Glenn writes in part:

> The choice of politics or religion has nothing to do with education or
>  ability.  The choice of conservative or liberal has little (if anything) to
>  do with providing a quality of life that is acceptable for all who reside
in
>  an area.  Just because the past developments of high tech corridors have
>  routinely been developed in urban, liberal areas really has no association
>  with education.  There are pockets of highly educated people spread
>  throughout the country where highly intelligent people have chosen to
>  locate - and where high tech centers have failed to materialize.  The high
>  tech corridors have developed in areas where either a large contingent of
>  young have taken up residents or in climates that are conducive to a
>  year-round life style.  Areas around large  universities are notorious for
>  such development (i.e. - Austin, TX; Boulder, CO;  Boston, MA; Raleigh /
>  Durham, NC: and San Francisco, CA).  However, areas such as Chicago
>  (Northwestern), Columbus, Ohio (OSU), Ann Arbor, MI (U of M) are equally
>  awash in liberal ideology and high education levels - and yet are
>  conspicuously absent from any list of high-tech havens.

Glenn's response was both very reasonable and very cogent, and it deserves an
equally well formulated response. Unfortunately, I won't have time this
afternoon to do that, but I will respond as soon as I can.

I also received several private emails that were similarly well written and
well thought-out that repeat some of Glenn's primary points. I'll try and
respond to all of them simultaneously.

Wirt Atmar