LETTERS: SB Southampton, teacher concessions and more
Reopen Southampton, cut budget elsewhere
The editorial "Let ideas on future of Southampton campus be heard" bothers me. In the very first sentence, Newsday basically tells us that the Stony Brook University president is the king no matter what, and his decision will not be changed by some court.
Then it says that he should sit down with us and let us hear his explanations and rationale for what he has done at our kids' college. Spare me, please. We have all been hearing and reading that rhetoric for five months. Another meeting to hear more of the same is not needed.
A meeting to discuss ways of reinstating the dormitory and environmental sustainability program at Southampton, while at the same time looking for expanded educational uses, would be more productive. Let's have an open meeting to discuss other cost-cutting alternatives.
I'm not interested in hearing yet again about Stony Brook's budget shortages when I already know how much they waste on excessive administration and their own executive salaries. I am not interested in hearing about the progress they are making in finding "other uses" for my daughter's college as they throw her out.
Julie Semente
Teacher concessions not the norm for LI
With regard to the story about some teachers agreeing to salary concessions : Most Long Island teachers will still be getting annual salary increases plus step increases and education credit pay jumps.
Teacher salaries on Long Island are far above the national average.
George Rand
Put troop news
front and center
A recent letter writer was absolutely right .
Who cares who dances with whom or which star gets arrested or who goes out with whom? These are unimportant people. Our soldiers are the important ones. I am a combat veteran of World War II, served in Africa, Sicily and Normandy. I resent the fact that Newsday puts the war in parts of the paper where many readers don't look. Honor our soldiers by putting what they are up against on Page 2.
Arno Heller
Nation must work together for recovery
When President Barack Obama addressed the nation last week and declared an end to the combat mission in Iraq, he mentioned it was time to turn the page and focus on our economic problems .
The president should have also asked for the country's support to move the economy forward and called for an end to the obstructionist rancor which has succeeded in stalling the economy's recovery and prevented Americans from going back to work.
Put simply, the days of blue and red division have passed.
Those who choose to combat President Obama's every intention with media blitzes, congressional stalling tactics and vile rancor should take no joy in how their tactics are achieving results. Sectors of our nation's economy - such as the New York area construction industry, which has employed me for 10 years - are stalled, and now it is time for all to consider turning the page for the sake of starting building projects that will create and preserve jobs.
Perhaps the ending of the combat mission in Iraq will mark the beginning of domestic compromise so that our country's shovel-ready infrastructure projects can get started.
The boots in the mud are eager to get back to work and prove that America's work ethic remains second to none.
Robert Remler
President Barack Obama couldn't even give credit where credit is due, even if it could be done without admitting that he was an opponent of the ultimately successful Iraq strategy.
He said: "This afternoon, I spoke to former President George W. Bush. It's well known that he and I disagreed about the war from its outset. Yet no one could doubt President Bush's support for our troops, or his love of country and commitment to our security."
He could - and should - have said: "This afternoon, I spoke to former President George W. Bush. It's well known that he and I disagreed about the war from its outset. Yet it was he who went against the consensus and implemented the strategy that led us to where we are today, and for that he needs to be both commended and thanked."
Michael Biscuiti
Cost of machines hard to justify
I was shocked and disgusted as I read "Your new way to vote" . As many struggle during these tough economic times, how can anyone justify spending exorbitant funds to purchase 2,270 new voting machines for Nassau and Suffolk counties?
The lever machines with 100-year-old technology that are being replaced were successfully used all these years. They were simple, efficient, private, easy and quick to use. I had never seen or heard of any problems with them accurately recording votes.
Yet because of the 2000 presidential election with "hanging chads" in Florida we're forced to use a new system? This makes no sense to me. We never had hanging chads on Long Island. We had sturdy and efficient machines that didn't fail us.
If the entire country were going to a uniform system, perhaps you could understand the reason why this was forced upon us, but that's not the case.
Hasn't anyone learned that if it ain't broke, don't fix it? And by the way, why are our elected officials permitting this absurd expense when our state and our country are in the worst economic shape since the Great Depression?
Barbara Gilman
Updated 48 minutes ago Snow expected Tuesday ... Ruling in teacher sex abuse trial ... Holiday pet safety ... Cheer at the airport
