RE: "Why Is Portland's Cinema 21 Showing Vaxxed?" [Blogtown, June 8], Erik Henriksen's interview with Cinema 21 owner Tom Ranieri, who booked the anti-vaccination film Vaxxed: From Cover-Up to Catastrophe. "I feel, having researched some of this stuff, it's probably a good thing to have conversations about it rather than categorically suppressing it," explained Ranieri, who later added, "It's a spectrum. It's not 'If you show it, you're this, if you don't show it, you're that.' I think it's more nuanced." "Booking Vaxxed could also prove to be a savvy business decision," Henriksen wrote. "After all, this is Portland—a city where, despite overwhelming scientific consensus regarding the safety of fluoride, voters have repeatedly rejected it. And it's Oregon—a state that, despite overwhelming scientific consensus regarding the safety of vaccines, has the highest vaccine exemption rate in America."

Cinema 21 is showing this movie because they are a cinema in America, not Communist Russia! Because Ranieri obviously believes in free speech and the right of every American to unfettered information and the freedom to evaluate for themselves. The real question needs to be asked of those who do not believe we have these rights. You have given yourself the power to censor for us. I am sure you believe you are somehow protecting people from their own stupidity.


Actually, it is a scientific fact that fluoride is a highly toxic cumulative poison. Anyone who doesn't understand that is simply ignorant. Unlike Erik Henriksen, who is clearly scientifically illiterate, I have a university science education.

Dan Germouse329

I was going to post supporting this film but it looks like the Mercury has perked enough interest with their fascist reporting. I can trust in the people checking this film out for themselves and making up their own minds about it.


Thank you for writing about the decision by Cinema 21 to show the "documentary" Vaxxed. I also appreciate the pieces you've written on junk science and bias in Portland with respect to positions on fluoride, GMOs, etc. Personally, I'm disappointed with how readily Mr. Ranieri passed on any responsibility he has for giving voice to this dangerous and discredited malarkey under the guise of "having a conversation." He hand-waves about opposing censorship and suppression of free speech, but it's not incumbent upon him to give a platform to anyone who wants it. If Mr. Ranieri feels a moral responsibility to further public discourse and debate, one would hope he would develop a similar reverence for properly vetting information and sources.

Reid Olsen


RE: "What the Sanders Campaign Could Learn from the Clinton Campaign in '08" [Blogtown, June 8] and "Obama Just Endorsed Hillary Clinton" [Blogtown, June 9], Megan Burbank's continuing coverage of all things Clinton.

Nice!!! I'm getting the feeling that in five months, we're gonna have a hell of a party!

Todd Mecklem

Yup, an "Anybody But Trump" party. I don't think many Democrats, myself included, will be celebrating four-to-eight years of Hillary. We'll just be celebrating four-to-eight fewer years of Trump.


If I start holding my nose and chanting the mantra "President Donald J. Trump" now, I should be able to cast my vote for Clinton in November. But I'll probably need to bathe in Purell for at least an hour afterward.


Great piece, Megan, and I agree 100 percent. I waffled between Sanders and Clinton throughout the primary buildup, but now that Hillary is in, I'm totally on board. Hoping for a Clinton/Sanders ticket when the dust has settled.


That's not a bad idea, mel. Hey, Hillary! Check out mel's great idea! And mel, just in case Clinton doesn't immediately offer you a job as one of her advisers, we're giving you the Mercury's letter of the week—and two tickets to the Laurelhurst Theater, where the only decision you'll have to anguish over is what movie to see! And which beer to drink. And if you want butter on your popcorn. Come to think of it, there are lots of decisions.

DEPT. OF CORRECTIONS: A story in the June 1 issue of the Mercury—"Did Larry O'Dea's Shooting Mistake Get Special Treatment?" [News, June 1]—incorrectly stated that the Portland Police Bureau launched an investigation into a shooting by Chief Larry O'Dea immediately upon learning about it on April 25. A department spokesman has since learned, and clarified, that the investigation didn't begin until May 23. The Mercury regrets the error (but not as much as we regret having to read all the letters we got from anti-vaxxers).