Attention, Austin Powers: Dr. Evil has assumed control of the beach development conglomerate Burroughs & Chapin, and he plans to use it to rule the world! Which means B&C hired a new top guy who wants to do what they’ve always wanted to do.
OK, maybe I’m exaggerating a tad. Actually, I’ve never been one of the reflexive, anti-Green Diamond, B&C haters. I had serious doubts about the floodplain project, but did not consider the company to be Eee-ville (like the Fru-its of the De-ville) for proposing such a plan.
But I sort of soured on them when they carried out their diabolical plan to tear down the Pavilion. Really,
think about it — for those of us who grew up going to the Grand Strand in the summer, is that not like some sort of Bond-villain plot? I mean, it’s not the Golden Mosque, but can’t you just see a guy with a shaved head (like the one in the picture) holding his pinky to his mouth and delighting in saying, I will blow up your seaside Sanctum Sanctorum unless you send me … one hundred billion dollars!
Well, the actual name of the guy in the picture is Jim Rosenberg, which is why I restrained myself from headlining this post, "Lebensraum." He’s the newly unveiled head of Burroughs & Chapin, and down here at the beach, that is major news. Those of us in the rest of the state might want to pay attention, too, since the new guy wants to grow the company. Yeah, I know, all new CEOs say they want to grow the business, even the ones hired to tear it down and sell off the pieces. But when Burroughs & Chapin says it, believe it:
"If you think the last 14 years was high growth, fasten your seat belt," Rosenberg told the crowd.
The headline in the story that led the Sun News this morning was "New president pledges growth." Here in Horry County, you don’t even have to ask, "the president of what?" I was particularly touched by this passage:
One of the first things he did when arriving on the Grand Strand was visit the former site of The Myrtle Beach Pavilion Amusement Park. But he said it’s too soon to determine what will happen there or at the empty 60-acre site that used to be Myrtle Square Mall.
I wondered whether he laid a wreath while there. If so, the story doesn’t mention it. But at least he paid his respects.
Sure, it’s easy to be nostalgic about something you don’t have to deal with, and I recall being told by the former editor of The Sun News that the Pavilion area had become seriously blighted, a magnet for drugs and crime, etc. But I guess my image of the place will never go much beyond the one in the movie. And now that it’s gone, it sort of reinforces that — even though that image came from before my own time, and own experiences.
Oh, well — gotta pack the car and head back to Cola town.
Related Posts
Unless the floodplain that they are planning on building on consists of wetlands that we need to retain for ecological reasons, let them build on it if they must, but make it clear that it’s a floodplain, and so sorry, no insurance.
Hmmmm, always thought a floodplain had a lot do with wetlands and, ergo, “ecology”. Ever been to the Congaree Swamp, one of the last standing native wetland forests on the East Coast? The Diamond is a Bad idea anyway you look at it. I hope Columbia will be able to buck B&C. Myrtle Beach and environs are B&C’s testament as to how to ‘develop’ urban space. These guys are dangerous!
The State editorial page was so strident in it’s push for government restructuring, outlawing video poker and removing the Confederate flag from the state house. None of these issues was particularly important. But when it came time to oppose a project that was clearly absurd they dragged their feet. The whole Green Diamond thing was a collosal disaster that had no business continuing. And yet the State hesitated to oppose government funding of the darn thing. I will never understand the thinking of the State editorial board.
Here’s how the thinking works, bud: We were stuck on that one. We work by consensus. There were negative feelings on the part of most of the editorial board, ranging from vaguely against to pretty strongly.
Our publisher at the time was in his own place on that — he was all for it. So we had a few editorials in which we raised questions but didn’t have a hard position, and encouraged the publisher to write columns on the subject (columns being personal opinions, not reflecting the view of the board) in order to express the positive vibes that he kept wanting the board as a whole to express.
So yeah, I can see how that looked like “dragged their feet.”
Meanwhile, the need for restructuring, for stopping video poker from taking over the State House and taking down the flag were so obvious that the consensus was very strong, no dissension. There essentially were no rational counter-arguments that a well-informed person could mount to prevent agreement. So the editorials reflected that.
See how it works?
developing in that flood zone is a terrible idea. Glad there arent children who go to school there everyday on a huge campus. wow. imagine how dangerous and silly that would be.
Brad, you just made my point. What was “obvious” to you was anything but obvious to others, on these issues. To suggest that there are no “rational” counter-arguments to these issues is highly insulting (and stridently PARTISAN).
But Green Diamond? If ever there was something that made no sense at all this was it. Certainly the New Orleans tragedy should end the debate about building in flood plains once and for all. To even consider for one nano second government funding for that idiotic project was the height of insanity. Talk about an issue with no rational counter points.
There essentially were no rational counter-arguments that a well-informed person could mount to prevent agreement.
-Brad
Let’s try these on for size. Starting with the Confederate Flag. It’s pretty obvious now that many people oppossed moving the flag because they were afraid this would amount to a slippery slope that would eventually lead to an eradication of all public references to the heritage of their Confederate ancestors. With the bruhaha anew about moving the flag yet again it’s apparent that they were correct. That seems pretty rational to me.
As for video poker. It seems perfectly rational to allow people to retain the freedom to spend money on whatever entertainment outlet they so choose. It is certainly rational to oppose a draconian measure that would outlaw a practice that had been legal for many years. Disagree with that argument if you must but it is the height of arrogance (and the very definition of PARTISAN) to suggest that this argument is not rational.
As for restructuring. I’ve laid out at great lengths how the restructuring legislation passed in the early 90s was a complete failure to prevent corruption and inefficiency in government. You have railed constantly about the DOT. Did the restructuring measures you pushed so hard for prevent the problems you now rail against? It was, in fact a huge step backward. To suggest opposition to that crap legislation was irrational is arrogant, naive and P-A-R-T-I-S-A-N.
mottes_mom, frequently wetlands are associated with floodplains, but not necessarily. A floodplain is simply where the water goes when a river floods. So, if a bank has been artificially built up, or if a dam controls the water level, there may not be wetlands, unless, of course, the river reaches flood stage anyway, in which case that plain floods. At any rate, if there are wetlands there we really need to stop it. If not, well, it’s really foolish to build or live on a flood plain, but these people seem to have crawled out of the shallow end of the gene pool.
Well, bud, as long as you want to talk about things that have nothing to do with the facts or the issues, I suppose you’ll win the arguments — by your own rules. But if you read what we wrote — for instance, the fact that they absolutely did NOT restructure DOT to make it more accountable; they just shifted things around and called the mess they came up with by different names.
But ol’ bud wants to call THAT restructuring — which puts him in the category with some of the ol’ boys in the Senate — and say THAT proves “restructuring” doesn’t work. This sort of thing makes me tired.
I’m beginning to think bud has an itch to argue that he’s just got to scratch.
As for the flag — I don’t know what you’re trying to say, but “slippery slope” arguments almost never work with me. Talk about what is done or not done; don’t argue on the basis of the suggested action carried out to the nth power. That’s absurd.
Finally, for the gazillionth time — the damned video poker issue wasn’t about people playing the stupid game. It was about the fact that we had agreed to a set of rules, the industry absolutely refused to play by them, and it was using its $3 billion cash flow to scare the hell out of everybody in the State House, to make sure it got everything it wanted. You had lawmakers on both sides of the aisle as scared of the poker lords as some Republicans are of the voucher crowd today. They were terrified of having all that money behind primary opponents. The corrupting influence of this was a palpable thing at the legislature, and you knew this if you spent time there, or IF YOU READ THE PAPER, because we kept writing about it.
But you want to talk about an individual’s godalmighty FREEDOM to play some idiotic video game, which is something I cannot imagine caring about.
So we have our little parallel monologues…
I go to school at Heathwood Hall, where I am a freshman. Heathwood lies on the floodplain that is at topic in the project. There are, in case you aren’t aware, swamps and other ecologically sensitive areas all over the land that they want to develop. The Green Diamond Project should be stopped, or, as I am seeing as a recurrent theme in this society, we will without a doubt ruin another ecosystem.