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,
    The Enclave at Westgate is a new development at the corner of West Gate Boulevard and Cameron Road. The sign boasts "contemporary homes from the 200s.” As a very near neighbor to this site, I have watched these homes spring from the ground to apparent near completion in less than a month, and recently my level of annoyance at them increased tenfold. The four homes currently situated there received their exterior coats of paint.
    I'm honestly baffled at the developers interpretation of "contemporary,” however my deepest concerns run beyond that of questionable taste.
    Home No. 1 is painted the color of the imitation beef patties that have been served to school-age children at every public educational facility for the last 20 years. I'm hoping that simple description should invoke an accurate enough picture in the minds of most who read this. Home No. 2 boasts a fascinating shade of green: eerily similar to that of an industrial jar of sliced dill pickles, the kind that keep forever and ever.
    I understand that this may not seem alarming and perhaps even sound as if it could be a typical color scheme … and I suppose it would be, if only homes 3 and 4 weren't dead serious ketchup and mustard, respectively.
    The Enclave at Westgate is a classic, cartoon, unmistakable hamburger.
    They have erected a giant hamburger-themed eyesore on what used to be a nice enough vacant field that was if nothing else inoffensive.
    I have been disturbed enough by the unbelievable and ridiculous residential development in this beautiful city of ours, but I wish these structures would be subtle about their intrusion as opposed to screaming American consumerism as loud as Ronald McDonald himself.

Dear Editor,
    There didn't appear to be a single issue the two candidates disagreed on at the Hustle for Mayor debate held Tuesday, April 21. The only difference I could detect between Brewster McCracken and Lee Leffingwell was a slight shift in emphasis. Among the things the two candidates apparently do agree on: The Second Amendment is bad, illegal immigrants should never be asked their status and should receive city assistance to open a bank account, man-made global warming is not to be questioned and should be a guiding force in all city government decisions, and our salvation lies in bringing the "emerging green technologies" industry to Austin, an industry which will make … well no one's quite sure, but it sounds cool.

Dear Editor,
    Recently I read an article in a nationally published magazine regarding the increasing numbers of pets being “dumped” at local shelters due to the poor economy. According to the article, their reasoning for giving up their animals was the need to cut back on household costs. As a responsible pet owner, this article greatly alarmed me. First of all, given the poor economy, I understand the need to cut costs and save money. As a full-time student paying my way through college, I personally understand the financial burden of caring for a large dog. What I cannot understand is the justification of abandoning a helpless animal to cut costs. How much money can you really save by giving up a pet? Realistically, the yearly cost of a pet can be low in comparison to other luxuries. My cost last year for caring for my dog totaled $515. I find this cost minimal compared to the cost of my girlfriend’s acrylic nails at $750 a year. What really concerns me about dumping a pet is that this is causing an alarming rise in the number of overcrowded shelters. When there is a lack of room or resource, shelters are forced to euthanize animals to control the overwhelming population of abandoned pets. I strongly urge anyone who is thinking about abandoning an animal to think twice before you make that decision. Consider what luxuries you can do without in order to pay the minute costs of maintaining your pet. By re-evaluating your lifestyle and making sacrifices, you can save your pet while also relieving an animal shelter of the responsibility of another mouth to feed or another pet to euthanize. My hope is by speaking out against animal abandonment, I will give a voice to these helpless victims of the economy.

Dear Editor,
    I want to express my disappointment in the way the Chronicle continues to cover the Austin mayor's race and the fact that the Chronicle has been guilty of excluding mayoral candidates from debates (i.e., the Hustle for Mayor forum).
    As a former journalist, who ended my newspaper career as the Capitol bureau chief for Scripps newspapers, I am especially disappointed that the Chronicle, which has a reputation of offering new alternatives to the public, would disenfranchise voters by not including every candidate in its forum. It is a shame that the Chronicle has taken the tact of not allowing every voice to be heard.
    And lest you think that new candidates don't have a chance and are undeserving of your coverage, I would remind you to look at the recent Corpus Christi city race, where for the first time in 50 years, an incumbent mayor was unseated. He was unseated by a Realtor who few gave a chance of winning. The difference may have been that the Caller-Times at least provided fair and even coverage to all candidates.

Dear Editor,
    Re: “Ditch the Doughnut Model” [“Postmarks,” April 24]: I couldn't agree more, Mr. Thrower. People all over Europe have gotten by for centuries despite having to build up instead of out, especially island nations like England, Ireland, and Scotland, but it's really no different for small nations like France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Austria, and a vast majority of the world's other 550 countries.
    Only in the U.S. are we unable to control our insatiable need for constant consumption, our embarrassing need for more and more and more – and always at the expense of the taxpayer when things implode.
    I'm reminded of the wonderful line in Contact, where it's discovered that the government has built two time machines instead of only the one that is needed. Quips an actor about the waste, "Why spend money on a single unit when you can spend twice as much by building two?"
    When we build up instead of out, we're instantly eliminating the need for more electric towers, more miles of electric cable, more trenches for sewer and water and gas lines not to mention the lines themselves, more highway on which to travel out, more EMS vehicles needed to handle more accidents occurring more frequently, more gasoline, more oil, more emissions. It's sheer insanity.
    Austin needs to grow up.

Dear Editor,
    Stop the live cycling Capitol music madness! Stephen, ol' tramp … you know me. I'm just yer average badly dressed, heterosexual 78704er "After a Fashion" fan and of course … cycler. Ya ain't gonna win this 'un. Trust me. We got the all-knowing advantage of too-often-tapped, literally life-flashing road rage on our side, which this universally sad argument's opponents all too obviously never needlessly experienced (with your big fancy bumpers, Road Warrior gauntlets, hard lessons, and such). Otherwise, the topic needn't drive characteristically nice peeps to narcissistically murderous overtones, simply for being troubled by incidental cycler needs. Again, that's been my exceptionless observation with this tirelessly tired argument, as a cycler. Humor and other aesthetic sensibilities being your gift, dear (again, trust me). Your amigo always, Bri in the (Lady Bird) hood.

Dear Editor,
    What was the recent tea-bagger protest at City Hall all about anyway? Taxes are 10% lower now than under Ronald Reagan, so what are the tea-bag folks protesting? If taxes lower by 10% than under Reagan makes Obama a socialist, then I reckon Reagan himself was an actual communist.
    Perhaps the tea-bag party was a protest of the Obama administration – now only in its infant stage of four months of a four-year term. Did things really get that bad in only four little ol' months? Perhaps the tea-bagging was protesting the dastardly results of last November’s general election, which the tea-baggers lost in a landslide. (They like democracy enough, so long as it is their side that wins. Obama gets no honeymoon from these cattle rustlers, liars, and thieves, and that includes Fox News.)
    The symbolic throwing of tea into Lady Bird Lake by a mostly white crowd was also probably in protest of Lyndon Johnson’s civil rights laws and basic Keynesian economics which has left right-wing, rip-off monetarist policy and supply side economics in the dustbin of history.
    George W. Bush and the GOP Congress got us into this mess by deregulating banks and other nefarious organizations like Enron. And it was the irresponsible tax cuts and two expensive, unsuccessful wars of George W. Bush which first led us to unsustainable deficits which do, indeed, threaten the prosperity of the country and passes the bill for it all right on down to our posterity – our children. (But I don’t think they were protesting about that, neither.)
    Thankfully, Obama’s going to fix all that.

Dear Editor,
    The mainstream news media made a big fuss over Barack Obama's recent peaceful overtures to Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez and Cuba. People should know that the so-called “liberal” mainstream U.S. press falsely and habitually calls President Chávez "anti-American.” The truth of the matter is that Hugo Chávez has never said or done anything that would lead a reasonable person to label him as anti-American. Chávez has made it clear that he is against oligarchy, imperialism, white supremacy, unbridled corporate greed, and all the other ugly products of the most corrupt misleaders of the colonial powers. Chávez has taken a stand for the people and against Bush and those who apparently think that the role of political leaders is to help the rich get richer while pissing on the poor. Like many other good people, he hasn't been shy about his opposition to the U.S.-led invasion and occupation of Iraq. He and his supporters have made great strides in turning the tide and creating a government that helps the majority of the Venezuelan people. Millions of Venezuelans have Chávez's picture in their living rooms, next to their pictures of Jesus. Naturally the greediest Venezuelans, many of whom have second and third homes in Washington and Florida, don't like Chávez's approach at all. They do everything in their power to hinder his work. Another major thing that more people should consider is that Havana, Cuba, was the U.S. Mafia's No. 1 source of revenue until Castro and the Cuban people had their revolution and threw them out. The Mafia pledged at that time that Fidel Castro would regret it for the rest of his life. The longstanding, cruel U.S. trade embargo against Cuba reflects the wishes of the old Mafia and its sympathizers, not the wishes of the majority of the American people. Anything that President Obama does to lead us toward a better relationship with Cuba, Venezuela, and all of Latin America should be applauded by all who value justice and peace.

Dear Editor,
    Why is it not possible for the Chronicle to tell the unvarnished truth about Mayor Will Wynn’s alleged Climate Protection Plan [“Two Years Gone – How Many Left to Save the Planet?” News, April 17]? In February 2007 Wynn declared, and both the Statesman and Chronicle dutifully reported, that the new plan was the “best” city climate protection plan in the nation.
    The simple fact is that the plan does not exist. It didn’t exist in February 2007. It didn’t exist in February 2008, when the original outline-of-a-proposal-for-a-plan promised we would have a community action plan. It does not exist today. In fact, there’s not even a plan to have a plan. (If I’m wrong, please provide a link to the plan.)
    While highlighting our “moral obligation” to move decisively to curb our greenhouse-gas emissions before it’s too late, Katherine Gregor continues to coddle and obfuscate with chirpy green cheerleading. (How 'bout a big shout-out to Lee Leffingwell and Brewster McCracken, who both promise to continue Wynn’s overhyped, slacker efforts?)
    There are a handful of fundamental components to an honest community climate protection plan. Instead of spelling them out, Gregor sheepishly suggests 10 half-steps that Wynn “could” take now that he is leaving office [“Securing Climate Protection,” News, April 17] – “policy directives,” “biannual reports,” expressions of “council support,” and "dimming the lights in the mayoral office”!
    Somebody already dimmed the lights at the Chronicle.

Dear Editor,
    Re: My grandma, Sarah Emily (Boyd) Ransom, “Nina,” owner of the Dry Creek Cafe (April 23, 1913-April 16, 2009): Another great figure of Austin's history has passed away. Sarah bought the Dry Creek Cafe and boat dock from her brother in 1956. At this time, her business existed for the local Hill Country citizens ("cedar choppers"). This was when she developed her tough manner and colorful language. In the 1970s, when the drinking age was lowered to 18, the college crowd discovered the Dry Creek. At this time, Austin's Sixth Street was not fashionable nor developed as a college hangout. Her business boomed, and she served a great hamburger. They saw a crusty woman and saw her as their second mother. She ran the business for 50 years by herself, and therefore you were always told to bring your bottle back down. No empty bottle, no more beer. This also prevented people from throwing the bottles off the deck of the bar. In 1984, the Dry Creek and surrounding area were incorporated into the Austin city limits, and the drinking age was raised to 21. She was ordered to bring her rental houses and trailers up to code. This almost broke her. She decided to sell the property to her son so he could lease it back to her and gift her the lease payments. He also agreed to pay all her maintenance costs and property taxes plus a yearly mortgage payment. Her son, Jay Reynolds, still owns and runs the bar today.

Dear Editor,
    I'm a Texan. I was born here, raised here, and will live here till I die. My allegiance to my state is fierce, my pride in its heritage is vast, yet after hearing the words Gov. Perry spoke at the Tea Party, I must say, I am ashamed to be called a Texan. His words cheapened our state. It invoked outrage within me that a sitting governor would allow his words to degrade and tarnish the honor of our great state.
    I have lived under many Texas governors, both Democrat and Republican. I have witnessed the battles waged and felt the losses of those fights no matter which party was victorious. In this time, this moment in American and Texas history, I have become ashamed to live under the rule of the current administration.
    I say to Gov. Perry – you, sir, are no true Texan. Your words only divide our state even further than it has already been split. Your actions push further away those individuals who truly are working in the best interest of all Texans. Your allegiances outside the boundaries of our great state speak volumes of not only your ambitions but the ambitions of a small group of individuals who seek their agenda to be pressed upon all the citizens of this great nation.
    I hope, sir, that you are appalled at these words. I hope, sir, you are angered by these words. Governor, if you truly are a Texan, you would accept the stimulus money. If you are truly a Texan, you would do so humbly and graciously, without pause or reservation. For to be a true Texan one must extend his hand in friendship. To be a true Texan, one must have compassion for those less fortunate. And finally, to be a true Texan, one must seek the advice of the common man who settled this land and sacrificed all he had in the hope a new life would be born from a dusty plain or a wooded glen without the oppression of a government bent on supreme rule. My Texas honor has been tarnished. I throw my gauntlet at your feet. Do you have the courage to retrieve it?

Dear Editor,
    With this note I am going public with a sad request for the seemingly only appropriate name for the new city of Austin Comprehensive Plan: Outward Austin. This appears to be representational of the sentiment contained in many of the letters sent to City Council for its consideration of a most important vote this Thursday on the selection of a consultant. The City Council and its citizenry need to ask themselves if this doughnut-planning approach (which will be a first for a comprehensive plan, making it far less than comprehensive) really is appropriate planning for the future of Austin! Since the consultants are all geared to urban density and firmly believe in the concept, which they are being asked to ignore, can the consultant submit a minority report?

Dear Editor,
    So the city of Austin wants to start enforcing a sound ordinance of 70 decibels in restaurants. Another bonehead move from “the live music capital of the world.” Interesting isn't it, that the city waited until after South by Southwest and its $100 million in the city's coffers? From now until the dog days of summer are some of the most glorious days in Austin. Musicians will be losing places to play, and the city will lose some of the magic that makes it Austin. Once again, bread is snatched from the mouths of Austin musicians.
    During SXSW, most local musicians don't work much. Musicians from out of town pay to play. Friends of mine earned less than usual, worked less than usual, and paid more than usual for parking. You do the math. It seems we are being sold a bill of goods. This is the “exploited musician capital of the world.” Musicians come to Austin only to be exploited by booking agents, club owners, and especially city fathers who are all lip service and no real help.
    The city of Austin's music office has been delayed. Good. I don't really know how much more “help” we need from City Council. Pinetop Perkins, a certified American musical treasure, at 95, has been found in violation of the noise ordinance. He was not playing in Metallica. Musicians in this town get fewer guarantees and more gigs for tips. As long as musicians accept this, they have no one but themselves to blame.
    During the Republic of Texas Biker Rally, the noise ordinance is repealed for the weekend because the bikers fill our hotels and restaurants and bring their money. I suggest a moratorium or a boycott until this asinine ordinance is repealed or modified. We musicians have to do something to make City Hall take us seriously. Perhaps the musicians should make the music stop since the only thing the city seems to understand is the economic impact. During the biker rally coming up, let's shut down Austin music. Hell, we won't be able to hear ourselves over the Harleys anyway.

   [Louis Black responds: Although I don't know exactly what the policies of non-SXSW clubs and events are, musicians do not pay to play at SXSW. They are either paid or in lieu of payment take a badge and wristbands.]

Dear Editor,
    Re: “Point Austin: Madness in Many Packages” [News, April 10]: In his column, Michael King lowers the boom on Alex Jones, Richard Poplawski, the National Rifle Association, and “gun fanatics.” I agree with most of King's arguments except for his logic-on-head howl over guns: “[T]he predominant official response, from the feds on down, has been to look for ways to make guns even more omnipresent and readily available – in churches, on campuses, in public buildings, wherever the hell some unhinged wacko with a real or imaginary grievance (or in an argument with his mother) can take it into his fool head to shoot everybody within range and especially any police officer who walks up to his door wondering what all the fuss is about.” Gun omnipresence didn't cause the latest surge of shoot-outs. In fact, it takes no genius to see there is nothing more inviting to an armed psychopath than a “gun-free” zone. Even The New York Times reported that Columbine killer Dylan Klebold's last conversation with his father was over the advisability of passing then-pending concealed-carry legislation in Colorado. Both were opposed.
    Much of the impetus for the continuing expansion of “gun rights” is the result of the screaming culture war induced by gun-controllers/banners over the last 30 years. It's a war that has been lost by prohibitionists. But they keep screaming about the hated other, and the other side is bent on whacking every mole that pops up. Perhaps we should follow the advice of some in mainstream media who have recently called for a “dialogue” about the failed War on Drugs, with an aim to changing national policy. Why not have that dialogue concerning the failed war on guns?

Dear Editor,
    Re: The Fireants concert at Whitewater Thursday night: I am 75 years old and have not heard or enjoyed a band as much since I first started following Kris Kristofferson before he hit the big time. The Fireants were awesome. They were so polite; their musical talent and their singing were a joy to listen to; they were so appreciative of the audience for coming out on a rainy night to hear them. They even apologized that they couldn't play longer as they had to get up to go to school the next morning. It's been a long time since I've witnessed such wholesome, polite, and talented musicians and know they will have a tremendous and successful future. I was honored to be part of the audience. Many thanks to all of you.

Dear Editor,
    Michael King's excoriation of conspiracy-based hysteria [“Point Austin,” News, April 10] waxed a bit hysterical itself about the availability of guns, which, by the way, has still somehow failed to return us to the days of Wild West shoot-outs and bloodbaths in the streets despite decades of Chicken Little predictions to the contrary. Those "unhinged wackos" are hardly a new invention, either; the same way the illegality of guns on campus didn't stop the murderers at Virginia Tech or Columbine High, it also didn't stop Charles Whitman at UT. What did stop Whitman was the fact that as soon as people realized someone was shooting from the tower, they retrieved their own guns and returned fire. Watch the film footage; those puffs of smoke around the bastard every time he sticks a rifle barrel over the edge of the deck are bullets fired by armed bystanders. A lot of lives were saved because he didn't have time to aim once he was being shot at himself.
    Ask New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, and Washington, D.C., how terribly effective gun control is. Ask Mexico. Why does the left seem incapable of understanding that prohibition, which clearly isn't working on pot, clearly isn't working on guns either? It's every bit as absurd as the right failing to understand that the prohibition which clearly isn't working on guns – and never did work on abortion in “the good old days" – clearly isn't working on pot either.