STS

No. Big government equals more government. Abolishing the SBoHE would mean less government i.e. smaller government. The nickname issue will actually be a good "trial by fire" for the SBoHE, if they recognize what North Dakota wants and snap-to, good for them. If they bite the hands that feed them, it may need to go. And before someone says it, if it's that "small" of an issue, they should have no problem letting it go and doing what the state wants.

The "only following orders" argument is getting so thin it's transparent. Very soon people who have been claiming to be pro-Sioux and just doing their job are going to have to stand on their own, especially at the SBoHE.

Since your comprehension is so superior to the rest of us, what dollar amount do the terms "proper" and "adequate" prescribe? And if you can spare just a bit more of your valuable time to educate us poor, uneducated rubes, who would decide what is "proper" and "adequate"? Pssst, maybe there's some clues to the process in this article. Yes, the SBoHE seems to have the constitutional right to tell the legislature to go pound sand, but just because you CAN, doesn't mean that you SHOULD. Should the SBoHE spit in the face of North Dakotans on an issue that seems to have enthusiastic and overwhelming support? I would say probably not, but CAN they? Sure, and if/when the constitutional amendment abolishing the SBoHE is on the ballot will voters remember what they chose to do? Will voters be reminded?

...or if they value their jobs and/or budget. The legislature is already "involved" in higher ed, if UND, NDSU, etc... were private schools, they would be uninvolved.

There's that, which I would think is unlikely, and the fact that the legislature has a firm grasp on the purse strings. It just may not be wise to oppose a strong majority in both houses and the general public, especially with some polishing up the guillotine.

Your probably right. I just don't think "their turf" is as sound of footing as you, and possibly they, think it is.

It may or may not be their right, that's why there's a judicial branch and checks and balances. And the SBoHE may want to tread carefully no matter how constitutionally sound their position is, I'm not saying the other shoe is dropping, but it's definitely out there. With the momentum behind this issue, I'd be very careful about standing against it.

I agree, but here you are proving yours post after post. I'm not saying it's an education issue. I'm saying as long as UND is a STATE school, it can be administered by the STATE. You raising the big government argument is the dumbest thing I've seen in this thread, but then you surpassed even yourself by somehow bringing up health care, well done sir. We're off topic and straying into verboten territory, but it's a good day for North Dakota, and getting better and better as the night passes at The Ralph. Go Sioux!

Since their nose is already where it doesn't belong (education), they may as well weigh in on the administration of such things.

You're too busy trolling SiouxSports.com to actually keep up on Sioux sports. GTFO.

I don't think there's even a glass.

Bumping this up to the top. If you're having Sioux Hockey withdrawals, want to escape the Kristo "controversy" for a bit, or just love hockey head down to Fargo tonight and take in the Fargo Force game against the Omaha Lancers. In addition to featuring future Sioux players your ticket purchase supports a great cause.

What's this "Ole" crap?

Yeah, but they don't have The Fighting Sioux in the Big Sky.

Completely understand, that's why I asked instead of just right clicked. Nice work!

Couldn't agree more, on a separate issue, mind if I steal your avatar for use on another forum?

No problem, love the last couple of seconds of the vid of Lasch on the bench doing his best suffocating fish impression.

Alright, so Roe escaped for the time being. But here's the hit on Lasch just for smiles.

Now, if somebody would just crush Roe a-la Lasch at the Final Five it would be a perfect night. I'm sick of the little stick swinging punk!

Do you really think that a truly better option could be suppressed, by anyone, let alone the nefarious oil industry? If there were an alternative to internal combustion, a real alternative that doesn't need to be propped up with MASSIVE government subsidies or equally MASSIVE punitive taxes, that is. How would you even do such a thing? It's less about money and politics and more about the fact that they aren't economically viable, and oh yeah, people don't want them. Why would a company produce something nobody wants to buy?

Don't get too excited. If you're familiar with the movie Army of Darkness, the appropriate quote is "it's a trick, get an axe." It's a typically two-faced scheme to garner support for cap and trade, promise next to nothing, then renege. Just like nuclear energy, it will be tied up with endless litigation and red tape by certain interests. Remember ten years ago when the reason not to drill was that it would take ten years to come on-line, think about that next time you're tanking up, and then again next time you're voting.

??

Resignation accepted under the condition that I never again have to hear that "what New Orleans really needs is something to believe in blah blah blah."