September 9-10, 2014
Sep 09 01:57 SCSU dorm statistics Sep 09 06:58 Harry Reid, Minority Leader? Sep 09 07:46 DFL dishonesty reaches new low Sep 09 09:11 Goodell must go Sep 09 14:03 Horner endorses Jeff Johnson Sep 10 05:34 SCSU's impending budget cuts? Sep 10 07:12 Trickle down enrollment? Sep 10 07:54 Lee Lindquist: my physician, my friend Sep 10 19:33 The end of the Goodell era
Prior Months: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug
Prior Years: 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
SCSU dorm statistics
Dorm Occupancy in a Time of Declining Enrollments
by Silence Dogood
At multiple meetings, Vice President for Finance and Administration Tammy McGee has stated that the reason for the declining residence hall occupancy rate is that "SCSU is not providing the type of accommodations desired by students." Her argument sounds reasonable but does it stand up to close inspection?
From the Residential Life webpage:
According to the webpage, there are "a little more than 3500 students living on-campus." Additionally on the Residential Life webpage, each of the residence halls has a link that provides additional information and the capacity of each of the ten residence halls.
The capacity of each residence hall (taken from the Residential Life webpage for each of the residence halls) is listed in the following table:
The sum of the capacities equals 3,369, which isn't "a little more than 3500 students" as indicated on the website. The difference amounts to a difference of 129 students and represents an error of at least 3.7%. This might seem like a minor point, but it should not be too hard to determine the capacity of each of the residence halls and determine the total capacity.
However, this is only a part of the story. Last fall, the Residential Life website listed the following capacities of the residence halls.
So it is now understandable how one could come up with the statement "a little more than 3500 students" since it shows a capacity of 3,567. For FY'14, only Shoemaker hall was closed for renovations and perhaps the capacity was reduced in the remodeling. If you have an empty two-person room and you 'change' the capacity to one person, you have simultaneously reduced your capacity and increased your percentage occupancy by the stroke of a pen. As a result, if you can change the capacity of the residence halls, occupancy rates really mean nothing. As a result, we need to talk about the numbers of students living in the residence halls rather than the occupancy rate.
In the fall of 2009, the year before Coborn's Plaza Apartments opened, residence hall occupancy on campus was 96% (according to Dan Pederson, Director of Residential Life). If you subtract the Coborn's Plaza Apartments from the total capacity you have a total capacity of 3,114. If there was 96% occupancy, this would mean there were 2,989 students living in the residence halls. Unless the percentage of students wanting to live in the residence halls increased in the Fall of 2010, the net effect of adding Coborn's Plaza Apartments to the dorm capacity would be to lower the occupancy rate from 96% to 84%.
It seems as if the whole idea behind building Coborn's Plaza Apartments was "if we build it, they will come." Yet no data was ever provided to show that the 43% occupancy of Coborn's Plaza Apartments in the first year of occupancy (FY11) was due to new students. In fact, one of the major selling points for Coborn's Plaza was that it was intended for upper-level students. That certainly went by the wayside with the low occupancy level during the first year and now first-year students as well as students from St. Cloud Technical and Community College now reside there.
From FY11 to FY14, SCSU's FYE enrollment has fallen by 17.2%. Again, assuming the same percentage of students wanted to live in the residence halls, the enrollment decline would reduce the residence hall occupancy to 67%. However, the story doesn't end here. With the explosive growth in the S2S program, over 3,300 of the students counted as being enrolled at SCSU, approximately 20% of the headcount enrollment, are actually in high school and living at home. As a result, the decline in SCSU's pool of potential residents for the residence halls would reduce the occupancy rate to less than 60% if interest in resident hall living remained constant.
Dan Pederson and his staff have done a marvelous job of selling the residence halls on campus and keeping the occupancy in the vicinity of 70% during this time of declining enrollment and shifts in student body composition to include large numbers of high school students. Let's hope the increase in occupancy rate is not due to playing games with the capacity numbers by artificially reducing capacity.
Unfortunately, at a 70% occupancy rate, there is room for over 1,000 students in the residence halls. A total of 779 empty spaces are accounted for in two dorms (Stearns and Holes) that are being mothballed. Additionally, there are approximately 100 empty spaces in the Coborn's Plaza Apartments as well as empty spaces in the other seven residence halls.
From the Residential Life website, we find the following:
"Living on campus is a great value. It's easy to budget when you know exactly what your expenses will be. In the halls, there are no hookup charges for cable TV. There are no deposits or hidden costs. Meals are included, as well as some extra money on your ID card for late night snacks! Our residence hall costs are well below the national average, making them very affordable for students. The full academic year costs for room and board are approximately $7236. This includes everything (food, utilities, expanded basic cable TV, ResLife Cinema movie channel, on-line computer access, etc.)."
Assuming that the data is accurate, 1,000 fewer students who could live in the residence halls represents the loss $7,236,000 in room and board revenue. On August 6, 2014, an SCSU press release listed the cost of tuition at MnSCU universities as $7,340. Thus 1,000 students represent a loss of $7,340,000 in lost tuition. Combined, the 1,000 'lost' students cost SCSU a total of $14,576,000 in revenue this year!
Clearly, all of the $14,576,000 would not be profit to the university but it would certainly raise the number of credits by 1,000 FYE and help in our state allocation calculation. Additionally, these missing 1,000 students are not present to create an additional positive economic impact for the campus and the St. Cloud community!
So back to Vice President for Finance and Administration Tammy McGee's argument that SCSU doesn't have the type of housing desired by students. Clearly, her argument doesn't hold up to close examination because the occupancy of the residence halls is actually higher than expected with the declining enrollment. As a result, the percentage of students that would normally desire accommodations in the residence halls has gone up. Her thinking that on-campus housing is less desirable is based on looking at the total numbers of students living in the residence halls and not understanding how the additional capacity and the decline in the number of the potential residence hall residents affects the occupancy rate. One might expect more of a CFO where accounting is involved.
Posted Tuesday, September 9, 2014 10:36 AM
No comments.
Harry Reid, Minority Leader?
Stuart Rothenberg's latest article predicts a GOP majority in the Senate:
While the current Rothenberg Political Report ratings don't show it, I am now expecting a substantial Republican Senate wave in November, with a net gain of at least seven seats. But I wouldn't be shocked by a larger gain.
Rothenberg then adds this:
But I've witnessed 17 general elections from my perch in D.C., including eight midterms, and I sometimes develop a sense of where the cycle is going before survey data lead me there. Since my expectations constitute little more than an informed guess, I generally keep them to myself.
This year is different. I am sharing them with you.
Then he explains why he's expecting a big Republican wave in the Senate:
After looking at recent national, state and congressional survey data and comparing this election cycle to previous ones, I am currently expecting a sizable Republican Senate wave.
The combination of an unpopular president and a midterm election (indeed, a second midterm) can produce disastrous results for the president's party. President Barack Obama's numbers could rally, of course, and that would change my expectations in the blink of an eye. But as long as his approval sits in the 40-percent range (the August NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll), the signs are ominous for Democrats.
The generic congressional ballot currently is about even among registered voters. If that doesn't change, it is likely to translate into a Republican advantage of a few points among 'likely' voters. And recent elections when Republicans have even a small advantage have resulted in significant GOP years.
There's a dozen political lifetimes between now and Election Day so things can change. Still, Stuart Rothenberg has been doing these predictions for decades. I'm willing to trust him because his explanation makes sense.
Predictably, Rothenberg says that Republicans will flip West Virginia, South Dakota and Montana. Democrats aren't even competitive in those seats. Arkansas and Louisiana are both uphill climbs for Democrats because those states are increasingly Republican states. North Carolina is still close but that's only because of North Carolina's large African-American population.
If those states flip, that's the 6 seats Republicans need for the majority. The bad news for Democrats is that those aren't the only states that are competitive. Terry Lynn Land is virtually tied with Gary Peters in Michigan. Joni Ernst leads Bruce Braley in Iowa, though usually by less than a point. New Hampshire is suddenly competitive. In Minnesota, Al Franken is vulnerable because he's been a do-nothing senator, with the exception of rubberstamping President Obama's and Sen. Reid's agenda. That's before talking about how competitive Colorado and Alaska are.
Posted Tuesday, September 9, 2014 6:58 AM
No comments.
DFL dishonesty reaches new low
This LTE takes DFL dishonesty to a new low. About 2 weeks ago, Jim Knoblach wrote an op-ed that a recent mailer he sent out was justified in including past endorsements because he identified them as past endorsements. This LTE attempts to make the case that the mailer is misleading:
What this DFL hatchetman is talking about is anyone's guess. First, he says that Jim Knoblach's LTE is "deceptive." I'd love hearing that explanation, especially considering the fact that Knoblach identified them as "past endorsements." Apparently, this DFL activist/hatchetman was confused by Jim Knoblach's honesty. Perhaps, Jim was too honest for this DFL hatchetman to understand.
Former Rep. Jim Knoblach wrote Aug. 25 ( "Endorsement note was reasonable") saying he felt he was reasonable in listing prior endorsements on a campaign mailing.
I feel he was being deceptive. Upon looking at this mailing, Knoblach also listed receiving the Minnesota Police & Peace Officers Association and the Minnesota Association of Professional Employees endorsements. Those are both associations that have already endorsed our Rep. Zach Dorholt for this election.
While the brochure is correct in saying that they are "past endorsements," it comes off that these are endorsements he expects to receive again, not endorsements that he is not even going to try and attain this election.
If a candidate tells the truth, it isn't the candidate's fault that the DFL activist reading the LTE didn't comprehend what was said. That's the reader's fault.
If this is the type of deceptive campaigning Knoblach is going to run this fall, it is not one that I want to represent me in St. Paul. I wholeheartedly hope all of you will vote for Zach Dorholt, as he has been nothing but honest in his campaign and in St. Paul.
First, the writer can't figure out what the phrase "past endorsements" means. Then he accuses Jim Knoblach of running a deceptive campaign. This DFL activist should be criticized for lying through his teeth. I don't believe for a split-second that this DFL activist is that stupid.
I've known Jim Knoblach for years. He's one of the most honest people I've ever met. Accusing Jim of running a "deceptive campaign" is taking it too far. As I said earlier, Jim communicated clearly that he'd gotten endorsed by the MPPOA and MAPE in the past. If this DFL activist wants to push this as deceptive campaigning, then he'd better have a better argument than this because this is feeble. I'm definitely not ok with people dishonestly accusing an honest man with running a "deceptive campaign."
In fact, I'd argue that Mike Lawson, the guy who wrote the LTE, is the dishonest person in all this.
Posted Tuesday, September 9, 2014 7:46 AM
No comments.
Goodell must go
Predictably, the Ray Rice/Roger Goodell disaster isn't going away anytime soon. Thankfully, outsiders are forcing the NFL to do the right thing. Jonathan Capehart's post provides a sensible solution to the NFL's lack of integrity problem:
Condoleezza Rice made a startling admission to the New York Times in 2002. The then-national security adviser to President George W. Bush said it was 'absolutely right' that she wanted to be commissioner of the National Football League. This was no joke. Rice was serious, but she wanted it to be known that she wouldn't want to do it 'before Paul Tagliabue is ready to step down.'
Well, Tagliabue is long gone and his successor Roger Goodell has made a mess of it. Time for the former secretary of state with an intense love of the game to step in and save the NFL.
Despite the NFL's statement that they hadn't seen the in-the-elevator video before TMZ published it Monday morning, despite the Ravens' insistence that they didn't know, essentially, that Rice was a monster, the reality is that Roger Goodell and the Ravens got this sickeningly wrong.
These are phony excuses made by people who think they can do whatever they want. The reality is that TMZ's video should've been irrelevant. When the NFL and the Ravens saw Ray Rice dragging his unconcious then-fiancee out of that elevator, they should've ended his career. The Ravens should've said that they were releasing Rice that morning. The NFL should've said that they wouldn't tolerate that type of violence. Period.
Players, coaches and executives who committed such heinous acts of violence don't have the right to wear an NFL jersey. Period.
If there's anything that Condi Rice would bring to the commissioner's job, it's integrity and gravitas. Goodell essentially did what the owners wanted him to do. Since he's employed by them, that isn't unreasonable. What's unreasonable, though, is turning a blind eye when a thug pummels a woman.
At that point, Goodell had an affirmative obligation to step forward and say 'This isn't about promoting the NFL. It's about doing what's right.'
On that count, Goodell and the Ravens failed miserably.
It's apparent that Goodell tried his best to protect a star player from a recent Super Bowl champion. Suspending Ray Rice for 2 games isn't getting it wrong, like Goodell claims. He's making an alleged $44,000,000 a year as commissioner. People who aren't bright don't get hire into $44,000,000-a-year jobs.
The Ravens are complicit in this, too. They accepted the suspension without complaint, figuring they'd gotten a gift from the NFL. They even posted this tweet on their website:
The Ravens should be criticized mercilessly for their role in this humanitarian disaster. Yesterday on ESPN's NFL Live, SportsNation Ravens beat reporter Jamison Hensley reported that the Ravens' initial reaction yesterday morning after TMZ published the video, the Raven's initial reaction was to not terminate Rice's contract. It wasn't until they saw the public's outrage that they decided to terminate Ray Rice's contract.
If the NFL fires Goodell and replaces him with Condi Rice, they won't have to worry about doing the right thing when it's the only option left. Under Condi Rice's leadership and integrity, they'll do the right thing the first time.
That's why Goodell must go. ASAP.
Posted Tuesday, September 9, 2014 9:11 AM
Comment 1 by walter hanson at 09-Sep-14 01:46 PM
Gary:
I know that you're giving Rodger some well deserved grief, but if Democrats in Minnesota can think it's okay to have a job when you don't read bills let alone think through what bad things might happen before making a decision it's okay to have a job every Democrat in Minnesota already has said that Rodger should keep his job.
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
Comment 2 by David Solomon at 09-Sep-14 07:36 PM
fire that jerk Roger Goodell ASAP, he is a loser and jerk.Get rid of the bum once and for all.
Comment 3 by walter hanson at 09-Sep-14 10:21 PM
David:
Did Goodell punch a lady in an elevator? I believe that is what makes Rice a loser and jerk. The fact that he reviewed badly shows that Goodell was incompetent not a loser or jerk.
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
Horner endorses Jeff Johnson
Tom Horner, the Independence Party's gubernatorial candidate in 2010, endorsed GOP gubernatorial candidat Jeff Johnson this morning. Here's part of Horner's statement:
'As an independent-minded person, I took a good hard look at all the candidates, but it didn't take me much time to come to the conclusion that Jeff Johnson is a different kind of politician, and that he will make an excellent governor.
Jeff has the right priorities - helping people climb the economic ladder, expanding educational opportunities, and focusing government spending on things that work. But what strikes me most about Jeff is not his politics, but rather his temperament.
Jeff Johnson will need to win lots of independent voters. Horner's endorsement statement will help with that. Horner's statement highlights 2 of Jeff Johnson's biggest selling points to independent-thinking voters.
First, Jeff isn't just intereste in creating jobs. Jeff's interested in helping create the types of jobs that turn into good-paying careers.
Second, Jeff's policies represent Main Street's priorities. There's no doubt that Jeff's a conservative. The good news is that Jeff's conservative principles fit nicely with Minnesota's priorities.
That can't be said about Gov. Dayton. Mr. Horner highlighted that rather quickly:
'Time and again, Mark Dayton has had to choose between doing the right thing for average Minnesotans or doing the things his campaign contributors wanted - forcing child care providers to unionize is just one example - and he has always chosen his campaign contributors.
Time and again, Mark Dayton has bucked responsibility for unpopular decisions or failures - how many times, for instance, have we heard Dayton say he didn't know a provision was in a bill?
Gov. Dayton has insisted that he didn't know key provisions in bills were in the bills he negotiated, then signed. Here's a partial list of provisions Gov. Dayton claims he didn't know were in bills:
- PSLs, aka Personal Seat Licenses, in the Vikings stadium bill;
- Farm Equipment Repair Sales Tax in the Tax Bill;
- kids that mow lawns for money on a weekly basis would have to pay sales tax.
In addition to those provisions, Gov. Dayton didn't know that MNsure was a total mess. He literally didn't know that data security was terrible. Gov. Dayton didn't know that April Todd-Malmlov took a 2-week vacation while the website was frequently crashing.
At what point will Minnesotans insist that their governor actually have a clue what's happening on a daily basis? Gov. Dayton doesn't fit that description.
It's time for a new direction. The economy beyond the Twin Cities is mediocre. Minnesota's competitiveness with other states is minimal. Worst of all, Gov. Dayton's decisions are determined almost exclusively by what his campaign contributors want.
Posted Tuesday, September 9, 2014 2:03 PM
Comment 1 by walter hanson at 09-Sep-14 05:12 PM
Gary I would've highlighted in an election where Horner got (insert Horner votes) that he just asked all (insert Horner votes again) to vote for Jeff Johnson for governor.
And if I remember that number right it was way more than Dayton won his election by.
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
Comment 2 by Rex Newman at 09-Sep-14 05:57 PM
Forgive me if I cannot see what terrible flaw(s) Tom Emmer had that Johnson does not. Thank you for the endorsement, Tom. Now, please go away.
Comment 3 by Chad Q at 09-Sep-14 06:23 PM
Pretty rich that Horner is now endorsing the GOP candidate over the DFL candidate he helped get elected.
Comment 4 by Gary Gross at 09-Sep-14 07:42 PM
Walter, Horner got about 10-12% of the vote. Dayton and Emmer each got approximately 41%, with Dayton winning by 8,300 votes or thereabouts.
Rex, Tom had definitely had some flaws then that probably cost him that election. The good news this year is that he's learned from 2010. He'll win handily.
Chad, the irony is noteworthy but if it helps Jeff win, I'm totally cool with it.
SCSU's impending budget cuts?
Are 5% Budget Cuts Fair?
by Silence Dogood
The FYE enrollment at SCSU has declined from FY10 to FY14 by 17.8%. The administration has also projected a 4-5% decline for FY15. As a result of enrollment declines, the administration has finally acted. As a result of enrollment declines, the administration has finally acted and last week has taken back 5% across the board from department's budgets. One might say that it's great that the administration has finally decided to do something to plug the $8,000,000 - $10,000,000 shortfall they say now exists. Others might ask why it's taken so long to act and that across the board cuts are inherently unfair.
The following figure shows FYE production by school/college from FY12 through FY14 (The data was provided by the administration). The abbreviations are School of Education (SOE), College of Liberal Arts (CLA), College of Science and Engineering (COSE), School of Public Administration (SOPA), School of Health and Human Services (SSHS), and Herberger Business School (HBS).
Clearly, not all schools/colleges have declined by the same amount. Only COSE shows an increase in FYE from FY13 to FY14. Using FY12 as the baseline, the following figure shows the percentage change in FYE production for FY14 for each of the colleges/schools.
While it is clear that all of the schools/colleges are down, it is also very clear that the enrollment decline has hit some schools/colleges much harder than others. From FY12 through FY14, FYE enrollment declined 11.0%. As a result, some schools/colleges improved their position relative to the others during this decline while others have lost ground.
Even though the percent decline is nearly four times greater for the School of Education than the College of Science and Engineering, President Potter's solution is to cut 5% across the board. While we normally like to think it is fair to treat everyone the same, sometimes treating everyone the same is patently unfair when you know that everyone is not the same.
Cutting budgets unilaterally does not take into account the differences in performance. Both CLA and SSHS have dropped by approximately the same percentage as that experienced by the university. SOE and SOPA have dropped by nearly twice the percentage as that experienced by the university (let's call them the losers). COSE and HBS have declined significantly less than that experienced by the university (let's call them the winners). In life there are always winners and losers. However, in this case, by cutting unilaterally, it doesn't make a difference if you have been a winner or a loser.
As a result, cutting unilaterally will hurt the very schools/colleges that have been successful during this most recent period of enrollment decline. If you are drowning, you probably aren't too concerned about fairness so unilateral cuts may be the expedient thing to do as well as the simple thing to do. But it may also certainly not the smartest thing to do.
If you spend any time looking at SCSU's budget, the vast majority of the budget is already committed to salaries and other expenses (such as debt service, electricity, etc: ) that cannot easily be cut. Salaries for faculty and staff make up the largest percentage of the budget. Eliminating tenured faculty is typically not an easy or a quick thing to do. Administrators and staff have contracts that can be terminated with appropriate notification. In the case of administrators, 90 days notification is all that is necessary. Adjuncts, fixed-terms, overload and reassigned time are easier targets. Unfortunately, the adjuncts and fixed-term faculty are some of the lowest cost faculty and at the same time generate very large numbers of credits. In some cases, eliminating these people is not sound academic or fiscal policy.
The most unfortunate part of this situation is that, for the past few years, President Potter denied that a problem even existed! By not recognizing the problem early enough, drastic measures will need to be taken. Now that the problem of declining can no longer be ignored, President Potter has decided to take the easy way out. Knowing how things have been going the past few years, this is hardly unexpected.
Posted Wednesday, September 10, 2014 5:34 AM
Comment 1 by Crimson Trace at 10-Sep-14 09:09 AM
If your ship starts to take on a little water, it's a lot easier to deal with the problem right away instead of waiting until the bow goes underwater. Gary, you've followed this for quite some time now. Is it realistic to think an $8 to $10 million dollar budget deficit at SCSU will now be solved using a 5% across the board cut without laying off employees? If you ask me, it's like having the captain ordering his crew to bail water out of the ship using their teaspoons.
Trickle down enrollment?
Dick Andzenge's monthly column was valuable in that it caused me to rethink what drives a university's enrollment. Here's what got me thinking this through:
To some students, the location, cost and availability of desired programs are primary reasons for choosing universities. Any change in these three can affect their decisions. To some students, the reputation of particular programs or university is the major determining factor.
Simply drifting through the university without learning does not build the university's reputation. If institutional reputation is that important in recruitment and retention, then those of us who work for the university are the institutions' ambassadors.
While each of those things are legitimate and important considerations, there's more to it than that. For instance, if campus morale is low, both with the faculty and with students, there's no question that morale will have a negative impact on enrollment. To that point, there's no question that on-campus morale is low. The Great Place to Work Institute's Trust Index Survey yielded told us that:
Only 26% of survey respondents agreed that "We're all in this togther." What's worse is that only 21% of survey respondents agreed that there's a "family or team feeling" at St. Cloud State.
Professors and staff whose morale is low won't recommend St. Cloud State to their neighbors or their family. While it's impossible to specifically quantify how much that affects St. Cloud State enrollment, there can't be any doubt that it's having a negative impact.
Why would anyone want to enroll at a university that's run by president whose policies are more ad hoc than they are well thought through policies?
The Great Place to Work Institute Trust Index Survey blindsided President Potter. Multiple people in the room described President Potter's facial expression as being stone-faced and filled with disbelief. That's what happens when a president lives in a bubble, insulated from the realities of his decisions.
There's no question that word's gotten out that President Potter hasn't always exhibited the type of poise you'd expect from a university president. I wrote about one of President Potter's temper tantrums in this post . That type of outburst isn't the type of thing that'll tell potential students that SCSU is the place they'd like to enroll at.
Another factor that can't help but impact St. Cloud State's enrollment is the reputation of the various programs. Right now, St. Cloud State's academic reputation isn't exactly soaring. When SCSU spends more than $400,000 on rebranding the University, that's an indication it isn't doing well.
When the University spends more than $400,000 on rebranding and all it gets is "Think. Do. Make a difference." for a slogan, people naturally find it difficult to take that institute of higher learning seriously.
There's nothing in St. Cloud State's advertising that makes them stand out. There's nothing in word-of-mouth advertising that's telling potential students that SCSU is a great place to learn career skills.
If President Potter's leadership, decisionmaking and attitude don't change, the downward cycle SCSU's in will continue until he retires or he's fired. The minute he leaves and is replaced by someone who's a real leader with a coherent plan, SCSU will return to being a university of choice.
Posted Wednesday, September 10, 2014 7:12 AM
No comments.
Lee Lindquist: my physician, my friend
I've been privileged to call Lee Lindquist my friend for almost 20 years. I've been fortunate to call Lee my primary care physician for 15 of those years. The selfish side of me regrets that today is Lee's last day. After 41 years of work for CentraCare, Lee is retiring to spend time with his delightful wife Julie. This video, shot by WJON, offers a great insight into Lee's medical practice:
I have to inject a personal story into this tribute to Lee because it showed how he put being a friend first. On Aug. 6, 1998, I had what I thought was a heart attack while at work. After being taken to the ER, they ran some tests. The ER doctors told me that a) I'd be admitted to the hospital and b) further tests would be run to determine what had happened.
The next day, I was told by a cardiologist that they wanted to do a angiogram, which I immediately consented to. Before I left the hospital room for the procedure, I asked what would happen if they found something alarming. They said that they'd probably do an angioplasty.
The first thing I asked was if we could do this all in one procedure. The nurse told me that's what they'd prefer. My brother called Lee the night before the procedure. It's my understanding that Lee told my brother that he should call Lee when he knew more. The next morning, my brother updated Lee, at which point Lee came over to observe the angiogram. When the cardiologist finished the angiogram, Lee updated my brother, telling him that they'd found a major blockage in the main artery and that they would implant 2 stents.
Lee's first instinct that morning was to be my brother's friend first, then to be the excellent doctor he's always been to his other patients. When Lee observed those procedures, I was his friend, not his patient. That wouldn't happen until a few years later.
In my opinion, Lee's medical credentials are topnotch. Whenever I've had an ailment or condition, Lee's diagnosis and treatment were spot on. I can honestly say that he never got a diagnosis wrong with me.
Lee Lindquist's star shined brightly those 41 years. Now it's time for Lee to move into a different phase of his life. While he isn't my physician anymore, he'll forever be my friend.
Lee, I wish you and Julie nothing but the best. Take care and God bless your life together.
Posted Wednesday, September 10, 2014 7:54 AM
No comments.
The end of the Goodell era
Roger Goodell's time as the commissioner of the NFL is all but officially history. Today, league owners like Jerry Jones, Robert Kraft and John Mara had voiced their support of him. This AP article will force these owners to withdraw their support of Commissioner Goodell:
A law enforcement official says he sent a video of Ray Rice punching his then-fiancee to an NFL executive three months ago, while league officers have insisted they didn't see the violent images until this week.
If this is verified, which I suspect it will, then Goodell will have made a less-than-truthful statement to CBS host Norah O'Donnell on national TV. At that point, Goodell's ability to mete out discipline on players and executives will be demolished. At this point, he doesn't have any credibility left.
Here's the NFL's reaction to the AP's story:
"We have no knowledge of this," the NFL said in a statement Wednesday. "We are not aware of anyone in our office who possessed or saw the video before it was made public on Monday. We will look into it."
It isn't likely that the AP would've published this article if they couldn't verify this information multiple ways. I can't imagine the AP publishing that article that tarnishes the NFL's reputation without extensive verification.
There's no way the AP would publish that article if it wasn't completely verified. Publishing an inaccurate article that tarnishes the NFL's reputation would trigger a lawsuit by th NFL.
That's the last thing the AP would want because the NFL has a fleet of the best lawyers in the United States on retainer. Running a story against the NFL that's based on gossip is financial suicide. That isn't a risk the AP is willing to take.
What that means is that Roger Goodell's credibility is pretty much tarnished for at least a decade. That won't sit well with NFL owners.
Posted Wednesday, September 10, 2014 7:33 PM
No comments.
