HST on the WWW HST on the ...

HST on the WWW

To get the whole Hunter S. Thompson interview that is excerpted in the Paris Review book ("Books," 7/23), go to Salon.com, where they have an audio file of the interview. The interviewers were George Plimpton, Douglas Brinkley and Terry McDonell. They are all smoking hash during the interview, and I'm not so sure that the interviewer is "shocked," as Dolan puts it, about the fact that Thompson celebrated using drugs while writing. If anything, they seem more surprised that he was able to pull off the feat so well.

Nick Yulico, San Francisco

Only What Our Spy Cam Tells Us

MUGGER: What the fuck do you know about Lewis Lapham (7/2)?

Giulia Melucci, V.P., Public Relations, Harper's Magazine, Manhattan

You're So Cute

Your efforts to insult and intimidate me ("Letters," 7/23) are puny. Since Russ Smith sold the paper and relinquished editorial control, you guys suck. You still need to get a clue. Pound sand you weaklings.

Tracy Meadows, Brenham, TX

Bushwhacked

Bravo to Matt Taibbi for not just analyzing Bush's utterly cynical p.r. stunts, but for having the guts to express the anger and contempt Bush deserves for his smarmy hypocrisies ("Cage Match?" 7/16). The idea that this pretender to the presidency is entitled to our respect and fawning deference is anathema to democracy. Reactionaries in this country have monopolized vituperation and outrage for too long. But give Bush credit for his courageous denunciation of slavery. Maybe in another 150 years his gang will get around to denouncing racial discrimination, which they currently deny exists.

I hope Taibbi will report on the persecution he'll likely experience at the hands of the Secret Service and other "authorities" for his effrontery.

Jason Zenith, Manhattan

Everybody loves Armond

"Loyalty, respect for tradition, not to mention artistic integrity?" ("Billboard," 7/23) How about editorial integrity? Perhaps Tony Millionaire wanted to leave New York Press because you'd shrunk his comic into illegibility, after dumping every other entertaining comic you ever ran. Good for Tony! But I admit, it's led to the only funny Mr. Wiggles drawing ever. Step one in driving Armond out?

Dave Irwin, Queens

Piggedly Wiggedly

Mr. Wiggles Loose? What the hell have you done? Can you please tell me what I'm supposed to do with this semi-conscious, vomit-stained, semen-ridden teddy bear that keeps telling me to lick his "furry little taint"? (which, by the way, is neither furry nor little).

I don't know whether to call Betty Ford or animal control. Any help would be greatly appreciated. That was some of the funniest shit I've seen in a long time. Thanks for a good laugh and keep on truckin'.

C. Scott, Manhattan

Aw, Shucks, Tony

I seem to have developed something of a love-hate attitude to New York Press. It used to be so easy back in the good old days when that frothing lunatic MUGGER was fairly typical of the noisome content of your esteemed organ; nowadays things are more difficult. For a start, you have the very wonderful Michelangelo Signorile and Matt Taibbi lambasting bigots, bullshit and Bush's crew of criminals. Also, there seems to have been a general move toward more considered commentary in other areas; sometimes so much so that Russ Smith now seems little more than an ugly throwback whose embarrassing right-wing ravings are only printed as a sort of nostalgic comedy turn. So whereas at one time your spectacularly mean-minded Billboard piece about Tony Millionaire's departure ("Billboard," 7/23) would have seemed typical, now it stands out as an unpleasant slice of petty churlishness and bad grace.

You say you cut Millionaire's fee by two- thirds. You sneer that he was "already walking the plank." And then you think it is reasonable to bitch when he chooses to take up a better offer from the Voice? And to bitch in print, in a manner that positively reeks of very, very sour grapes? You print this guy's strip for Christ knows how long and then, when you stiff him financially and he quite understandably quits, you ungraciously suggest he "hoodwinked" the Voice by getting them to take him on? You have the unmitigated gall to whine about "loyalty" and "respect for tradition?" How many of you would take a 66-percent pay cut lying down? That sort of behavior doesn't exactly indicate that you were showing Millionaire much respect or loyalty, does it? You're certainly not the first employer to imagine those qualities should only apply in one direction and you won't be the last, but to actually think you have any justification for sniping about it in public is beyond ridiculous.

I'm no fan of "Maakies." To be honest, I've never understood what the hell it was about. But I wish Tony Millionaire good luck at the Voice. What a shame that you couldn't find the good grace to sincerely do so too.

Jack Rawlinson, Manhattan

Whose Nephew, Mr. Forbes?

Last week, Taibbi suggested "George Bush should be hung up by his balls. No kidding." This week, Taibbi intones, "When you cease to be horrified by the horrifying, you really cease to exist as a person."

While he may or may not continue to exist as a person, he must cease to exist as a contributor to your paper. The mental, moral meltdown of this person reflects poorly on your entire publication.

Perhaps Matt Taibbi is the publisher's un-employable nephew, kept on out of pity. Certainly his ideas and writing skills do not merit a regular column in any thoughtful newspaper.

John H. Forbes, Manhattan

Au Revoir, Tony

Sorry to see Tony Millionaire go. As far as your lecture to him about "loyalty and tradition," if you guys are suddenly respectful of those two things, why not send Kaz an apology and bring back his strip? Underworld may be long-in-the-tooth, but it's funny first and offensive second, as opposed to Mr. Wiggles, who gets it backwards: offensive first and funny only occasionally.

Mike Vago, Brooklyn

Make That Four!

Three cheers to Vicki Khuzami for her art for the "When Love Comes to Town" piece.("Feature," 7/23) I laughed out loud!

Jerry Morris, San Luis Obispo, CA

By the Balls

How come it is so hard to understand that even though it is a crude image, some of us would like to see W. hung by his balls ("Cage Match," 7/16)? Come on now?like it wouldn't be fair punishment? It's amazing that the result of Iraq's not having WMD's becomes a glitch in our "official information," okay?and we just keep buying this?and W. is off the hook. He is also off the hook about environmental issues, federal funding of adverse giant corporations, the transfer of ear marked funds from the Feds to the State not just for Head Start and Section Eight, but for the entire educational system?especially higher ed?now who is going to make sure that money gets appropriated correctly? I know I need to make a trip to the library to check out the red book if it still exits, but maybe the Press or Matt Taibbi can do the research and get the correct titles and names of the government officials supposedly responsible. Let's start a dialogue with them, and hold them accountable. Now let that be taken as some liberal nonsense, but if we don't see the reality of the sad state we are in and take some action, then all of us, right, left, and in between will certainly continue to pay the price.

Micki Santo, The Bronx

TV Parties Not Allowed

TAIBBI: When my wife and I married, we decided not to bring our televisions with us ("Cage Match," 7/23). We didn't want to start out our marriage with a third partner, tv. And when we have children, we both agreed we did not want to fall into the habit of drugging them with inane movies. Now, old Tom and Jerry cartoons are a little different, but we've got Netflix and our computer for that.

It's insane to sit next to another human being in a stupor with unblinking eyes staring at a load of crap. The human mind definitely needs to be occupied, and tv is the quick fix.

Each time someone asks us if we saw such-and-such program, their eyes bug out when we inform them of our tv-less house. You'd think I'd just said that my wife was barren or that I was impotent or something.

Martin Dula, Chicago

Right-Wing Rubaiyat

The 16 words are true

Bush did not lie

Like reading the mag.

turned on through MUGGER and Taki and Drudge

Why did Drudge drop the link?

Oh well, whatever.

Gordon Johnson, Kingston, TN

Nadler. Mahoney. Starsky. Hutch.

I don't know what liberals Russ Smith keeps talking about (MUGGER, 7/23). Surely not Manhattan's twin representatives in Congress, Carolyn Maloney and Jerry Nadler. President Bush announced the other day that he was sending $20 million in aid to the Palestinian Authority to encourage Abu Mazen and the new anti-Arafat government to continue to fight terrorism. The President said that ultimately he wants to provide much more aid, assuming the Palestinians continue to reject terrorism, to help relieve the terrible humanitarian conditions in the West Bank and Gaza.

Three House members circulated a letter supporting the Bush initiative. All three are liberal Democrats. They gathered support from a hundred House members, Democrats and Republicans. But not Nadler and Maloney. And why not? The reason is that those two never allow their humanitarianism to extend to Palestinians because they are afraid of being called anti-Israel by the Jewish lobby. Nadler tells people in Washington that he can't support this type of thing because he has a pocket of Orthodox Jews in the Brooklyn part of his district. Maloney can't because she is afraid that one day she will be primaried against Nadler and he'll trumpet his opposition to Palestinians.

Neither has ever allowed their Manhattan liberalism to stand in the way of their full- court pander to the Jewish far right (the mainstream Jewish organizations support the Palestinian aid). So what kind of liberals are Nadler and Maloney? The phony kind who only take "courageous" stands that are popular in Manhattan. Gee whiz, they are brave on gay marriage, choice and gun control. What heroes! But don't look to them to give a damn about a humanitarian crisis among Palestinians that USAID says resembles sub-Saharan Africa's. On every issue, they put partisan politics first. No, that's inaccurate. They put their own careers first.

Manhattanites should not let them get away with this. These two stand for nothing. They are courageous on the cheap. Manhattan can do better, and does with Charlie Rangel. But those other two should be retired. What has happened to politics that we allow ourselves to be represented by these cringing mediocrities?

Mark Kramer, Manhattan