Katherine Williams 
Member since Nov 18, 2012


Stats

Friends

  • No friends yet.
Become My Friend Find friends »

Saved Events

  • Nada.
Find events »

Favorite Places

  • None.
Find places »

Saved Stories

  • Nope.
Find stories »

Custom Lists

  • Zip.

Recent Comments

Re: “City Paper endorsements for November 2014 election

City Paper's endorsement are bewildering. If you don't want Nikki Haley, how do you endorse anybody but Sheheen? You deride him as a waffler, while the candidate you endorse switched from Democrat to Republican. Even if this made sense, Haley's strongest opponent will need every possible vote if she's to be unseated. And if you don't want Sanford, how do you not write in Cherny even if his economic policies are "too far-fetched to do any good in Congress?" What are those ideas, and how are they far-fetched? And where is the research on these school board candidates, given the recent controversies involving our public schools?

For twenty years the LA Weekly was my guidepost for elections, with thoughtful reporting and analysis of every candidate's position on everything. Her sister paper could do a lot of good in a one-paper town, but this is mediocrity on wheels.

4 of 4 people like this.
Posted by Katherine Williams on November 1, 2014 at 8:29 PM

Re: “Legislators shouldn't meddle in the affairs of CofC-MUSC

McConnell would be perfect to head CofC, for all the wrong reasons. We need our universities to lead us into a complex future, and McConnell represents an oversimplified past when planters had absolute control over the lives of everybody else. While both of these schools have diversified their faculties and student bodies, they also have real problems coping with this diversity, and McConnell is no more fit to solve these kinds of problems than any lawmaker who thinks forbidding life drawing or censoring books will lead us forward.

7 of 12 people like this.
Posted by Katherine Williams on March 14, 2014 at 9:44 AM

Re: “City Council approves Riley’s I-526 takeover resolution

So what if folks in the City Proper or in the upstate supposedly want this road? They won't have to live with a freeway going through their back yard, breathe the polluted air from traffic idling from Calhoun Street to River Road, listen to the engines, or have the oily stormwaters wash up onto their banks. They won't lose their dog park or their swimming pool or their quaint country neighborhoods and the neighbors that live there. Their properties will not lose value with a freeway running through them.

I-526 won't help traffic, it will bring development. Charleston doesn't need more housing units in a glutted market, nor more bottom-feeding service and retail jobs. We need to fix the downtown flooding. We need to capitalize on our burgeoning ability to attract cultured, entrepreneurial youth and experienced retirees to our beautiful town, so let's augment public transportation and green infrastructure. Let's embrace Charleston's future and not stubbornly adhere to misguided commitments to an ugly, expensive, and obsolete travel experience.

4 of 5 people like this.
Posted by Katherine Williams on November 18, 2012 at 11:09 AM
Classified Listings

Powered by Foundation   © Copyright 2015, Charleston City Paper   RSS