"The fact is that police officers not only seek confrontation with minorities, they slobber over the chance."


I found it ironic that you chose the third place color winner for the cover of your paper ["Seattle Weekly Women Photo Contest," Oct 18].

Granted, there was an idea behind the shot chosen for the cover, but because of the people involved, a professional model and a professional makeup artist, the end result was very "fashion" in flavor. Like most fashion photography, the photograph is about looking not understanding.

By contrast, in the winning color photograph you can see the understanding the two women have of each other. By viewing the photograph we can begin to have our own understanding of them and perhaps a new understanding of women in general.

So in choosing a photo for the cover, the Weekly chose the photo of a woman rather than a photo about women. I think this demonstrates the Weekly's position toward women: to look at, not to understand. But in your defense, this is how society views women and, more important, how advertisers view them.

David M. Brown



As a firm believer in meaningful and progressive tax reform, I was pretty horrified to hear Geov Parrish state that "sloppy tax reform is a lot better than no tax reform" ["Cut Taxes, Now!" Oct. 18]. Are you kidding?!

Sloppy tax reform in the form of I-747 will strangle local governments around the state, requiring them to run elections EVERY SINGLE year in order to find funding for services we all agree are necessary and wanted—firefighters, libraries, courts. And after public employees spend a quarter of the year running an election, what if the measure doesn't win? Then the local government is out thousands of dollars that were already scarce.

Furthermore, to think that the legislature is going to be spurred by I-747's passage to propose a progressive income tax is ludicrous. The legislature has been loathe to violate the will of the voters over the past few years. Think 695. If the voters pass I-747, they'll do so because it represents immediate (albeit totally false) tax relief to them. Are we really supposed to believe that this kind of sentiment will prompt the legislature to suggest an income tax?

There is no doubt that we need tax reform in this state, but to suggest passing a measure that highlights a problem without offering an iota of a solution is shortsighted and irresponsible. "Don't tax us" isn't tax reform, it's a quick way to choke off the public services we all use and expect to be there when we need them.

Becky Kavoussi



Regarding Geov Parrish's "Cut Taxes, Now!" [Oct. 18], it's nice to see that even a Lefty like Mr. Parrish is willing to take an honest look at the problems inherent in the Democrat mantra of "No New Tax Cuts." Unlike most Seattleites, he seems to understand that there is a need to force accountability on our legislators, and Eyman's initiative is a step in the right direction.

As for his comments concerning Honorable Jim McD, Mr. Parrish is right again. As a Republican, I couldn't ask for a better Democrat in a safe seat. He's shown over the years to be incredibly ineffective in getting any of his ideas passed into law. Thank God.

Geov, for a wacky socialist, I love you.

Nick Slepko

Bangalore, India


How some people (such as the Post- Intelligencer editorial staff) have come to the conclusion that "the facts" were revealed at the Aaron Roberts inquest flies in the face of credulity [see "Rights and Wrongs," Oct. 18]. When "facts" are merely the testimony of clearly guilty parties, one can only conclude that those who believe this are merely stooges of the institutions of power. I followed the testimony of the white police officers responsible for the death of Roberts, and it is beyond belief how anyone, beyond the P-I, bigots, and police apologists, could take their version of events without a measure of disbelief. Furthermore, attempts to portray the victim as the "guilty" party only makes such hypocrisy all the more despicable.

Others make the ludicrous claim that the officers did not seek this confrontation. The fact is that police officers not only seek confrontation with minorities, they slobber over the chance. One would think that, to avoid bad publicity, white officers, before allowing bigotry, racial profiling, and mere whim to govern their actions, would think twice before seeking confrontation over what is often merely "intuition," but they do it anyway—often with bully-boy delight. That is fact—and just because white-skinned suits (at the P-I, for example) are fortunate enough not to be subjected to police harassment does not give them the right to say it does not happen.

The bottom line is that the police cannot be trusted to tell the truth—and why should they worry about lying? All across the country, police are allowed to get away with murder by white jurors, apologists, politicians, and newspaper editors.

Mark Kittell



Let me add this Mayor's race up:

One guy has never done anything in his life but play politics. Didn't even graduate from college. This guy is so beholden to the construction unions that he voted to build a light-rail line to the airport that stops a mile away from the airport. That vote last month cost us $2 billion and will evict busses from the downtown bus tunnel.

The other guy? The Weekly has ranted against Sidran for years. I don't favor alcoholics knocking back 40 ouncers at 10 a.m. on the benches overlooking childrens' play equipment in our public parks. Or untaxed, unlicensed, unregulated sole proprietorships operating on public property. That would be the panhandling crowd. Does the Weekly believe it is good public policy to mix 15-year-olds, over- 21-year-olds, alcohol, and a party scene together? That would be the teen dance ordinance. And to look at the ads in the Weekly, our music scene is no better or worse than elsewhere in the nation. So keeping the utility poles clean of tavern advertising for the past decade hasn't really harmed that local industry.

If the Weekly editorial staff wants an incompetent mayor and the money-sucking disaster of Light Rail, be idiots and endorse Nickels. I'm voting competence and the Monorail: Sidran.

Jules James



Thank you so much for the Cheesecake Factory reality check (Audrey Van Buskirk's spendid "See Dick Run," Oct. 18). I have long been aghast at the explosive success of this awful chain and was mortified that my fellow Seattleite "ate it up" with such frenzy and enthusiasm when it landed downtown earlier this year. My disbelief is compounded by the sad struggles and closures of many local restaurants, a result of many factors facing the restaurant industry, one of which is this very type of corporate invader. Loads of credit to Ms. Van Buskirk for being the first local reviewer to tell it like it is and not get caught up in the hype—this place is rotten. I've been waiting for [restaurant critic] Ms. Robinson to rip this place, but you did just great!

Seth H. Howard


Lots to say and no one to say it to? Write to Seattle Weekly, 1008 Western, Ste. 300, Seattle, WA 98104; fax to 206-467-4377; or e-mail to letters@seattleweekly.com. By submission of a letter, you agree that we may edit the letter and publish and/or license the publication of it in print, electronically, and for archival purposes. Please include name, location, and phone number.

comments powered by Disqus

Friends to Follow