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 [email protected]. Thanks for your patience.

Dear Editor,
    Unlike the vast majority of the 75% of Texans who voted for Proposition 2, this issue actually affects me personally. I don't imagine many of these folks bothered putting themselves in my shoes, or the shoes of the hundreds of thousands of other gay men and women in this state. No, instead they listened to their pastors or they read their two-millennia-old Bibles, or they just figured the idea was icky, so why not make it even more illegal than it already was.
    I drove up to the Great Hills Baptist Church for the pro-amendment crowd's celebration that included Rep. Chisum. I didn't go all the way in, but I found almost exactly what I expected: a parking lot full of large, expensive SUVs and a church lobby full of well-dressed, aging white people. My implication is not that the only folks who voted for this amendment are out-of-touch old people, just most of them. To that crowd, I must say:
    This was not a personal issue for all of you. You may have gay family members or friends, but at the end of the day you and your kind can enjoy all the legal and societal benefits of marriage, while even civil unions are now impossible for me.
    This is a personal issue and it hurts immensely. To put it simply: What you believe is wrong. Gay people are normal, are made that way, and will always be around. You can't make us go away, and you can't legislate us out of existence. And, for the record, deliberate and discriminatory acts such as this will only make us angrier and stronger.
    Ultimately, though, my true solace is in the fact that you people are getting old. Eventually, you'll be gone.
    I can wait.

Dear Editor,
    You won't allow monogamous, same-sex couples to get married, but let us look at what you will allow, shall we? Here are some of the examples of who you do grant the right of marriage: 1) convicted murderers and rapists, 2) men who beat their wives and kids, 3) convicted sex offenders (who, by the way, have the right to have their own children), 4) people who meet on game shows where the prize is marriage, 5) atheists, 6) hypocritical "Christians" who cheat on their spouses (you know who you are). I could go on, but surely by now you get the picture. Texas is a state, folks, not a church. Way to go on keeping those 50%-of-marriages-that-end-up-in-divorce so "sacred." And congratulations to all those who voted to oppose gay marriage, for not only did you show your small-mindedness by voting on something already illegal in Texas, but you went directly against the Bible and sat arrogantly in judgment of a group of people, and you actually shared the same views and prejudice as the KKK. You will go down in history as being just like the people who thought African-Americans should drink from a separate water fountain. Think about that for a moment. Were you really victorious?

To the editor,
    This has puzzled me for some time now: The Austin Chronicle is clearly capable of and willing to publish solid pieces of journalism (as evidenced by this week's feature News story, “Justice or Vengeance?,” by Kevin Brass) [News, Nov. 4], yet when it comes to stories dealing with contentious political issues it seems that this weekly always chooses its most radical and least objective writers to cover the assignment, as in the case of the recent article “This Ain't No Picnic: Minutemen on Patrol” (Diana Welch, Oct. 28) [News].
    I turned to the article hoping to learn about the Minutemen and what issues their presence creates for the people of the United States and Mexico. What I got was a mean-spirited narrative about a day spent with rednecks and this lead sentence for background information: “Southern border hysteria has a long and dishonorable history, but this latest, half-sinister, half-absurd version began in earnest last year.” The founder of the ACLU's Legal Observer Project was cast in a much more favorable light, of course. When I looked through the author's archive of work it became obvious that Ms. Welch's habit is to smear her enemies by offering only selected details about their positions before jumping to the opposing POV.
    It's really a shame that the Chronicle's reporting quality isn't more consistent. I frequently look to you for interesting and important items that aren't covered by the corporate media giants or the sensationalist local news outlets, but the blatant bias of some on your staff is neither funny nor helpful.

   [News Editor Michael King replies: In an article about border vigilantism, it's hardly surprising that legal observers should appear more rational than a self-appointed, untrained, and hysterical posse. Diana Welch spent a day and night with the Minutemen and reported what she saw. As for the sentence, "Southern border hysteria has a long and dishonorable history, but this latest, half-sinister, half-absurd version began in earnest last year" – it may not be funny or helpful, but it happens to be true.]

Dear Editor,
    Re: Best Response to Klan Rally: Ignore It: I am in complete agreement with the author (Kenney C. Kennedy) of this letter, posted Nov. 4 [“Postmarks Online”]. While the KKK's racist philosophy outrages and offends the majority of people, myself included, their right to free speech is protected under the First Amendment, no matter how ridiculous and ignorant it is. Rather than give them the attention they were seeking, it was far more effective to ignore their uneducated racist spewings. And, in the end, they made absolutely no impact. Next.

Dear Editor,
    By letting four Klan supporters – not actual Klan members and not people whom the White Knights or the Imperial Klan knew (according to the AWK's discussion bulletin board I'm reading) – Austin police inadvertently increased the number on the plaza from eight to 12 [“KKK Takes Spotlight Away From Other Prop. 2 Backers,” News, Nov. 4].
    AP stories that are being carried all across the country could have been saying eight KKK members rallied on City Hall instead of 12. I know that may not seem like much of a difference. But it is a 50% increase in their numbers.
    What happened was that there were these Klan supporters standing on the northeast corner of Second and Colorado and Anti-Racist Action surrounded them. APD rescued them. But instead of bringing them behind police lines, they could have escorted them away to safety.
    The Public Information Office could have also given the media information as they were being escorted into the plaza regarding the actual number of Klansmen who parked in the parking garage – i.e., the actual number of Klansmen there – which was eight.
    So that even with the four "supporters" that APD added in to the mix, media around the country would be reporting only eight.
    There's something about the number eight that just seems even more of a ridiculously small number than 12 does.
    So APD screwed up for bringing them in.
    And PIO screwed up for not clueing in reporters to actual numbers of bona fide Klan – which clearly they had to have known.

Dear Editor,
    In "Justice or Vengeance?" [News, Nov. 4], Brandon Threet's fatal attack on Terence McArdle is repeatedly characterized as an "accident." Apparently, we are to view Threet's deliberate, unprovoked, brutal, and ultimately fatal attack on Terence as an accident because Threet's friends and family think he's a nice guy. Many of these same friends were among the crowd so depraved that it left Terence to die rather than call 911 and risk exposure of its underage drinking and drug use.
    Threet punched Terence repeatedly until he crumpled to the ground. Threet was restrained by a friend, broke loose, took three deliberate steps, and kicked Terence in the head, causing his death. These deliberate actions were the antithesis of an accident. Threet may wish with all his heart that he never did these things. He may not be able to explain why he did them. But the fact remains that his deliberate actions caused the death of another human being, and for that he needs to take responsibility.
    The author states that Threet flipped out when he attacked Terence and delivered the blow that would kill him. Did he remain in this flipped-out state while Terence lay dying? Too flipped out to dial 911? Is flipping out a new legal defense?
    Terence was our nephew. His death was no accident. Justice requires that Brandon Threet pay for his deliberate actions that caused Terence's death. When you compare Threet's 20 years to the endless suffering that Terence's family endures, it's nothing; it's far less than he deserves.

Dear Editor,
    Now you guys are getting closer to the “truth” behind the Williamson County justice system [“Justice or Vengeance?,” News, Nov. 4].
    Strangely enough I was probably the last of Terence's adult friends to talk to him the night of that party, and it hurts to see that this story may be the one to put Williamson Co. under the microscope. He was a great kid and had a lot of potential, though I suppose that can be said of almost anyone, but he really did.
    And I think that if this story can force a change in that joke of a justice system, Terry's mom will be more hurt (I didn't know her that well, but she doesn't deserve more pain). So I don't know where I should stand on this. Terence is gone, but his family isn't. The Williamson County justice system is long overdue for scrutiny, but this case will hurt people if it can be developed into something more than “the story o' the moment.”
    That's up to you guys, huh?
    Ah, what am I saying. Nobody will do anything about WilCo and it will be business as usual. They'll sweep this story and every other under a rug, and life will go on. I suppose I should congratulate the reporter with a hearty "good story,” but I don't think the magnitude of WilCo's “corruption” can even be imagined. I'm almost positive I heard the same phrase Brandon Threet probably heard (from the prosecutor, from the judge); it sounds like this: We don't care about the details in this case and we don't care about what you did or didn't do, we have a 98% conviction rate in this county and you're part of it.
    Go WilCo.

Dear Editor,
    Mr. Black's incoherent leftist rant is eclipsed only by his naked and abject hypocrisy [“Page Two,” Nov. 4]. He accuses conservatives of actively delighting "in hating fellow Americans and blaming half the population directly for all and any problems" while doing exactly the same thing in his article relative to his opinion regarding conservatives. Mr. Black has no clothes!
    Let us look in the mirror of truth. Mr. Black is a neoleftist utopian who clings to moral relativism as the key ingredient to understanding the meaning of life. This makes it convenient for him and his ilk to find sympathy, tolerance, and acceptance of deviant ideologies such as Marxism, suicidal pacifism, anarchic chic, equivocating multiculturalism, and whatever ideology the mavens of social fashion may deem as admirable. Conversely, moral relativism affords him the fig leaf to be outraged at any ideological opinions labeled as unfashionable, i.e., his severe and totally untrue criticism of conservatives as the voice of a new McCarthyism.
    The Democratic Party is now controlled by those infected with this same moral malignancy. This is why members of that party can never be honest with the American people. If they were, the Democratic Party would become extinct.
    These truths are self-evident. All one need do to see it is to make a moral commitment to objective truth seeking. Unfortunately for Mr. Black, he is left wanting and advocating a mindset of moral hypocrisy that has shown historically to be the pavement on the road to hell. He and his fellow travelers must be resisted totally. Rest assured, they will be.

   [Louis Black responds: Dear Vance, thank you so much for helping me make my point. I hate no Americans. I hate no Republicans simply because they are Republicans. I believe in the two-party system. When Democrats gerrymandered or redistricted against Republicans I protested. One can disagree with others' ideas, policies, and tactics without hating or demonizing those with whom you disagree. Rather than the name-calling you delight in, I celebrate the differences and disagreements among Americans, that is until one side feels disenfranchising all those they disagree with is acceptable in a constitutional republic. The founding fathers felt that our government would be best if it came out of the clash of differing beliefs. I adhere to that and would feel equal despair if the country were being run by an intolerant leftist majority. I despair at the viciousness on all sides in modern American political discourse. "[F]ellow travelers" – that was a nice touch, making clear your contempt for the ideas upon which this country was built and for which, at its best, it still stands.]

Dear Chronicle Editor:
   Somehow, I fail to sympathize with Brandon Threet ["Justice or Vengeance?," News, Nov. 3]. He deserves his sentence. Terence McArdle would not have died had Threet not been drinking excessively.
   The idiots at the party who failed to call for help are equally culpable. The story is a sad commentary on the state of our society – one in which individual responsibility is not encouraged.

Dear Editor,
    OK, kids, this is ridiculous. Twice on Saturday I spotted APD helicopters in the air. One over the KKK vs. gay rights protest and one over a big keg party in West Campus. A helicopter over a keg party. It is obvious to me that the APD is vastly overfunded and needs budget cuts. The fact that our insane rates of property taxation are being cavalierly spent so that the cops can shine lights on things from up in the air makes me physically ill. Besides, given the APD's current habits of killing unarmed minorities, I think a nice big slash of funding might force them to get their priorities in line.
    Are you listening, Stan [Knee]?

Dear Editor,
    Supporters of the Texas marriage amendment [Proposition 2] seem to assume they have the Bible and American tradition on their side. They should look at the facts and think again.
    Jewish Old Testament laws outlawed several homosexual and heterosexual sex acts and relationships. Yet Jesus himself never forbade homosexuality, and the type of homosexuality St. Paul criticized was mainly a system of boy prostitution, now long extinct. Even if you look at the main biblical traditions about the destruction of the sinful city Sodom, you will find that Sodom’s sin was lack of charity (e.g., Ezekiel 16:49 – the tradition to which Jesus alludes in Luke 17).
    Another common misconception is that the founding fathers modeled our laws on Christianity. This is manifestly false. They drew much more heavily from pre-Christian, Greco-Roman political thought, and from early modern European thinkers. In fact, most founding fathers rejected traditional Christianity; figures such as Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Jefferson saw themselves as part of the European Enlightenment, a movement which was largely critical of Christianity.
    If we were to model our marriage laws on the clearest testimony of Jesus (as in Matthew 5), we would outlaw divorce and remarriage, not gay unions. As a married heterosexual Christian, I’m glad that our founding fathers chose not to make this country a theocracy. They would not want us to do so either.

Dear Editor,
    "I hate chummy waiters. I don't want to know a waiter's name, and I don't want them to know mine" [“Split Parties,” Food, Nov. 4].
    As a waiter for going on 14 years now, I can honestly categorize Mick Vann's article as one the most dead-on I've seen penned on the topic of tipping and food service. I must, however, take issue with the idea that it is somehow an unwelcome advance into personal territory for a server to reveal his or her name to a guest. Speaking for myself, the impetus behind the first-name basis with a table has, for the most part, to do with a concern for the party's ability to contact me via other staff when I'm otherwise occupied. If the table is unaware of my name, all bets are off as to whether they can communicate to a busy staff member that they need extra butter, a new bottle of wine, or a myriad other concerns that can suddenly crop up during a night out. Of course, we do our best to anticipate these issues before we have to turn our attention elsewhere on especially busy nights – but if I'm taking an order three tables over and Table 12 desperately needs their check, they'll have a much easier time asking the hostess to grab "Ryan" than "that brown-haired guy." I feel like I've, at this point, got a decent handle on who would and who wouldn't like to be "chummy" with me, and I honestly strive to make every diner's evening with me to be a beneficial (for both of us) experience. My personal introduction is not an attempt to tread onto your treasured space – it's a sincere effort to serve you better.

Dear Editor,
    The same people protesting these developments today were protesting the apparent racism shown by the lack of development on the Eastside not that long ago [“How Not to Gentrify: HRC Asks for Eastside Moratorium,” News, Nov. 4]. PODER director Susana Almanza seems to be selectively citing statistics when she talks about the increase in the East Cesar Chavez neighborhood property values from 1998 to 2004. The six years in question have seen property values skyrocket all over Austin, not just on the Eastside. Property values aren't static. They will either go up or down. Many of us east of 35 welcome thoughtful development and restoration efforts as an effective alternative to the steady deterioration and accompanying increased crime rates of the previous decades. PODER would be more effective at protecting the poor by using the economic tools offered by the new Homestead Preservation Districts introduced by Rep. Eddie Rodriguez, D-Austin, last spring (which went into effect Sept. 11) to make sure that affordable housing remains in the mix, and to keep us from becoming SoCo East. And please, Susana, let your Eastside neighbors enjoy some of the aesthetic and safety benefits of Austin's economy for a change.

Dear Editor,
    What is Pat Johnson's problem [“Postmarks,” Nov. 4]? Besides being a sad, lonely, little, angry man. Where to begin with this loser?
    The so called "problems caused by the valet companies" that he mentions would hardly bother most sane individuals.
    For one I would like to know of the "golden egg" Johnson speaks of.
    If Johnson could only tear himself away from photographing the valets for just a moment he might have noticed that the price for valet in the Warehouse District goes no higher than $7, which with my meager math skills parking two cars only adds up to be $14 not the $25 he says would cover the city's penalty. Not surprisingly he doesn't take into account that the valets don't keep that amount. Most people know they rely on tips. Which aren't increased when traffic is at a standstill.
    So we can dispel the conspiracy that valets have it in for the taxpayer by filling the valet lane or blocking traffic. Besides, shouldn't traffic go slower to begin with since it is a high-pedestrian area?
    As for increased enforcement by the city in that area I for one, being a taxpayer and all, would like to see that man power go to better patrols in other parts of the city like the West Campus area where it seems like the crime rate is worse than the Eastside's but without the stigma.
    If Mr. Johnson, and the COA are so concerned about the tax revenue lost maybe we should be like other cities and start charging on the weekends at our parking meters. Better yet, why don't the meters accept pennies. Last time I checked they were still a form of currency.

Dear Editor,
    I just read the article “Justice or Vengeance?” about the conviction and sentence of Brandon Threet in the death of Terence McArdle [News, Nov. 4]. Although I believe Mr. Threet is truly sorry for what he did, I think the sentence was just. Mr. Threet certainly knew that kicking someone in the head could have had serious and deadly consequences. He chose to commit a violent act instead of walking away while Terence McArdle was lying on the ground. This makes him dangerous. I feel a great deal of sympathy for all concerned, including Mr. Threet, but I agree with James McArdle, Terence's father. This was not self-defense but an intentional and deadly act and must be punished accordingly.

Dear Louis Black,
    Calm down, you'll get a coronary. As you correctly point out at the end, all this insanity continues to be offered up by the "CRR" [conservative Republican right] – as you've labeled them – because it sells [“Page Two,” Nov. 4]. So it would seem that the more basic problem is not what the bastards are doing, rather why it has an audience. Why are so many so pissed-off that they eagerly accept all the insanity and scapegoating as gospel? But isn't that where the real irony lies? The "common man" is being tossed about by powers and events beyond his ken and – he presumes – beyond his power to control or direct. And in large part, the events are produced and directed to serve the interests of the few at the expense of the many – the very agenda of the Bush mob. So when you get right down to it, the American sheep herd is pissing all over everyone except the major perpetrators of the circumstances that have them looking for a scapegoat to begin with. We've always had this going on. Welfare mothers driving Cadillacs, outside agitators, foreign workers, gays, and on and on. It seems that people just have this innate need to take out their frustrations on the nearest convenient target that they see as weak enough that they can effectively transfer some of their pain to them. Prisoners of the human condition. Can a constitutional republic survive it?

Dear Editor,
    I appreciate your propositions critique [Endorsements, Nov. 4]. It helped me make up my mind. I'm a pragmatist and regard liberalism as impractical. This being the case, since the Chronicle opposes the propositions, they must be good. I'll vote for them.

   [Ed.'s note: The statement "liberalism as impractical" is dogmatic, i.e., a doctrine (liberalism is always impractical) rather than pragmatic, i.e., situational. Thus, we find your letter mistifying and after some thought think it is a code urging all our readers to vote no on Prop. 2!]

Dear Editor,
    Modest Mouse and the Walkmen rolled through Austin last night [Nov. 3]. Sadly, many concertgoers unwittingly paid money to enter a venue showcasing a sleazy new marketing ploy for big tobacco.
    Austin Music Hall opened its doors to music fans who thought they were going to see two well-established acts. Once inside, what they got was a sordid showcase of the Camel Cigarettes Sin City Tour.
    Before entering the venue, the security force on hand repeatedly warned concertgoers not to bring cameras into the hall. The message was clear that there was something to hide in the building.
    And it's no wonder. The "smoke-free" facility opened its doors to a slick, interactive marketing campaign to lure new smokers. The concert was a shameless ploy to promote the Camel brand.
    With free cigarette giveaways and scantily clad burlesque dancers, Austin Music Hall was transformed into a Vegas-style wonderland of cigarettes and sex. Camel marketers worked hard to promote their brand – trapping many music fans to put up with its unsavory tactics waiting for the first signs of the Walkmen.
    Once on stage, the bands did their best to support their corporate backers and seemed unfazed by their ties to big tobacco's new gimmick. It was a disappointing concert event that charged for music fans to enter a new world of corporate marketing.

   [Louis Black responds: The ad for the show in this paper at least included "Camel Casino Presents," "A Camel Event," and the Surgeon General's Warning at the bottom of the ad which would seem to be something of a giveaway. Big Tobacco is the current Boogeyman of Choice but come on, this seemed pretty clear-cut. And the Austin Music Hall, usually at the talent's request, rarely lets cameras in for any show.]

Dear Editor,
    Concerning the Ku Klux Klan rally and march to be held at the Capitol and down Congress Avenue, on Saturday Nov. 5 [“KKK Takes Spotlight Away From Other Prop. 2 Backers,” News, Nov. 4]:
    Protesters, you are playing into these people's persecution fantasy. They enjoy your outrage. Plus, you are only expressing your conceit that you're not a bunch of ignorant bigots.
    The best thing that could happen is that the Klan would march down a completely empty street.
    I won't be there.

Dear Editor,
    Loved the “Page Two” this week [Nov. 4]. One of the things I miss most about Austin is that article each week when Louis Black unloads on the absurdity of the current governing regime in Texas and this country.
    Still reading in the cold northern front of Rochester, N.Y. Thanks for making your stuff available online.

Editor,
    John Bradley should be slapped upside the head for not getting Brandon Threet a life sentence [“Justice or Vengeance?,” News, Nov. 4]! Your article attempts to make Threet out to be some kind of saint or something. The kid obviously has an anger management issue. Had he walked, there is no doubt that he would be beating up on the next vulnerable kid, learning to relish each new victory over those weaker than he. I realize that the Chronicle is a liberal-leaning rag, but you're now defending psycho killers like Threet? You need some introspection there.

Dear Chronicle,
    Just wanted to give credit where it's due. The mural that appeared behind Merle Haggard in the article about the video shot at the Austin State Hospital was painted by Tim Scott and Nate Nordstrom [“TCB,” Music, Oct. 28]. And yes, we don't ever want to spend the night in the state hospital again.

Mr. Michael Ventura,
    There are people still scattered over this planet who won't even notice the collapse you're talking about [“Letters @ 3am,” Oct. 28]. At least not in the way we will notice. Aside from being left alone once again, they will continue as they have since the beginning of human history. Civilization failed to notice them except the missionaries, and when we decide they have land that we want. Although more and more often people these days are taking notice, and not just cultural anthropologists. I'm not talking about the noble savage; they're neither. What they are is a way of life that has survived far longer than ours, and will, so long as we don't completely wipe them out. And when things get bad enough, perhaps we will look to them for help once again like we did when we first arrived in the New World. When we decide we want to survive, we have examples, all over the world. We don't have to reinvent the wheel. In the words of Daniel Quinn, “We are not humanity.” We are one of the thousands of cultures that exist or have existed on this planet. Ours, unfortunately for us, flies in the face of sustainability at every turn. Keep up the excellent writing; I've truly enjoyed it. Thanks for your time.

Dear Editor,
    I read Ms. Welch's article on the Minutemen and found it very biased [“This Ain't No Picnic: Minutemen on Patrol,” News, Oct. 28]. Sounds as if she was against the Minutemen and had made up her mind before she even wrote the article. Journalists are supposed to be hopefully unbiased and have an open mind. I would strongly consider replacing this person with someone who has those standards.
    And by the way, why doesn't your newspaper do an article about the pro-Arab-terrorist, anti-American movement known as "Aztlan.” I am a translator/interpreter who has worked with thousands of Mexican illegals who have told me personally how they are going to throw out the "gringos" (and murder any that don't leave willingly) and make seven Southwest U.S. states into Aztlan (which they perceive as closest to communism). As an editor, don't you think Americans need to know about this movement? We want and have a right to know!