economic liberals vs. liberals who care about poor people, part forty-seven

Oh, Gray Lady. You are a reliable home page, guaranteed to receive an admiring nod from those well-intentioned, vaguely liberal intellectuals glancing at my computer screen. But I no longer read you for news. Just for your Arts, Magazine, and the pretty, rich people getting married. Why? Because of the stark contrast between you, the socially acceptable but unappealing news wife and my hot, illicit news mistress, Salon. Salon published an article a few days ago with actual victims from Katrina lamenting the loss of their homes (or possible future homes) to rapacious casino companies. And then today, the Times lauds the new casino developments in Biloxi as this great source of revenue.

Compare this: Soon after the storm, local and state officials announced that from now on they will locate the casinos on land, within the first 800 feet of Biloxi's shore. Some of this new development will cut directly into East Biloxi's worst-hit sections.
Not surprisingly, rumors fly around these neighborhoods: "The remaining houses will all be flattened for new casinos. There won't be a place for any of us to live around here anymore."

To this: For better or worse, casinos are the source of that rarest commodity along a Gulf Coast battered by Katrina: optimism. "Legalized gaming," said Biloxi's mayor, A. J. Holloway, "is going to be what saves us." These garish Las Vegas refugees are proving resourceful, resilient neighbors by serving as an economic lifeline in a town that lost one-fifth of its housing stock and well over 10,000 jobs.

To be properly Talmudic about this- you're both right. I am not one of THOSE liberals against job creation or business expansion, no no. But I do look for journalism that doesn't just tongue-bathe economic development without exploring how these business will actually take care of the local populations they intend to help (that's why I don't read the Wall Street Journal).