Are we serious?

If you meant this as a joke, you're not even funny. The Weekly endorses Jeanette Burrage for position 26 on the King

"/>

"I'm sorry, but a judge who insisted that 'women lawyers wear skirts, not pants, in her courtroom' (your words) has no place at the bench."

Are we serious?

If you meant this as a joke, you're not even funny. The Weekly endorses Jeanette Burrage for position 26 on the King County Superior Court? Huh? I'm sorry, but a judge who insisted that "women lawyers wear skirts, not pants, in her courtroom" (your words) has no place at the bench. The Bar Association rated her "not adequate." You call her "an extreme conservative . . . of absolutist persuasion." Wake up, Weekly! Anyone but Burrage!

GEORGE NEMETH

SEATTLE

Are we high?

Requiring female attorneys to wear skirts is not merely a "blunder," it's sex discrimination. I want a judge that's listening to my attorney's arguments, not looking at her legs. Not to mention the fact that Burrage has been labeled "unqualified" by several Bar associations. Speaking of unqualified . . . who's making the endorsement decisions over there?

JENNIFER GEESE

VIA E-MAIL

Are we crazy?

YOU ENDORSED BURRAGE????!!!! ARE YOU OUT OF YOUR FRIGGING MINDS?

KAREN BACKMAN

FEDERAL WAY

Silly City Council

As pointed out by James Bush, two leading lady columnists from Seattle's two leading daily journals recently published two variations on the same theme, the silliness of this City Council [4th & James, "The dailies wake up," 9/14]. Both articles named names of the "responsible" and the "irresponsible." Unfortunately, they both got it wrong.

A closer look at the facts reveals that both columnists were not only trying to revive old horses, already beaten to death in the press (council parking costs and circus animals), but neither bothered to interview their biggest target, council member Steinbrueck. In fact, the only live quote came from pseudo-historian and political gadfly Walt Crowley, who said something about squandering credibility.

Most politicians in this town run their elections with the support of well-connected downtown donors. Sometimes civic activists like Steinbrueck can overcome the downtown money advantage by raising funds in smaller increments from a larger, more representative constituency. As a true populist, Steinbrueck cannot cavalierly dismiss as "silly" those issues that many voters ask him to pay attention to.

All politicians make harmless decisions at least once. Even Mayor Paul Schell knows only too well how pressure from a well-meaning special interest group can force one into making a foolish decision with surprising consequences. Does anyone remember Seattle's Bible Week?

Of course, the silliest council member is the one responsible for creating this whole tabloid spectacle in the first place. Council President Margaret Pageler should know better than to introduce meaningless, token legislation that makes her friends and colleagues look bad. This is not the type of leadership we are looking for in our council.

PATRICIA STAMBOR

SEATTLE

Starbucks and us

Ummmm. I'm just curious about your decision to chain the Seattle Weekly paper boxes in front of Starbucks locations. What exactly do you expect to achieve by this action? I understand that you're upset that Starbucks has banned free weekly newspapers from being distributed in its stores [see Uffda, this issue] but why would this action make any difference to a decision that is final? How many years has Starbucks allowed you to distribute your paper in its stores? Has any gratitude ever been expressed by you for this incredible favor? Maybe, instead of looking a gift horse in the mouth, you should look for alternative outlets instead of acting like a pissed off nine-year-old. You're doing your wonderful paper a huge disservice by acting like a victim. Act like the champion of free press that you are and take the hit on the chin and move on. Best of luck!

BRENT STAVIG

SEATTLE

Pissed-off geek

Angela Gunn, thank you for equating "true geek" with Mechanical Engineering (BattleBots is "the sort of spectacle that makes any true geek's heart beat faster") [Kiss my ASCII, 9/14]. I admit this is my ego talking, but it is so irritating that the label geek has been appropriated by all these people who likely never took anything apart and put it back together (except maybe to install a new chip on their motherboard or some such thing. Ooooh, I'm impressed). Sure, some dot-com programmers and engineers actually qualify as obsessive detail-oriented perpetually analytical dysfunctional geeks, but what about the other 90 percent? We don't call massage therapists doc- tors, why are we calling Web developers engineers?

At least massive use of the word improves the female:male geek ratio, which hopefully inspires young girls to be an "engineer" like their dot-com sister/ cousin/neighbor/mother. I had an older sister mechanical engineer (and brother systems engineer), definitely enough support to get through the 1:15 undergrad and 1:30+ grad school proportions. So if you people out there insist on calling yourselves geeks and engineers, at least live up to the title in actions, if not discipline. Join a professional society, visit high schools, participate in technology outreach, be role models for kids who don't think tech fields are options for them. Live up to what your title implies.

Or continue watching "Hackers" and "The Matrix," thinking about how cool you are.

M. KAPLAN

SEATTLE

Ooh!

I, amongst many other other fans of Ooh!, will have been delighted to read Kurt Reighley's Two Ears and a Tale column [9/7]; at last this influential band is getting some of the props it deserves. The fact that a critic of the stature of Reighley is giving credit where it is so obviously due has certainly got the Ooh! chat room hopping again! For that alone, thanks.

However, and with all deference to Reighley, I was shocked at some of the factual inadequacies! Granted, there is not a lot of source material around, but a brief trip to our Web site (www.ineradicablestain.com/ooh) would have ironed out all the problems. We are grateful to Reighley but, in the words of Ooh! ( from Time For Pants Part Two): If you're going to rewrite history, get it right! So, though I hate to be pedantic, here are a few pointers:

A) If Reighley thinks that Every Good Boy Deserves Fudge wasn't worth the vinyl it was pressed on, he should bear in mind that the album was never pressed on vinyl. It came out only on CD and is now available directly through the Web site.

B) Notes Loved the All You: The Ooh! Remix Album which he suspects was never released at all! (He then came up with some music critic stuff that we simple folk at Ooh! Central didn't even understand but let us assure you that this album rocks.)

C) Under no account did Ooh! ever look like a cheap knock-off of the Slits! That's all I have to say about that.

D) Wordless vocals? Wha? Wordless? Vocals? Check the credits! They were never referred to as vocals! And read the lyrics! Wordless words? Wow! That would be something (and possibly not something that would even be beyond Ooh!).

E) They never played under the name All About Meat, though they did play literally under some meat once, which is documented in the Taschen photobook of Kirk Sliver's photography called Under the Overground.

F) Ooh! are not, under any circumstances, done—they never even went away. They have new material coming out and we'll send it straight to you.

But apart from the above errors and even including the above errors, we loved the article and hate to seem ungrateful. So thanks and keep them coming. Drop by the chatroom. All questions answered and we don't bite.

Love through Ooh!

MONTY SMITH

VIA E-MAIL

Shoddy

I have found myself in the need to comment on this review [of Wyclef Jean's The Ecleftic, Slanguistics, 9/14]. After having heard the album myself, I must ask if Jon Caramanica was given a different copy than the rest of the listening public? His editorial on the new Wyclef album was surrounded in base trivia, petty rumors, and outright misunderstandings of the content he listened to. I'm not a booster of the album personally, but I just had to comment on the shoddy article, from a magazine I usually otherwise enjoy.

Thanks for the ear,

ERECH OVERAKER

VIA E-MAIL

Novelty vote

It would seem that Michael Krugman and Jason Cohen were not thinking very clearly in their 8/24 column [The Culture Bunker], when they first admit that they will vote for Gore over Nadar [sic] solely out of fear, then next predict Bush's inevitable election. If Bush is going to win, all the more reason to vote Nadar [sic], if you're so inclined! However, the better reason to vote Nadar [sic] is the utter novelty and satisfaction to be derived from voting for someone who you believe actually supports your views and who will not be seduced into the hands of corporate agendas the moment elected.

LINDA CERIELLO

VASHON ISLAND

*N Sync: SEXY!

I think you have guts to go off and judge Justin Timberlake ( whom by the way his bushy hair is SEXY to me) [Slanguistics, "*N Sync: Race traitors!" 4/27]!! I think that it is just sooooo wrong....He is not a poser...He can like rap...Geese all you people do is try to ruin there reps.. Just because they are a GUY band you have to think that it is bad for them to listen to rap... They don't have to just listen to POP...GOSH...It just "MAKES ME ILL" Which is a rap song and I LIKE IT...THat you have to judge someone, like that...

As you can see I DON'T like your article...SO ... I suggest that you do NOT write another one~ Especially since you probably haven't Even MET HIM!!!!!!!!!!!

Sincerley.

LAUREN

VIA E-MAIL

Once again, friends, we are more likely to print your comments about recent articles in Seattle Weekly than your musings on tin foil. Letters may be edited. Please include name, location, and telephone number. Write to Letters Editor, Seattle Weekly, 1008 Western Avenue, Suite 300, Seattle, WA 98104; fax to 206-467-4377; or e-mail to letters@seattleweekly.com.

 
comments powered by Disqus