"People Who Hate Wal-Mart Hate Success"

Great rant from Greg Gutfield, and so true:

As any Manhattan masseuse will tell you, I love a happy ending. And that's exactly what I've found in this story about angry locals who tried to keep a Wal-Mart out of their town.

In this case, after years of tangling with selfish, poorly informed citizens, Wal-Mart finally took its toys and left, leaving the idiots of Plainfield Township, Pennsylvania, to fend for themselves.

Now, that's not the happy ending. This is: What took Wal-Mart's place was a metal-shredding plant. A massive, recycling noise machine, louder than a freight train and prone to accidental explosions. The citizens now have a monster in their midst -- so, make way for more petitions.

And I love every minute of it!

As you know, Wal-Mart has been an object of spite, usually from fools too cowardly to admit that their bile has less to do with the store than with their own insignificance. People who hate Wal-Mart really hate the success that's eluded them. As for the attacks on Wal-Mart from elitist media hacks — that's bigotry, for they assume you must be genetic trash to shop there.

Fact is, Wal-Mart is just a symbol of America — a successful phenomenon that brings you what you need cheaply. But to its opposition, it's the daddy that never hugged them -- poor things.

So, Plainfield got what was coming. I hope every night they go to bed hearing the mangling of metal, thinking, "If only a Wal-Mart was nearby, we could buy earplugs."

And if you disagree with me, then you sir are worse than Hitler.

Technorati Tags: wal-mart walmart

Say What?

I know the importance of civic engagement, supporting local businesses, and the havoc that giant corporate entities like Wal-Mart can wreak on a small community.

I've lived it more than once in small towns in South Dakota and Iowa. But that story has been told over and over, and some just don't want to believe it, so we'll leave that one for the history books.

- "Efforts of PARD must go on," Patricia Freitag Ericsson, Letter to the Editor, Moscow- Pullman Daily News, July 18, 2008

I'm wondering if Dr. Freitag Ericsson, a WSU English professor and professional colleague of PARDners T.V. Reed and Alex Hammond, would be willing to elaborate more on how Wal-Mart "wreaks havoc on a small community."

According to her CV, she graduated from the University of South Dakota in 1972 and then worked as a high school teacher in Vermillion, SD. Wal-Mart did not open any stores in South Dakota until 1990. In any case, she worked at Dakota State University in Madison, SD from 1982 to 1997. There is no Wal-Mart in Madison, SD.

I'm not sure where Iowa fits in. Wal-Mart didn't open any stores in Iowa until 1983, when Dr. Freitag Ericsson was living and working in South Dakota. She did receive a master's degree in 1988 from Augustana College in Rock Island, IL, which is on the border with Iowa. But Rock Island is part of the Quad Cities area that has over 400,000 people. Hardly a "small town."

She then taught at Michigan Tech in Houghton, MI from 1998 to 2003. Houghton does have a Wal-Mart Supercenter, as well as a ShopKo. However, Houghton was recently included in the book The 100 Best Small Towns in America. That doesn't sound very havocy. But to be fair, she didn't mention Michigan.

I'm anxiously awaiting Dr. Freitag Ericsson's next letter to the editor where no doubt she will detail the exact havoc that was wreaked, as well as the specific places where it occurred. Like Agent Mulder, I want to believe.

Weird Al and the Mayor

Obnoxious liberal loudmouth Weird Al Norman has made a lucrative career out of reassuring wealthy suburban snobs that their elitist disdain of Wal-Mart and those that shop there is actually "protecting worker's rights" and stopping "urban sprawl." You can hear Norman rant about his hatred of Wal-Mart in person for only $5,000, plus expenses.

Norman is also a paid union shill, running "Battle-Mart" for the Service Employees International Union astroroots front organization "Wal-Mart Watch" and speaking on behalf of big labor all over the country.

Now, Weird Al has turned his sights on our mayor, Glenn Johnson. On his web site, Sprawl Busters, Norman urges "readers" to write to Mayor Johnson and the Pullman City Council urging them to pass a raft of socialistic, business-killing ordinances, much like Moscow did a few years ago.

Norman, who lives 3,000 miles away in Massachusetts (it figures), obviously has no clue that Mayor Johnson, the "Voice of the Cougars," is one of the most beloved and respected figures in the history of our town (he has been elected mayor twice with no opposition.) Norman chides Johnson:

If Wal-Mart is a ‘very good thing,’ why were so many residents upset about this project? These people that you say cost the city lost revenues-—these are your taxpayers, your constituents. You are the Mayor of all Pullman residents, not just the Mayor of Corporate Interests. Zoning decisions do not have to be a win/lose situation. When people believe they are on the losing end of a deal—they are usually right. Pullman was not prepared for a project of this scale. It’s time to bring your zoning code into the 21st century, before more big boxes saturate your city with highway sprawl.”

What a patently absurd allegation. Glenn Johnson is a professor at the same university as are the professors of PARD. He is beholden to no "Corporate Interests."

It is also laughable that Norman calls on Mayor Johnson to respect the feelings of the few dozen of his constituents that make up PARD, while simultaneously calling on people all over the country who are neither taxpayers nor constituents to write the mayor and city council and meddle in Pullman's affairs. This is just like a few years ago when PARD was soliciting donations from all over the country on Norman's website.

Send Weird Al an e-mail here and tell him and his "readers" to keep their snooty noses out of our business. Let's fill up his inbox! You might just get lucky and get a nasty reply from Weird Al himself.

Also, while you're at it, send an e-mail to Mayor Johnson and the Pullman City Council here and express your thanks for staying strong during this process, upholding the will of the majority of the electorate and not caving in to the special interests of a few.

Technorati Tags: wal-mart walmart

"City may make PARD pay for another appeal; Attorney, councilman say they'll seek reimbursement of legal fees if group loses case in Supreme Court"

As a Pullman taxpayer, I'm outraged PARD gets a pass on the appellate appeal costs. And the threat to go after PARD if they appeal to the Supreme Court is moot, as there is a 0% chance the Supreme Court will hear the case.

And I love the hypocritical BS from Citizen Hosick. Hosick said "she'd support a decision to drop the case if Wal-Mart officials opted to locate the super center along the Pullman-Moscow Highway instead of Bishop Boulevard." Please. If you remember, the only PARD member to submit a SEPA comment against the Hawkins development in the corridor was, you guessed it, professional kvetcher Hosick. She stated that she "would have liked to maintain the rural feel of the county." Of course, Hosick also thought SEL's new corporate headquarters was an "absolutely awful example of hilltop development, and a prime example of what any city/county development code in this area ought to prohibit." Basically, she's against everything.

From today's Moscow-Pullman Daily News:

City officials are awaiting a decision from the Pullman Alliance for Responsible Development and indicated there could be financial ramifications if the anti-Wal-Mart group takes its case to the state's highest court and loses.

City Attorney Laura McAloon said she'll recommend the city recoup its legal fees if PARD appeals a recent ruling to the Washington Supreme Court. Both the company and city shouldered their share of the costs in PARD's appeal to the Washington District III Court of Appeals, which ruled in favor of Wal-Mart and Pullman on June 3.

She doesn't think the city should be so gracious if PARD decides to pursue another appeal.

"In my opinion, PARD got a pass last time - they got a good deal," she said. "Should they appeal again, Pullman would absolutely pursue their actual costs ... and I'm confident we'd win."

McAloon said the city and Wal-Mart declined to seek reimbursement of legal fees during a December appellate court hearing in Spokane.

McAloon said Wal-Mart's attorney took the lead in the appeal, and the company likely could have recovered a significant amount of money when the three-judge panel sided against PARD. As a relatively silent partner in the process, the city could only have recovered a statutory fee of about $200.

Mayor Glenn Johnson and City Councilman Barney Waldrop said they would need to discuss the issue with McAloon and other city leaders before deciding to seek reimbursement of legal fees if a PARD appeal is heard by the state Supreme Court.

Councilman Keith Bloom isn't as accommodating.

"The actions by this particular group ... have hurt the city financially in the long-term. I think that would be a responsible step on the part of the city. They certainly cost us something," he said, noting that PARD not only cost the city in attorney fees, but also lost sales tax.

Wal-Mart announced plans to build on Bishop Boulevard in October 2004 and a site plan for the store was approved by city Public Works Director Mark Workman. PARD appealed Workman's approval of the store's environmental checklist and site plan, claiming it would negatively affect Pullman's economy, as well as stormwater run-off and traffic.

A hearing examiner determined the site plan and environmental checklist were sufficient, and that ruling was upheld by Whitman County Superior Court Judge David Frazier.

PARD then took its case to the Division III Court of Appeals.

PARD board member Chris Lupke said the group's leaders need more to time to decide whether to continue their legal battle, adding that they'll continue gathering opinions from supporters before any determination is made. PARD has until July 3 to file the necessary paperwork for the case to be heard by the Supreme Court.

"We're getting there, but it's taking longer than we expected," he said. "It's complicated and it involves a lot of people. We're trying to make this democratic ... I think it is important to get a read on the broader constituency that PARD represents before we make a move."

Lupke said PARD executive board members are meeting with the public and sharing the responses amongst themselves in an "informal process."

"I would hesitate to characterize it," he said. "I would just say that we haven't come to a decision yet."

PARD board member Cynthia Hosick hopes a decision is reached sooner rather than later.

"I don't see any point in holding off for a long, long time," she said.

Hosick said she'd support a decision to drop the case if Wal-Mart officials opted to locate the super center along the Pullman-Moscow Highway instead of Bishop Boulevard.

"I don't like Wal-Mart and I don't shop there, but I won't stop anyone else from shopping there," she said. "It would be a lot easier to swallow if they built it in the corridor. I would support that individually.

"Even if that's not an option anymore, I would still like to see the city ask Wal-Mart if they would relocate. It's not likely to happen, but it's worth a shot."

Technorati Tags: wal-mart walmart

Academic Freedom?

The great Milton Friedman wrote:

The essence of political freedom is the absence of coercion of one man by his fellow men. The fundamental danger to political freedom is the concentration of power. The existence of a large measure of power in the hands of a relatively few individuals enables them to use it to coerce their fellow men. Preservation of freedom requires either the elimination of power where that is possible or its dispersal where it cannot be eliminated.

By Friedman's definition, there is no freedom at WSU, as Foley Institute director Ed Weber recently pointed out, "hegemony of the left-leaning liberal viewpoint" has coerced him into not "inviting too many of 'the wrong kind' of intellectual."

Yet "academic freedom" is being used as a defense of Ayad Rahmani's "architorture" protest by Chuck Pezeshki and Chris Lupke.

A letter in Saturday's Moscow-Pullman Daily News pointed out that absurdity:

Protest not the best way

Chuck Pezeshki (His View, April 12 & 13) does it again. He missed the point even after questioning it himself. And Ayad Rahmani, (His View, April 18) with somewhat reasonable explanation, also.

If a medical professor required a for-credit peaceful protest against abortion, a science professor for nuclear energy or against climate change advocates, a political science professor against anti-war protesters or for guns, or a religion professor for prayer in schools or against gays, and many more possibilities, there would not only be a tempest in a teapot, there would be tornado in a Starbucks latte.

You would never hear the end of it from liberals. Just think if this type of requirement became a trend in education. A more responsible, rational, less controversial requirement would have been for students to critically evaluate the good, bad and ugly of the situation, write a comprehensive article and send it to the newspaper and all concerned.

Joe Ulliman, Moscow

Indeed. The 1940 Statement of Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure states with regard to academic freedom that:

Teachers are entitled to freedom in the classroom in discussing their subject, but they should be careful not to introduce into their teaching controversial matter which has no relation to their subject.

And:

College and university teachers are citizens, members of a learned profession, and officers of an educational institution. When they speak or write as citizens, they should be free from institutional censorship or discipline, but their special position in the community imposes special obligations. As scholars and educational officers, they should remember that the public may judge their profession and their institution by their utterances. Hence they should at all times be accurate, should exercise appropriate restraint, should show respect for the opinions of others, and should make every effort to indicate that they are not speaking for the institution.

There are a couple of comments on the Friday Rahmani column that are too good not to repeat:

"I have a great idea for Lupke, Pezeshki, and the architecture prof: If you don't like the way it looks, then you can buy the property and do anything they want with it. Just like the folks who own it now. The concept that the "community" should consider themselves stakeholders is ridiculous and elitist, and pretty parasitic to those who buy, develop, maintain, and pay taxes on the land. You do what you want with your stuff, and I will do what I want with mine. period!"

"I cannot believe the arrogance of some of these professors. Bishop Blvd was not developed for your walking/visual pleasure. It was developed to grow retail development for Pullman. For your walking and visual pleasure and in memory of Bill Chipman many of us worked very hard to gain funding to develop the Chipman trail and downtown walkways for that purpose. I also resent that you seem to think our elected/hired city officials do not know what our community wants and apparently are not as intelligent as you. I am very pleased that they are not making the mistakes of their predecessors and are moving in the direction the community has been waiting for."

Barry Explains It All

Here's how elitist Harvard Law School grad Barry Obama recently explained the Typical Working Class White Person to a bunch of wealthy liberal snobs in San Francisco:

They get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.

So there you go white folks. According to Barry, you're all racist, xenophobic, isolationist, gun-toting Jesus freaks. And it's all Dubya's fault.

Change we can believe in?

"WSU investigating 'architorture' protest; Demonstration organized by architecture prof causes concern among administrators, community members"

Rush has got "Operation Chaos." What should we call this?

Last week, I urged Palousitics readers to e-mail WSU president Elson Floyd about architecture professor Ayad Rahmani's "architorture" protest on Bishop Blvd. Apparently, we got results!!

That makes two victories this week, along with Ed Weber's proposal for more intellectual diversity at WSU. Let's keep up the pressure and take our campus and our town back from the academic extremists!!

From today's Moscow-Pullman Daily News:

Washington State University administrators are investigating a professor's conduct following a protest in Pullman last week.

Ken Vreeland, special assistant to the provost and executive vice president, said his office has received several e-mails from community members concerned about architecture professor Ayad Rahmani's role in a March 27 protest with more than 100 of his students on Bishop Boulevard.

"We are aware of the concerns and are reviewing them," Vreeland said.

Rahmani encouraged students in his sophomore-level architecture class to protest the lack of continuity, planning and design along the boulevard. He said the protest was relevant to the course work, which studies the built environment and includes buildings, infrastructure, sustainability and design elements and how they create a community.

Students carried signs that read "Stop Architorture in Pullman" and "The Show Starts on the Sidewalk" in the protest, which took place during a regularly scheduled class period. Participation in the protest was optional for the 200 students enrolled in the class. Credit was given to students who protested, as well as those who didn't as long as they justified their position in writing.

Rahmani said the protest was intended to pinpoint city planning issues "respectfully, not controversially."

"I made it clear to the students that this is a democratic option. This is not something that they have to do," he said. "I told them that, but I did say, 'I would like you to do it, to show the principles of the class.' I thought I really needed to do something to show the students what I'm talking about."

Vreeland said many WSU classes expect students to participate in community service or interdisciplinary learning projects.

"We encourage that ... but we expect that they're inclusive of different views and use sound education practices," he said

Vreeland said he is in the information-gathering stage of the investigation, collecting facts about the protest and the course work itself. Rahmani eventually will be interviewed, though no reprimand is expected at this time.

"It would be premature to say we're taking any action against the instructor," Vreeland said. "Right now, we're going to take a look at what we can learn from this."

Rahmani said he's not aware of any concern that has surfaced in the community.

"I think I did everything according to the rules," he said. "I may have done something new, but as a teaching method I think it was significant. It got students to talk and ask questions that weren't there before."

In Rahmani's opinion, the protest was a success if the community still is talking about it one week later.

"Obviously, that's why I did it," he said. "I wanted the students to perk up ... but also the community and the developers to know that people do care and it's important to do something about it."

The only thing that it is important to "do something about" is you Professor Rahmani. Hopefully after this, no other WSU professors will be tempted to take their liberal fascist agenda to the streets of Pullman at taxpayer expense.

A Real Architect Responds

A self-described former Pullman resident, WSU grad and architect has left a great post on Dnews.com regarding the "architorture" protest last Thursday:

As a former resident of Pullman, a graduate of the School of Architecture, and now a practicing architect, I’m glad to see Pullman growing, and slightly ashamed of this.

If the architecture students want to dedicate their lives protesting each thing in the public realm they find slightly abhorrent, they’re in for a long, frustrating, and largely pointless life. Don’t they know what it means to be “tolerant” of “diversity”? Or do they expect that everything around them should be built to their own pleasing? Their actions are somewhat dismissible; they have no clue what factors actually determine who builds what and why.

My real concern is with the professor and his ilk, for encouraging and promoting this sort of behavior. It’s easy to exist in the confines of a university, and think that your own architectural theories must trump the realities of your client, but it’s an unrealistic and unhealthy expectation to place on the shoulders of students looking for a career. Furthermore, the notion that more and more zoning and design review results in better architecture is fallacious. I wonder; has he worked with and through a building permit process recently?

With professors such as this, and activities of this sort passing as credit, is it any wonder that architecture is as irrelevant and thoughtless as it is today?

Quote of the Year

There is no really good area outside of what’s on campus.

- WSU architecture professor Ayad Rahmani passsing judgment on Pullman, "Architecture students protest on Bishop Boulevard," The Daily Evergreen, April 1, 2008

Rahmani hopes his imperious and insulting comments will "generate some intelligent discussion."

Runner-Up:

Each building is completely independent from one another

The Rantings of an Arrogant and Contemptuous Jerk

Your blood will boil when you read what elitist WSU archictecture prof Ayad Rahmani wrote in an op-ed that appeared in the October 27, 2007 issue of WSU Today. Some quotes:

WSU’s claims to “world-class” status, while true, ultimately ring hollow because the reality finds no match with those statements. World-class ambitions cannot be met with low-class ideas. High-class faculty will refuse to live in scattered and inconsequential buildings. [And after all, it's only the "high-class" faculty that matter in this town. The rest of us are just low-class. Oh my God. -tf]

The new housing stock in Pullman sadly represents the worst of the effects of a market economy; it has neither respect for art or the environment — or for that matter the fact that within a short walk there is an architecture school with graduates who have gone on to change the world. [So what's stopping them for developing houses with respect for "art and the enivonment?"? Oh yeah, money. It's much easier to tell someone else how to spend theirs. - tf]

Rather than taking clues from cities such as Portland and Seattle — whose architects and developers have joined forces to create a denser and more community friendly environment [and that obsession with "density and community friendly environment" has added $200,000 to the average price of a Seattle home - tf] — Pullman developers have made more suburbs. These offensive McMansions, with garages looking onto the streets, use materials and planning that are highly wasteful and unsustainable. [You mean like wood, which is a renewable crop? Concrete? Seems to me there is a virtually infinite supply of sand and gravel. Vinyl, which can be recycled? What's wasteful and unsustainable? - tf]

Rather than building inward and promoting walking and bicycling, these suburbs force those who live in them to use their cars. And rather than building with materials that have a low-carbon footprint and reflect an inventive approach to scarcity, these same suburbs persist with a cookie-cutter mentality. [So why did Pullman just get nationally recognized as a "pedestrian-oriented" city? And where in the hell are we going to build "inward" in Pullman??????? College Hill?? Downtown?? There's no room left but at the periphery of town. But in any case, there is no "suburb" in town that is more than two miles from the WSU campus. What a joke to call that "sprawl." And that "cookie-cutter mentality" is otherwise known as "affordable family housing." How dare you insult my home as "cookie-cutter" when that is all I can afford, you snobby asshole. - tf]

The university also cannot rely on the town to resolve this problem; the town is too bogged down in trying to increase tax revenues to worry about the role of architecture in improving matters. The university must lead the way in not only improving its own grounds but in transforming the town. [Oh sure. The poor townies are so plebeian wanting to pay the bills for parks, police, fire and emergency services, schools, etc., etc. Let the highly-educated solons take over. I have read some elitist and snobby crap before, but this takes the cake. - tf]

Urban Sprawl or Urban Decay?

So if WSU Professor Ayad Rahmani and his "volunteer" student protesters think these new developments on Bishop Blvd. represent "architorture" and "urban sprawl":







Then what do they think about this urban decay along Pullman's most traveled and visible road, Grand Avenue?:









Perhaps rather than advancing an elitist, liberal fascist political agenda, a better extra credit project would be volunteering the students' expertise/labor to refurbish/demolish these dilipidated structures, the true archictectural "eyesores" in Pullman. How about a carwash or bake sale to raise money for the Grand Avenue Greenway project?

"WSU class protests Pullman sprawl"

How unbelievably repugnant. An elitist professor bribes students who are not even from Pullman to go out and protest supposed "sprawl." They don't even know what "sprawl" really is. If those students are unhappy with the economic development that helps pay for the police, fire, streets, water, sewer, bus service, etc. that they enjoy, then they are more than welcome to run for City Council and effect a change. Perhaps they could actually even show up at a City Council meeting or Planning Commission meeting. But Bishop Blvd. is being developed in accordance with the city's Comprehensive Plan as determined by our democratically-elected representatives.

The good professor and his students are also more than welcome to purchase a lot on Bishop and build their own "sustainable" structure if they choose. Until then, they should just shut up and stop meddling in things they nothing about. These kinds if things only exacerbate tensions between the university and the town and build resentment towards students and professors.

I encourage you to register your disapproval of this agenda-advancing cheap stunt to Professor Rahmani at: arahmani@wsu.edu and WSU President Elson Floyd at floyde@wsu.edu. Let's clog their inboxes with our indignation at our town being used as some social engineering laboratory.

From Dnews.com:

A group of more than 100 Washington State University students protested building sprawl on Bishop Boulevard Thursday morning.

Enrolled in an Architecture 202 class taught by Ayad Rahmani, the students carried signs proclaiming “Stop Architorture in Pullman” and “The Show Starts on the Sidewalk.” The group’s purpose was to promote sustainable structures and growth, not haphazardly constructed strip malls and big box stores.

“There’s no cohesion,” said 21-year old WSU student Angela Congdon. “Everything is random.”

Participation in the protest was optional for the roughly 200 students enrolled in the class. Extra credit was given to students who protested, as well as those who didn’t — as long as they justified their position in writing.

"What Wal-Mart Gets and the Candidates Don't"

Terrific op-ed from the Washington Post from Sunday a week ago. Warren Brown, self-admitted union man, explains it to the elitists like Obama, Clinton, and the PARDners. It's not about globalism, offshoring, or union-busting. The average person doesn't think about politics when they shop. I made this point last week. It's about being able to buy quality goods at the lowest price. Period.

I wish to say at the outset that I hold no grudges against Wal-Mart. In fact, my family and I are rather fond of that giant retail chain, where we often find the best prices, especially on pharmaceuticals.

It is an odd thing to admit. Many in our clan, including yours truly, hold union memberships. Politically, with me being the sore-thumb exception, we run from left to leftist. Yet, regardless of politics or union affiliation, when it comes to searching for the best quality at the most reasonable prices, Wal-Mart is one of the places we look first.

As I said, this is odd, almost embarrassing. Wal-Mart is no friend of unions. Wal-Mart is one of those American retailers keeping foreign factories humming and foreign workers employed. Viewed from that perspective and in context with the current political debate on international trade, Wal-Mart is something of a bad actor, one of those companies supposedly putting people out of jobs in places such as Ohio.

Poor Ohio. It has become one of the rustiest parts of the Rust Belt. It has lost tens of thousands of jobs, largely in the automotive and related industries, and it has shed nearly 200,000 residents over the past couple of decades.

In last week's titanic Democratic presidential primary battle, Ohio, one of the most unionized states in the nation, was made the prime example of what happens in America when international trade supposedly runs amok.

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.), the victor in that contest, rose to electoral glory on promises that she would fix what is wrong with international trade, that she would somehow find a way to reverse job losses allegedly caused by contracts such as the North American Free Trade Agreement.

Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.), who was made to look a bit wishy-washy on the free trade issue, largely lost Ohio as a result.

But here's suggesting that none of us should take seriously anything that politicians, Democrat or Republican, liberal or conservative, have to say against NAFTA in particular or international trade in general. The reason is simple: They neither understand Wal-Mart nor do they routinely shop there.

Consider Ohio: Wal-Mart is one of the largest employers and biggest taxpayers in the state. As of March 2007, there were 99 Wal-Mart Supercenter stores in the Ohio, 38 Wal-Mart discount stores, 30 Wal-Mart Sam's Clubs and five Wal-Mart regional distribution centers.

In Ohio state sales taxes alone, the company paid $410.2 million in 2007. In other state and local taxes, it paid $82.4 million.

All of those Wal-Mart facilities and the money they generated were supported by one phenomenon: consumers, union and nonunion, employed by and laid off by domestic car companies and other manufacturing entities, seeking the highest quality products at the very best prices.

If Wal-Mart could not meet that essential consumer demand, it would not exist in Ohio or anywhere else. It certainly would not be the formidable retailer it is today.

What does that mean for the current political debate on international trade? Simply this: As long as politicians continue to ignore the Wal-Mart phenomenon, the consumer-driven reality of international trade, they are being dishonest. They are blowing smoke.

The truth is as simple as it is harsh. Automotive and other industrial jobs lost in Ohio are not coming back, certainly not the way they were, because the same consumers who shop at Wal-Mart stores in Ohio and everywhere else there is a Wal-Mart store are not willing to pay for those jobs and the products they represent.

Look at it this way: If I buy enough Honda cars made at the lower cost, nonunion Honda plant in Marysville, Ohio, I'm putting pressure on my union buddies at the higher-cost General Motors, Ford and Chrysler plants to offer me equal or better products at prices equal to or better than those offered by Honda.

I might drink with my union buddies. I might tailgate with them. I might even join them in shouting "hooray" for Clinton or Obama. But if they can't give me the car I want at the price I demand, I'm buying that nonunion Honda. If that means GM, Ford and Chrysler plants close, I'm sorry about that and all that means for my friends who will lose their jobs.

But they should have found a way to give me what I was willing to pay for. They should have understood why so many of us shop at Wal-Mart.

Technorati Tags: wal-mart walmart

Snobler's List

Liberal Moscow gadfly Vera White took a gratuitous swipe at Whitman County in her column in the Daily News last Friday:

A recent posting on V2020 caught the INKster's eye, so she Googled the mentioned Web site to check it out. Earlier this month, The Progressive Farmer magazine released a list of the "Best Places to Live in Rural America." Each year, the rankings name the top-10 rural counties and profile each in the magazine. This year, Kent County, Md., was awarded top honors.

The magazine also listed the top 500 rural counties by region, and the INKster was pleased to learn some of the surrounding counties made the top 100 list in the Western Region.

Nez Perce County ranked No. 11 in Idaho, with Kootenai County No. 23 and Latah County coming in at No. 55. Asotin County in Washington ranked No. 70, but as the V2020 poster noted, "neither Whitman nor Spokane counties cracked the top 100."

As those chamber of commerce types continue to note, "things are lookin' good in the Valley."

So just what is a "Progressive Farmer" you may ask? (as well as why, since "Crime" is a ranking factor, did Latah County with a murder rate last year greater than most large U.S. cities rank as #55, but I digress.)

I read what the magazine had to say about its top rated place to live, Kent County, MD:

By all reasoning, Kent County should be covered with homes, strip malls and "farmettes." But it's not. Not anywhere close. [And Kootenai County is #23 by this standard? Go figure. - tf]

Instead, Kent County is a rare holdout in the sprawl and development in this country that clearly is out of control. Kent County maintains a culture of farming, wildlife, and small towns and villages that are relatively untouched.

For a county to be in our Best Places list, we hold them to the usual standards—good schools, health care, safety and other desirable qualities. But what makes Kent County stand out is its residents' resolve to maintain a solid rural heritage. At the foundation of that effort is farmland preservation, something that started decades ago with foresight, cooperation and some far-sighted planning.

Then it became readily apparent to me. A "Progressive Farmer" must be a wealthy, well-educated escapee from some big city that lusts after open spaces and breathtaking views and is willing to deprive the locals of their progress and property rights in order to keep it. It's just the old elitist, drawbridge mentality.

I'm frankly very happy glad Whitman County didn't make such a snobby list.

Say What?

I still don't get it. We have a Walmart 6 miles away. For some of us in Pullman, it's shorter and easier to get there than across to Safeway.

- Chuck "Mr. Civil Discourse" Pezeshki, online comment regarding the Pullman Wal-Mart Supercenter at Dnews.com, December 6, 2007

So many of these decisions really benefit no one who lives here-- that's my point. They just create more sprawl, which, as gas prices go up, is really going to kill all of us five years from now.

And needless to say, no one is even beginning to look five years into the future.

- Chuck "Mr. Civil Discourse" Pezeshki, online comment regarding the Hawkins development near the Moscow Wal-Mart at Dnews.com, February 24, 2008

I still don't get it either. Liberal man speak with forked tongue.

Say What? Special Edition

The wit and wisdom of Moscow City Councilman Tom "Last Liberal Standing" Lamar, as displayed in today's Moscow-Pullman Daily News:

I am not convinced that it is legal for an Idaho city to sell water to a private entity in another state

That's funny. I'm not convinced that it's legal for an Idaho city to oppose a private development in another state.

Why should Moscow give up its precious resource to benefit another county and a private company?

Excuse, me, MOSCOW'S precious resource? The last time I checked, the Grande Ronde aquifer extended under Washington, Idaho, and Oregon, with the vast majority underneath Whitman County and Washington.

I have not seen a retail study showing that a retail development of this size - 714,000 square feet is needed or justified.

Here you go, Tom.

Locating a giant shopping center in an unincorporated area is poor community planning. It runs contrary to Moscow's comprehensive plan.

That would be great, if THE HAWKINS DEVELOPMENT WAS IN MOSCOW. But it isn't. It will be built in Whitman County and the concept FITS PERFECTLY WITH OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. Arrogant jerk. You plan your community, we'll plan ours.

It will be more difficult for Moscow residents to reach via walking, biking or bus than our current shopping choices.

Let's see. Most Moscow residents live on the other side of town from Winco, the Palouse Mall, Tri-State, Wal-Mart, etc. If they are willing to walk a mile or more to shop now, an extra few hundred yards to get to the Hawkins development shouldn't deter them. Of course, Lamar's premise is absurd. How many people do you see walking or biking to the mall or Winco? And I imagine Moscow city buses will go to the Hawkins mall. If not, I'm sure the Wheatland Express will.

Moscow residents who work in Pullman likely will face longer commute times.

That's too stupid to even address.

How will this long-term commitment of water affect the future ability of Moscow businesses to grow? Or our ability to attract new businesses?

Here's how, Tom. This whole agreement is a Win-Win-Win-Win. Hawkins wins by avoiding hundreds of thousands of dollars in further lengthy litigation. Those concerned about water and the environment win because Moscow's municipal water and sewer system will be far more effective at conserving water and preventing pollution than anything Hawkins would construct. Whitman County wins because the corridor is now open for business and all the millions of extra dollars in tax revenue that means as opposed to Hawkins pulling the plug and scaring off all future corridor development. And Moscow wins because they get a piece of the sales tax action by selling water and sewer at a premium, existing Moscow businesses will benefit greatly from the spillover from Hawkins, and the land behind Staples, Wal-Mart, and the Palouse Mall just got a lot more attractive to new businesses. In fact, I would argue Moscow made out the best inthe deal. By selling Hawkins water, Moscow has forestalled any county or City of Pullman water services in the corridor for now, which of course will forestall any further development in the corridor. Any new businesses attracted by the Hakwins development will go into Moscow.