PCC Computer Education. Register now!

Letters
WW welcomes letters to the editor via mail, e-mail or fax. Letters must be signed by the author and include the author's street address and phone number for verification. Preference will be given to letters of 250 words or less.

BREAD CONTROL--IT'S NO LONGER JUST ABOUT GUNS
by Naomi Pass
Handgun Control Inc.

I've done a little research, and what I've discovered should make anyone think twice.

More than 98 percent of convicted felons are bread users.

Fully HALF of all children who grow up in bread consuming households score below average on standardized tests.

In the 18th century, when virtually all bread was baked in the home, the average life expectancy was less than 50 years; infant mortality rates were unacceptably high; many women died in childbirth; and diseases such as typhoid, yellow fever and influenza ravaged whole nations.

More than 90 percent of violent crimes are committed within 24 hours of eating bread.

Bread is made from a substance called "dough." It has been proven that as little as one pound of dough can be used to suffocate a mouse. The average American eats more bread than that in one month!

Primitive tribal societies that have no bread exhibit a low incidence of cancer, Alzheimer's, Parkinson's disease, and osteoporosis.

Bread has been proven to be addictive. Subjects deprived of bread and given only water begged for bread after as little as two days.

Bread is often a "gateway" food item, leading the user to "harder" items as butter, jelly, peanut butter and even cold cuts.

Bread has been proven to absorb water. Since the human body is more than 90 percent water, it follows that eating bread could lead to your body being taken over by this absorptive food product, turning you into a soggy, gooey bread pudding person.

Newborn babies can choke on bread.

Bread is baked at temperatures as high as 400 degrees Fahrenheit! That kind of heat can kill an adult in less than one minute.

Most American bread eaters are utterly unable to distinguish between significant scientific fact and meaningless statistical babbling.

In light of these frightening statistics, we propose the following bread restrictions:

No sale of bread to minors

A nationwide "Just Say No to Toast" campaign, complete with celebrity TV spots and bumper stickers.

A 300 percent federal tax on all bread to pay for all the societal ills we might associate with bread.

No animal or human images, nor any primary colors (which may appeal to children) may be used to promote bread usage.

The establishment of "bread-free" zones around schools.

Remember: Think idiotically, act globally!

John McEnroe
Southeast Stark Street


TIME IS ART, NOT MONEY
Your Dec. 2 cover article--"Y2K Hippies"--on our organization, the Planet Art Network (PAN), contains a number of glaring, and seemingly gratuitous, inaccuracies. That's actually putting it politely. As a fellow human being, I am counting on your sense of integrity to set things right.

First, PAN is not focused on, nor even organized around, the Y2K issue. We are not concerned with so-called Jan. 1, 2000; it is just another day on our calendar (specifically, Day 20 of Moon 6, Resonant Wizard Year). As a peace movement first and foremost, PAN is concerned with many issues, both of the day and of all time.

Second, PAN has no real leader, not even Jose Arguelles, as PAN's basic tenets are free will, autonomy, and equality. PAN Portland is governed by the Navigation Council, an open group of 7 to 13 which makes decisions for the organization by consensus. I know you spoke with at least one member of our Council, but chose not to print any of that interview, including the official phone number for PAN, which is 219-9928, not the number printed in the article. Also, our official Web site is www:earthascending.com. People desiring to know more about PAN should contact these sources.

Third, PAN absolutely does not advocate armed retreat in the wake of the coming (false) millennium. Your focus on just one person's viewpoint creates the false impression that PAN operates from a fear-based perspective. Our brand of warriorship involves an internal process of fearlessly asking the intelligent questions in order to purify ourselves and be of the highest service to others and the planet.

Finally, anyone (and there were over 3,000) who attended our second annual Day Out of Time celebration in Pioneer Courthouse Square on July 25 (an event your publication ignored despite press releases and active attempts on our part to get coverage) saw and experienced what PAN is really about--a new consciousness in which time equals art, not money; and community bound by love.

I am another yourself.

White Electric Mirror
Southeast 10th Avenue

NO PROFITS ON THE FRONT LINE
Your article on nonprofit executive compensation ["Good Pay Toward Men," WW, Dec. 2, 1998] shed light on an important part of the nonprofit salary discussion. The missing part is executive compensation compared to front-line staff compensation.

Executive directors should be adequately compensated. It's a tough job. But front-line staff should at an absolute minimum make a living wage of, say, $8 per hour plus health benefits, particularly when the top executive makes six figures.

This sometimes glaring disparity results from two factors. First, the accepted board to executive director paradigm is that setting staff salaries is solely the executive director's job. There is danger in the board becoming too involved in a nonprofit's day-to-day operations, but as an executive director myself, I don't think it's out of line for a board member to ask for the salary ranges of a few lower-level positions before it decides the executive director's raise for the upcoming year. If you are a board member and try to ask those questions today, you're likely to be told it's none of your business.

The second reason for the disparity is that not enough funders (or donors for that matter) ask what the lowest-paid employee makes. Some do, but more should, including city and county governments. It'll force nonprofits to set a goal for doing what they should have been doing all along.

Chip Shields
Executive Director,
Better People


DON'T GIVE UP ON US , BABY
The last Timbre column [WW, Dec. 9, 1998] was the most depressing thing I've read in weeks. Is Richard Martin growing up and growing cynical, or does the Portland rock scene really suck so hard it drives rock critics out of town? I sincerely hope that Mr. Martin also has strong personal reasons for wanting to leave Portland, but a lot of us have reasons as strong to stay; speaking for myself, Portland's music scene is one of those things. I find it grim and reductionist to concentrate only on the bands headed for (inter)national stardom, as this seems to signal the end of a truly great band (i.e., Thirty-Ought Six). The fact that I can see King Black Acid or the Heavy Johnson Trio for cheap on a Wednesday night AND talk to them afterwards is a deeply meaningful and wonderful experience for me as a rock music fancier. Yes, the music industry does try to destroy all local scenes--to them, a band's only worth is in how many CDs they sell at Wal-Mart. To the fans, however, there's more to life than Budweiser-sponsored arena tours.

Bye, Richard. I've enjoyed your column, even when I didn't agree with your perspectives or opinions. Don't give up on Portland's local music, though. It's only a flesh wound.

Jemiah Jefferson
Southeast Brooklyn Avenue

NO PAIN, NO GAIN
Anticipating the letter that inevitably follows negative reviews, particularly those of Steffen Silvis ["Comparisons Are Odorous," WW, Dec. 9, 1998], I would like to remind your readers, and especially the fiercely protective members of the Portland theater audience, that it is a critic's job to render an opinion. It should go without saying that anyone's opinion is highly subjective, but critics generally bring to bear a larger body of experience and knowledge in forming their opinions--that's why we pay attention to them.

Sure, we'd all like to get good reviews all the time (didn't we all want straight A's in school?), but any review can be a good review if you can learn from it, and, for better or worse, whether I agree with him or not (and often I don't), I almost always learn something from Steffen's opinions. His reviews of my work are usually an experience analogous to that eighth grade teacher who never let up on you, never gave you a break, who rode your ass hard--but actually taught you something. So, gentle readers, here's my advice: Read the reviews. Then get out and go to a play, any play. And take a friend. That's the best way to keep theater compelling, meaningful and alive in Portland.

Myra Donnelley
Producing Director,
Stark Raving Theatre


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Willamette Week | originally published December 16, 1998

 

Advertiser

Portland Travel Specials! Full Sail Brewing