Fire BU regents!
As a member of Bears For Leadership Reform I have waited to see if any meaningful reform would take place. Although I don’t believe the two goals of exonerating former head football coach Art Briles and reform of the Baylor University Board of Regents are mutually exclusive, I side with the stated goal of regency reform. As stated at the first Bears meeting in Waco, “there are some great people on the BOR but even well-intended people can make bad decisions.”
If the regents cannot understand the frustration of rank-and-file Baylor alumni (not “fat cats”) and just plain supporters who are genuinely interested in Baylor, then let me emphasize the point. When I read and hear sportswriters toss around allegations as if they are among the board of regents themselves, I have to question the veracity of their statements when prominent donors Drayton McLane and John Eddie Williams (amazingly known to the BOR as “fat cats”) say they don’t have all the facts. I have similar concerns when information is leaked by Baylor regents or administrators and is then immediately refuted by assistant coaches who still work for Baylor.
As for the primary oversight committee at Baylor, henceforth referred to as the hindsight committee, just where were they when some of these allegations surfaced years ago? The university should have had a firewall in place so that any student who had been assaulted would have immediate assistance regardless of whomever the accused was. Where was the “hindsight committee” when reservations concerning Title IX and its implementation came to light?
With these basic comments, I will let Regent Chairman Ron Murff do the math: 10,000 members of the Bears for Leadership Reform, whose average donations are $100 a month ($1,200 a year), multiplied by 10 years. If these donations were to be withheld, would Chairman Murff feel as he obviously does now? My vote is to clean house and start over!
Gary Sutton, BU alumnus, San Antonio
Ms. Foster writes on Nov. 27 that 97 percent of women at Planned Parenthood are not there for abortions. The Washington Post gives this statistic three out of four Pinocchios — in other words “significant factual error and/or obvious contradictions.” Seven percent is the lowest percentage provided for abortion clients, assuming a woman only visits it once per abortion.
These percentages mask the brutal number of more than 300,000 babies killed every year by Planned Parenthood, the nation’s largest baby-killing company. Another telling statistic from Planned Parenthood’s 2013 report: for every adoption referral, they commit 174 abortions. With that high of a killing rate, it cannot even call itself pro-choice.
Planned Parenthood is pro-abortion and pro-murder, pure and simple.
Eric Holloway, Waco