The marginalize Maureen parade continues, this one I can pass on.
Polinaut reports.
I remember last cycle, Tarryl Clark gave the keynote "endorse Ol' El" speech at the convention in - Blaine of all places. Bob Olson had some nice food there, and nice people who had stayed with his effort to the end.
I really want to see both of the DFL candidates on the issues. It is about time.
Higher education, beyond the easy question of having to be more responsible on the problematic escalating of undergrad tuition - we all know that's bad and Pawlenty's fault; but what about post graduate excellence?
Reed was a Regent head, and with her holding an MD degree, and Clark a lawyer, each has experience in higher education beyond getting an undergraduate degree.
So, Clark, Reed, any thoughts on how it takes forever vigilance and funding to build first rate excellence, and how it can be blown with tenured people leaving in droves if government gets negligent about commitment to quality, or dirt cheap on funding.
Which of the two will come forward with the best ideas - never mind cheapest, we know what the GOP mantra is, we want the best.
It's the seed corn of the future - it is quality jobs for decades.
It is sense or nonsense.
DFL or GOP.
And we know the GOP on education is total nonsense - teaching lukewarm creationism aka "intelligent design," as if it were science had Bachmann gotten her way while in the State Senate. Wisdom, instead, prevailed. The dunce effort died in committee.
Now, of two DFL contenders, do they differ and in what details (it still is two despite the most conservative ranks of the "GOP-lite" wing of the DFL getting together in agreement over Clark per the Polinaut reporting).
We live in interesting times.
