Conservative in Name Only (CINO)

WHAT IS TRUE CONSERVATISM?

by Thinkwell

William F. Buckley (1925-2008) is considered by some to be "the preeminent voice of American conservatism" during the second half of the 20th century

(May 5, 2010) — I can’t believe CINO-infested Townhall has allowed one of its authors, Diana West, to mention the natural born Citizenship issue.  I quit reading Townhall in disgust about six months ago because Townhall would not touch this fundamental Constitutional issue.  I found Ms. West’s article via a Google search.  Perhaps I should give Townhall another chance?

With this in mind, I just ran a Google advanced search on the phrase “natural born,” limited only to the “townhall.com” domain and found no other recent articles on this subject — an absolute zero (you know, just like the _resident-in-chief).  There were quite a few hits from reader comments, so at least Townhall is not actively squelching all mention of the eligibility issue, but sadly, it appears that Diana West is the only regular Townhall author who is willing to formally broach this important subject in defense of the Constitution.

With that in mind, I think I will go ahead with my cancellation of Townhall.com and just keep an eye out for individual Diana West articles (it certainly will keep the email inbox a lot tidier).

Anyone who seriously researches the historical Constitutional meaning of “natural born Citizen” will find that it means being born within the United States to parents both of whom, at that moment, are U.S. citizens (of any type).  Although Obama has never submitted any evidentiary documentation proving where he was born (try referring to an internet JPEG image of your short-form COLB when applying for a passport and see how far you get), the real issue is that he was born with dual allegiance/citizenship due to his foreign father.  Therefore, per the Founders, he can never be a natural born Citizen.

Until Townhall mans up and starts truly standing up for our Constitution (all of it) and starts openly declaring Obama the usurper that he is (or at least fairly discussing the issue), I will continue to look elsewhere for legitimate conservative thought (The Post & Email is a good source).

Just ask yourself, since Obama claims he was born equally a citizen of Great Britain and the USA, then he logically must be a natural born Citizen of both countries at once, right?  Of course this is totally absurd, but that seems to be what most Townhall authors would have me believe.

Good day and goodbye.

6 Responses to "Conservative in Name Only (CINO)"

  1. epicurious   Thursday, May 6, 2010 at 11:00 PM

    As I understand It, Lakin’s appearance was postponed until Friday.

  2. epicurious   Thursday, May 6, 2010 at 8:35 PM

    It will be interesting to see how Lt Col. Lakin and his attorney are treated tomorrow during their scheduled appearance on CNN’s Anderson Cooper 360. CNN has been one of Barry’s biggest lap dogs.

    I would not be a bit surprised if CNN cancels the interview altogether citing “due unforeseeable circumstances we regret…”. The last thing Barry wants is one of his tentacles of his propaganda machine to highlight the issue no matter how they manage to twist Lt. Col. Lakin’s words.

    Hats off to the Lt. Col for having the fortitude to venture into enemy territory in an attempt to make his case to the liberal trolls who blindingly accept whatever CNN says at face value.

    http://www.safeguardourconstitution.com/news/lakin-on-ac360.html
    —————
    Mrs. Rondeau replies: It’s on right now, or is supposed to be!

  3. epicurious   Thursday, May 6, 2010 at 7:56 PM

    What disturbs me the most is how complicit the establishment conservative media has been in general. O’Reilly just blows it off, Beck thinks it is an unwinnable issue, Hannity was allegedly threatened he would be fired by Fox if he pursued the issue, and Rush only jokes about it. Listen to the following audio clip. http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/201004280039

    The left has been quite effective in using Alinsky’s 13th Rule to “pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it” to paint anyone who questions Barry’s eligibility as “fringe” or as “right wing extremists”. The vast majority of the conservative media, including Fox, only has aided and abetted the left’s objective to keep Barry’s records out of the public domain.

    For example, O’Reilly and Megyn Kelly recently depicted Lt. Col. Lakin as nutcase for standing up to Barry and demanding he prove his eligibility before he follows anymore orders. It just made me sick.

    Kudos to Diana West for not falling into the sheep herd.

  4. thistle   Wednesday, May 5, 2010 at 9:40 PM

    I wholeheartedly agree with Thinkwell. I, too, have an email box cluttered with Townhall and have been beyond disappointed that they never seem to cover the most important constitutional crisis in American history. I really need to clean out my inbox.

  5. Dan   Wednesday, May 5, 2010 at 5:34 PM

    Way back in Dec 08
    http://townhall.com/columnists/DianaWest/2008/12/12/where_were_you_born,_obama

  6. slcraig   Wednesday, May 5, 2010 at 4:31 PM

    Mr. Thinkwell acknowledges what has become obvious to many of us and it makes the situation that much more devastating. We can now appreciate the the feelings of betrayal that occured amongst families during the Civil War when they were split on the issues of loyalty and support.

    This USURPATION orchestrated by the Marxist/progressive/liberal/et al cabal was not entered into willy-nilly IMO, but rather was ‘VETTED’ up one-side of the Constitution and down the other looking at all obstacles of both pulling it off in the 1st instant and making it stick in the 2nd.

    The Doctrine of ‘Separation of Powers’ is the protection the ‘0’ is relying on now that he has USURPED the Office of POTUS.

    The Courts have been put in a box over the ‘eligibility question’ because there is NO ‘administrative process’ codified other than the counting of the electorial votes by the Congress.

    In that the Congress ‘deemed and certified’ satisfaction with the count there would need be a ‘obvious and blantant’ abuse of the process for the courts entertain reviewing the correctness of THAT process. In that NO Member has come forward saying they had ‘objections’ when/if called there is nothing to hang a hat on.

    Which always brings me back to the fact that there is NO ‘Singular Legal Constitutional definition’ ACKNOWLEDGED of the ‘idiom’ of ‘natural born citizen’.

    That puts the courts in a position of having to ‘MAKE a DEFINITION that AFFIRMS ineligibility’ in order to answer the ‘POLITICAL QUESTION’.

    That is like asking them to change a front tire while driving down the highway at 100 mph.

    WE know what the specific circumstances are that are required in order to be a Constitutional NBC as intended by the Framers of the Constitution; history, reason and intellectual honesty bares witness.

    But at the moment, as far as the United States Government is concerned, there are NO DISTINCTIVE CIRCUMSTANCES that are acknowledged that distinguishes a ‘native born’ person, regardless of parentage, from any other CIRCUMSTANCES of ‘born into citizenship’.

    That makes ‘standing’ on ‘eligibility’ a ‘political question’ meant to be answered at the ‘ballot box’, insofar as the courts are concerned and lacking a ‘smoking gun’.

    It gives me NO PLEASURE to acknowledge the obstacles erected in obtaining the ‘smoking gun’ with the use of our own system of Government being used against us but before you can solve a problem you have to identify it.

    At the heart of the issue is the Constitutional definition, meaning and intent of the ‘idiom’ of natural born citizen and having that question answered, aside from and outside of its ‘political context’ is, IMO, the sword to cut and unravel this Gordian Knot.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.