Comments on: The Post’s Renaissance Man

By: acomplia

acomplia — Wed, 23 Jul 2008 08:38:15 +0000

Hi! http://www.diigo.com/profile/markallen acomplia

By: acomplia

acomplia — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 20:31:06 +0000

Hi! http://www.viddler.com/groups/lookingforacomplia acomplia

By: paxil

paxil — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 20:13:02 +0000

Hi! http://www.viddler.com/groups/lookingforpaxil paxil

By: Kazelexw

Kazelexw — Wed, 16 Jul 2008 10:27:02 +0000

Hi! http://lejadloj.com bjqty vbyog http://bryduipt.com gjtrc ntlqj

By: Kazeliox

Kazeliox — Wed, 16 Jul 2008 06:39:48 +0000

Hi!slvf! http://ymgpdpzn.com ycnhh ttuqt http://diocrwcz.com spqvm bzvne

By: AJ

AJ — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 19:40:13 +0000

“Here’s my answer: The revival is for: a) people that love airport food (see Cinnabon, Ruby Tuesdays); b) people that can afford bullshit luxury condos; c) people who buy big TVs and video games (ok that’s everybody).”

Not to mention people who like to buy food without getting into a car, new parents like myself who appreciate being able to buy affordable baby gear by only walking five blocks to Target instead of driving to Alexandria, and those who like to live in an interesting and walkable neighborhood with strudy pre-war houses close to where they work without having to rely on a car.

Yes there is still crime, drugs and rock throwing kids. But do you really think you could compare the Columbia Heights of 10 years ago with it today and act like nothing has changed. Come on.

By: Mike O

Mike O — Tue, 11 Mar 2008 20:10:58 +0000

I’m curious to know if Mr. Cherkis or frontpage live, or even visit, CH.

While the cost of housing in DC has surely displaced some CH residents, however it should be pointed out that all of the glitzy developments displaced zero (0) units of housing. Most were built on empty lots, which makes The Man v. Mom and Pop theme (which the Post seems to love in most cases) moot. Yes, one can quibble with the choice of tenants (Best Buy AND Radio Shack? Target AND Marshalls?), but this is literally a case of something from nothing.

Your consumer snobbery speaks for itself. If you saw the criminally bad produce (not an exaggeration, the place should have been shut down by the health inspectors) at the old Giant or the large numbers of African American and Latino CHers who patronize Ruby Tuesdays and Cinnabon, our lack of macrobiotic green grocers might not seem so tragic to you. CH still has a wealth of pre-existing businesses, and I’m sure, were you to visit, you would patronize the four liquor stores within a block of my house or the oh-so-appealing eating options along Park Rd.

The traffic is bad, yes, this is why we have a Metro. Excellent planning by the DC government to put the biggest new development in the city literally on top of public transportation. For once, our taxes dollars well spent.

frontpage’s airy comments about neighborhood change belie the fact that CH was gutted (literally and figuratively) 40 years ago and the place is just now making it back. The fact that CH, finally, offers modern consumer advantages (and their attendant civic and economic advantages) for the people who have lived there for decades is a good thing. Not sure what kind of person would think it isn’t.

By: antonio

antonio — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 22:44:59 +0000

oh, the drama in columbia heights. its an “alright” neighborhood, i don’t know why everyone is so in love with it.

By: Matthew Borlik

Matthew Borlik — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 19:38:23 +0000

Andrew: Make clueless generalizations that leave you looking like a bitter and insecure old fart much?

By: andrew

andrew — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 19:13:02 +0000

Most of the writers over at the City Paper are just rich kids who rent rooms in group houses with no real investment in any community…other than wherever their parents live, which is usually where they go back home to after about a year. They look at an incredible development story in a great neighborhood like Columbia Heights only through the eyes of a recent college grad with strong left-wing, activist political views. Those views, comments, belgian beers, artsy clothes, and poor work ethic are all subsidized by mommy and daddy. Since they don’t know anything about real work, committment, or community (other than their usual, tired, brief stint in the Peace Corps – where they did no more than socialize with like-minded shirkers), they can only criticize those who are productive. The good news is, they all go home to mommy and daddy eventually, to leach off of them for a couple more years, until mommy and daddy pay for grad school and force them to go. By the time they 30, they have either come to their senses, are in rehab, or have moved to Key West.

Maybe somebody should write a story about that? I would read it.

By: PNWxNEDC

PNWxNEDC — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 16:57:04 +0000

If the folks at City Paper spent half as much time on their own product rather than nitpicking another paper’s coverage, they’d have something I’d actually read.

By: sanegirl

sanegirl — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 16:47:37 +0000

these are the kinds of pieces that make your paper not only predictable, but insufferable. i suppose empty lots and boarded-up storefronts are better than big-box stores. how about some history: did you know 14th and irving was a main center of commerce in the city before the 1968 riots happened?

By: dcdude

dcdude — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 16:26:06 +0000

Sorry frontpage. I have to disagree. Do you recall what was there before the DCUSA and all the condos went up in Columbia Heights? NOTHING! Vacant lots full of empy liquor bottles. How’s that for historical character? If you can’t see what’s happening in Columbia Heights as progress, then I don’t know what’s wrong with you. And you know all the poor long-time residents that everyone is so worried about in all this gentrification? They’re THRILLED that they don’t have to drive or take the bus to the burbs to do their shopping. And they’re thrilled that the neighborhood is finally safe enough that they can actually walk their own streets. Also, independent local shops are great if you are of a certain class and income level. But let’s face it, they can’t beat national retailers when it comes to the things that most working folks need: value and selection. You’re only mad because development isn’t happening in a manner that caters to YOUR consumer preferences.

By: thefrontpage

thefrontpage — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 14:37:43 +0000

The City Paper is right in this case, folks. Yes, neighborhoods undergo rebuilding. Yawn. Of cours they do. But most of the time, that’s just half the story. Most, if not all, of the time, these rebuildings suck–they literally suck the life out of the neighborhoods. Somewhere in time, some iditots thought that razing historic buildings, gutting classic rowhouses and townhouses, getting rid of mom-and-pop stores, trashing affordable housing, giving robotic chain stores free tax breaks (which is unfair), putting in a bunch of bland, boring glass structures that are just ugly, tearing up the landscaping and just overall making everything boring, bland, dehumanizing and overly-expensive, was progress. Folks, it’s not progress. In the long run, it’s not even productive. It’s a sham. It’s going back 100 steps. And, in a real way, it’s very anti-neighborhood. Yes, anti-neighborhood. Keeping mom-and-pops, keeping the historical nature of the neighborhood, welcoming long-time residents, keeping boring chains OUT, keeping local businesses IN, restoring historic structures, and keeping the real, actual, living neighborhood charm of a community are the real answers. That is real pro-neighborhood work. Anything else is just window dressing and stupid dog-and-pony shows. We should be able to see through the crap from the developers and the builders and the greedy politicians.

By: J

Wed, 05 Mar 2008 20:27:17 +0000

We posted a lengthier rebuttal to the Post piece, which really is quite poor reporting: http://campusprogress.org/opinions/2618/all-you-need-is-shopping