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.
Thursday, May 29, 2008
Wednesday, May 28, 2008
Carl Bunce on Homeschooling
Carl Bunce, candidate for Congressional District 3, is our next responder:
Hello, Thank you for your interest in my campaign. My answers are below.
I have worked in Education for 10 years, at all levels K-12 and University. I worked for Educational Testing Services (ETS) for the past 5 years, now I currently work for Clark County School District as an Administration. So I have seen the bad and good of public education. I have seen how standardized testing has destroyed the learning environment. Education is one of my main concerns in my campaign, because everything else we do in life depends on the education we receive.
1. To what extent do you support parental choice in regards to education?
I strongly support a parent's choice in the Education of their Children. I believe there are various educational opportunities for students in this country; I do not believe that any form of government can offer them all. Most of the time, governments try to push a single form of education on the population. This helps with costs! That is what government is concerned about. The students and parents are seldom considered.
2. Do you support the annual registration of homeschoolers in Nevada?
There should be no registration of homeschoolers, period.
3. Do you believe homeschoolers should be subject to standardized testing?
I do not believe any students should be subjected to standardized testing. I think the memorize and recall education environment that has been created over the past couple decades is a terrible learning environment. I have seen first hand across the country, most teachers and students only worry about how they will do on the next "TEST". I want students asking, "What can we learn next" not "This again!" just so the students are sure to pass their tests.
4. Do you support a tax credit/rebate to homeschooling families?
I support Tax Credits and Rebates, whatever it takes to get the money back where it needs to be, until the current system of federal taxation is removed and people get to keep all their income.
5. Anything else to add or could you provide a short overview of your stance on education:
I want to eliminate the Federal Department of Education, they spend $70 Billion + a year, and our education system is still falling short in the world. I want all that tax money to stay at home with the people that earn it. I want to see an education system where students can be free to choose a path they desire and not have to worry about financial restrictions or federal regulations that could prevent it.
--
Carl Bunce
Bunce for Congress CD 3 Nevada
www.carlbunce.com
Hello, Thank you for your interest in my campaign. My answers are below.
I have worked in Education for 10 years, at all levels K-12 and University. I worked for Educational Testing Services (ETS) for the past 5 years, now I currently work for Clark County School District as an Administration. So I have seen the bad and good of public education. I have seen how standardized testing has destroyed the learning environment. Education is one of my main concerns in my campaign, because everything else we do in life depends on the education we receive.
1. To what extent do you support parental choice in regards to education?
I strongly support a parent's choice in the Education of their Children. I believe there are various educational opportunities for students in this country; I do not believe that any form of government can offer them all. Most of the time, governments try to push a single form of education on the population. This helps with costs! That is what government is concerned about. The students and parents are seldom considered.
2. Do you support the annual registration of homeschoolers in Nevada?
There should be no registration of homeschoolers, period.
3. Do you believe homeschoolers should be subject to standardized testing?
I do not believe any students should be subjected to standardized testing. I think the memorize and recall education environment that has been created over the past couple decades is a terrible learning environment. I have seen first hand across the country, most teachers and students only worry about how they will do on the next "TEST". I want students asking, "What can we learn next" not "This again!" just so the students are sure to pass their tests.
4. Do you support a tax credit/rebate to homeschooling families?
I support Tax Credits and Rebates, whatever it takes to get the money back where it needs to be, until the current system of federal taxation is removed and people get to keep all their income.
5. Anything else to add or could you provide a short overview of your stance on education:
I want to eliminate the Federal Department of Education, they spend $70 Billion + a year, and our education system is still falling short in the world. I want all that tax money to stay at home with the people that earn it. I want to see an education system where students can be free to choose a path they desire and not have to worry about financial restrictions or federal regulations that could prevent it.
--
Carl Bunce
Bunce for Congress CD 3 Nevada
www.carlbunce.com
Tuesday, May 27, 2008
James Smack on Homeschooling
James Smack, candidate for Congressional District 2, is my first responder to the homeschooling questions I sent out. Here is his response:
Tara,
Thank you for allowing me the opportunity to answer some questions in regard to how I feel about Homeschooling and my positions on Education. I salute all parents like yourself that take educating their children seriously enough to accept the challenge of homeschooling. I will take them in the order received:
1. To what extent do you support parental choice in regards to education?
I believe that the parent has every right to determine how their child is to be
educated, whether that be in the public school system, in private or parochial
school, or whether by schooling their child at home with the parent as the
instructor.
2. Do you support the annual registration of homeschoolers in Nevada?
I do not believe that this is necessary. The superintendent of the school
district or other authorized person may need to be informed of a homeschooled
child to allow for participation in extracurricular activities within the public
school district as provided by Nevada Law. I firmly believe that there does not
need to be any regulated registration of the parents who decide that
homeschooling is their best option, nor any necessity for said parents to meet
state mandated teaching guidelines.
3. Do you believe homeschoolers should be subject to standardized testing?
No, subjecting homeschooled students to standardized testing is entirely
unnecessary. It is an infringement on the spirit of what homeschooling is trying
to accomplish, which is parental control over their child's education. Home
schooled students should be allowed access to all college entrance exams through
the local school district as allowed by Nevada State Law, such as the SAT and
ACT.
4. Do you support a tax credit/rebate to homeschooling families?
I most certainly support a tax credit for homeschooling families.
5. Anything else to add or could you provide a short overview of your stance on education:
As Congressman, I would be in favor of the elimination of the Federal Department
of Education and elimination of No Child Left Behind, to be replaced by local
and state level control of Education. I believe that returning authority to the
schools at a local level will improve schooling for all students being educated
in the public system. Let the parents in the community have the input on how
their children should be educated. Federal and State Government should mandate
as little regulation as possible on parents who wish to homeschool their
children.
It is my feeling that homeschooled children are more likely to
succeed, get much more individualized teaching, and are more prepared to meet
the challenges of college and adult life. I look forward to continuing this
conversation, and please do not hesitate to contact me with any other questions
you may have!!
Most Sincerely,
James Smack
Republican Candidate for Congress
Nevada Congressional District 2
http://www.jamessmack.com/
Tara,
Thank you for allowing me the opportunity to answer some questions in regard to how I feel about Homeschooling and my positions on Education. I salute all parents like yourself that take educating their children seriously enough to accept the challenge of homeschooling. I will take them in the order received:
1. To what extent do you support parental choice in regards to education?
I believe that the parent has every right to determine how their child is to be
educated, whether that be in the public school system, in private or parochial
school, or whether by schooling their child at home with the parent as the
instructor.
2. Do you support the annual registration of homeschoolers in Nevada?
I do not believe that this is necessary. The superintendent of the school
district or other authorized person may need to be informed of a homeschooled
child to allow for participation in extracurricular activities within the public
school district as provided by Nevada Law. I firmly believe that there does not
need to be any regulated registration of the parents who decide that
homeschooling is their best option, nor any necessity for said parents to meet
state mandated teaching guidelines.
3. Do you believe homeschoolers should be subject to standardized testing?
No, subjecting homeschooled students to standardized testing is entirely
unnecessary. It is an infringement on the spirit of what homeschooling is trying
to accomplish, which is parental control over their child's education. Home
schooled students should be allowed access to all college entrance exams through
the local school district as allowed by Nevada State Law, such as the SAT and
ACT.
4. Do you support a tax credit/rebate to homeschooling families?
I most certainly support a tax credit for homeschooling families.
5. Anything else to add or could you provide a short overview of your stance on education:
As Congressman, I would be in favor of the elimination of the Federal Department
of Education and elimination of No Child Left Behind, to be replaced by local
and state level control of Education. I believe that returning authority to the
schools at a local level will improve schooling for all students being educated
in the public system. Let the parents in the community have the input on how
their children should be educated. Federal and State Government should mandate
as little regulation as possible on parents who wish to homeschool their
children.
It is my feeling that homeschooled children are more likely to
succeed, get much more individualized teaching, and are more prepared to meet
the challenges of college and adult life. I look forward to continuing this
conversation, and please do not hesitate to contact me with any other questions
you may have!!
Most Sincerely,
James Smack
Republican Candidate for Congress
Nevada Congressional District 2
http://www.jamessmack.com/
Pro-Liberty Nevada Candidates
I've recently received a list of pro-liberty candidates and wanted to share them with you. Please pass thislist along to others. I've emailed those who's emails I could locate (minus those who's websites are not up) with questions about their stance on education in regards to homeschooling and will post those answers as I receive them.
To check your district numbers, refer to your voter registration card or click here for voter registration lookup.
Congressional District 1:
Chris Dyer - http://www.chrisdyer.com/
Congressional District 2:
James Smack - http://www.jamessmack.com/
Congressional District 3:
Carl Bunce - http://www.carlbunce.com/
Assembly District 6:
Lisa Marie Johnson - vegasamerican.com
Assembly District 13:
Michael Kurback (website not up yet)
Assembly District 14:
Andrew Brownson (website not up yet)
Assembly District 17:
David Isbell - http://isbellfornevada.com/
Please do what you can to support those running for State Assembly and Congressional seats. These candidates need contributions and volunteers.
To check your district numbers, refer to your voter registration card or click here for voter registration lookup.
Congressional District 1:
Chris Dyer - http://www.chrisdyer.com/
Congressional District 2:
James Smack - http://www.jamessmack.com/
Congressional District 3:
Carl Bunce - http://www.carlbunce.com/
Assembly District 6:
Lisa Marie Johnson - vegasamerican.com
Assembly District 13:
Michael Kurback (website not up yet)
Assembly District 14:
Andrew Brownson (website not up yet)
Assembly District 17:
David Isbell - http://isbellfornevada.com/
Please do what you can to support those running for State Assembly and Congressional seats. These candidates need contributions and volunteers.
Sunday, May 18, 2008
Sunday, April 27, 2008
My recap on the Nevada State Convention
I just returned home to Las Vegas from the Nevada Republican Party Convention in Reno, NV. The weekend was a whirlwind of drama, chaos and adrenaline. The following is my recap of what happened, based solely on my perception of things I witnessed and heard.
Our convention was scheduled for Saturday, April 26th. After a surprisingly short wait we were signed in as delegates and seated. We were called into order with 1,347 delegates shortly after 9am.
That’s about where it started going wrong. The first two and a half hours of our day were spent listening to teary speeches and patriotic poetry, while watching black and white movie clips that were quite frankly offensive to my friends, family members and neighbors who consider themselves Democrats. I wasn’t the only person in attendance to find them divisive, immature and unnecessary. I also wasn’t the only person ready to get down to business rather than waste our time socializing.
One highlight of the morning was one of the best speeches I've heard Ron Paul give, earning him a standing ovation by most of the room, including McCain supporters.
However much the majority didn’t complain about the morning’s “entertainment”, they sure did complain when actual business was being conducted and taking longer than presumed necessary. I can’t remember the number of times I heard the phrase “in the interest of time” being uttered by party leaders and other delegates. The fact that many of us had driven over 400 miles to come to a convention to work, and were instead made to suffer through pointless banter and being rushed through the actual business at hand was frustrating.
Our chairperson, Senator Bob Beers was another frustration. Many of us support Bob Beers but his smugness and apparent inability to conduct business or understand the rules of order was unacceptable. Many times a delegate more rehearsed in parliamentarian law, Mike Weber, had to go to the microphone to (thankfully) correct Senator Beers’ procedures. This was at one point not very appreciated by Senator Beers, as he attempted to have this gentleman unduly removed by the Sergeant at Arms, which the entire room objected to having done. (This gentleman, although not with the Ron Paul camp, has received much respect and support of his fairness.)
And the frustrations continued. Apparently the reason we wasted so much time in the morning was because the party assumed we were simply there to rubber stamp their agenda - their rules, their by-laws, their platforms and their delegates. That’s right, they had already selected the delegates they would allow us to vote on after hand-picking from the nominations that were required to be sent into the Nominations Committee prior to the convention. Luckily this was voted down by both McCain and Paul supporters.
To comply with state rules, we were required to vote for 3 delegates from each of the three congressional districts in Nevada, aside from an additional 22 delegates to bring the total to 31. Their second solution - after we voted down their rubber stamp idea - was to have each one of us only pick 5 delegates and the top 31 vote getters would be placed. This also was unacceptable to both sides and we managed to vote it down as well, enabling us to allow nominations from the floor and bringing fairness to those who had not received the nominations packet via mail and who therefore could not nominate themselves by the predetermined deadline.
Little did they tell us that these changes to the rules would throw us into overtime. Apparently long gone are the days when political conventions take more than their desired afternoon. Our convention hall was only booked until 5pm that evening, with no contingent plans for a run-over.
Shortly after we had taken our first vote to secure our 9 congressional district delegates (but before we had voted on the other 22 delegates-at-large), it started becoming apparent to vote counters and party leaders that the Ron Paul campaign had secured at least 6 and possibly 7 of the first 9 delegate spots up for grabs. This has been confirmed by vote counters of both sides - McCain’s and Paul’s.
However, in the middle of voting and before one district had finished, Beers swung the gavel, ending the convention without discussion or debate (against the rules of the convention) and notifying us that it was our fault because we had changed the previous rules that would have apparently safe-guarded us from running out of time (with no mention to the over 2 hours of wasted time that morning). He stated the party would inform us of when we would reconvene within the week. Senator Beers and other party officials quickly shut off the microphones, turned off most of the lights and left the building.
As you can imagine, mayhem ensued. Beers stated that our contract was up on the room, disallowing any discussion for alternatives, despite the fact the hotel managers came in shortly after and informed us we could extend the contract. Most delegates were even willing to help cover the added cost of the convention hall, in order to save themselves the expense of additional travel in the future and waved their cash in the air to prove it.
During this time, our fair and friendly McCain delegate, Mike Weber (mentioned above) called for a quorum, essentially allowing us to continue the convention and giving us the possibility to vote in a new chairperson should Senator Beers choose not to return. Unfortunately to have any of our conducted business count, a quorum requires one half the delegates from the original delegate count. 674 delegates must have remained which we narrowly missed with only 590 delegates willing to continue.
Although many McCain supporters were equally outraged and stayed in attempts to conduct a continuation via quorum, many others strategically waited in the hall to ensure we didn’t have the numbers to conduct business (but staying close by to reenter, just in case we did). Because of this and because of the many Ron Paul supporters who left too quickly (despite the fact that we’d been counseled time and time again to remain past the end of the convention for just this reason), we were not able to continue working.
I almost forgot to mention the angry protesters, the near fist-fights by outraged delegates on both sides, and the McCain supporters saying we had "bought out" the chair person, Congressman Beers in order to win the delegates. At least it’s not only Ron Paul’s supporters who are uttering the word “conspiracy”.
The following morning it was brought to our attention by hotel personnel that the Republican Party had booked the same room for half the morning. Because of this, many of us (quickly calling and text messaging as many as we could) waited in hopes of reconvening. Unfortunately our hopes were unfounded, as by 10am it became apparent that all our efforts and expenses in coming to the State Convention had been a near waste and we would instead have to foot another bill for another convention at a later date.
There were many rumors flying. One was that phone conversations were overheard that implied the National Convention leaders had been watching Nevada closely and would rather cut us off than allow us to get a majority of delegates for Ron Paul and had therefore ordered the meeting shut down until they could formulate a plan to lock us and our delegates out. This however was hearsay and although possible, not easily provable.
Another rumor was that the reconvening was to be held at another convention center in town, which turned out to be untrue. Yet another rumor was that “the McCain people” were hiding in the wings of the hotel waiting for us all to leave the Peppermill so they could reconvene without us. This was unlikely but even if it were true, they would require the same quorum of 674 delegates and would not be able to meet the requirement, just as we had not been able to the previous night.
What do I personally think of all this?
I believe most of this is a result of poorly orchestrated and incompetent plans. Had we not wasted several hours with out-of-order and meaningless activities, fundraising or divisive joking that morning, we could have done the job we came to do. Instead convention planners assumed this new wing of the party would simply play along as the old guard has for decades.
Also, had the party leaders been happy with the results they were seeing, I do not believe they would have been so quick to walk out and would instead have sought solutions, such as meeting at a local high school or passing a collection plate to pay for the extended contract on the hall. Where was the consideration to those who had traveled long distances at their own expense and have to now do so again?
Do I believe this is a top-down conspiracy? Not exactly. However I do believe the favoritism and goal to squelch our efforts was apparent in their actions. Not because of a "vast motive to take over the world", but simply because they’ve become accustomed to the relative ease and comfort of the herd mentality and have given away all independent thought that does not fall in line with party loyalty.
It is my opinion that for too many Republicans, it’s become about sticking their heads in the sand and refusing to admit the fault of losing their conservative way. Let’s have our banquets, wear our lapel pins, wave our flags on our lawns and trust someone else to sort out the decisions. At this convention it become apparent to me that many (no, not all) of them cared more about their frivolous socializing and the label of “conservative”, than the true meaning behind that label or the meaning of why we were there at all.
What did Caesar say when asked what to do about citizen dissent? “Give them bread and circuses.” We now have proof that Caesars formula works well for most Republicans. All but those pesky and highly organized Ron Paul Republicans, of course.
[For anyone worrying about the Clark County platform that supported more regulations on homeschooling, I can assure you the State platform was very acceptable. The exact platform read as follows: 8. We support a parent's right to choice in education including vouchers, charter school, and home schooling. We also support the elimination of the U.S. Dept. of Education. We further oppose requiring licensure for parents who choose to home school. We support the elimination of the No Child Left Behind law and require the State of Nevada to replace the No Child Left Behind concept.]
Update: Here are some preliminary videos from the State Convention.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=5iKzVTl-eHI
http://youtube.com/watch?v=XUMjySV72p8&feature=user
Our convention was scheduled for Saturday, April 26th. After a surprisingly short wait we were signed in as delegates and seated. We were called into order with 1,347 delegates shortly after 9am.
That’s about where it started going wrong. The first two and a half hours of our day were spent listening to teary speeches and patriotic poetry, while watching black and white movie clips that were quite frankly offensive to my friends, family members and neighbors who consider themselves Democrats. I wasn’t the only person in attendance to find them divisive, immature and unnecessary. I also wasn’t the only person ready to get down to business rather than waste our time socializing.
One highlight of the morning was one of the best speeches I've heard Ron Paul give, earning him a standing ovation by most of the room, including McCain supporters.
However much the majority didn’t complain about the morning’s “entertainment”, they sure did complain when actual business was being conducted and taking longer than presumed necessary. I can’t remember the number of times I heard the phrase “in the interest of time” being uttered by party leaders and other delegates. The fact that many of us had driven over 400 miles to come to a convention to work, and were instead made to suffer through pointless banter and being rushed through the actual business at hand was frustrating.
Our chairperson, Senator Bob Beers was another frustration. Many of us support Bob Beers but his smugness and apparent inability to conduct business or understand the rules of order was unacceptable. Many times a delegate more rehearsed in parliamentarian law, Mike Weber, had to go to the microphone to (thankfully) correct Senator Beers’ procedures. This was at one point not very appreciated by Senator Beers, as he attempted to have this gentleman unduly removed by the Sergeant at Arms, which the entire room objected to having done. (This gentleman, although not with the Ron Paul camp, has received much respect and support of his fairness.)
And the frustrations continued. Apparently the reason we wasted so much time in the morning was because the party assumed we were simply there to rubber stamp their agenda - their rules, their by-laws, their platforms and their delegates. That’s right, they had already selected the delegates they would allow us to vote on after hand-picking from the nominations that were required to be sent into the Nominations Committee prior to the convention. Luckily this was voted down by both McCain and Paul supporters.
To comply with state rules, we were required to vote for 3 delegates from each of the three congressional districts in Nevada, aside from an additional 22 delegates to bring the total to 31. Their second solution - after we voted down their rubber stamp idea - was to have each one of us only pick 5 delegates and the top 31 vote getters would be placed. This also was unacceptable to both sides and we managed to vote it down as well, enabling us to allow nominations from the floor and bringing fairness to those who had not received the nominations packet via mail and who therefore could not nominate themselves by the predetermined deadline.
Little did they tell us that these changes to the rules would throw us into overtime. Apparently long gone are the days when political conventions take more than their desired afternoon. Our convention hall was only booked until 5pm that evening, with no contingent plans for a run-over.
Shortly after we had taken our first vote to secure our 9 congressional district delegates (but before we had voted on the other 22 delegates-at-large), it started becoming apparent to vote counters and party leaders that the Ron Paul campaign had secured at least 6 and possibly 7 of the first 9 delegate spots up for grabs. This has been confirmed by vote counters of both sides - McCain’s and Paul’s.
However, in the middle of voting and before one district had finished, Beers swung the gavel, ending the convention without discussion or debate (against the rules of the convention) and notifying us that it was our fault because we had changed the previous rules that would have apparently safe-guarded us from running out of time (with no mention to the over 2 hours of wasted time that morning). He stated the party would inform us of when we would reconvene within the week. Senator Beers and other party officials quickly shut off the microphones, turned off most of the lights and left the building.
As you can imagine, mayhem ensued. Beers stated that our contract was up on the room, disallowing any discussion for alternatives, despite the fact the hotel managers came in shortly after and informed us we could extend the contract. Most delegates were even willing to help cover the added cost of the convention hall, in order to save themselves the expense of additional travel in the future and waved their cash in the air to prove it.
During this time, our fair and friendly McCain delegate, Mike Weber (mentioned above) called for a quorum, essentially allowing us to continue the convention and giving us the possibility to vote in a new chairperson should Senator Beers choose not to return. Unfortunately to have any of our conducted business count, a quorum requires one half the delegates from the original delegate count. 674 delegates must have remained which we narrowly missed with only 590 delegates willing to continue.
Although many McCain supporters were equally outraged and stayed in attempts to conduct a continuation via quorum, many others strategically waited in the hall to ensure we didn’t have the numbers to conduct business (but staying close by to reenter, just in case we did). Because of this and because of the many Ron Paul supporters who left too quickly (despite the fact that we’d been counseled time and time again to remain past the end of the convention for just this reason), we were not able to continue working.
I almost forgot to mention the angry protesters, the near fist-fights by outraged delegates on both sides, and the McCain supporters saying we had "bought out" the chair person, Congressman Beers in order to win the delegates. At least it’s not only Ron Paul’s supporters who are uttering the word “conspiracy”.
The following morning it was brought to our attention by hotel personnel that the Republican Party had booked the same room for half the morning. Because of this, many of us (quickly calling and text messaging as many as we could) waited in hopes of reconvening. Unfortunately our hopes were unfounded, as by 10am it became apparent that all our efforts and expenses in coming to the State Convention had been a near waste and we would instead have to foot another bill for another convention at a later date.
There were many rumors flying. One was that phone conversations were overheard that implied the National Convention leaders had been watching Nevada closely and would rather cut us off than allow us to get a majority of delegates for Ron Paul and had therefore ordered the meeting shut down until they could formulate a plan to lock us and our delegates out. This however was hearsay and although possible, not easily provable.
Another rumor was that the reconvening was to be held at another convention center in town, which turned out to be untrue. Yet another rumor was that “the McCain people” were hiding in the wings of the hotel waiting for us all to leave the Peppermill so they could reconvene without us. This was unlikely but even if it were true, they would require the same quorum of 674 delegates and would not be able to meet the requirement, just as we had not been able to the previous night.
What do I personally think of all this?
I believe most of this is a result of poorly orchestrated and incompetent plans. Had we not wasted several hours with out-of-order and meaningless activities, fundraising or divisive joking that morning, we could have done the job we came to do. Instead convention planners assumed this new wing of the party would simply play along as the old guard has for decades.
Also, had the party leaders been happy with the results they were seeing, I do not believe they would have been so quick to walk out and would instead have sought solutions, such as meeting at a local high school or passing a collection plate to pay for the extended contract on the hall. Where was the consideration to those who had traveled long distances at their own expense and have to now do so again?
Do I believe this is a top-down conspiracy? Not exactly. However I do believe the favoritism and goal to squelch our efforts was apparent in their actions. Not because of a "vast motive to take over the world", but simply because they’ve become accustomed to the relative ease and comfort of the herd mentality and have given away all independent thought that does not fall in line with party loyalty.
It is my opinion that for too many Republicans, it’s become about sticking their heads in the sand and refusing to admit the fault of losing their conservative way. Let’s have our banquets, wear our lapel pins, wave our flags on our lawns and trust someone else to sort out the decisions. At this convention it become apparent to me that many (no, not all) of them cared more about their frivolous socializing and the label of “conservative”, than the true meaning behind that label or the meaning of why we were there at all.
What did Caesar say when asked what to do about citizen dissent? “Give them bread and circuses.” We now have proof that Caesars formula works well for most Republicans. All but those pesky and highly organized Ron Paul Republicans, of course.
[For anyone worrying about the Clark County platform that supported more regulations on homeschooling, I can assure you the State platform was very acceptable. The exact platform read as follows: 8. We support a parent's right to choice in education including vouchers, charter school, and home schooling. We also support the elimination of the U.S. Dept. of Education. We further oppose requiring licensure for parents who choose to home school. We support the elimination of the No Child Left Behind law and require the State of Nevada to replace the No Child Left Behind concept.]
Update: Here are some preliminary videos from the State Convention.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=5iKzVTl-eHI
http://youtube.com/watch?v=XUMjySV72p8&feature=user
Thursday, April 17, 2008
State Convention coming soon
The campaign has slowed down but the foot soldiers are still working. The issue in the last post has been taken care of and the homeschooling delegates are getting ready for the Nevada Repubican State Convention in just over a week.
Anyone in need of transportation, lodging or anything else need only contact briank@ronpaul2008.com.
I'll let you know how it goes!
Anyone in need of transportation, lodging or anything else need only contact briank@ronpaul2008.com.
I'll let you know how it goes!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
