QUOTE OF THE WEEK: "Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so." —Ronald Reagan (this quote is too good to change) 


"Do not blame Caesar, blame the people of Rome who have rejoiced in their loss of freedom who hail him when he speaks in the Forum of more security, more living fatly at the expense of the industrious." —Marcus Cicero 

"To preserve [the] independence [of the people,] we must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt. We must make our election between economy and liberty, or profusion and servitude." —Thomas Jefferson to Samuel Kercheval, 1816


Disclaimer: North County Conservatives are in no way affiliated with nor do we receive financial support from any political party or activist group.

Our mailing list is the sole property of North County Conservatives and personal information will not be provided to any other organization.


We the People...




In fact, it was our second president, John Adams, who said of our thoroughly researched and developed governing document, "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people.  It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other."  Quote from Ben Carson's book, "One Nation."



15. Escondido City Council meeting, Council Chambers, 4:30 p.m.

17.Happy Saint Patrick's Day!

To signup for our monthly newsletter, click HERE and complete form at bottom of page.

Click HERE for further information on local political meetings or click on Calendar for more information on scheduled activities.

Read the latest from Election Integrity Project by clicking on

NCC's personal referral link:



Your North County Conservatives meet on the fourth Tuesday of each month at Mike's BBQ, 1356 W. Valley Parkway, Escondido.


Our March 28th NCC feature...

We start at 6:00 p.m., but please come early and enjoy the best BBQ in San Diego

Tuesday Night Special is a Pulled Pork Sandwich with one side for only $5.99 

This month we have special guest

Mason Weaver 

 seen on FOX News and elsewhere


Come hear our friend Mason Weaver

He has some unique views on how we can save our"REPUBLIC"

Seriously on the funny side...



Mail Call 
October 20th

Mail your petitions in today!
Like us on Facebook

Follow us on Twitter

The LGBT Weekly says you have cooties.  Actually, cooties are for kids.  Grownups accuse each other of "hate".  
LGBT Weekly was upset that Privacy For All was raising money on the popular crowd funding website "GoFundMe".  The site was used to fund PFA's initiative to prohibit unwanted intrusion of physically opposite individuals into bathrooms, showers and locker rooms. 
On the playground, a sure way to isolate the one you did not like, was to say that he or she had cooties.  Playground bullies age, but their tactics don't change that much.
Don't like what somebody is saying? Accuse them of "hate".
Want to stop somebody from donating to a charity that you do not favor? Call the charity "hateful".
Too lazy to form an argument? Call your opponent a "hater".
There is not such a thing as cooties.  But hate really does exist.  And that is why it is all the more repulsive that some throw around the accusation so casually.  
In fairness, LGBT Weekly did have a source for the accusation that a hater is among us.  The Southern Poverty Law Center has labeled one member of the PFA coalition as a "hate group".  And SPLC should know about hate.  They have amassed a small fortune by labeling their ideological opponents as "hate groups".  Never mind that the SPLC has come under increasing fire from conservative and liberal groups alike for their name-calling.
Hate is a motivation, not an act.  Neither LGBT Weeklynor the Southern Poverty Law Center have a mirror to see into people's souls.  The claim that those who do not agree with them are motivated by hate might itself be motivated by hate.
But the accusation of hate shows something more in terms of the battle over who will be allowed to use which bathroom.  Those advocating that gender identity be used as a pass into formerly off limits facilities rely on feelings over reality.
If a boy FEELS like a girl, then he should be able to use the girls' locker room.  (Or the boys' locker room if that FEELS better.)
If you disagree with those actions, then it FEELS like you are full of hate.
But reality and nakedness trump feelings.  In the locker room, unwanted exposure will make some very uncomfortable.  Modesty and a desire for privacy is not hate.  
PFA will not let the accusation of cooties or hate stop them from protecting the privacy of boys and girls in bathrooms, showers and locker rooms.  LetLGBT Weekly and the Southern Poverty Law Center know that you will not be intimidated.  Add your signatureto the Personal Privacy Protection Act initiative. After you sign a petition, donate to Privacy for All and help to protect privacy in California.  

Privacy for All
The Basics
  • This Initiative, if passed, will protect an individual's right to privacy while using locker rooms, restrooms, and showers in government buildings, including public schools. 
  • Under the "Personal Privacy Protection Act" a person must use facilities in accordance with their biological sex in government buildings, including schools.
  • Currently in California, schools are implementing co-ed locker rooms, bathrooms, and showers! This Initiative is necessary to stop this assault on privacy. 
  • Boys and girls should not be forced to shower, change, or use the restroom in front of members of the opposite sex. 
  • We must gather 500,000 signatures to qualify this Initiative for the 2016 ballot.
  •  Petitions are due in our office by November 20th, 2015. 



A recent Harvard study revealed what many of us have been feeling – millennials are starting to feel the effects of bad policies on our generation. We produced a video with some of the important findings from these recent studies that we believe others need to know. Will you help us by passing it along?

This is a video created entirely by college students to help wake up our generation.

I wanted to share this with you and ask that you send it to as many people as possible through your networks, email, facebook and twitter.

Thanks for helping us bring about real change at a time when our nation desperately needs the next generation to engage.


Audrea Taylor

President, im2moro


IMPORTANT NOTICE:  Please check out our Agenda 21 page to get the 8-page special report published by the American Policy Center. Please read "Sustainable Development" by going to and printing the information that claims that "TEA Parties and 'End the Fed' Protests Cannot Win Back the Republic Without this Information!"  Very sobering... a real eye-opener!





"The problems we face today exist because the people who work for a living are outnumbered by those who vote for a living.” -Judge Judy 


    <Click on "STOP" logo 


Amendment Cosponsors: To date we have 81 cosponsors in the U.S. House and 05 cosponsors in the Senate.


Overruled: Government Invasion of your Parental Rights

To view the entire 37-minute docudrama, click on the following link:


Protecting children, empowering parents
Teddy James
AFA Journal staff writer

March 2016 – John* was 13 years old in 1984 when he approached his school counselor about a problem in his home. His parents took him to church too often. The counselor listened patiently and sympathetically. She felt so much sympathy that she called social services, which immediately placed John in foster care. He was not allowed to return home that Friday afternoon.

Instead, he was placed with a foster family for the weekend. The following week, John’s parents hired a young Michael Farris to represent them in court to bring their son home. Following a recently passed law in Washington state, the judge decided John’s case was strong. He ruled that taking a teenager to church once a week is sufficient for any religion. If the parents violated his ruling, the state would take custody of John.

This was the first time Farris saw a clear and distinct violation of parental rights. Since 1984, the year of the ruling, he has seen many more. It drove him to create Home School Legal Defense Association and, two organizations fighting for the preservation and protection of parental rights across the United States.

Historical attacks
“There have been attacks against parental rights for almost 100 years,” said Will Estrada, director of federal relations for HSLDA and “But three landmark Supreme Court cases defined and still protect parental rights.”

Meyer v State of Nebraska in 1923 stated parents had the freedom to choose to enroll their children in public or private school. The majority opinion stated, “It is the natural duty of the parent to give his children education suitable to their station of life.”

Two years later, the Supreme Court reaffirmed this opinion in Pierce v Society of Sisters with the majority saying, “The child is not the mere creature of the State; those who nurture him and direct his destiny have the right, coupled with the high duty, to recognize and prepare him for the additional obligations.”

The final case of the trilogy is Wisconsin v Yoder (1972) in which the majority said, “The history and culture of Western civilization reflect a strong tradition of parental concern for the nurture and upbringing of their children. This primary role of the parents in the upbringing of children is now established beyond debate as an enduring American tradition.”

Modern attacks
Unfortunately, parental rights’ seat at the table of enduring American tradition(s) “is quickly eroding away,” Estrada told AFA Journal. “Modern threats to parental rights started in the 1990s. One of the flagship threats was, and is, the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child.” This UN treaty has the same core language as the Washington law used in the ruling against John’s parents.

Of the many provisions in the UNCRC that should trouble American parents, one is especially dangerous. It states that all judiciary decisions should be based on “the best interest of the child.” While this sounds positive, David Miranda, national grassroots director for, offered a strong caution.

“In relation to parental rights,” Miranda said, “the ‘best interest of the child’ precedent allows the government (rather than the parent) to decide what is in the best interest of the child. When you have that as the basis, parents lose most of the time.”

Previous Supreme Court decisions established the idea that a safe home with loving parents is always in the best interest of the child, but the UNCRC disagrees. says in an article, “Instead of placing the burden of proof on the government to prove that a parent is unfit, the convention places the burden of proof on those who claim that other interests are more important than the state’s characterization of the ‘best interest’ of the child.”

Future protections
To ensure parental rights are recognized as fundamental, has drafted a constitutional amendment putting the protection of parents in the black and white of the Constitution. (See amendment below.)

But to see the amendment ratified, two-thirds of the Senate must approve it, and three-fourths of the states must ratify it.

“We do not want to make the mistake we saw in the marriage debate,” Estrada said, “where a decade ago people said, ‘We need to do something, but it will never get to the point that we need a constitutional amendment at the federal level.’ Then, when they tried to get one, there were no votes. We see that as deeply instructive and believe now is the time to put parental rights in the Constitution.”

While these actions must take place in Washington, D.C., there is much parents can do to help the amendment. Miranda said everyone who is concerned about protecting parental rights can visit to sign up for email alerts. When the amendment is presented in Congress, followers will be alerted to contact their representatives to gain support for the amendment. Also, Miranda urges all citizens to be more informed and learn how to be active in the movement. The group’s website offers many more resources, and he recommendsOverruled, a 30-minute documentary (

“The high levels of academia are right now questioning whether parents should have the right to teach their children their religion,” Miranda warned. “They believe it will benefit children to be informed on all the religious options available to them. That is why it is so important for us to amend the Constitution to protect the rights of parents as a fundamental right.”  undefined
*Name changed to protect privacy

Proposed Parental Rights Amendment

Section 1: The liberty of parents to direct the upbringing, education, and care of their children is a fundamental right.
Section 2: The parental right to direct education includes the right to choose public, private, religious, or home schools, and the right to make reasonable choices within public schools for one’s child.
Section 3: The United States or any State shall not infringe these rights without demonstrating that its governmental interest as applied to the person is of the highest order and not otherwise served.
Section 4: The parental rights guaranteed by this article shall not be denied or abridged on account of disability.
Section 5: No treaty may be adopted nor shall any source of international law be employed to supersede, modify, interpret, or apply to the rights guaranteed by this article.

Learn more about this issue. Visit

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- logo

Sign the PetitionDonateVolunteerLearn MoreView Online

Update As Our Year Ends Thursday

-- March 28, 2016

Thanks to your help, we’ve had a busy spring. Our volunteer directors are leading 2016 or 2017 statute efforts in ten states including four with current bill numbers. We’ve had several follow-up meetings with key leaders in Congress. And our executive director, Jim Bentley, met with the legal counsel for the House Judiciary Committee to discuss our language in the Parental Rights Amendment.

All these meetings went well and we’re excited about our prospects for the rest of this Congress. I hope to have more to tell you in the coming weeks, but right now I want to remind you about an important deadline for that impacts our 2016 plans.

Thursday of this week (March 31st) is your last chance to make a donation before our new fiscal year begins on April 1.

Our board of directors will meet at the end of this week to make plans for the coming year, and one decision they will make is what projects to keep in the new budget. We make effective--some would say amazing--use of our modest receipts. Yet, as you can imagine, many decisions ultimately come down to whether or not we have the funds.

Our efforts depend on your support. If you’re able to give this spring, right now is the very best time. If you haven’t yet renewed your support for 2016, or if you’re able to make a special Fiscal Year End gift, please send a generous donation today!

If you can’t make your donation until Friday or later, that will still be helpful in getting the new fiscal year off to a healthy start. But your gift by Thursday will help our board to know just how much we can plan to accomplish in the months ahead.

I’m grateful for your continued help in this vital effort, and I hope to hear from you this week.


Michael Ramey
Director of Communications & Research

Share This Online





Join the Discussion



P.O. Box 1090 Purcellville, VA 20134 * (540)-751-1200 *







Page last updated 03/14/17