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,
    Virginia B. Wood's description of Anthony Bourdain as an "unrepentant former heroin addict who gets drunk and stoned on television," and thus not as worthy of an Emmy nomination as Paula Deen made me livid [“Food-o-File,” Food, July 26].
    It is the 21st century, Virginia. Do you really believe that addiction is a moral failing from which one must repent, as opposed to an illness, which addiction professionals have been trying to explain to us for a generation? And how do you know he is drunk and stoned on TV and that it isn't just an act? It worked for Dean Martin.
    Most importantly, Bourdain's recent public takedown of Justin Bieber for his tweet about urinating in a restaurant's mop bucket shows that Anthony cares about the people who clean the floor. Can that be said about Paula Deen?

   [Food Editor Virginia B. Wood responds: While I'm not a particular fan of either performer and don't consider either of them Emmy-worthy, my point was that their behavior over long careers is judged by different standards by corporate sponsors and television executives. What I've discovered from writing about these two multimillionaire celebrities is that they both have legions of rabid fans ready to defend them against any criticism, deserved or not.]

Dear Editor:
    Your recent article about the independent redistricting commission [“City Redistricting Commission Wants Its Own Lawyer,” News, July 26] justly pays tribute to the outstanding contribution that Peck Young has made to Austinites for Geographic Representation and is making to the commission.
    Nevertheless, the Chronicle injected a bit of sarcasm by calling the independent commission process “messy.” I doubt if the author of this statement has either experienced redistricting in a large city as a basis for comparison or attended more than a few of the weekly meetings of the Austin redistricting commission or the prior Applicant Review Panel.
    The focus of your story is on the redistricting commission’s decision to hire its own legal counsel. The story implies that this decision is a result of recent events. It is not. The decision was long planned by the commission as part of its organization. Hiring such counsel is essential to maintaining the commission’s independence from all outside interests and is explicitly required by the city charter.
    The independent commission process has been smooth and successful, from the initial steps by the city auditor, through the selection of the eligible applicants by the ARP, and to the organization and work of the commission itself. The members of the independent redistricting commission are smart, conscientious, and experienced men and women that represent the diversity of Austin. They do not constitute a “novice board.” Again, I ask the Chronicle to embrace a democratic idea that is working.

Dear Editor,
    Regarding Virginia Wood's column this week ["Food-o-File," Food, July 26]: Are you serious, Virginia? Assuming you are referring to Mr. Bourdain, Tony is a genius author, one who also brings top-notch educational TV to his viewers in, yes, a charming, bad-boy, yet fascinating manner. I have learned countless things from his shows over the years, whether it's about food, various cultures around the world, or the human spirit. If you have seen him speak in public, he is a very intelligent, successful, yet extremely humble man. And the most offensive part of your article is when you put him down for being a "former heroin addict." Really, Virginia?
    Ms. Deen, on the other hand – an old fashioned, deep South, backwoods racist – has taught me nothing other than how to raise your cholesterol a few hundred points and give yourself a heart attack. Do they give awards out for that?

   [Food Editor Virginia B. Wood responds: While I'm not a particular fan of either performer and don't consider either of them Emmy-worthy, my point was that their behavior over long careers is judged by different standards by corporate sponsors and television executives. What I've discovered from writing about these two multimillionaire celebrities is that they both have legions of rabid fans ready to defend them against any criticism, deserved or not.]

Dear Editor,
    How ironic that the letter you printed in the July 26 issue pointing out errors would have such a gross misstatement of fact [“Lives at Stake,” Postmarks]. There are no taxpayer subsidies of abortion in the U.S. In fact, the Hyde amendment of 1976 banned federal Medicaid coverage of abortion. There are now exceptions for cases of rape or incest, or when the life of the mother is endangered. Low-income women are most affected by this law. For those who would object to any taxpayer money funding abortion, might I point out that our taxpayer dollars are going to fund wars that not everybody agrees with. I hope I'm not the only reader to point out the inaccuracies in that letter. Yes, let's have an accurate discussion on abortion. Please stop printing letters stating that there are taxpayer subsidies for abortion, when that is the furthest thing from the truth.

Dear Editor,
    In response to your article “City Redistricting Commission Wants Its Own Lawyer,” [News, July 26]: It would have been extremely nice, and more importantly, fair, if the article had also pointed out that Austinites for Geographical Representation and most everyone associated with AGR who has offered comments has, in fact, urged the Independent Citizens Redistricting Commission to hire its own attorney. AGR even suggested that they hire temporary counsel at the very first ICRC meeting and retain that counsel until they were ready to establish a more permanent arrangement.