is an analogy between thermodynamics and liberalism.

Posted by Lawrence Auster at August 11, 2009 01:58 AM | Send