Style Weekly

A friend and I ate there the first week they were reopened. We absolutely loved it! Both the service and the food were fine. I'll be going back with my wife very soon.

When you go, be sure to have some of Corinna's tiramasu -- it is absolutely exquisite!
-- Roy
P.S.
Jeff, that should be "note", not "not". Gotcha!

Re: “Cuccinelli Denied”

OK, guys, I have been watching this issue -- and advocating for its reform -- for a number of years at our General Assembly, primarily in the House Courts of Justice Committee.

The sodomy statute was supposed to have been eliminated as part of a multi-year, million-dollar plus overhaul of the entire criminal code. That was defeated, along with the rest of the overhaul, by one member of the HCoJ Committee (who was of course a Republican, and who also happened to be Black), who had been traumatized by a solicitation from a pederast when he was a youth, and used that as a "reason" to keep the statute in place. This person derailed not only the repeal of the sodomy statute, but the entire reform effort, thereby wasting over a million of your tax dollars and ensuring that our criminal laws would continue to be scattered among many chapters of the Code of Virginia and needlessly confusing.

In the multiple hearings of the reform measure, I don't recall a single objection to eliminating this statute . . . except a few mentions that it would be politically controversial. That was the problem in HCoJ: it was proposed that there be a "gentleman's agreement" that no one would use the reforms as an election issue, and this one member0 refused to agree. He said that he was upholding "traditional values".

Ironically, he was an alumnus of my old high school -- a tiny private school in Albemarle County, which if it had continued to uphold the "traditional values" upon which it was founded would have never even considered him for admission, because of his race.

Re: “Letter: Why Should Felons Have An Easier Job Search?”

Now let me see here . . . a guy who had ANY AMOUNT (including spectroscopic traces) of hashish, before we changed that law, gets sentenced to ten years. He serves his time and gets out. Now he wants a job, so that he can become a "productive member of society".

He interviews and tests for a job for which he is well-qualified. He aces the tests. At that point, as I read your letter, he should nevertheless be rejected in favor of someone else who is less qualified, because the first guy is a big ol' nasty scarey FELON! The job goes to a less-qualified applicant, who does not perform as well, so the company that might have hired him instead hires a less-qualified person, and thus is less competitive in the marketplace . . . and the GDP is somewhat reduced.

Meanwhile, our well-qualified and highly-skilled felon gets a job involving asking "Would you like fries with that?", and again the nation's GDP is reduced . . . or perhaps he goes back into crime.

Re: “The Mad Minute”

Joe, I'm sorry I missed this column when it first appeared. It's a positive pleasure to read an article favoring more gun control which is written by someone who knows what he's talking about! Of course, that doesn't mean that I agree with you.

One relatively minor point is that you cite the "Slide Fire", a gadget to let you "bump fire" a semi-automatic weapon. Those have been around since at least the seventies. The problem with them is that they destroy accuracy, and the user is reduced what we call "spray and pray". You'll kill people, but you'll waste most of your shots, and run through all the ammunition you can carry.

A more serious flaw is your statement that, "If you want to stop a man with an assault weapon and body armor, you need a similar weapon and protection, not a 9 mm in a shoulder holster". This is simply untrue. All it takes is a simple .22 pistol, and a good aim. Confronted with an assailant in body armor, aim for the head. "Kill the brain, kill the zombie" -- or murderer! (I might add, when confronted with an assailant who is wearing full-coverage armor, just dodge around him faster than he can maneuver with all that armor, and smash a chair over his head, then grab his gun and/or slit his throat.)

Again, thanks for the article, and the thought that went into it.

Re: “Shooting High”

What a fine idea this was!
There are very few places where one can safely and legally get in some practice in the Richmond area, and even fewer where the prevailing culture is welcoming to those of all classes and political beliefs. This looks to be a very welcoming, and welcomed, place.

Re: “New Classic”

EVERYTHING that Stella does is "something right". The woman is a culinary genius, and for decades has been a blessing to our community!

Re: “On the Clink of Greatness”

Citizen said, "The name is Robertson."
OOPS! Of course it is. Thanks.
As I said above, we need the support of voters (and citizens) . . .

Re: “Cut and Run”

To Receiver's advice, I would add that it does sometimes help to interview people on both sides of an issue. Item #4, about gun-related legislation, would certainly have benefited from that. Really, people, three gun-control advocates quoted, versus zero gun-rights sources?