RedScare

If one must use Peter Brown in support of an argument, the argument has failed.

Umm...I live next door to it. I am there often during both the day and at night. It is MUCH better than before the arrival of Christian's, D'Amicoos, and the other establishments. Lame 19th Street should be so lucky as to get these stores.

It just occurred to me how unlikely it is that anyone has ever uttered these statements to you, or anyone else. Since 19th Street shops all close at 5 or 6, the strip is dead after that. Therefore, no one would be anywhere near 19th Street to even notice whether a live music venue or big bar was even open at night. I'd be willing to bet that the shop owners wish there was a draw to bring people to 19th Street at night. Some of them might stay open later. In conclusion, I can think of no reason why anyone would be opposed to more business and entertainment opportunities on 19th Street after 5 pm. I am all for it.

Maybe it has something to do with one's circle of friends, but I have never heard a single person say that about either 19th Street or White Oak. In fact, among those that I talk to, 19th Street is a dead zone after 5. We'd love to see a little life up there, and food and drink is what it takes. As for White Oak, I've heard nothing but good things. The only gripe is that there is not enough parking. I suppose different types may be averse to groups of people. White Oak is far from Washington Avenue. There are no niteclubs, other than the aforementioned Fitz's, There are two bars, one that predates all of us, and one that is not crowded. So, the reality is that anyone complaining about White Oake simply does not like people.

It would be too close to the remaining church to get a license.

No one ever said it was. But, no one wants the added paperwork associated with a club license. I will admit that you seem to be a big fan of added government regulations and paperwork in all endeavors, however. Having owned a restaurant with an alcohol permit, I can safely say that the fewer forms the better. But hey, that's just me.

Holy Cow! You aren't kidding. That tower may ruin everything around it. http://www.nashersculpturecenter.org/getdoc/5c15485b-6b0f-45b5-a934-91ccf0e8bbca/DMagazine-May-2012-Article-opt

Well, they must have considered a little bit of the demographic, since I live nearby and it is my favorite Kroger.

Actually, it is called Party Kroger, in deference to the party stores, but it has not caught on that well yet.

Maybe a lawsuit should have been filed over this.

Wow, this is shocking news! Why are we just now hearing about this! We should have started a facebook page about this...or something! By the way, that Kroger is STILL the best Kroger in the area. Much hotter chicks than the one on 11th.

wow. i hadn't heard that.

Yeah, sure. I actually had occasion to shop at BOTH Walmart and Target this weekend. No made up reasons. I actually went to both stores on purpose. I found Walmart to have a decent crowd. Target's crowd was slightly smaller. As if that means something. Neither store is going anywhere.

I know you are a Tech fan, but if you can stand it, take a drive up to A&M. They have an entire campus of Soviet bloc architecture up there, including a football stadium.

It's an internet forum. That's what they are for.

Did the Woodlands annex Exxon? Did Exxon move its HQ? Why doesn't anyone tell me these things.

Well, that would be interesting if true. However, the statute says that assault occurs if a person causes injury to his spouse. In some cultures it is not assault for a husband to beat his wife. The Texas assault statute makes clear that we do not subscribe to that culture.

Well, now that you mention it... Sec. 22.01. ASSAULT. (a) A person commits an offense if the person: (1) intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly causes bodily injury to another, including the person's spouse; (2) intentionally or knowingly threatens another with imminent bodily injury, including the person's spouse; or (3) intentionally or knowingly causes physical contact with another when the person knows or should reasonably believe that the other will regard the contact as offensive or provocative.

Well, there is that.

The problem with trains is that if they go to places where no one wants to go they end up empty. Dallas took the cheap route and built their light rail down old rail ROWs. But no one lives or works near those old ROWs. So, they ended up with a very expensive empty train. Pretty useless.

I keep looking at those 80 miles of rail and wondering why nobody rides it. Actually, DART is the perfect metaphor for Slick's posts. The grass is greener on the other side of the fence.

Not in 1954, he wasn't.

Are you sure that was IAH? The pictures that I saw were of Hobby, which was known as "Houston International Airport" from 1954 to 1967. I don't think IAH was ever known as "International".

Well, since you brought it up, dying in a plane crash is not heroic. It is tragic, but not heroic. Flying a fighter plane in a war could be described as heroic. Leaving your seat in a plane in order to confront terrorists attempting to hijack it is almost certainly heroic. Sitting in a plane that crashes generally would not be heroic without something else.

Sounds like s3mh is their lawyer. http://www.houstonarchitecture.com/haif/topic/24342-construction-at-11-12th-and-studemont/page-3