Wednesday, October 29, 2008

Greta Muirhead - District Court Judge, Family Division, Dept I

Greta Muirhead recently left a comment on this blog stating;

I have several friends who homeschool their children. So long as they have the
necessary skill set, I think they should be free to do so.

I questioned her through email, asking the following;

Can you please explain what you mean by "necessary skill set"?

This was her reply;

1) Patience is the most important attribute, in my opinion.
2) Organization;
3) Discipline to ensure that the work gets done;
4) The ability to read and write;
5) The ability to teach their children about technology
6) Resourcefulness;
7) Actively looks for and encourages socialization opportunities for their
Thank you for letting me share my opinion.

When I questioned her further on these comments and whether she agrees that as Family Court Judge she has no jurisdiction on whether or not or how a family chooses to homeschool as described by the law, she had no response.

*IMO* I do not see her as understanding homeschooling, the law pertaining to it or her role as judge (to interpret that law). Please use this information in making your own choice for Dept I.

Friday, September 26, 2008

Why I Will Be "Wasting" My Vote

I’ve heard it said too many times that voting for anyone other than a Republican or Democrat is a “wasted vote”. I cannot tell you how frustrating an idea I find that to be. I’ve heard all the reasons; a third-party candidate can’t win so why vote for them or if you don’t vote the lesser of two evils, the greater evil might win. Seriously people? Is this what it’s come to? Voting based not on preference but on popularity, like some high school contest? I think it was Jesse Ventura that said voting is not a horse race. We’re not betting on who we think will win. We’re telling others who best represents our views.

So for those that are curious, here are all the reasons I’ll be “wasting my vote” this year:

1. Voting for a candidate other than the best representative of your views has the exact opposite effect. Since the candidate already knows that your vote is in hand, he can then concentrate on moving the platform AWAY from your wishes, in order to court the votes of people with beliefs far from your own.

Many people who like Libertarian ideas always vote for Republicans. What does the party do to reward them? They make policies to win over moderate liberals. Similarly, many people who prefer Green Party ideas always vote for Democrats, and so the Democrats ignore them and make policies to win over moderate conservatives. Either way, the voters get the opposite of what they wanted, as the Democrats and Republicans both move toward the political center. Even Democrats and Republicans are getting screwed as their party plays politics as usual, instead of standing up for their ideals.

2. If the greater of two evils was to win it wouldn’t be my fault, because I didn’t vote for him. Nor would it be my fault that I didn’t vote for the lesser of two evils. The fault lies in the hands of anyone voting based either on popularity or fear, rather than policies, issues and ideals. Keep in mind that voting is suppose to be FOR something, not AGAINST something.

You personally have only one vote. Like it or not, you are powerless to turn the results of a democratic election. This being the case, your one vote counts for something only in the sense that it represents your approval of some set of principles. Voting is a means of conveying information about what you believe. If you ignore your principles then this information is lost, and your vote really is wasted.

3. I do not wish to take part in the status-quo. I believe in real change, not just change of hands. And real change will never come by supporting that which we do not agree with out of fear of who might win if we don’t. I think we’re on a slippery slope to fascism and both parties are to blame. My supporting the status-quo with my vote sends the message that I will tolerate what they are doing. (Click here to watch the documentary, America: Freedom to Fascism to fully understand my view.)

4. My vote may be extremely unlikely to affect the outcome of the election. But it can influence policy. A vote for one of the two main candidates will be lost in the mass of voters, while a vote for a minor candidate, especially if he gets enough to make the margin of difference between the other two, will have far more influence. It will impel the other two parties to appeal to the voters for that minor candidate, and that may come to be as important if not more important than their main positions. So my vote can be a drop in the ocean or a splash in the pool. I’ll go for the one that gets more attention.

5. Voting for the lesser of two evils, still results in evil in the White House and I refuse to take any part in that.

6. On a more personal note, Both McCain and Obama support this ridiculous “bailout” plan. I don’t find the solution to all our problems to be in the form of more government. And you don’t save a sinking ship by adding more water to the hull. Big Government got us into this mess, Bigger Government won’t get us out. Neither of the major candidates seem to understand this fully, therefore they do not share my utmost ideals. See #1.

So there ya have it. All my thought and research laid out for you. Call it a wasted vote or call it a protest vote. Either way I plan to send a message by supporting my third-party candidate this year. Whoever you choose to vote for, I simply hope it’s a vote for the right reasons; someone who best represents your views.

Thursday, August 28, 2008

Update: Nevada Republican Delegation to the National Convention

The following is an email from Robert Terhune, one of the many faces behind the Ron Paul movement.

Hi everyone,

Here is a rundown of everything that's been going on with the Nevada Delegation to the Republican National Convention. Thanks to all who have helped with and supported this process, and please be assured that the fight is not over. I included our Press Release below.


Due to the fact that the Nevada State Republican Convention was shut down abruptly and illegally in April (when Party leaders weren't getting their way), and because the State Party leadership never intended to (and never did) complete the convention, we decided to finish it ourselves. We reconvened on June 28, and legally elected a full delegation to represent Nevada at the National Convention.

The Party leadership of course never acknowledged the June 28th gathering, and submitted their own list of delegates, appointed by the leadership. Their list was comprised of party regulars and contributers. A Party official was heard boasting at a meeting that "not one of those Ron Paul people" were on the list.

The party's list was submitted to the RNC, while we submitted an appeal to the RNC to try and stop them. The RNC's initial decision was to reject both delegations as illegal, and to seat only the three automatic delegates. The state party appealed that, and the matter was sent to the RNC's Contest Committee.

The Contest Committee heard the appeal on Sunday, August 24, 2008. The Party was represented by high-powered Washington DC attorney Ben Ginsberg, and we were represented by Mike Weber, a long-time Republican activist (and McCain supporter) from Washoe County, Nevada. The hearing was set up like a Senate hearing, with the committee seated at a table at the front of the room, with the two parties facing them, seated at their own tables. Each side was allowed opening and closing statements, and in between the committee peppered both sides with questions. The committee was obviously very knowledgeable about the situation, and seemed very interested in getting to the truth and conducting a fair process. As the day wore on, it was apparent that the committee started to realize how poorly the state party had been conducting itself. In one instance, a committee member was trying to find out how people became state delegates. Between Sue Lowden (NV GOP Chair) and Ginsberg, the State party was unable to answer the question, to the frustration on the member. In another instance, another member was trying to learn if the party knew who the state delegates were. After receiving no firm answer to several questions, she exasperatedly asked, "You accepted money to register for the State Convention, right? So there must have been some bookkeeping of some kind!" She never got a satisfactory answer.

Mike Weber closed with a stirring closing statement that basically told the committee that they could chose righteousness or corruption, and that the country was watching. No final decision was reached that day, and several smaller meetings between Weber and Party attorneys took place over the next few days. The outcome clearly was not going to be good.

So here is where the process stands now: The Contest Committee released its report on Wednesday. The report strongly chastised the state GOP, calling the Nevada GOP’s handling of the delegate selection process “flawed, inadequate, and unacceptable,” and added that they were “deeply troubled by the ineptness of the State Party in conducting its process to elect delegates."
The National Party has confirmed that, in their opinion, BOTH delegations were selected illegally, and that they would not accept either. The only exceptions were the CD1 and CD3 delegates that were elected during the original convention in April-- they will seat them. Ron Paul is represented by four of those six delegates.

However, there is a little-known rule that allows the National Party to appoint delegates to fill open slots within ten days of the National Convention. So, in order to fill all of the now-open seats from Nevada, they decided to invoke this rule and fill the vacancies. They did so using names from the State Party's appointed delegation.

So, in summary, the Nevada state party did not like what was happening at the State Convention, so they took the ball and went home, cheating the delegates out of their vote. They tried to appoint delegates to the National Convention instead. We tried to stop them and ensure the voting rights of ordinary Nevada Republicans. The National Party sided with the State Party and, after slapping them on the wrist, accepted their appointed delegates.

From now on, there is little to stop any state's GOP from ignoring the voices of it's people, and instead appointing their own cronies to attend the National Convention-- where our next potential President is selected.

Here is our press release from this afternoon:

RNC Labels NV Party “Inept,” but Seats Most of
State-Appointed Delegation

MINNEAPOLIS, MN, 8/28/08 – The RNC’s
Committtee on Contests handed down a recommendation yesterday regarding the
ongoing Nevada delegate debacle. The Committee condemned the State Party’s
handling of the delegate selection process, and declined the State Party’s
ability to appoint delegates. However, the Committee then recommended seating
the majority of the State Party’s appointed slate, as well as six delegates
elected in CD 1 and CD 3 at the April 26th State

“We definitely do not consider this a just resolution,”
said Wayne Terhune, a Nevada Republican activist who traveled to Minneapolis to
support the appeal. “Despite some strong language from the Committee,
their actions have backed up the illegal delegate appointment of the State

The Committee on Contests held a hearing on Sunday,
August 24th when they heard statements from both sides. The
Committee’s statement released on Wednesday called the Nevada GOP’s handling of
the delegate selection process “flawed, inadequate, and unacceptable,” adding
that they were “deeply troubled by the ineptness of the State Party in
conducting its process to elect delegates […].”

“This game seems to
have been fixed from the start,” Terhune said. “It was obvious to
everyone at the Committee’s hearing that the State Party was inept, but the
Committtee decided to back them up anyway and seat the majority of their
slate. This is a miscarriage of justice, and smacks of
tyranny. All the Republican voters of Nevada have been
disenfranchised. ”

Thanks again to everyone who helped.
In Liberty,

Tuesday, July 22, 2008

Rally for the Republic

If you haven't already gotten the email, please check out the Rally for the Republic!

"If they expected us to retire quietly from the scene, the political elite are
in for a surprise." - Dr. Ron Paul

It will be a 3 day event to send a strong message to our political establishment that we will not fade quietly from the scene. The Campaign for Liberty is planning music and entertainment, special guests and a speech promised to inspire.

Join the revolution from August 31-Sept 2 in Minneapolis, MN.

Saturday, June 14, 2008

Homeschoolers for Liberty

By now you probably have heard the heartbreaking news that Dr. Ron Paul has dropped out of the race. I think many of us saw it coming, but still it's hard for me to see.

My journey with his campaign started almost a year ago, when I first heard a few hardcore Libertarians talking him up. After doing some research, I was shocked upon finding a non-corrupt politician, as well as a Republican that still stood for the core principals of the party.

This past year has been a crazy ride; full of canvassing, marching, meeting great people (including my neighbors!) and learning so much. I was once a very apathetic and cynical person when it came to politics. But Ron Paul's campaign has awoken something in me that had laid dormant for too long.

After hearing the official end of the campaign comes the hard decision: Where to go from here. Ron Paul has officially launched the Campaign for Liberty, which will focus on the long road ahead. It's mission, as quoted on the site, states:
The mission of the Campaign for Liberty is to promote and defend the great
American principles of individual liberty, constitutional government, sound
money, free markets, and a noninterventionist foreign policy, by means of
educational and political activity.

I have joined the campaign and will continue to fight for Liberty-minded candidates on the local, State and National levels. I have changed the title (but not the web address) of this blog to reflect that. I encourage you to join the campaign if you have not already done so. I also encourage any delegates to the Nevada State Convention to continue their duties. This is not the time for us to back out. It is not about the man, but the message that has resonated within us.

In the November election, we have some serious choices to make. This is something I've been contemplating for a few months. I cannot and will not allow myself to become apathetic again. I will also not allow myself to grudgingly follow a path I do not agree with or blindly fall in step with "party loyalty".

I will no longer "hold my nose to vote" or "choose the lesser of two evils", but will continue to find the person who best represents me.

I still have some decisions to make in who I will throw my support behind, and when I further research my choices I will post my decision and what got me to it. I encourage you all to do one thing: Put aside any party loyalty, as well as party grudges and research ALL candidates carefully to decide who best represents your beliefs. I will do the same.

Friday, May 30, 2008

Chuck Hoskin for Clark County Family Court Judge

In light of recent Family Court Judge's decisions in regards to homeschooling, I thought it would be important to evaluate what potential judge's thought on the matter. I started with Chuck Hoskin, as recommended by a friend of our family.

I (anonymously) asked him whether or not he supports parental choice in regards to education. His first clarification - that this issue does not fall in his realm of practice - is a good sign! Here is his full answer:

...As for your question concerning a parent’s right to choose how their
children are educated, let me first state that such issues are not decided, nor
is the existing law interpreted, by a Family Court Judge.

As a result, I can tell you that I believe a parent has the ultimate right in
deciding how their children are educated, whether that be by utilizing public
schools, choosing private schools, or home schooling. I have several
friends who home school their children and I see that their children are at, or
above, the education level of other children their age.

For more information on Chuck Hoskin, you can visit his website

If you know other candidates you would like me to highlight, please let me know via comment!

Thursday, May 29, 2008

Chris Dyer on Homeschooling

Chris Dyer, candidate in District 1, has responded below:

1. To what extent do you support parental choice in regards to education?

I know what's best for my children. I should have every option available to educate my children.

2. Do you support the annual registration of homeschoolers in Nevada?

I would support one time registration. As long as the child remains in the same school, there's no need to re-register.

3. Do you believe homeschoolers should be subject to standardized testing?

That's one for Nevada voters. I actually enjoyed taking the standardized tests when I was in school. They're was no preparation and it didn't affect our grades. I have heard the schools now just teach kids how to pass the test and not much else. If that's what standardized testing gets us then we can do without it.

4. Do you support a tax credit/rebate to homeschooling families?

Sure. Public schools are overburdened and in some instances broken. Public schools should have to compete with private schools, charter schools, and home schoolers. I don't see why we shouldn't be allowed to invest our tax money in the best education for our children.

5. Anything else to add or could you provide a short overview of your stance on education:

I believe the federal government needs to get out of the education business. Let the voters of the states decide.