Monthly Archives: December 2012

Shop threatened for selling candy cigarettes, gum

A Minnesota retailer recently got an unwelcome visit from a Department of Safety and Inspection official who threatened the owner with a $500 fine for selling candy.

The small shop – which features a retro soda fountain and specializes in old-fashioned candies – kept products such as Big League Chew, candy cigarettes and bubble gum cigars on its shelves in violation of a ridiculous city ordinance.

Apparently, the legislators in St. Paul equate the availability of these products with tobacco use among adults.

The left’s demonization of smoking extends to those selling candy sticks that have been available for decades prior. Exposure to such sweets leads to a lifelong addiction, they say, but seem to ignore any link between kids exposed to increasingly gratuitous sex and violence and similar behavior as an adult.

Two states – Maine and Tennessee – prohibit candy cigarette sales within their borders and I’m sure those behind each such ordinance believe they are protecting children. It is disturbing, though, to witness the government crackdown on politically incorrect products while ignoring the amoral culture actually contributing to this nation’s descent into mediocrity.

B. Christopher Agee founded The Informed Conservative in 2011. Like his Facebook page for engaging, relevant conservative content daily.


Failure of the Matriarch

For generations Americans have blamed guns, laws, schools, circumstances and even traffic laws for the state of their nation – none are more responsible than those most able to turn the tide:  the matriarchs.

Many have blamed psychos, gun laws, schools, local restrictions, etc… but in reality, the failure of the traditional family is the issue.

Having a strong figure at the center of  any family prevents unethical behavior much better than any dumb-ass Senator or Representative ever could, but don’t tell them that.

Congress is useless simply because they never contemplate the future of their families – not just their direct offspring, but their entire familial legacy.

All mothers worry about their children and husband – that’s close. Only real matriarch’s worry about the continuous line that represents all of her familial lines. Most matriarchs deal with 3-7 different family lines and work out how to bring them together into a singular group. They deal with the responsibility of multiple families and they welcome the challenge.

Almost no human can make that happen – save the matriarch. Women everywhere have to ask – am I that strong? Am I that woman the media makes me to  be? Or am I – the leader of my family?

To prevent evil, one has to lead a family away from it. Legislating purity is no more sane than expecting the church to insure it. Believer or not, Atheist or other – only a human connection can prevent human tragedies. The human connection is the matriarch.

Who leads your family?


East and Gulf coast ports still running, for the time being

By reaching a short term extension, a strike that would have shut down many of the nation’s major seaports on the East and Gulf coasts has been postponed.

The United States Maritime Alliance and the International Longshoremen’s Assn. have reached an agreement on container royalty fees, one of the most heated and controversial issues in the negotiation.

Employers have attempted to put a cap on royalty fees (which supplement dockworker wages) and limit who gets them. The longshoremen’s union has been against the changes.

If it had gone into effect, the strike would have efficaciously stopped the flow of consumer goods to virtually the entire half of the U.S. Talks will now go on until at least Feb. 6.

“The container royalty payment issue has been agreed upon in principle by the parties, subject to achieving an overall collective bargaining agreement,” George H. Cohen, director of the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service, said in a statement.

The National Retail Federation, which represents many of the nation’s largest retail chains, told the L.A. Times Friday that it was pleased to learn of the latest contract extension, but referred to it as only a temporary reprieve.

In the dispute, are 14 ports with over 15,000 dockworkers. The ports are among the busiest in the country.

Harry Reid, Why Are You Furious with John Boehner’s “Plan B;” It’s A Democrat Plan in Republican Disguise!

 Beohner if we must destropy nation


Harry Reid is up in arms over John Boehner’s “Plan B,”  insisting the plan will hurl America over the fiscal cliff and force the nation to default its loans.

Memo to Harry Reid: America is $16 trillion in debt. I think it’s safe to assume you leaders defaulted America when we passed the $1 trillion mark.

Furthermore, if you’re going to feign indignant outrage, don’t do it over John Boehner’s liberal Democrat actions. Boehner’s no different than you Harry: You’re both sticking it to the people!


Reid gives the finger


As to Speaker Boehner, he’s is nothing more than a liberal Democrat in GOP clothing. He has no intentions of demanding deep tax-and-spend cuts or he never would have agreed to the 2011 debt ceiling hike.  If Boehner truly wanted to cut spending, he would have called the Democrat’s bluff:  Demand they cut billions from  government-funded programs like Planned Parenthood. Nancy Pelosi’s facelift would hit the floor, but, calling for deep cuts in areas taxpayers do not want to fund is the kind of demands conservatives want, not tax-hikes on the wealthy, as Boehner’s “Plan B” demands.

Despite “Plan B” being nothing more than anti-wealth  socialist collectivism, Reid says:

Speaker Boehner’s ‘plan B’ is the farthest thing from a balanced approach. It will not protect middle class families because it cannot pass both Houses of Congress. The Senate bill is the only ‘plan B’ that can be signed into law and prevent taxes from rising by $2,200 on the average middle-class family. Now is the time to show leadership, not kick the can down the road. Speaker Boehner should focus his energy on forging a large-scale deficit reduction agreement. It would be a shame if Republicans abandoned productive negotiations due to pressure from the Tea Party, as they have time and again.


Give me a break! John Boehner lays down and rolls over for Obama and spending hikes like a Paris Hilton sex video!

I’m surprised Harry Reid isn’t praising “Plan B;” it’s progressive Democrat legislation: More tax-and-spend hikes on millionaire earners that will trickle down to the middle class, creating more job and business losses and more government dependency.

Reid is angry. He  says “John Boehner seems to care more about keeping his speakership than keeping the nation on firm financial footing.” If I didn’t know better I would say Harry was talking about himself and every other leader serving unconstitutional life terms.

Its obvious Harry Reid doesn’t spend much time around Speaker Boehner or Reid would realize they are two of a kind:  They care more about their careers than serving the country and fixing America’s economy.

Reid and Boehner

Still, Reid is in a huff over Boehner’s tax-hiking fiscal cliff standoff.  As if any legislative standoff will stop the bill-shoving Obama from hiking taxes on   American earners in 2013.

Reid blames Boehner, insisting he is pushing America over the fiscal cliff with a plan that terminates Bush-era tax-cuts to those earning $250,000 and under. Reid says this debacle could be avoided if only Boehner would concede to Senate legislation.  Political translation: Concede to Harry Reid. America’s dilemma: All Boehner ever does is concede.

America has a debt crisis both parities contributed to.  None of these spendaholic leaders ever admits that America goes over the fiscal cliff every time the Federal Reserve cuts interests rates too low, over prints worthless paper, and the federal government over spends, lends and borrows what it cannot repay.

That didn’t stop Reid from calling Boehner a “dictator” who won’t go against the GOP, because Boehner caterers to his fellow Republican leaders:

The American people I don’t think understand the House of Representatives is operating without the House of Representatives. It’s being operated by a dictatorship of the speaker, not allowing the vast majority of the House of Representatives to get what they want…If the 250 [cut-off for income tax votes] were brought up, it would pass overwhelmingly.


Furthermore, Reid insists “what goes on [in the GOP] shouldn’t be decided by the majority, it should be decided by the whole House of Representatives.”

Reid never made that statement when Nancy Pelosi was Speaker of the House. Nor will Reid admit his statements reflect the way President Obama pushes bills into law without a “majority” Congressional consent.

As to dictators, most leaders in Washington are dictators, the reason many Americans dislike the modern-day government. Both parties have become power-grabbing life-termed aristocrats who care more about party loyalty than working to preserve, uphold, and defend the Constitution.  That’s why the Tea Party started.

Reid himself  admitted to the Senate that conservatives are sick and tired of Boehner:

He has so many people over there [in the GOP] that won’t follow what he wants, That’s obvious from the debacle that took place that week [with Tea Party leaders saying no to “Plan B”]. And it was a debacle. It was so bad, he was in such difficult shape there, he wouldn’t even allow a vote to take place with his Republicans because he knew he would lose.


Boehner cartoon


Conservative House members are furious with Boehner because he silenced their votes, removed their committee seats, trashed the Tea Party, and acts like Harry Reid:  He legislates as Democrat and compromises to Obama.

Boehner has not presented one, single plan that significantly cuts spending, decreases the deficit, and reduces taxes for every American.

According to The Economist:  

“Plan B” is a bill that hikes taxes only for income over $1 m[illion] per year, with no other spending measures or tax compromises…Mr. Boehner’s Plan B is an attempt to defray blame for the fiscal cliff onto Democrats, but if the country actually goes over the cliff, Plan B is unlikely to shield Republicans. Pressure from business groups and from taxpayers to reach a compromise deal before the economy suffers serious damage will become immense.


Hiking taxes on millionaires will crush middle class businesses that earn $1-$5 million before taxes. “Plan B” is another compromise for government programs to continue spending billions through taxes and  increasing debt as America defaults.

Both Reid and Obama should be jumping for joy; John Boehner has been a gift to the DNC: He’s just like Harry Reid, a liberal Democrat.






PETA targets town’s New Year’s tradition

For about 20 years, residents of a small North Carolina town have welcomed each new year with an unorthodox substitute for the iconic New York City ball drop.

Slowly lowering a plexiglass box containing a live marsupial, locals look forward to the yearly “Opossum Drop” celebration.

Leave it to the dunderheads associated with People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals to target any event – even without any evidence of mistreatment – involving the use of a live animal.

PETA filed a lawsuit against the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, alleging the agency should not have issued a permit to organizers of the ceremony. A judge agreed with PETA in his ruling, noting individuals “are prohibited from capturing and using wild animals for pets or amusement.”
Though there is no evidence anyone complained about the opossums’ treatment during the drop, a PETA spokesperson contended locals can “ring in the new year” without “dangling a small, timid and terrified wild animal over a boisterous crowd and exposing him to bright lights, fireworks, and other frightening noises.”

Judging by the number of dead opossums I’ve seen along this nation’s highways, I’d submit the bright lights and frightening noises that truly threaten these animals belong to cars and trucks.

Still, coordinators say the event will continue, though a stuffed opossum – or possibly one scraped from a nearby road – will take the place of a live specimen.

Of course we should respect animals and do what we can to protect their habitats, but the lengths radical groups like PETA will go in order to spread their message sullies any worthwhile cause animal rights activists support.
B. Christopher Agee founded The Informed Conservative in 2011. Like his Facebook page for engaging, relevant conservative content daily.

Do Parents who Choose Life over Abortion Deserve Tax Break For Unborn Child

Women who had abortions - protesting to protect unborn life

Women who had abortions – protesting to protect unborn life

As the year 2012 closes, there are millions of parents across the nation who should be realizing a tax break for their unborn child.  If their state follows Michigan’s lead which is considering granting parents that chose preserving a child’s life in the womb deserves a financial break.  For several weeks Michigan GOP legislators have been seriously contemplating granting a tax credit for parents of fetuses that are twelve weeks or older, according to the publication, the New Civil Rights Movement.

Liberals in the state legislature immediately jumped on the notion of granting an economic benefit for those cash-strapped parents who may be hit with higher taxes next year. They, like many parents across the nation are worried about the congress and the president being hopelessly deadlocked in ‘fiscal cliff ‘negotiations that will possibly add an additional $2,300 – $3,500 tax bill to their household. Why are Democrats worried about granting a tax break for middle-class families? Does it make sense to you?

Parents that have chosen protecting a child’s life over aborting the child should be a cause for celebration and why not reward the expectant parents with a tax break and legislators with re-election!  State legislatures across the nation are moving to strengthen the opportunity for an unborn child to hold onto their right to life, as abortion numbers continue to fall in America.

In 2009, which is the last year for reported abortion numbers, “A total of 784,507 abortions were reported to CDC for 2009. Of these abortions, 772,630 (98.5%) were from the 45 reporting areas that provided data every year during 2000–2009, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.”

The value of life in the womb is gaining traction.  And these future parents deserve to be helped and not spurned by liberal and anti-life supporters.  Millions of families that are seeing their bills continue to increase, and it becomes more difficult to make their shrinking paychecks stretch.  A tax break for their unborn child, could be passed in early 2013 and have retroactive impact on 2012 income.

Is this legislation extreme as many liberals have claimed, who are concerned about the possibility that an unborn child just might be granted “personhood rights” rights? The director of Progress Michigan, Zack Pohl, called the pro-family legislation a back door way of, “passing extreme personhood legislation.”

How can it be extreme to grant a young struggling family the right to take advantage of the tax system that could grant them the benefit of putting a little more in their budget to pay for items necessary for the support of their expected child?


How can  liberals like Obama, force Catholic institutions like Georgetown pay for Law student Sandra Fluke’s abortion pills, but liberal leaders like him them not support tax-breaks for struggling parents of an unborn child?

With the fortieth anniversary of the U.S. Supreme Court Roe V. Wade decision coming in May of 2013, it seems more than ironic, that these same anti-life pro-choice forces are looking for yet another way to deprive a mother and father of a benefit of bringing a life into the world.

These liberal leaders know what you already know in your heart and in your gut. An unborn child is not just a mass of tissue, but is life, feels pain and suffers when harmed.  Examine for yourself, the state of law in America, concerning the status of an unborn child being carried in the womb of a mother. You determine if granting tax privileges for an unborn child is wrong.

An unborn child is considered a person under the law, when the mother is attacked and the attack results in the death of the unborn child. The laws which give legal human status to a murdered unborn child are called “feticide” laws. As a matter of law, the fetal homicide is considered a separate and distinct criminal act which exists aside from an attack and possible harm to the mother.

Therefore, the unborn child already has legal status, and that legal status is protected by law in 38 states in America. Twenty three states go even further in granting legal right-to-life protection for the unborn child from harm. These states provide, “fetal homicide laws that apply to the earliest stages of pregnancy including ‘any state of gestation,’ or conception,” according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

So where is the debate and where is the harm in granting a mother and father a tax benefit for their child, in any state, be it Texas, Ohio, Montana, Tennessee, Kentucky or any other? Abortion activists have claimed that granting “special rights” to the unborn child would take away a mother’s flexibility to strip an unborn child’s life from its body as the Roe v Wade decision permits. How ironic that the mother can harm and impede the life of her child.

The congress has already set the table for protecting the unborn child’s right to be defended against harm, with passage of the 2004 Unborn Victims of Violence Act. When President George W. Bush signed the legislation into law, it recognized:

A “child in utero” as a legal victim, if he or she is injured or killed during the commission of any of over 60 listed federal crimes of violence. The law defines “child in utero” as “a member of the species Homo sapiens, at any stage of development, who is carried in the womb.”

If a child is considered a legal victim and is, “a member of the species Homo sapiens, at any stage of development, who is carried in the womb,” then why shouldn’t the 49 other states in the nation, and Michigan, take the next logical step and pass a law granting parents the right to a tax break for their unborn child?

Make 2013, a year of celebration for the truth about unborn life. Life is more than a heartbeat.  Life is a child, a future that deserves a choice.  Join the effort locally to protect the parent’s choice by supporting their right to a tax break for their unborn child.  After all, each precious unborn child is a “member of the species Homo sapiens.”  We all are…born and unborn!

( click – let me know what you think )


Won’t You Come Home Bill Bolling?

Hugging Obama: the first step toward renouncing the Republican party.

Virginia’s Lt. Governor Bill Bolling is going to have to lose a considerable amount of weight and drastically increase his time on the tanning bed to physically resemble Charlie Crist, but Bolling’s ideological transformation is coming along nicely.

For those who don’t follow Florida politics, Charlie Crist is the former Republican governor who intended to be the state’s new US senator in 2010. When Crist announced he was well known and could raise money — music to establishment Republican ears. Crist was immediately endorsed by the National Republican Senatorial Committee in an effort intimidate potential primary competition.

Life was good! Crist had essentially been handed the nomination. Time to order some staffer to start measuring for new drapes in his senate office. Except Marco Rubio decided to enter the race. Rubio had everything going against him but the voters.

Crist wasn’t worried at first. But as the campaign continued, FL voters decided Crist was too cozy with Obama and lacked conservative commitment. Rubio won the primary and in a fit of pique, Crist changed his registration to Independent and ran as a spoiler.

Rubio beat him and the Democrat both.

Really angry and wanting to “lash out” (thank goodness there weren’t any “assault rifles” handy!), Crist endorsed Obama in 2012. And he just made the news by changing his party affiliation to Democrat. Proving Republican voters were correct all along.

Bolling’s situation is quite similar. In 2009 he was in his first term and Bob McDonnell was the Attorney General. Both wanted to run for governor, but Bolling didn’t want a fight — something that appears to be characteristic. As Pope Alexander IV divided the world between the Spanish and the Portuguese — McDonnell divided the top Virginia offices between himself and Bolling. McDonnell ran for governor and promised to support Bolling in 2013.

Unfortunately, the nomination is not McDonnell’s to confer. The wealthy may be able to hand political office from relative to relative in Massachusetts, hence the “Kennedy” senate seat, but Virginian’s don’t cotton to inheriting office.

Like the English in Pope Alexander’s time, Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli ignored an agreement he was not party to and worked to secure the nomination. He packed the GOP central committee with his supporters. After Cuccinelli announced, the committee changed the nomination process from a primary election to a convention.

At which point Bolling avoided another fight and dropped out in the belief he could not win a convention in which strong grass–roots support is a crucial factor.

Cuccinelli is not without sin in this saga. Ken initially promised voters he would run for re–election, which I thought was an excellent idea. He broke that promise when he announced for governor, but as former Texas Gov. Bill Clements once said in connection with a lie he told, “Well, there never was a Bible in the room.”

Few Republicans are as popular with liberals and their media choir as establishment Republicans defeated by a conservative. All it took for Bolling to become a statesman was for Cuccinelli to run him out of the primary. Now he is another unfortunate establishment moderate who — according to the media — is the best general election candidate. Unfortunately he can’t win a primary dominated by the right wing.

What’s wrong with mouth–breathing TEA party types? Didn’t they see how successful Republicans were with John McCain, George Allen and Mitt Romney?

Predictably, Bolling is now “growing in office” as he starts emerging from his “Cristsalis.” Bolling has come out and opposed uranium mining in Virginia because he agrees with “environmentalists” that it will create a hole in the ground. After the Newtown elementary school shooting, Bolling broke with McDonnell and opposed even researching the possibility of arming school staff. And Bolling warns he will be an “independent voice” during the 2013 gubernatorial campaign.

All that’s left for Bolling is to “evolve” his views on homosexual marriage and schedule a big hug photo op with Obama. Then he’s free to enter the race as an independent and undermine Cuccinelli’s candidacy.

Only Bolling won’t really be running as an Independent. He’ll be running as a Petulant. Nothing prevented Bolling from putting his supporters on the central committee. He wasted eight years instead of building a strong grass–roots organization. Bolling’s problem isn’t Cuccinelli or conservatives; it’s inertia.

Why Republicans must change to survive (let alone to win again)

The GOP is in disastrous shape now, even a worse shape than in 1964 or 1974. As of today, it has lost 4 of the last 6 presidential elections by large EC vote margins and has lost the popular vote 5 out of 6 times. The most recent GOP President, George W. Bush, won reelection by the smallest margin of any reelected President in US history, 286-252. Eighteen states that collectively have about 240 EC votes have voted Democratic in each of the last 6 presidential elections, from 1992 to 2012. Three of the nation’s seven mega-states – California, Illinois, and New York – are safely Democratic. Pennsylvania has voted Democratic in each of the last 6 presidential elections; it has not voted Republican since 1988. Ohio and Florida are swing states, and Republicans have not won either of them since 2004.

Only Texas remains secure – for now. But whites are already a minority in Texas. When the Lone Star State is lost, America will be irrevocably lost.

By contrast, the GOP was not in such dire straits in 1964 or 1976.

In 1964, it did suffer a worse defeat, but that one was entirely avoidable if Republicans had not nominated Barry Goldwater. And it had won three of the previous 4 presidential elections, including the 1960 election, which JFK “won” solely due to vote fraud in Cook County and Texas.

In 1974, the GOP was defeated in the Congressional midterms, but its 1976 presidential election loss was by a slight margin. Had a few states where the election was decided by less than 1% of the vote had voted Republican, Jimmy Carter would’ve lost it. And even though he won, he could muster only 51% of the vote in an environment marked by Watergate, defeat in Vietnam, inflation, and a stagnant economy. And the GOP had won 4 of the previous six presidential elections (or 5 if you count that of 1960), all of them except the 1968 election won by a landslide. Indeed, just 4 years before, the GOP had won the presidential election by one of the largest blowouts in American history. Furthermore, in both cases, the electorate was predominantly white.

This year, Republicans badly lost what should’ve been a winnable election. Barack Obama won 7 of the 9 swing states he had won in 2008 (all but North Carolina and Indiana) and won the EC vote 332-206. Republicans won no Senate seats on net, and actually lost two, thanks in part to nominating extremist candidates like Todd Akin and Richard Mourdock who beat far more electable Republicans (John Brunner, Sarah Steelman, and Richard Lugar) only to go on to lose the general election by a landslide. The GOP has also lost seats in the House and now retains only a slim minority.

And looking ahead, the Party’s prospects for Senate seat pickups are dim. Only the seats currently held by Jeff Merkley, Jay Rockefeller, and Mark Begich are realistically winnable as of today – and only if Republicans nominate electable candidates (Greg Walden, Shelley Capito, and Mead Treadwell, respectively).

Why have Republicans lost this election so disastrously, and how can the GOP win future elections?

There is no single answer to the first question, because many factors colluded to give Obama a victory: a friendly media, a better GOTV machine, a largely uninformed electorate (a large portion of which is dependent on the government and has an incentive to vote for Big Government politicians), and more.

But the biggest factor was demographics. And demographics is destiny.

Today, whites constitute only 72% of the electorate and 65% of the population. Blacks constitute 13% of the electorate; Latinos, 10%; Asians, 2-3%. In some states, such as California, Texas and New Mexico, whites are already the minority.

Obama got the majority of his votes from minorities, and won these minority groups by huge margins: 90% of the black vote, 71% of the Latino vote, and over 70% of the Asian vote. The GOP received 90% of its votes from whites – a shrinking majority that is on course for minority status by 2050.

It has been said that “Europe will be Islamic by the middle of the century.” The US will be Hispanic by that time.

Obama also received the majority of the female vote and a large majority of the youth’s vote. Old Republicans are dying out and being replaced by young, mostly Democrat, voters.

And why is the GOP not winning these groups’ votes? Contrary to what some fringe groups and activists may tell you, it’s because the GOP advocates, on some issues, policies that repel the vast majorities of these groups. Policies which these groups, and indeed, a vast majority of all Americans, oppose by large margins.

Take Hispanics, for example. Some columnists, such as Mark Krikorian, Ramesh Ponnuru and John O’Sullivan, falsely claim that Hispanics don’t really care about immigration and instead care about the issues that most Americans consider most important – the economy, jobs, healthcare, and the budget deficit.

This is not true. While immigration is not THE single most important issue for Hispanics, it is nonetheless an important issue for them. And on that issue, the vast majority (77%) of Hispanics strongly oppose the GOP’s official policy. Here’s what a post-election Pew Hispanic poll said on the subject:

“Throughout this election cycle, the issue of immigration has been an important issue for Hispanics. In the national exit poll, voters were asked about what should happen to unauthorized immigrants working in the U.S. According to the national exit poll, 77% of Hispanic voters said these immigrants should be offered a chance to apply for legal status while 18% said these immigrants should be deported. Among all voters, fewer than two-thirds (65%) said these immigrants should be offered a chance to apply for legal status while 28% say they should be deported.”

See? 77% of Hispanics want illegal immigrants to be legalized; only 18% say these people should be deported. But most importantly, 65% of all Americans – a staunch majority – agree with 77% of Hispanics on this, while only 28% support a mass deportation policy.

Things are actually worse for the GOP than that: Hispanics, even those who are US citizens, consider an attack on immigrant an attack on themselves. Thus, it’s not just the GOP’s policies but also its language that repel Hispanics.

And the Latino vote clearly cost, or greatly helped cost, the GOP the crucial swing states of Nevada (6 EC votes), Colorado (9), Florida (29), and Virginia (13), as well as putting New Mexico (6) out of reach for Republicans. Had those five states voted for Romney, he would’ve won 269 EC votes, and get elected President by the Republican-controlled House.

Latinos are hardly the only way the GOP has alienated. Republicans have also offended the ladies by adopting extremist stances on abortion, thus playing nicely into the (false) Democrat narrative of a “Republican war on women”. This started when Virginia legislators, led by single-issue anti-abortion-crusader Delegate Robert G. Marshall passed a bill (signed by Governor Bob McDonnell) requiring every woman wanting to obtain an abortion to undergo a vaginal ultrasound. Then, Missouri Republicans (and Democrat plants in the open MO primary – when will Republicans learn that they need to hold closed primaries?), helped by Mike Huckabee nominated anti-abortion-crusader Todd Akin, whom Democrat incumbent Claire McCaskill correctly considered to be the weakest candidate, instead of nominating a across-the-board conservative like John Brunner or, even better, Sarah Steelman (endorsed by Sarah Palin). Republicans initially denounced him, but he refused to withdraw from the race, and Republicans eventually adopted his (and Marshall’s) policy of seeking to ban abortion in all cases – including rape, incest, and the life of the mother – as their official party policy, inscribed into the GOP platform.

So, while the GOP was denouncing Todd Akin’s remarks, it was simoultaneously inscribing his policy into the party platform.

Then, Richard Mourdock opened his mouth and said to women, “Don’t worry about that getting pregnant thingy, because if you get pregnant as a result of rape, that is a gift from God!”

This allowed the Dems to slight all Republicans across the country by warning voters that if they vote for this or that Republican, they’ll be voting for the party of Todd Akin and Richard Mourdock. This hurt Republicans across the country and lost several winnable races – not just those in MO and IN.

The result? Women could not run away from the GOP fast enough.

In every state that Romney lost, he also lost the female vote, in most cases by a large margin. Even in NC, where he won overall, he lost the female vote.

It’s not surprise, because women are the majority of voters in this country. Alienate a majority of them, and you will lose.

And yes, contrary to what radical religious Republicans will tell you, most women support a pro-choice position and consider this issue important. Right or wrong, they do.

Indeed, according to the most recent Gallup poll on the subject, 54% of all Americans consider themselves pro-choice.

And 75% of all Americans support maintaining abortion’s legality in cases of rape, incest, and the life of the mother.

The electorate will never support, and no state legislature will ever pass, a law requiring a woman to bear the child of her rapist.

Again, Republicans are advocating a policy that a vast majority of Americans oppose. No wonder why they’ve lost 4 of the last 6 presidential elections.

Finally, there’s American youth. They are less religious and less traditionalist than any previous generation of Americans. While they may be fiscally conservative, they are socially liberal and consider “socially conservative” policies such as banning abortion and gay marriage to be inconsistent with the GOP’s self-proclaimed principle of limited government.

Obama’s presidency has been a disaster for them. The youth unemployment rate is in the double digits, and Obama has accumulated a huge public debt that these young people – not their parents or grandparents – will have to pay back, with interest.

But Republicans have failed to seize the moment. They have alienated young people with their extremist policies and self-righteous pontification about abortion (see above) and gay marriage. The problem is not just the policies Republicans advocate, but also the fact that when Republicans talk about these issues, they sound like pompous, self-righteous prigs.

65% of all Americans, including a solid majority of youngsters, support allowing gays to marry. The public’s attitude towards this issue has changed significantly since 1996. It’s a losing issue for Republicans these days (as is abortion). Hence why it has already been legalized in several states by legislatures and in two by referendum.

The American electorate has changed beyond recognition since 1980, but the GOP hasn’t changed with it.

And so, young Americans, who would’ve otherwise been natural Republican voters (if they are really fiscally conservative – this is not yet clear), couldn’t run away from the GOP fast enough.

Looking ahead, what should the GOP do?

Firstly, it needs to state clearly that it is a party of limited Constitutional government, free market economic policies, fair trade, and a strong national defense. Period.

Secondly, Republicans should drop the gay marriage issue. Now. There is zero evidence that allowing gays to marry somehow harms the institution of marriage. It is divorce (predominantly no-fault divorce, pioneered by California) that really threatens marriage: America has a sky-high divorce rate, the highest in the world. Divorce, breaks up families with disastrous results for everyone.

At minimum, Republicans should adopt a federalist position on gay marriage, i.e. say that it should be decided by the states.

Thirdly, on abortion, Republicans should also adopt a federalist position, i.e. leave it to the states, and at the state level, say that they support an exception for rape, incest, and the life of the mother. This should be written into the GOP platform to make clear that it’s the official GOP policy.

Fourthly, on immigration, Republicans should support the legalization of illegal immigrants who have not committed crimes other than immigrating illegally, coupled with securing the border with a fence, a virtual fence, and making the E-Verify program obligatory. Simoultaneously, immigration laws need to be reformed so as to bring in (indeed, attract) bright, well-educated, productive people to the US while ending the cretinous policy of letting in huge numbers of unskilled relatives of US citizens (extended families). Only spouses, fiance(e)s, and children of US citizens should be let in. Otherwise, the only way to immigrate to the US should be to have at least a Master’s degree and/or some years of experience in an occupation, science, or art in demand in the US.

Currently, if you have a relative in the US, you can immigrate easily, but if you don’t, your chances are slim, even if you have a PhD in computer science and an IT or computer games company wants to hire you. If that company petitions to get you a visa, you’ll have to wait 5 or more years for it. In that time, the company could go out of business, and in the meantime, you need to feed yourself.

The US should stop importing unskilled relatives of US citizens who are a burden on taxpayers, but extend a warm welcome for skilled, self-supporting people.

Fourthly, the GOP needs to diversify its ranks and its leadership. Yes, this is “identity politics”, but it works. One of the reasons  minorities vote for Democrats is because the Dems nominate minorities for high positions. They have nominated a black for President, and in 2000, they nominated a Jew for Vice President.

Republicans, by contrast, have never nominated anyone but a white for President or Vice President, anyone but a white man for the highest office in the land, and only one woman (Sarah Palin) for Vice President. Minorities will not vote for Republicans if the top tiers of the party’s nominee crop and its leadership remain an exclusive club for whites.

And no, Republicans don’t have to adopt an affirmative action policy to change this. There are plenty of qualified Republicans who can lead the party. They include Hispanics Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz, Brian Sandoval, and Susana Martinez; Indian Americans Bobby Jindal and Nikki Haley; and women such as Martinez, Jindal, and Kelly Ayotte. All of whom except arguably Sandoval, are conservatives.

So the good news is that Republicans can still win elections and can still become a majority party. But it’s imperative that they drop losing positions on losing issues and make amends with Hispanics, women, and young voters. Before it’s too late.

Feinstein releases more information on proposed gun ban bill

Sen. Dianne Feinstein has been working furiously on new gun ban legislation ever since 2004 when the previous Clinton weapons ban expired.

Dianne Feinstein assault gun weapons ban

Dianne Feinstein assault gun weapons ban

Some information has slowly surfaced about her proposed gun ban bill, and now, the Senator’s office has released a summary including some information that many gun owners should find alarming:

  • Bans the sale, transfer, importation, or manufacturing of:
    • 120 specifically-named firearms;
    • Certain other semiautomatic rifles, handguns, shotguns that can accept a detachable magazine and have one or more military characteristics; and
    • Semiautomatic rifles and handguns with a fixed magazine that can accept more than 10 rounds.
  • Strengthens the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban and various state bans by:Bans large-capacity ammunition feeding devices capable of accepting more than 10 rounds.
    • Moving from a 2-characteristic test to a 1-characteristic test;
    • Eliminating the easy-to-remove bayonet mounts and flash suppressors from the characteristics test; and
    • Banning firearms with “thumbhole stocks” and “bullet buttons” to address attempts to “work around” prior bans.
  • Protects legitimate hunters and the rights of existing gun owners by:
    • Grandfathering weapons legally possessed on the date of enactment;
    • Exempting over 900 specifically-named weapons used for hunting or sporting purposes; and
    • Exempting antique, manually-operated, and permanently disabled weapons.
  • Requires that grandfathered weapons be registered under the National Firearms Act, to include:
    • Background check of owner and any transferee;
    • Type and serial number of the firearm;
    • Positive identification, including photograph and fingerprint;
    • Certification from local law enforcement of identity and that possession would not violate State or local law; and
    • Dedicated funding for ATF to implement registration.

The last paragraph is last for a reason. The Senator knows that registering currently legal firearms could only be desired for one reason: confiscation. A large segment of the American population would never want the government learning what guns they do or don’t have. Look at the outrage in New York when a liberal newspaper released the names and addresses of all gun permit holders in some counties.

Privacy, individual rights, basic human rights – call it what you will. The government has no right to know what we do in our homes unless a crime is committed.

The ATF is not currently informed of the type and serial number of a firearm bought by citizens. The identifying characteristics of the gun are NOT read to the FBI when a background check is performed by a licensed gun dealer. The purpose of the background check is only to insure that the purchaser is legally able to own a firearm – not inform the government of the particular firearm they purchased.

The transfer of the firearm is kept by the individual federal firearms licensee (FFL). Those records are not given to the government unless necessary in an investigation. Requiring that these purchases are registered with the government is unthinkable and eerily equivalent to an invasion of privacy or search without warrant. If I have not committed a crime, there is no probable cause allowing anyone to know what firearms I may or may not have.

Pure and simple, this is unconstitutional – on so many levels.

Tis The Season

Tis the season to be jolly, or so the saying goes.  There are more important stories than this one for sure but,  I feel compelled to share this short story about the salesman from hell, while also discussing the importance of integrity in all individuals. This isn’t really news, but its purpose is legendary; it focuses on our expectations of a car salesman along with other people as well.

The long and short of the story is this:  This is my third Mercedes-Benz, all bought in MO,  two of which were bought at one dealership in Ellisville, MO.  All things considered Mercedes-Benz financial is very good, my service rep is also a commendable individual, but the sales man I just dealt with in November is someone I would consider as a person who literally has no scruples. The General Manager is also a person not to high on the list of people with moral or ethical charecter for a number of reasons as well, but I won’t into all that here.

The long and short of it is this: I called to trade in my 450 GL for a Black 2010 ML.  I ended up leaving with a 2009 ML, which by the way I can’t stand, because 1. it is a piece of S —. I already bought it once so far – one of the things on this CPO vehicle was the back seatbelt doesn’t work Guess what? It still doesn’t work. ; 2. I took the car based on an outright lie by my salesman, which it didn’t even occur to me until I drove it off the lot. ( which by the way occurred around 4:30 pm and I called him the next morning beginning at 7:30am).

In a nutshell my salesman quoted me a payment on the 2009, thereby convincing me to buy the 2009 over the 2010.  What he quoted was not even remotely close to what I am paying, nor what we discussed. Clearly, his own gain was all that mattered in this deal.  Furthermore, my contacting the General Mgr., also proved to be a waste of time.  But what is really disheartening, is that I WAS as a regular customer of Mercedes-Benz, and one would think they would show some appreciation, rather than being obama_liescondescending, rude, and outright liars.  My request to the GM, which occurred less than 12 hrs after my driving off their lot, was treated with very little regard and I was simply dismissed .  That request consisted of the following: give me my GL, the 2010 I called about, or make this car payment the amount  I was quoted. Since I have a 2.9 interest rate that speaks volumes about my credit history with MBF.

Most of us work hard and make a lot of sacrifices throughout our lives to obtain the things we want in live. A car, any car, is a large purchase a lot of money. I think most of us somehow believe we have this fiduciary relationship with the salesman. When ask them to honor our requests we just assume they have integrity to do so. Sadly, my salesman found clearly lacks integrity based on both his words to me and his actions. But all this really made me think about integrity and how it is really falling short in our society. So many people worship the value of the almighty dollar over that of relationships, regardless of the type of relationship. Seemingly, the anger that occurs, as the result of a faulty deal, the lies, or just the blatant disrespect seems to be happening all to often and with little regard for the victim.

As a result of my experience I decided to do a random survey at a nearby Mall over Christmas to see how many people have had negative experience with a car salesman. Sadly, after talking to 50-100 people over half  reported they did have a bad experience at one time or another, but after one time they never returned. What was interesting is that many of the people believed there was a direct correlation between car saleman and bad attitudes. Perhaps the level of pressure to sell, in a failing economy, is a contributing factor. I don’t know. What I do is that I have been buying cars, new cars, for along time and never once have I been treated with such little regard.

For me, integrity is everything, without it you have nothing. If you lie about little things, you probably lie about bigger things as well.  Honesty, integrity is something I have drilled into my son’s, and  I hope they drill it into their children, and so on.  Ask yourself this one question;  Is it so surprising that a society whose morals and values have digressed as  they have would end up with a failing economy, socialist president, and the continued dismantling of our constitution? Is that so surprising? After all, they are the people we vote into office, they are the people we trust, and it all begins with a simple thing you don’t think twice about like buying a car.

Meet The Press Anchor Breaks Law To Embarrass NRA With High-Capacity Clip

David Gregory attempts to embarrass NRA leader by holding up  high-capacity magazine clip on Meet the Press.

David Gregory attempts to embarrass NRA leader by holding up high-capacity magazine clip on Meet the Press.

Just how important was it for David Gregory, NBC Meet the Press anchor to break a gun law to embarrass NRA on Sunday’s show? It was not enough for Gregory to continue to badger NRA Chief Wayne LaPierre, into submitting to points that a New Assault Weapon Ban would work when the expired ban had not. According to the Washington Post, Wednesday, December 26th, an official investigation has been launched by the D.C. attorney general’s office.

The NBC anchor had to go the extra mile to challenge Wayne LaPierre, with a high-powered magazine clip, knowing full well that it was against the law in Washington D.C. to be in possession of such a clip. So, was it right for Gregory, a longtime Washington journalist, to break the law, when he knew that the Washington D.C. police had denied the display of the gun clip on the air when it was requested? Should Gregory be fined, suspended or fired for going too far in breaking the law in his attempt to neuter the Second Amendment rights of American law abiding citizens?

There is a serious problem that is emerging in the nation when journalists like NBC’s Gregory can decide that they are above the laws which mere mortals in the heartland of the nation must obey.

Was it not enough to bring up points of disagreement with the NRA as it attempted to do, and were summarily dismissed with great professional skill as LaPierre, displayed? When the arguments that the Meet the Press anchor was trying to skewer the NRA were easily deflected, Gregory appeared to become more combative. His continued being more insistent, and even attacking and vilifying the NRA official for not agreeing with the gun control Washington democrats, and headline writers from around the nation.

Instead, LaPierre, calmly and firmly stated his and the concerns of millions of parents around the nation that wanted to see their children arrive and leave safely from their schools. The Meet the Press anchor kept insisting that the NRA leader was wrong, wrong, wrong!

Gregory, appeared visibly shaken by the steadiness of the NRA leader and seemed to decide at that moment that he needed to play the ace, which the police had already said he could not. Gregory picked the high-capacity magazine and held it up.

By shoving the high powered magazine clip in the air with vigorous motion, he appeared to be playing to his audience, because NRA Chief Wayne LaPierre, had seen this type of clip before, and he was undeterred. Now the NBC show anchor was openly and brazenly in violation of a gun law, of laws, that he had hypocritically been referring to as needing more enforcement.

This type of gotcha journalism has a streak of yellow a mile wide, and while the gun control fanatics in the television audience may have been shaking their fists at the television screens in indignation, the D.C. police were probably wondering, what the heck is wrong with this man, who presumes their gun laws he protests against have no meaning.

Well, it should be made clear to Gregory and every other journalist who decides that they cannot run for cover under some argument of free speech, which he may try to raise, in order to escape punishment.

There are definitely a few critical questions, which journalists from other networks, newspapers and the Washington D.C. attorney general’s office should be inquiring about now. For instance, how did Gregory even get his hands on a supposedly illegal gun clip in the first place? Why did he knowingly break the law, when he was notified that he did not have permission to do so…period?

Hopefully, those and other related questions about Gregory’s ill-considered on-air performance will be answered when he appears before a judge in a Washington D.C. court to explain, why he and his network is somehow above the law.


(Click – let me know what you think)


Pa. schools to provide free self-serve condoms

In a purported effort to reduce sexually transmitted disease, nearly two dozen Philadelphia high schools are featuring bowls of condoms – free to students, no questions asked – in their nurse’s offices.

The respective nurses heard of the new program through an email from school administrators, informing them the prophylactics will be placed “near the entrance to your office.”

Though parents can theoretically opt their children out of the condom giveaway, but officials made it clear they won’t do anything to enforce such restrictions.

In the same email to nurses, the school district’s assistant superintendent conveyed his position that students “are to honor the wishes of their parents” and doing otherwise would constitute “an issue of the home.”

When teenagers know they can grab a handful of condoms whenever they wish, with a written guarantee their parents will be none the wiser, I’m sure we can trust them to make the right decision. We can probably all remember how responsible we were at that age.

As easy as it is for today’s youth to make unwise decisions, the last thing they need is a school system contributing to their potential for delinquency. Of course, this is hardly the only case of a corrupt public education system actively indoctrinating the next generation with values contrary to traditional parents. It is an egregious slap in the face to social conservatives throughout the school district.

Adding to the insult, outraged parents will be footing the bill for the program since the city’s health department – funded directly by taxpayers – is supplying the condoms.

B. Christopher Agee founded The Informed Conservative in 2011. Like his Facebook page for engaging, relevant conservative content daily.

Black judge commutes four killers’ sentences based on race

An activist judge in North Carolina said prosecutorial racism was the reason he commuted the sentences of four convicted killers.

Described as three of the state’s most notorious death row killers, among the group’s victims are three law enforcement officers, two women and a teenager. The judge was able to overrule the first sentence under the state’s controversial Racial Justice Act.

Commuting a black man’s death sentence to life in prison, the judge cited “the persistent, distorting role of race in jury selection in North Carolina.”

He never argued the man – found guilty of kidnapping and robbing a teenager before shooting him in the face – might be innocent. Since the Racial Justice Act gave him the discretion, he simply declared prosecutors were racist and gave a murderer a get-out-of-death-row-free card.

Republicans subsequently gained control of the state’s legislature and enacted a new, pared down, version of the act. Apparently, that didn’t present an obstacle for the black judge who commuted the sentences of three more murderers – including two cop killers – later the same year.

Concluding race was a factor in jury selection, he presented some handwritten notes supposedly proving prosecutors tried to eliminate blacks from jury pools to back up his claim.

One killer is a Lumbee Indian convicted of murdering two women and shooting another in a gang initiation; the other two are black men who killed a total of three law enforcement officers in separate incidents.

“This conclusion is based primarily on the words and deeds of the prosecutors involved in these cases,” the judge ruled. To the casual observer, though, it seems his conclusion might have roots in his own idea of racial justice.

Some in the courtroom expressed vocal disagreement to the ruling, including the brother of one murdered state trooper who shouted an expletive as the judge spoke. As about 60 uniformed police officers left the courtroom, a woman in attendance yelled at them, urging them to shed their badges because the legal system could not protect them from criminals.

Activist judges from the Supreme Court down can cause significant damage to our system of law. Although prosecutors plan to appeal the judge’s ruling, this case proves America’s justice system is not immune to moral relativism and race baiting tactics.

B. Christopher Agee founded The Informed Conservative in 2011. Like his Facebook page for engaging, relevant conservative content daily.

It’s Still Government Spending, Stupid

Barack Obama, who has stayed in continuous campaign mode since birth, persists in insisting House Republicans submit to his demands to hike tax rates on “the rich.”  If Republicans do note cede to his decrees, Obama will let everyone’s tax rates go up and cut obama_liesone trillion dollars from the budget, half of which will come from defense spending.

If he were truly interested in solving America’s fiscal troubles, this would not be his position.

Most definitely not…

Obama carries on with his nonstop campaign-style appearances, claiming that higher tax rates will reduce the U.S. deficit and cut the national debt.

That is categorically complete, total, absolute, utter fantasy.

The amount collected by the IRS from Obama’s long lusted for tax hikes would fund U.S. federal spending for fewer than nine days.

For members of the self-imagined, self-appointed “progressive” intellectual elite: That is less than two weeks.

At current spending levels the U.S. federal government borrows forty six cents of every dollar it spends.  Despite the fact that 2013 has not yet begun, through the first two months of fiscal year 2013 the U.S. is already approximately $300 billion in debt.

The biggest drivers of U.S. deficit spending are Medicare, Social Security, “safety net” programs and interest on the debt.  The looming short and long term costs of Obamacare have yet to fully reveal themselves, but given the U.S. federal government’s track record one can safely predict that it will be far more than what taxpayers were told and will rape their wallets for billions every year.

In other words, under the White House’s current “progressive” policies, it is only going to get worse, not better.

obama_pelosi_reidThe Oval Office occupier and his “progressive” Party Pravda press secretaries willfully ignore and refuse to mention that under the current tax rates, revenues are up by thirty billion dollars over last year.

Obama keeps claiming that raising tax rates on America’s highest earners, those who already pay forty percent of the revenue to the IRS, will be the silver bullet that solves America’s financial woes.  He continues blaming today’s deficits on his predecessor.

During his time in office, George W. Bush’s highest deficit was $438 billion.  Obama’s government has posted a $1 trillion plus deficit for four straight years.  2013 will make five.  America’s fiscal gloom and the looming “fiscal cliff” “crisis” are the result of “progressive” spending on wasteful big government socialist programs.

That is the reason.  Any other claim is pure unadulterated political snake oil.

America’s debt and deficit problems can only be resolved by cuts in spending.  When the United States receives another credit downgrade, it will be because of “progressives”, not Conservatives.  America needs to cut spending, not increase taxes.

Anyone who says differently should be in organic fertilizer distribution…or is that redistribution?
Warning: This show is addictive

« Older Entries Recent Entries »