Rethink Feminist Research Institute
Re “Katehi a candidate to lead institute on feminist research at UC Davis” (Local, Dec. 8): As an educational institution with a primary emphasis on agricultural sciences and engineering, I fail to see how the Feminist Research Institute contributes in a meaningful way to the core mission of the University of California. Any relevance appears to be distant at best.
The UC regents must assure focus on core missions/programs as well as reducing costs to students. Cutting all nonessential programs such as this would be a good start. If the program is indeed worthy, then we probably will also need an institute of masculine studies.
Mike Gibson, Fair Oaks
Sign Up and Save
Get six months of free digital access to The Sacramento Bee
Where is the outrage at UC?
Where is the outrage from the University of California and the public when a discredited chancellor, essentially fired from her position for malfeasance, is up for consideration to head the Feminist Research Institute at UC Davis?
It’s bad enough that she will receive a year’s salary and then be rewarded with a full professorship at the university, but now the added honor to head an institute. It is a demonstration of how low the university system has sunk in terms of morals, ethics, honor and worthiness of emulation.
Chuck Woods, Elk Grove
Had enough with the liberal venting
Re “Under Trump, America will have minority rule” (Viewpoints Dec. 8): Enough of liberal venting about Hillary Clinton winning the popular vote. E.J. Dionne’s statement, “So what we are doing now is neither fair nor in keeping with the founder’s vision,” is wrong.
During the constitutional convention, the small states objected to being dominated by big states, and so the compromise was the Senate and, to a lesser extent, the Electoral College would be based upon states. This was designed for minority protection, not minority rule. This election is exactly what the framers of our Constitution intended.
A message from a deplorable
My home has a sign posted for the holidays. It reads: “Welcome to my home, just a small basket full of what Hillary Clinton calls Donald Trump’s army of “DEPLORABLES.” Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!”
Trump’s supporters are described by Clinton as a bunch of white, uneducated, blue collar workers. There are always exceptions to any statement, and I bet that I must be that exception.
I am a 70-year-old white man. I have been married for 50 years to the same woman. I have an undergraduate degree in engineering and a master’s degree in business. I have worked as a senior manager in Fortune 100 companies. I served as a combat infantry platoon sergeant in Vietnam.
The truth is that there are more good Americans like me who voted for Trump than Clinton could imagine. For the first time in years I am excited about the possibilities of America becoming great again.
Richard K. Thompson, Roseville
Republicans have a neglectful memory
Re “Why so arrogant and aggrieved about Trump?” (Viewpoints, Dec. 8): There are members of both parties who compound the divisions that may prevent the nation from improving the lives of a majority of citizens. While Democrats truthfully note the rejection of President Barack Obama by Republicans, even after he won two elections with clear majorities, they should not be so aggrieved when Donald Trump continues to make unsupported claims and trashes a majority of voters who found him to be unfit.
It is tragic to hear so many excuse Trump’s campaign rhetoric by saying none of it mattered. Without any respect or recognition for a majority of Americans who voted for vastly different policies, the constant Republican call to Democrats to stop voicing their preferences is a neglectful memory that tides flow both with and against you.
EXTRA LETTERS ONLINE
Find them at:
HOW TO SUBMIT
Online form (preferred):
Other: Letters, P.O. Box 15779,
Sacramento, CA 95852
150-word limit. Include name, address and phone number. Letters may be edited for clarity, brevity and content.