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,
    They were $10 boots. Scuffed and ratty, on a row of bleachers at the Settlement Home garage sale. The perfect toe, the perfect heel, butter soft and fit perfectly. That night I wore them to my job at Antone's Home of the Blues on Guadalupe. I had always thought of shoe shines as a man's thing, but that night I asked Gilbert Alexander, or Little Daddy, as most folks called him, if he could help my new boots. He winked at me, motioned toward the chair, and gave me a thumbs-up. Gilbert was incredibly graceful of movement. From the turning up of the pant leg, it was a dance. The artful polish, the edge of the sole carefully touched up with a dark little wand of polish. It was usually loud at the club, and Little Daddy had a very soft voice. If you asked him a question, you either had to lean over and make sure you knew what he said or just nod and pretend you did. Those who did the latter missed out on his most insightful comments and humor. I used to tell him he should have been governor. He'd laugh and say, "Another time, another time.” I'm sure I spent more on keeping that pair of boots shined than I spent on my entire wardrobe through the years. He kept our souls shined. I'll miss you, Gilbert.

Dear Editor,
    Re: Michael King's “Point Austin: Back to the Color Line” column of Dec. 31, 2010 [News]: I found it interesting that the people who scream the loudest about tyranny and being enslaved by the government are the same ones who say that slavery before the Civil War had positive aspects. I guess their argument is that as long as it's private-enterprise slavery it's OK. Separation of slavery and state?

Dear Editor,
    By now, it should be painfully obvious to all fair-minded citizens that our uniquely American experiment with representative democracy, although ideal in principle, has foundered in practice. Our present form of government is too inefficient, expensive, and divisive to function in any meaningful way. Frankly, most citizens would rather watch football games than waste their time and money on politics.
    The obvious alternative to such a “messy” form of government is the corporate model which has served this country so well, notwithstanding a few minor economic upheavals which are expected in a free market economy. We should unite in proposing that Congress outsource all governmental functions to a new holding company, which would apply modern business practices to all aspects of governance. The new corporation could be named U.S.A. Management, Incorporated.
    Benefits offered by this new form of government would include elimination of costly elections and useless programs, such as Social Security and Medicare. Since USAMI would operate on the profit principle, deficits would become a thing of the past.
    The Board of Directors would be chosen by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which already represents the best interests of all Americans. Thus the invisible hand of Adam Smith would bring efficiency and profitability to a faltering enterprise.
    Once this magnificent corporate structure is in place, costly “branches of government” such as Congress and the Supreme Court could be eliminated. Since the board would make all state decisions, the enactment of laws and the construction of same would be unnecessary. Binding arbitration would be the sole method of dispute resolution. Trial by jury would become a useless appendage of an inefficient system, and therefore discarded.
    The presidency, board-appointed, would be retained for ceremonial purposes.
    Let’s get behind this, folks!

Dear Editor,
    Outlaw plastic bags? A few Texas cities have done this, including charging large fees for the bags. Austin is considering it. Granted, there are too many plastic bags literally floating around.
    A suggestion: Since most people, especially in Austin, want to recycle, and visitors might also recycle if it is convenient, ask the city to promote a huge increase in recycling opportunities – especially in motels and hotels, but any place there are trash receptacles. Also, make reusable bags cheap and accessible.
    Plastic bags have many uses, including collecting waste rather than seeing it scattered.

Dear Editor,
    Re: “COM LPs” [Music, Jan. 14]: I consider myself fairly literate, but this opening sentence from a Raoul Hernandez review was beyond me: "Import-only hourlong captivity from metal's Dutch rite of passage excises parenthetical butchers credits beginning with Houses of the Unholy mushroom cloud …." Could someone please translate that into English?

Dear Editor,
    The City Council keeps violating planning rules to give developers benefits worth millions, while the public gets a pittance in exchange.
    Two years ago the council made a show of re-enacting the limit on building heights along Lady Bird Lake, but quietly inserted a provision to let the council grant variances if a developer can “prove” that the “public benefits” of a project “justify” an exception.
    Predictably, this policy lets every case become a potential exception. The latest example is the Park PUD, in which the council approved an eight-story office building exceeding height limits in the lake overlay zone – against the recommendation of city staff and the Planning Commission, and in violation of the city’s own official neighborhood development plan.
    The “community benefits”? A $250,000 payment for parks, a new restaurant, a cafe, 1,000 square feet of office space for “public use,” and a paid parking garage (a claim characterized by the Chronicle’s Wells Dunbar as “ludicrous”) [“City Hall Hustle: If You Don't Build It, They Will Still Come,” News, Jan. 21].
    This is bad policy and terrible business. The council never mentioned how much extra profit they gave the developer by breaking city rules. In fact the council never asks for the amount of extra profit in these cases.
    The extra floors the council handed the Park PUD developers will increase their profit by at least $10 million to $15 million dollars – probably far more. The so-called “benefit” to the public is as laughable as it is minuscule. It is certainly not fair compensation.
    Imagine the uproar if the council sold 30,000 square feet of lakeside property for a measly $250,000. Yet that is exactly what happens when you allow extra floors on a high rise. It’s the equivalent of millions of dollars worth of extra development space.
    It’s a travesty. In case after case developers take the cake and leave the public a few crumbs.
    We need an ordinance that all such deals require a realistic estimate of the extra profit produced by waiving city rules. That’s the only way to compare the true worth of what the city gives vs. what a developer gets.

Dear Editor,
    The health care reform act was enacted using classic Chicago politics of backroom bribery and intimidation. A little-known floor rule designed for the purpose of budget reconciliation was twisted shamelessly in the final hours in a reprehensible act of abuse of power. Democratic Sen. Robert Byrd of West Virginia, congressional historian (at the time), could not find it in his conscience to support abusing this rule in this way. However, the majority of the Congress won over the majority of Americans – by anyone's poll you want to read. So, right or wrong, the Republicans are saying “shove it down our throats in 2010, and we will stick it up your ass in 2011.” Are you surprised?

Dear Editor,
    I hope that someone can help me with a struggle down memory lane. In 1976, there was a restaurant on Congress Avenue south of the Capitol, on the west side of the street. They served the greatest chicken-fried steak that I have ever eaten. This place was within walking distance of the Downtowner Motel, where we stayed while attending the state basketball tourney, and I believe it was a family owned restaurant. Thank you for any help.

Dear Editor,
    Austin ISD is looking at a budget shortfall in 2012, and they are looking at covering most of these funds by closing some of the best schools in Austin. The AISD Facility Master Plan Task Force faces a challenging objective. Clearly the option of closing some of the smaller, older schools is a tempting way to quickly reduce the budget.
    This approach is in line with a school of thought which treats public schooling as an industry, which seeks to create efficient factories producing graduates by the thousands at the lowest possible cost.
    But we here in Austin, and our surrounding communities, can do much better.
    We can accomplish an educational environment that the mega-school districts of the sprawling Texas suburbs are not bold enough to dream of.
    We can allow diverse schools with unique communities to thrive. We can allow excellence to develop around these vital community centers.
    The option of closing educationally successful, desired, and culturally rich community public elementary schools shows a lack of creative problem-solving.
    Such closures run against all of the best ideals of public education and against the goals of the Austin community. These closures would represent a huge step backward for Austin.
    So, please Chronicle and readers, pay attention to this – AISD board members are elected. Make sure that their actions do not undermine the unique strengths of Austin culture and community.

Dear Editor,
    What can one say about the abstract circular philosophical moral and intellectual wanderings of subjective leftist thought? But Louis Black’s latest “Page Two” [Jan. 14] excursion actually edges into the objective universe. Indeed, he goes so far as quoting an enemy of subjective relativism – Ayn Rand. But alas, Mr. Black’s missive again explicitly implies objective truths are amorphous; claiming the closest we can get is “a generally accepted point of view.”
    But ironically, while he reflexively rejects the concept of objective truths, he (unconsciously) uses it to defend subjective thought. Specifically, he has to believe he’s right; otherwise he’s wasting his time. In other words, he clearly believes he’s objectively correct. And secondly, his gushing use of Rand’s defense of money highlights objective moral veracity, i.e., “If the source [of livelihood] is corrupt, you have damned your own existence,” and so on.
    Mr. Black’s inability to see his own willful blindness to this wisdom is actually very normal. We all do it at some level because truth can be tough and frightening. And this often inevitably results in pernicious reality denial. And this is precisely why there must be open acknowledgment that clear immutable objective behavioral precepts be defined and followed. When denied the savage will dictate. The most recent example is the mass murder in Tucson, Ariz. Moreover, this is the core of all anarchic tyranny.
    For up-is-down morally relative leftists, this is heresy. That said, most leftists aren’t stupid, albeit hopelessly misguided. Somewhere in their souls they know the objective truth reality isn’t only correct, but existentially necessary for the continuance of human liberty, its champion America, and civilization. After all, they live it daily in their peaceful civilized personal lives. All that’s needed to comprehend and apply this on a societal level is an objective mind.

Dear Editor,
    As clearly stated in the Bible, all Jeff Bridges movies are not created equal. It may be hyperbolic to say that Tron: Legacy [Film Listings, Dec. 17, 2010] was the worst movie of the year and True Grit [Film Listings, Dec. 24, 2010] was the best, but that polarity was certainly part of my reaction to seeing the equal rating from the Chronicle (three stars each). Perhaps the reviewers should review one anothers' ratings to avoid such a stellar false equivalence.