Just wanted to give y’all a heads-up on this event tonight, brought to my attention by my friend and fellow Capital City Club member Clare Morris:
MEDIA ADVISORY: Boston Marathon Bombing Fundraiser at the Capital City Club Tonight
The public is invited
What: The Capital City Club is sponsoring cocktails and fun for charity, featuring Celebrity Bartender Dr. Frank Clark. Dr. Clark, an avid runner and Columbia resident, finished the Boston Marathon in 2 hours and 57 minutes.
Frank’s special drink for the evening is Sam Adams Boston Lager. All Sam Adams Boston Lagers and Club brand drinks are $4.00. Complimentary hors d’oeuvres will be served.
When: Tuesday, May 14, 2013 5:30 to 7:00 pm
Where: The Capital City Club Lounge, 25th floor, Capital Center, 1201 Main St., Columbia
For more information: Contact Clare Morris (803.413.6808 or Clare@ClareMorrisAgency.com)
Check-out Frank’s WACH-FOX interview — http://www.youtube.com/watch?
v=C-hIbd_kw5Q
I’m going to drop by, and it would be great to see some of y’all there. As Clare said, the public is invited, so you don’t have to be a member. (Of course, if you’d like to become a member, I’ll be more than happy to help you with that.)
I like the way Clare worked Dr. Clark’s finishing time into the release. Aside from the horrific events of that day, I find his athletic achievement impressive.
Related Posts
Yeah for all those poor (in the financial sense) marathon runners. How many marathon runners do you know who don’t have good jobs or health insurance? I bet there weren’t too many homeless or welfare recipients running. Will there be a fund raiser for the next stock market plunge?
The One Fund is for those people who lost limbs and had other serious wounds that will impact them for the rest of their lives (and also for the businesses that were closed for the two weeks). Sometimes I wonder about how people live so cynically.
Usually you complain about the poor; but maybe it’s just everyone else that gets you, Steven.
If you don’t want to, don’t contribute.
He has a virile, cynical point — have you ever seen a revenue monkey do tricks? Try attending a military funeral. There “may be” military amputees/revenue monkies practically flipping their wheelchairs for emoto-donations. $$$Disabled.Vet.Monkeys.$$$.com
Since Joel Collins’ thug/mouthpiece warned me NOT TO say it again, I say it loud and clear,
REVENUE MONKEY.
Like
What Mark said.
I don’t understand what Mab said.
You don’t understand the concept of revenue monkies?
“I don’t understand what Mab said.”
Glad I wasn’t alone.
No
@Steven — glad your aren’t REALLY an amputee wondering why God hasn’t healed your limbs like He does the skinks and lizards. Fight the good fight of faith, Steven.
Brad — pls inform as to the correct plural form of monkey. Thx. This is one of the reasons why The State needs to hire you back. It’s either this or this, and no wishywashy libspeak ‘spell it how it feels right’ jazz.
Monkeys
Let’s just call them revenue primates.
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080117133134AAV1Bci
On your key ring, you put keys, not kies. You form the plural of a “y” word with “ies” only when the penultimate letter is a consonant.
‘Kathryn, key character question — do you believe employment law lawyers are always in the right when defending their client, the employer (SCE&G, SC Attorney General, SC Dept. of DISABILITIES AND SPECIAL NEEDS, etc., ad nauseum), vs. the peon/stranger/no FAMILY to protect them psychological abuse victim?
If so, what kind of person do you consider yourself to be? I have some suggestions…
Lawyers do their jobs. As long as they are behaving ethically, the deeds of their clients have no bearing on the lawyer’s morality.
Wrong. Lawyers are about legal; ethical is not a required skill set. There is legal and there is ethical. Many times mutually exclusively so. There was a big in-your-face article about this in The State some years back.
Law is like rain — it grows whatever is in the soil. Poisonous plants alongside beneficial plants. SC’s legal cartel is of the poisonous variety as far as it affects the powerless schmucks among us.
Point in case, Brett Parker. Everyone knows he’s guilty, yet his paid servant/lawyer is fighting to defend him… because he’s being paid to do so. No different than the used car salesman trying to sell that lemon off the lot.
‘Legal cartel’ intimates the predestined verdict of guilty or innocent (inner circle decision waaaaay beforehand). You don’t think these SC court charades are RL legal proceedings? Or do you?
Ya’ll are both wrong. It’s Monkees.
http://bit.ly/14wnFct
You are ALL (i.e., you in all of your wardrobes and charactery) irrelevant. Go away.
Strangely (appropriately) absent are you on the [https://bradwarthen.com/2013/01/yeah-conventional-wisdom-on-the-monkees-was-right-mostly/] thread. Grammar check?
I was overseas when the Monkees thread you are referencing was posted. Doing my duty for G-d and country, and what all. From the looks of things, I’m sorry I missed it though.
Actually, that’s one of those threads I sort of regret later.
My assessment that day was that conventional wisdom was right, and the Monkees weren’t very good musically.
But, as sometimes happens with these musical judgments, I’ve listened to some of the old stuff more since then, and have decided I was too harsh. No, not all of their songs were great, but they probably had more really good ones than most bands from the era that I listen to respectfully today.
When you consider the large number of great songs from one-hit wonders, they probably had a greater-than-average number of good songs.
Not everybody can be the Beatles, or Elvis Costello. After a certain point, not even the Beatles or Elvis Costello can keep cranking them out at peak quality…
Sometimes songs just have to grow on you. This is definitely the case with LMFAO’s “Party Rock Anthem,” which I initially gave one star and now, MANY listens later, would probably give 4 stars.
The principle seems to work even with songs that were once familiar, but that I have to listen to a few times to get back into…
Everyone has a right to have his story presented in the most favorable light. Lawyers are not ethically permitted to suborn perjury, though. They are permitted to DADT.
Is that the lawyer’s hypocritical oath?
No hypocrisy.
Just the way our legal system works….
‘Kathryn, I want you to be my first client in our NEW LEGAL SYSTEM.
I won’t disappoint…
No, just the 6th Amendment to the US Constitution from the Bill of Rights.
Marxist!
Imagine that, an Obama supporter referencing the Constitution.
Right. W was such a stickler….
Phillip, were you at Edventure yesterday?
Revenew Monkees.
Can we get a link? Throw us a bone, homey.