Letters are posted as we receive them during the week, and before they are printed in the paper, so check back frequently to see new letters. If you'd like to send a letter to the editor, use this postmarks submission form, or email your letter directly to mail@austinchronicle.com. Thanks for your patience.

Dear Editor,
    I was amazed no one responded to the “Page Two” column (June 3) that bemoaned the state of “current film criticism,” including the sentence “It's generated into the almost always predictable, anti-Hollywood (while really loving Hollywood), well-made-film school of criticism, abandoning ideological, political, and philosophical appreciations.”
    In order to help readers understand and interpret the Chronicle's movie ratings I've included a handy “translation guide.” The following list identifies how many stars are added or subtracted by the Chronicle reviewer to what one would normally have expected.
    If:
    directed by Austin director – add one star.
    it contains lesbian kiss – add one star.
    it contains lesbian theme – add two stars.
    it has subtitles – add one star.
    setting is primarily in a foreign country – add one star.
    it stars Sylvester Stallone, Steven Seagal, Arnold Schwarzenegger, or Vin Diesel – subtract two stars.
    it stars no one 99.9% of Austinites have ever heard of – add one star.
    it includes a car chase – subtract one star.
    it was positively reviewed in the Statesman – subtract one star.
    it portrays U.S. military in a positive light – subtract two stars.
    it portrays organized religion in a positive light – subtract one star.
    it includes multiple fart jokes or other humor about bodily functions – subtract two stars.
    it can be easily understood without a college degree – subtract one star.
    it contains nudity of someone that would cause most people to have nightmares – add one star.
    it contains nudity of someone that would cause most people to become aroused – subtract one star.
    it has an unequivocally happy ending – subtract one star.
    it has won or will win an Academy Award – subtract half star.
    it has won or will win an award at Cannes film festival – add one star.
    it is expected to be No. 1 at the box office at some point in time – subtract one star.

Dear Editor,
    As we journey through life, we find ourselves in different situations. If you find yourself poor, naked, and hungry and a Christian comes by; he will feed you, clothe you, comfort you, and help you get on your feet, sharing the Gospel of Christ.
    If a liberal Democrat is the one that comes by, he will tell you that you need to support his party, for it is everyone else's fault that you are in the shape you are in. Government owes you a check to stay where you are and support the party. You need for government to pay health insurance, housing, food, a new car, utilities, day care for your children, and tuition for college. And we (Democrats) are going to make this available to you. But, when you fill out applications, be sure not to say that you are a Christian, for we must remember “separation of church and state.” Our party will defend your civil liberties. If you are guardian of a disabled person – the right to starve them to death. The right of a mother to kill her unborn child, the right of gays to be accepted in all areas of public life, the right of displaying profane words on T-shirts and the removal of nativity scenes and the Ten Commandments from public government places, the right of sodomites, the right of sex offenders to be released back into society to abuse and murder your children.

   [Editor's Note: Here in plain view is the self-satisfied self-righteous right wing's take. Invading Iraq and gutting the social safety net were the "Christian" thing to do. Anyway, everything bad is the Democrats' fault. It really doesn't get dumber or meaner than this, and to pretend that the author – who forgives no one their trespasses, real or imagined – is a saintly "Christian" is just too priceless. This has got to be humor!]

Dear Editor,
    I am still in disbelief over the sudden shutdown of Austin's only real lesbian bar, Sidekicks, this past Saturday. What a slap in the face after all of the Pride Week festivities, huh? I don't want to chock it up to the smoking ban, as it hasn't even gone into effect, but had the owners been able to hold on I'm sure it would have put them under. I know that this is just the beginning of the end for many bars in this town that cater to specific subcultures, as visible and active as they may be. My friends and I are now "homeless," in a place that claims to be super liberal and gay-friendly. All we have left is a Ladies Night here and there, and I don't anticipate that those will last long, either. Austin's youngest lesbian club DJ told me the other night, after she found out that Saturday's shift would be her last, "Well, I was a DJ." What else will we have to lose before we realize that keeping Austin "weird" is more than just a slogan?

Dear Editor,
    In regard to the review of The Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants [Film Listings, June 3].
    Are you guys out of your minds! Three stars?
    It's official. I am too old to relate to your tastes in movies. It was inevitable. I am officially over the hill, out to pasture, and ready for my AARP membership.
    I will now rely on The New Yorker.

Dear Editor,
    Along with who knows how many others, I went to perform my civic duty and vote in the run-off election.
    Upon arriving at the precinct location shown on the Travis County Web site, I was told I was ineligible to vote in the run-off because I "live outside the city limits." It is an Austin address, just not within the city. Never mind, however, that during the May election, I was given a complete ballot to vote. Nobody had a good explanation for why that would have occurred.
    I can understand if I am ineligible based upon location, but I cannot understand being permitted to vote the full ballot and then the following month being ineligible to vote a run-off ballot in a race I was previously permitted to cast a ballot.
    I was afforded an opportunity to cast a provisional ballot, but cautioned that it would probably not count.
    It would seem to prompt the question of what potential problems could arise for other May issues that were close in number, as I am certain I was not the only person residing in Travis County, but not the city of Austin, that was permitted to vote a full ballot.
    It also raises the question of whether it is really effective to have combined polling locations, as that may very well have contributed to this issue.
    Maybe I should just turn into the large percentage of voters who can't be bothered to even show up at the polls.

Dear Editor,
    Dawnna Dukes and Karen Sonleitner have sold out their posts. As an avid environmentalist and human rights activist, I am outraged at the blatant disregard for public opinion and input regarding toll roads that these two "public servants" have for their own community. The CAMPO meeting on Monday, June 6, revealed to the public much about the forces that are relentlessly shoving tolls down the throats of all of us.
    Contrary to what some misinformed environmentalists think, toll roads will not reduce petroleum consumption. Just the opposite (if you don't believe it, drive to Houston sometime and witness the congestion, smog, and empty buses). Toll booths are not intended to produce cleaner air or enhance traffic flow. They are considered tax revenue collection sites, and for the police, surveillance posts, and (illegal) inspection mechanisms. And, oh yeah, a source for fat contracts for those with close ties to certain CAMPO board members.
    The last poll of Austinites lists a 94% opposition to toll roads that were amended to the 2030 plan. The Biscoe/McCracken (Rodriguez) amendment allowed a 12-month review process where the public may actually have an input to planning. This shows at least some of the elected officials are willing to pay attention to their constituency (especially when they are furious). But it became apparent who doesn't care about the public. I wouldn't have believed it unless I saw it for myself. Ms. Sonleitner didn't waste any time sabotaging the Biscoe/McCracken amendment by motioning that the 12-month review be taken out of the wording, essentially trying to strip the public of any input to the review. Fortunately, Chairman Sen. Barrientos saw through her contemptible maneuver (as many of us did in the moment) and kept the wording.
    Then came Ms. Dukes, who made sure that the amendment would receive no funding for the review, essentially ensuring toll roads for the tri-counties. But then, she would not just put her sister's lucrative toll booth contract in jeopardy.
    I have not seen this much disregard for public concern since Lord Bush took office ... and I don't see the difference! Watch out for these two traitors to ignore your concerns in the future.

   [Editor's note: The Chronicle has received several similar letters. We also wanted to point out that most people regard elected officials as courageous if they agree with them and cowardly or traitorious if they don't agree with them. Sometimes the most courageous do what they think is right even if many voters disagree with them.]

Dear Austin Chronicle,
    If you are running short on your supply of Q-Tips, I'll be happy to cover the expenses to provide a handful to Audra Schroeder. I'd be more than happy to provide this service, because her review of the White Stripes' Get Behind Me Satan is a joke [“Phases & Stages,” Music, June 10]. Only two stars? Give me a break.

To the editor,
    If I could build a trolley line downtown, I'd run it through the lower deck of I-35. It would connect to Cap Metro's light rail line near 38th Street on the north end, and on the south at Fourth Street. The trenches are already cut most of the way, and there's ample room for stations and related transit development.
    This stretch of road is very dangerous and should be phased out. It also has the largest concentration of high-volume destination points in the city: the convention center; Sixth Street, Brackenridge and St. David's hospitals, the Seventh Street and 11th Street corridors, the Capitol complex, the Erwin Center, Disch-Falk Field, Royal Memorial Stadium, UT, and Concordia University. Opening these destinations to rail service would remove a lot of traffic from downtown.

Dear Editor,
    My husband and I just moved here from Houston and were looking for some good places to eat. We drove out to the lake to meet some friends and ended up at a restaurant called Cafe Bleu. The food was amazing! We were pleasantly surprised (since it is considered "lake food"). I had the beef tenderloin with a raspberry glaze. The best I've ever had! The view was great, the people were wonderful, I will definitely be recommending this restaurant to everyone I know! If you haven't been out to do a review, this should be one on your list.

Dear Editor,
    The difference in the two peace movements obviously is that the earlier one prevented Chamberlain and Daladier from confronting Hitler early. And it prevented FDR (that right-wing nut) from doing what he saw clearly needed doing – getting into the fight. The implication is that the Thirties movement made things worse than they may have been. World War II would have happened anyway. But if begun earlier, it may have ended earlier and at less cost. Like it or not, only one element prevented it from starting earlier. The Vietnam protests didn't spring up until after we recognized that we weren't going to win. I'm not defending our entry there. I'm a retired Navy officer who would love it if no one ever fired another shot in anger. You might be surprised to find out how many active military officers feel the same. We know what those weapons do to people. But I'm surprised and pleased that you would print my last letter [“Postmarks Online,” June 6], even though I think that you are wrong.

Stephen Moser,
    I love your column and always look for it when I read the Chronicle, but I have to tell you that you outdid yourself in this last one [“After a Fashion,” June 3]. It was hilarious! I couldn't stop laughing. Keep up the good work!

P.S. p.s. I also enjoyed your other pieces but had to tell you how great I thought the column was.

Dear Editor,
    We should all be pleased that the Supreme Court set back the push for legal medicinal marijuana, as such laws are nothing more than another angle for a certain type of doctor/lawyer to corner the market on a "new" product. That said, we should now focus on an across-the-board, FDA-, Department of Agriculture-protected legalization of marijuana as a common commodity. More important, the prosecution and defamation of users of hemp/marijuana should be regarded as a crime against humanity, because that is exactly the assault we now endure. We must take a look at America's stockpile of nuclear power, alcohol, petroleum products, etc., and ask ourselves, exactly, what is our definition of poison? Legality? Humanity? Crime?