I HAVE SEEN THE FUTURE OF POLITICAL ACTIVISM AND IT INVOLVES LICKING DOORKNOBS

DAN SAVAGE: I just read that article about you and Gary Bauer in The Stranger ["Germ Warfare," Jan 27] yesterday and I saw another article about the incident on MSNBC today.

You are the future of political activism! Not only is what you did hilarious and kick-ass (I hope Bauer really does/did get sick and puke his guts out), but you further exposed his whole organization for the gaybashers they are. I can't believe people phrase what you did as "a gay man trying to spread his disease." That's such a fucking misrepresentation of what you were doing. It's obviously set up to sound like you're spreading an STD, not the damned flu, and to hype up people's fear. (We should nab George Bush senior for vomiting in Japan -- he was racially attacking all Japanese people with his virus!!)

Anyway, I'm just a breeder who appreciates your advice to gay and straight people alike. (Plus, most of the people who write in are fucking hilarious.... Remember HTH? That column practically made me shit my pants.) I'd like to see Iowa's voter registration system exposed as a sham: If they allowed you to register a hotel as your address, I can't see how they can get you for perjury [since] it was their own stupidity.

Brian Shrader, via e-mail


KEEP UP THE GOOD, IF DISGUSTING, WORK

HEY, DAN: Regarding your infamous Doorknob Licking Incident, I am sure you are being INUNDATED with e-mails, so I will try to be brief. After reading a rant about said incident, I have to say my reaction was negative. However, after I read the actual story, I changed my mind. I still have some mixed feelings about how you did or did not execute this action. Nonetheless, I completely understand the point. Being a financially successful gay guy in a big city, I often lose touch with any anger or outrage I have about homophobia and the actions of the people who seem to live to thwart our happiness. Reading about this gave me back some of that.

I don't think that what politicians do is any less violent than "viral" warfare (as hysterics are calling your actions). The right wing wackjobs are doing worse -- the laws they are trying to enact, the thousands of children they are raising to hate, etc. So, I may not have done what you did, but I totally get it. I hope you do not get prosecuted on some silly charge relating to this.

Jason Howard, via e-mail


GERM WARFARE IS BAD FOR DEMOCRACY

TO THE EDITOR: While I certainly view the presidential campaign of Gary Bauer to be a joke, at the same time I find Dan Savage's account of trying to wage "biological warfare" against him to be no laughing matter. If it's true that Savage deliberately undertook a covert operation to pass on a flu virus to the impish GOP hopeful, then it goes way beyond the pale of campaign "dirty tricks" -- which aim to sabotage a candidate's campaign apparatus, political message, or image in the eyes of the voters -- and takes us into the far more deadly and anti-Democratic terrain of terrorism.

We're talking Mafia, Milosevic, death-squad tactics here. And if "death" seems too harsh a word to be used in this context, consider the very real possibility of a newly infected Gary Bauer, going about his delusional business, grabbing a few elderly hands along the way. If, on the other hand, the article was just a gag -- a prank played on your readers' gullibility (like so many others), which made no attempt to fill them in on the fraud -- then it casts doubt on the credibility of all your political reporting, and even calls into question the good faith of your editorial stands on both issues and candidates.

Russell Scheidelman, via e-mail


THE SECOND AMENDMENT IS THERE TO BE ABUSED

TO THE EDITOR: Obviously, Dan Savage has not been playing "keep up" with the rest of the world when it comes to forcing [his] beliefs on others. First, he needs to buy a handgun or an easily concealable explosive device. Second, the subject of his disdain must be rendered completely non-viable by his efforts. Third, he has to be willing to "take out" more than just one individual. Very weak showing, this flu-bug-infection thing. Come on, Dan: Step up to the plate! Join the NRA... buy a gun... shoot those who disagree with you.

Gary Holland, via e-mail


STRANGER IGNORES DIRTY HOMELESS PEOPLE

EDITORS: I was going to write a letter about last week's one-sided article about Food Not Bombs (FNB), of which I am a member ["Food for Thought," Phil Campbell, Jan 27]. I would have wondered why FNB was branded as the poor communicator, rather than whoever called the cops on us without warning. I would have suggested that comparing feeding the homeless to feeding pigeons says more about the person (or newspaper) making the comparison than it does about the person doing the feeding.

However, after police actions last Sunday night, such a letter is unnecessary. You said in the article that this "is not about cops vs. charities," and the cops proved you right. Rather than continue to harass FNB cooks and servers, they turned against the homeless. Just before FNB showed up with food, and without warning or pretext, police accosted the hungry people waiting. They jabbed one man with a baton, told another to "get the fuck out of here, there's no food," and aggressively cleared the area. FNB was obviously the target. Smart cops; they know who doesn't matter in this town. After all, if a newspaper like The Stranger reports the story, they'll probably spend most of the article quoting a single local homeowner, and pepper it with a few quotes from us at Food Not Bombs. No way would they actually check their facts with real, dirty homeless people.

Jameson Quinn,

Food Not Bombs, Seattle


MIGHT AS WELL READ JONI BALTER

DEAR CHARLES: I read your feature "Phantom City," and wonder if, with your obviously powerful intellect and sensitive nature, you could propose an alternative to the police force ["Phantom City," Charles Mudede, Jan 27]. Make it a reasonably complete proposal with approximate numbers of "people" required, and what sort of "training" they would need. Include the "costs" to run the operation, and... "rules" for the officers to follow that work in the zones of "excruciating insanity," as well as in the "real city."

At the very least, when you quote a police report, you could offer suggested rewrites, showing us what one of your officers would say and do. Please do this soon. I'd hate to think that you were simply a very smart "asshole" who, although capable of quoting and emoting all over his readers, was incapable of constructive thought. If that's the case, I might as well start reading Joni Balter.

"Ish," via e-mail


MUDEDE IS NEAR-PERFECT

EDITORS: I just thought you might like to hear my appreciation for this passage from "Phantom City" by Charles Mudede:

"In theory, the job of the police is to patrol and maintain the border that runs between individual desire and universal reality. Universal reality being law, logic, and reason; desire being the 'stuff in our heads' that wants to find expression, form, and motion 'in the world of facts.' When a person is speeding to a job appointment or date, or cracking the code on a bank safe, they are effectively breaching this borderline, and it's up to the police to 'arrive at the scene' and mend the rupture." That's near-perfect writing, kids.

Julian Dimarco, via e-mail


IRRESPONSIBLE, HARMFUL, AND CRUEL IS WHAT THE STRANGER DOES BEST

EDITORS: I am truly shocked and disgusted that Charles Mudede's article ["Phantom City," Jan 27] was printed in your newspaper. Rather than presenting the very serious problems of the mentally ill in our city, the author created a cartoonish account based on a series of police reports. Two very real problems were mentioned: The lack of adequate treatments for severe mental illness, and the shortage of specialized training for police [officers] who deal with this population. However, the seriousness of these issues was severely diminished by the humorous tone of the article and the ridiculous portrayal of the "phantom city." Presenting an issue like this with humor is irresponsible, harmful, and cruel.

Vanessa McAnaney, via e-mail


WHERE WAS WIECKING'S BILE?

TO THE EDITOR: I'd like to thank Steve Wiecking for his review of Julie Taymor's film Titus ["Violence Done Right," Jan 27]. It is odd, though, that a critic would omit his own opinion of a movie in favor of giving the director's opinion. Possibly he didn't understand Titus, and he thought Taymor could explain it better. Maybe he chose not to see the movie. Or, of course, he could have seen it and found no weaknesses to spew the usual Stranger-style bile upon. Seems unlikely.

Craig Johnson,

Seattle