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,
    This letter is in response to the "Pushing for Shared Prosperity" article in last week's “Hightower Report” [News, Aug. 10]. Instead of calling itself under the feel-good name "shared prosperity," why not call it what it is: socialism?
    The assertion in the article that "the vast portion of America's wealth … is generated by all of us" is ludicrous and misleading. Business provides the capital for start-up costs and payroll – then hopefully sometime in the future real profits are made. The risk/reward that businesses undergo is representative of American individualism, which should be celebrated, not berated. The so-called "fairness" advocates fail to take into account the sacrifice business owners suffer to get into a position to make a profit.
    Like the author of the article, I too pay well above minimum wage. I don't do it to be "fair”; I do it to get and retain top-notch workers. It's good business. Government mandated wage minimums is bad business – and ultimately costs jobs.
    Let the marketplace set wages – government should get out of the way. Maybe the author missed the collapse of communism in the last century – just a quick reminder, it doesn't work.

   [Jim Hightower responds: Wow, I go from being a socialist to a communist in only four paragraphs! What I really am is a Jefferson-Roosevelt-Yarborough-Johnson Democrat – a believer in the core American values of economic fairness, social justice, and the common good. If he thinks that only CEOs generate wealth, then why do CEOs need workers? I am a business-owner, and I didn't "get into a position to make a profit" by myself. Those who worked with me helped to generate the wealth. That's why I'm both a business owner and a "fairness advocate."]

Hey Louis,
    It was great to see Rosie Flores [“Gypsy Rose,” Music, Aug. 10]. She's as hot monkey lovely as ever. To quote a line from the animated film Heavy Metal, “Bathe her, and bring her to me.”

Dear Editor,
    I would like for your editor to define his understanding of a transsexual if possible.
    In the editorial response to a letter posted by a Los Angeles reader [“Postmarks,” Feb. 6, 2004], it was stated that Ben ("The Death of Ben Brownlee") [News, Jan. 30, 2004] was not a transsexual.
    After reading the original piece, I do not understand the editor's criteria for defining a transsexual.
    Will you verify please?

   [Editor's note: Without entering into a tiresome and pointless semantic debate about pre-op or post-op transsexualism, the late Ben Brownlee was a gender dysphoric young person who was attempting to come to terms with his own sexual identity. QED.]

Dear Editor,
    The word of the day on my computer was bellicose, which means “favoring or inclined to start quarrels or wars.” Like an electronic fortune cookie, it arrived on the day Karl Rove told the world that he was resigning. We are fighting a war with a commander of the armed forces who lost 310 tons of explosives, 110,000 AK-47s, 80,000 pistols, and – my personal favorite – $9 billion in cash in Iraq during a time of war. How many of our soldiers have been killed by explosives we lost control of? How many soldiers and Marines have been shot by rifles or pistols given to our enemies? How many operations are being funded by our money that was “lost”? We’ve spent half-a-trillion dollars because we are funding and equipping both sides. I handled both cash and arms for the government, and there was no way to steal a single dollar, much less $9 billion. If a U.S. soldier lost his personal weapon or ammunition, he would lose rank, money, and his freedom. I dare to say the Bush administration demonstrates almost unprecedented incompetence. The war czar mentioned today that the government needs to look into starting the draft, but the draft already started a long time ago when the government forced service members to stay past their enlistment terms. They were punished for being patriotic. What a great message for those who were considering enlisting in the military. If Mr. Rove used his power and influence for good as opposed to this demented battle, the Iraq war never would have been started, and the world would still respect our nation, its people, and our values.

Dear Editor,
    Yeah OK, Karl Rove is gone. So what? Dick Cheney and his corporate cohorts will take it the rest of the way unfortunately. That is: stay the course. America going to hell in a bucket like a snowball headed for hell.
    The insanity continues – the mishandling of Iraq, no universal health care, most manufacturing jobs sent to Asia, free-trade rip-offs, phony war on drugs, more guzzling cars and guzzling people than ever, gangster rap the norm for a huge segment of the population, more and more prisons, no affordable child care, more bad parents than ever, more crystal meth than ever, more radical Islamics than ever, more unhealthy spiritually bankrupt people than ever, the lowest state of objective journalism ever, the good-for-nothing space program, more lobbyists than ever.
    But hey, the stock market is still up for now, there's no draft yet, and most people don't vote, so why should President Bush's base care? Rove did his job.
    We do what we can and leave the rest up to the big kahuna – life is still fun – just gotta poke around.

Dear Editor,
    Isn't it funny how the Republicans completely ignored world terrorism – until they noticed they could get votes from it? Now it's all they can talk about.
    Bill Clinton sent legislation to Congress to tighten airport security. The legislation was defeated by the Republicans because of opposition from the airlines.
    Bill Clinton sent legislation to Congress to allow for better tracking of terrorist funding. It was defeated by Republicans in the Senate because of opposition from banking interests.
    Bill Clinton sent legislation to Congress to add tagents to explosives, to allow for better tracking of explosives used by terrorists. It was defeated by the Republican Party because of opposition from the National Rifle Association.
    And so on – anything to make the Democratic president look bad.
    The right didn't even know terrorists existed till their mind-blowing incompetence let the terrorists hit the homeland.
    Small wonder world terrorism has tripled under their watch.

Chronicle editors,
    Environmentalists often communicate information in the “problem/solution” format. The problem with listeners/readers/viewers such as your recent writer Chrystia Wynnyk [“Postmarks” online, July 31] is that they react so strongly to the defining of a problem(s) that they never hear the solution(s) and rapidly accuse environmentalists of being against everything. That is not the case. Please consider what we are for in this hopefully short-enough letter. Environmental organizations are fighting at the local, state, and federal level for greatly increased efficiency measures across all sectors of our society. Increasing efficiency reduces the electricity load. Efficiency combined with fast-upcoming renewables – such as wind, solar, and geothermal energy – cancel any need for expensive, polluting new coal or nuke plants. Efficiency and renewables will yield all of the power we need to run reasonable and comfortable lives. We can eventually phase out our reliance on the coal, gas, and nukes that are making life too rough on the planet. To recap, environmental groups are for greatly increased efficiency and clean renewable energy.
    Economic studies, citizen efforts, and policy trends are for efficiency and renewables! The technology is here, and you may have noticed this month that Austinites are winning the Kill-a-Watt Challenge and both the Texas Public Utilities Commission and the Federal Congress are getting it, too! Yay! Now hear this, environmentalists are for clean-energy solutions – efficiency and renewables!

Dear Editor,
    Ric Williams' open-ended interview with Robert Bly left me feeling I had heard a knock at my door, and I don't answer because I am not at home [“This Is Your Wake-Up Call,” Books, Aug. 10]. At the least I am reminded to turn off the TV when I head out and savor waking up to my coffee.

Dear Editor,
    Louis Black defines the ideological trap of neo-leftism perfectly in the last paragraph of his Aug. 10 “Page Two” article – albeit unintentionally. But regardless, it is crucial to understand that the leftist mindset is the ideological enabler of the complaints that Mr. Black makes – and if allowed to expand those grievances will eventually obliterate civilization. So for those dark tendencies to be defeated, neo-leftism must be defeated.
    He essentially describes how apathy and addiction to wallowing in misery have reached alarmingly pernicious levels. However, he is not accurately stating why this transpired. In the immediate post-World War II era America was the model of how people thrive. After all, for the first time in history, the victor rebuilt the conquered. Could there be a more positive example?
    But over time the darker side of human nature reared – ingratitude, envy, and hubris. Neo-leftism was born. Worldwide people began to take U.S. good nature for granted. This tendency kept the horrors of communist Russia and China afloat for decades longer than necessary. Hubris was and is shared by those tainted by smug false victimhood and entitlement and morally lazy left-wing American social mandarins, e.g., academics, politicians, and artists.
    Socialism became fashionable. The “New Left” was vogue. Today it is “progressive multiculturalism.” Savvy leftist propagandists from Noam Chomsky to Michael Moore tirelessly work to further the radical agenda; legitimizing material envy, enshrining moral obtuseness and the monolithic state ruthlessly enforcing their political religion.
    And we now have a new addition – totalitarian Islamist collectivism. While traditional atheist leftists will recoil at the suggestion of a religious movement in their mix, ultimately there is not a great difference in the end goals of neo-leftism and radical Islamism – only the dogmatic mechanism. Indeed, “dark is easy; despair is lazy” defines the road to hell.

Dear Mr. Wes Marshall,
    Thank you for your enlightening article on boxed wines. Not three days before I read "Sipping From the Spigot" [Food, Aug. 10] I approached the wine guys at a "locally owned retailer of natural and organic foods" about the subject, and the only thing flowing from a spigot was pretentiousness. With bitter memories of the Franzia days of my youth and the pitying looks of the sales staff, I walked away empty-handed and ashamed. After reading your vindicative and inspiring article I'm ready to go to Spec's, and I'm sure this time I'll walk away a satisfied customer. Thanks again for applying some rigor and open-mindedness to a misunderstood subject.

Dear Editor,
    If you spend anytime at all on I-35, you'll notice that a significant amount of the traffic consists of 18-wheel tractor-trailer trucks. The vast majority of these trucks are "through,” meaning they don't stop anywhere in Austin. So when State Highway 130 came along, I thought for certain that a mandatory routing of through trucks on 130 would happen. This would make a huge difference in the congestion in Downtown traffic. But from what I understand, there is no requirement like this, so I guess the trucks will continue to stay on I-35 all the way through. From this perspective, 130 will now do nothing but encourage more people to live farther out and commute more.

Dear Editor,
    It seems we've finally achieved the unthinkable. Austin's air quality is nearly as bad as Houston and Dallas on many summer days. Reviewing daily information from the www.airnow.gov website, this morning, for example, Austin was recording a particulate matter 2.5 reading of 62, and Houston was just slightly ahead with a 72 reading. Dallas is just below us at 61 for their PM 2.5. Ozone readings are also similar with Dallas slightly ahead of us this morning.
    And all of this before the busy back-to-school season starts up. Think about the addition of thousands of idling sport utility vehicles dropping the kids off and picking them up from school and extracurricular activities. Yikes.
    PM 2.5 is defined by www.airnow.gov as "Particles less than 2.5 micrometers in diameter are called 'fine' particles. These particles are so small they can be detected only with an electron microscope. Sources of fine particles include all types of combustion, including motor vehicles, power plants, residential wood burning, forest fires, agricultural burning, and some industrial processes."
    Also, according to the www.airnow.gov website, PM 2.5 is dangerous to your health. "Particle exposure can lead to a variety of health effects. For example, numerous studies link particle levels to increased hospital admissions and emergency room visits – and even to death from heart or lung diseases."
    Yesterday seemed to be the same story.
    So forget about bad hair days – it's bad air days we need to control.