Gosh, you guys have got it all wrong.
Let the folks who sent complaints to the FCC, I ...
1. Fondly remember the documentary Roots.
2. Am offended that the FCC allows the Name of God and Jesus to go unbleeped while other cuss words are blocked.
3. Do not want nudity on broadcast radio.
4. Am afraid that our children will take off their clothes at school.
5. Believe that this proposal is bullshit.
X--tortion...it's everywhere. http://www.landofthisguy.com/?comic=projec…
The article says "the structure has to be at least 25 feet tall but no less than 50 feet tall"
Do you mean 'at least 25 feet tall but no MORE than 50 feet tall?'
"...undermine the sense of solidarity..."
Libertarians do not believe in solidarity.
Building out instead of up is an absolute waste of an incredible opportunity. The way to prevent a city like Charleston from feeling more crowded is not sprawling, flatter buildings! Building up allows both residential volume AND use of the surrounding land, such as the nearby baseball field, playground, tennis courts, or even the simply open field adjacent to Lockwood/Broad, which gives the area a more spacious feeling. Not to mention, balcony views of Charleston and the water are incredible, but are sadly few and far between. Charleston's vibrant crowd of young professionals tend not to be millionaires (yet?), and as a student, I can attest to how difficult it is to find an apartment in a safe area, close to campus, with washer/dryer and dishwasher, and for less than $1,000/month per bedroom. A high rise is the only way to achieve such value; otherwise, it will be unaffordable, have a waiting list, or both (Bee Street Lofts). Ashley House is the only other high rise in the immediate area, and while many would consider it outdated (most units do not have W/D & DW), it remains 100 years more modern than the vast majority of other options its area. It blows my mind that it sounds like they've essentially ruled out the concept of building a tall, beautiful, modern, energy-efficient, building to replace an aging one - all in the name of flattening the skyline over affording a positive, attainable experience for the everyday residents who make this city so great. For the "mix of college students, MUSC nurses and interns, young urban professionals, and retirees" you mentioned who currently live there, a flatter development means more of those people would be forced to live elsewhere, which also notably could mean more cars on the road - especially for the first 3 on that list who currently are able to bike/walk to work/class on the peninsula if they move out to West Ashley, James Island, or Mount Pleasant - and I think we can all agree we'd rather have less of that. Efficient use of the land should be a priority - the building can be designed to enhance Charleston's beauty, no matter how tall it is.
It's the old "give us Barabbas" (GUB) syndrome..
I'm thinking Hells Agents and the Black Panthers..
The public domain is police responsibility. That's why we pay tax dollars. I agree that you do not want a bouncer mixing it up in the streets and in parking lots. If this law passes I foresee a bouncer being attacked in a dimly lit lot. Remember, they don't carry anything to protect themselves besides their fists (maybe pepper spray). Further, if a bouncer tells me to get off a sidewalk I'm not going to listen to him since he does not have the authority to move me from the public space. Employees are going to be hurt and business will be sued. This is dumb.
Why not try it on cable (non-premium) from 8pm-5am to start with and just get a feel for how it goes? I don't really anticipate the weather Channel having anchors with their tits out or Al Roker dropping the F-Bomb on "Keeping it Real With Al." I mean, has anyone watched Tosh.0? I fail to see how a woman's breasts could be more inappropriate than some of these shows. And I have two small kids and would never let them watch Tosh, Family Guy, South Park, etc.
Regulation and censorship are two entirely different concepts.
An old building which has done a lot of good service to the community. I've lived there and it shelters a remarkable, diverse community. Some of these group's determination to drive everyone but the rich out of the city is gradually destroying the living city which once existed here. Almost no children grow up downtown now. Fewer young people live there. We're going to be left with a city which is a luxury experience largely enjoyed by older people who have made their money elsewhere.
After 20 years of relentless damage, during which my family had to leave for Mount Pleasant, Charleston is incapable of understanding that the city a century of poverty could not destroy is being leveled by the rich. The city's cultural institutions are weaker. The once active civic life is a shadow of what it once was. Do we have cooler restaurants? Sure. Can we put on festivals full of tourists and the occupants of trophy houses? Certainly. Do people here still know and honor each other's stories? Children, the young and those who need to earn a living need a city. A city should be devoted to the people who need and love it. It is not a product to be marketed to the highest bidder. Charleston and the Lowcountry's incapacity to comprehend that is why our communities are being obliterated.
Having seen the last strong years of the downtown community, an economically diverse, racially mixed experience and gone on to help attempt to recreated community in I'On in Mount Pleasant, I do understand what is at stake here. It's incredibly hard to maintain today. It is far more important and special than how the places look or how much parking you have.
The adage, "Success has many fathers (and, one assumes, mothers) but failure is an orphan," comes to mind while reading the remarks of Heather Higgins here and in other PR published by her group, IWV, since Sanford's victory. At least in this account she did not go so far as to state categorically that hers was the only group which supported Sanford when the NRCC abandoned Sanford's campaign. She only implied it. In truth, other organizations, such as Freedom Works, a large pro-life organuzation, and other groups both large and small jumped into the breach at the same time as, or even before, IWV. It is a shame that in its efforts to garner some (albeit deserved) praise and recognition, IWV would undermine the sense of solidarity and common purpose which attends an unexpected and resounding victory by dismissing or minimizing the efforts of others, including -- it sounds like to me -- the efforts of the candidate himself.
Ah yes. Boobs are great. But violence draws audiences, apparently with fewer public complaints. Most action programs feature sadism and random shootings without any psychological hangovers on anybody's part. It isn't even realistic violence: if you tie somebody to a chair and repeatedly hit him/her in the face with your fists, your poor hands would suffer terribly. Well, maybe that offers a little vicarious high to our sadomasochistic brothers/sisters. But tits, though wonderful, are sinful.
BTW, when does the new season of "Following" begin? Well, in the meantime, there's always "Criminal Minds".
"I don't get the rest of you. You have no skin in this game, and the purpose of it is to preserve relative peace and tranquility in Charleston."
Have you never seen a fight between a bouncer and a drunk patron? These happen all the time, and most of this occurs because the bouncers have no authority. If a cop shows up, even the toughest alcohol fueled badboy will become timid and docile. This is bad for the businesses, as their employees will be involved in additional possibly violent scenarios, which lead to lawsuits. It is bad for for those of us that frequent the bars, since we have to deal with possible increased violence due to less policing. The only people that win are the city government officials, who get to pay less for police presence.
I am against all censorship by the Gov. It's called parenting. If you don't want your kid to watch something, don't let them watch it.
I'm not sure I have a problem with the existing regs, except that violence seems to be fairly unregulated.
Then again, I'm just a Big Government Commie or something.
ohhh that hurt whats a matter need thicker glasses? can't read lowercase? maybe all caps would be better? your definition of True and mine r prob different.
seen one liberal democrat seen em all.
OK, then, nofaith - why don't you tell us who is qualified to be the acting Chair of the FCC or what those qualifications even are? Perhaps you could enlighten us on why Tom Wheeler, a venture capitalist, is qualified. Perhaps it is the money he donated to the President's re-election? Or perhaps he has long been a lobbyist for the very industry he may end up regulating?
Conservatives are only concerned about qualifications for government when they aren't calling the shots. You certainly didn't complain when George W. Bush filled up key government positions with wildly unqualified goons - except when those goons then went on to fail miserably at the jobs they were in, at which point you pointed and cried, "Government is ineffective."
It's a brilliant game, but it's utter crap.
The media does not care about the hundreds of other groups scrutinized by the IRS. Only the 75 conservative groups count, since those are the ones they can raise the specter of scandal over.
It isn't my fault you don't know the difference between Big Letter Words and their lower case companions.
As someone who was on the board of a non-profit on the other side of the argument from the tea party I can vouch that what they got was almost identical to the way our group was treated. All 501c3 groups go through the same thing to verify that they aren't being used to funnel money to candidates and issues under the table, illegally.
Powered by Foundation
© Copyright 2013,
Charleston City Paper