By Michael E. Miller
By Ryan Yousefi
By Kyle Munzenrieder
By Sabrina Rodriguez
By Michael E. Miller
By Carlos Suarez De Jesus
By Luther Campbell
By Kyle Munzenrieder
THAT'S POOP,ALL RIGHT
I must say that after reading your feature article concerning "George & Jane & Steve & Ellis & Kathy" (October 2) I became incensed. What kind of journalism is this? Why have you wasted your time and space? When are you going to do your jobs right?
Here's the real poop. George was right in stating that Jane became involved with Steve for career purposes. Jane, however, fell in love with Kathy from the first time she met her at Pure Platinum. Steve has always been sex-starved because of his insecurity of being overweight and thought it would be a great experience to bring Jane along for "investigative purposes." The loving looks that Kathy and Jane gave to each other while Jane was table dancing for the both of them should've triggered a negative response from Steve but this was not the case. Steve was not looking. From the corner of his eye he noticed George who was staring at his table. George, in fact, was in love with Jane, and when Steve wandered away from the table and approached him he thought his cover was blown. But a discussion led to the offer of a foursome. George immediately agreed. Everyone was happy. Steve lusted for George, George lusted for Jane, Jane lusted for Kathy, and Kathy lusted for sex.
The foursome took place in Kathy's apartment and of course it was videotaped by Kathy's husband. This is the secret videotape. The other videotape will never make it in court because it is inconclusive. Rumor has it the person in that video was Pee-wee, and there was never any penetration because of the mess he made, but this is a sick tale for another time.
I have the foursome tape secretly hidden in a wino's shopping cart in South Beach and it's not for sale but rather for my own sick purposes.
This is the real story; and the moral of the story is: who gives a damn?
A DOFF OF THE BOWLER HAT TO MANSON AND THE SPOOKY KIDS - OUCH!
Regarding Kathy Johnson's letter (September 25): I personally was happy to see Marilyn Manson and the Spooky Kids get a favorable review ("On the Beat," September 4). The band is interesting to look at, plays tighter than a size-six bowler hat, and the vocals have a raw sound reminiscent of early Alice Cooper. If the stage shows were bizarre and offended Kathy, then she should stay away somewhere nice and safe where the band will perhaps play whatever boring generic stuff that all too many bands in this area churn out.
The concept of original music is just that - original. Original music, original looks, and original stage shows. As far as Bergasse 19 goes, they have only played out once, seven or eight months ago. If this band has stayed in Kathy's mind for seven or eight months - need I say more? - they were at least memorable. Anyhow, was this girl complaining about the band or the crowd in attendance? She shouldn't forget what a lot of noise and moral posturing like hers can do for a band - look at Luther Campbell and the 2 Live Crew. If a band presents stage shows or has material that offends her, then she should bring her smelling salts. Both of the bands mentioned are noteworthy, original, and are deserving of praise for that. In addition, the only reference made about LSD in the write-up was a vague remark as to the alleged contents of a lunch box.
Lana Von Funk
NEW TIMES PASSES WITH EXTRA CREDIT
Regarding "The Case From Hell" (September 11 and 18) by Steven Almond: I have been a reader of New Times, since it was The Wave, of virtually every article, except a few I just couldn't hack, and I found this one to be excellent, by far the best ever, to date.
On a math test, even the smallest error at the beginning of a problem will usually so distort the outcome that even if the rest is done perfectly, the answer will be very wrong and the grade very low. On the other hand, a mistake of like magnitude near the end will only slightly throw off the answer and nearly full credit will be awarded. The official disposition of this case reminds me of the former. The result of placing the children with the older sister at the outset and to date - a glaring no-no - is that early in this case is a very large error that throws off everything after, even if all else were correct.
Thus, one of the fascinations about this story, is that manifestly, or to borrow from Jefferson, self-evidently, the state, that is HRS, etc., is wrong from the get-go.
Here's another, then I'll let it go. Miami Beach residents: Can you read "The Case From Hell," especially part two, and vote for Gelber?
But you get the idea.
NEW TIMES FAILS, REQUIRES REWRITE
In reference to "The Case from Hell," (two issues, mind you) I just want to say that it was extremely one-sided ("The Case from Hell").
HRS has helped far more families than one thinks (according to most recent media attention)! Study the statistics! Interview clients and families HRS has helped. Ms. Snodgrass, a protective investigator, is one of HRS's most experienced. So are HRS's attorneys, Esther Blynn and Robin Greene. They constitute employees who "truly labor" day after day, helping children, even under the pressure of limited resources and income, to do what's necessary to protect children from abuse, neglect, and/or death. Investigator Snodgrass was attempting to protect Aimee, due to the overwhelming evidence she obtained from the case. Often a victim recants his or her story once police, HRS, and the media intercede. Of course, no one at HRS can give his/her details of the story, due to our law of confidentiality.
Why not feature an article on one of HRS's success stories?
Rose Losniak, investigator
Health and Rehabilitative Services
HRS FAILS, REQUIRES RERIGHT
I just read your article, "The Case from Hell," and it frightens me to think that the very people who are supposed to be protecting our children are ruining their lives. The state has shown just how recklessly it has handled this case. HRS is destroying the lives of decent and innocent children. They are paid to make sure things like this do not happen. How can they let this case get so mishandled?
NATIONAL EARTHWORM DAY: A "FEEL GOOD" PROCLAMATION
In your September 11 edition you tell us about an attempt to censor porno magazines published in Coral Gables ("Tie Me Up! Tone Me Down!"). Many of your readers will undoubtedly be angered by this attempt at censorship. They will be fully justified; but the campaign against Dugent Publishing Corporation is less important (since it will undoubtedly fail) than the nature of the group which instigated it. This group is the Dade County Commission on the Status of Women, and the important point about it is that it is publicly funded - in other words, it is our tax money being used, or misused.
I will agree that the question of the status of women is an important one, but is it one that is properly a concern of the Dade County government, or even one that can be dealt with at all by any county government? There is always pressure upon government to do something about some problem and advance some noble cause, but certain goals are simply too nebulous to be dealt with by government.
What does this commission think it can do about "the status of women," and what facets of the status of women does it intend to address? Does it have any clearly formulated program? One suspects not, or else it would not be careening about the South Florida political landscape searching for a cause to champion, a dragon to rescue, a fair damsel to slay.
If the commission had a sufficiently narrowly focused agenda, it might perhaps have some purpose. If it were investigating job discrimination in Dade County, it might perhaps accomplish something. Perhaps. This is at least a subject matter that can be clearly defined, but if you cannot define what it is that you wish to accomplish, it is unlikely that you will accomplish anything at all. It is also unlikely that the politicians of the Dade County government really believed that the commission would do any good. Municipal, county, state, and federal governments regularly pass resolutions and publish proclamations naming state flowers, state birds, even state insects, honoring favorite sons, bestowing keys to the city, establishing a day, or a week, or a month honoring some worthy cause, naming a street, bridge, or building after some more-or-less famous individual, etc., and all to make some constituents feel good, and also, not incidentally, purchasing some good will for the politicians in the process.
No one really believes that any of this will actually make the world a better place. Similarly, none of our elected officials really believed that this commission would do anything to improve the status of women, it was just a "feel good" gesture, like proclaiming National Earthworm Day. The difference is that National Earthworm Day doesn't cost much, while the commission undoubtedly costs a lot (we are not told how much by the New Times article) - our elected officials are buying a little bit of good will from the feminists and their allied cohorts of leftist, "progressive," politically activist, New Ageish, and neohippie types. With our money.
Our tax money is taken from us by force or the threat of force, allegedly to be used for worthy and necessary public purposes. The money that is being pissed away on this well-intentioned but vacuous commission is not just being stolen from the taxpayers, it is also being taken from far more worthwhile causes. Mental health, food and housing for the homeless, drug education and drug counseling, police and fire protection, public health, protection of the environment - all these are crucial, and all are underfunded. There is never enough money for worthy causes, and there never could be enough for all the purposes that someone may find emotionally appealing.
North Bay Village
CALLAHAN AT THE BAT
Babe Ruth had a very high strikeout record. He also hit the most home runs. I mention this because I believe we represent the silent majority. In my letter of August 28, I addressed several issues and raised several questions, none of which were answered. K.G. Gibson ("Letters," September 11) calls me tired and a bigot. This is the typical "gay" response to anyone who has a right to a differing opinion. I don't claim lofty expertise and was not judging - merely observing, as Charles Darwin did.
You can't escape this simple biological fact of nature; it takes a man and woman to create life. Period. An organism is defined by its ability to reproduce. May I add that Gibson's very existence was dependent upon the love shared by "consenting adults," namely, man and woman; and his typical "gay" disdain for Christianity bleeds through in his choice of such words as "lofty." The catch phrase for the biologically incorrect, "consenting adults," makes everything okay. Well, consenting adults engage in many other activities that are illegal and/or destructive. Are they okay, too?
New Times took the liberty of editing out a very important fact of my original letter. Since the mid- to late Sixties, faggots were content with the sex. They were satisfied and giddy with joy to be out of the closet. Sex was the objective, sex was the cause, sex was the choice. It wasn't until the AIDS crisis and the question of life insurance, health insurance, job security, benefits, and estate upon death that the biologically incorrect stopped and took an inventory of what they really amounted to, namely, a group whose entire existence was validated and based solely on sexual activity or orientation. Now the biologically incorrect want more than simply their already given free right to the deviant orientation; they want all the things previously reserved for the great family structure here in America.
I have faith in the American family, I believe in it, I'm a product of it. Well, I'm out of the "closet," the closet of neutrality. Batter up!
National Organization of Families Against Gay Supremacists
FEED A CALENDAR, STARVE A CAFE
For some time I've been intending to call your attention to two things:
1) Your double-page "Calendar" begs to be placed at the center of the newspaper, for easy, fold-open referral or removal. Can't figure out why you didn't put it here long ago.
2) We sorely need some respite from the "likes" of restaurant reviewer Sue Mullin and her swining companion. By now we can all predict, ad nauseum, what makes these two gluttons salivate: any meal on wheels, too heavy to be carried to the table, apparently.
I fear for their health! Please save them from their excesses, and us from the indigestible accounts of them. Give us the taste of a reviewer with more health-minded appetites, and a companion who doesn't gripe about small portions and lack of bread, while giving lip-service to dieting. "Daphne be damned," if these two don't eschew buttery potatoes while, incongruously, gorging on rich, glazed cheesecakey desserts!
Perhaps Ms. Mullin's insomnia is caused not by coffee, but by internal stress from habitual overindulgence at the trough with Mr. Pork Barrel. Put them on a fast for their sakes and ours!
WE WERE ONLY JOKING, SCOTT - NO MORE COMEDY
Thank you for reinstating the comedy section in your paper's club listings. It has been very sorely missed. My friends and I always saw New Times as the best representative of the arts in this area, and comedy is as much a part of the arts as anything else (and sometimes more sorely needed). Thank you again, and keep up the great work.