We know D.C. Get our free newsletter to stay in the know.
What you said about what we said last week
Muriel Bowser’s election to the D.C. mayor’s office might have been a week ago, but Washington City Paper readers aren’t done jawing about it. In response to last week’s election day cover package, commenters struck a cynical note.
“We should expect vagueness from Mayor-elect Bowser,” wrote DCShadyboots. “She was vague on the campaign trail. That is who she is and she isn’t any different today than she was then. This is who the people voted for to lead the city.” Bowser’s erstwhile Libertarian oppponent, BruceMajors4DC, concurred, writing, “In reality, Bowser never really proposed much of anything new or different, and neither did [David] Catania or [Carol] Schwartz. If you are unemployed in wards 5, 7, and 8 you still will be. If you go to an abysmally bad school you still will…These people had no ideas or policies to change anything.”
CHRISPHISH, who “didn’t care for ANY” of the candidates, called out City Paper for looking for news on the mayor-elect where there is none. “Can she at least get to January??????” CHRISPHISH asked. “I’m sure many gentrifiers, hipsters, and the wealthy want a caucasian mayor in D.C., and in time it’s going to happen. But let’s face it, this city is an un-unified as rats and cats and horrifically divided…She got it for four years, and if she fails, then vote her out. But reporting on her every day before she even gets to govern is crazy, especially when this publication endorsed her opponent.”
501 Shakedown Street
Turns out even the historical landmarking process isn’t safe from scandal, as Aaron Wiener reported last week. The Southwest Neighborhood Assembly withdrew its application to designate a building, soon to be converted by the Shakespeare Theatre Company, a historical landmark as soon as the theater company forked over two cash payments of $30,000 to SWNA. The move didn’t sit well with many readers. “Well done SWNA for not even hiding your shakedown motivations,” commented Game. Hooray for Legal Extortion joked, “That’s a real nice building site you got there, Shakespeare. It’d be a real shame if anything, you know, *happened* to it. *cracks knuckles*.”
Sidney Rock Dove offered a counterpoint: “I actually don’t see any problem with this. I’m glad the group found a way to make sure the development benefitted the community.” Payton Chung counter-countered: “But $100,000 from the development could have benefitted the community more were it delivered directly to, say, free performances in neighborhood parks and schools—rather than as several fat checks to an organization whose agenda is hardly shared by all community members.” Striking a conciliatory tone unheard of in online comment sections the world over, Sidney Rock Dove conceded, “Sure, I suppose that’s probably true.” (!!!)
Turns out the notion of catering to dogs in bars struck some folks as Romanov-esque. Perry Stein’s piece on dog-friendly happy hours and steak for pups set Twitter ablaze. “BURN IT DOWN,” was @ronmknoxDC’s response. “America treats its lower classes like dogs,” tweeted @en_dash. “No, scratch that, it treats its dogs way better.” Writer Jim Newell concurred: “More evidence that the D.C. food beat is one of the best jobs out there for reporting on inequality and class.”
Not everyone had class objections to the story. “Yes,” wrote @bmcclane, “but which restaurants can I bring my cat to?”