Pittsburgh Laurels & Lances
On the “Watch List”:
• The Pittsburgh VA. If, indeed, it fell short in maintaining hospital water systems at its Oakland facility, as a system manufacturer claims, and that resulted in a fatal outbreak of Legionnaires' disease, not only should heads roll but civil and, possibly, criminal charges should be considered. There's simply no excuse.
• The Pittsburgh Steelers. With Dallas ahead on Sunday, and Cincinnati and Cleveland to follow, the wildly inconsistent 7-6 Stillers franchise is doing some serious soul-searching. It's still in the playoff hunt. But if past is prologue — beating good teams and losing to those bad — this will be the December of Discontent for Steelers Nation.
Laurel: To PNC. The banking giant wasted no time (this time) going public when cyberthugs launched a second round of attacks on its website. And that's a positive step. For the best defense against such criminals — in addition to better firewalls and other security measures — is calling out the culprits early, loudly and repeatedly. No one should shrink from confronting this kind of terrorism.
An observation: Pittsburgh City Council has passed legislation allowing the government-directed public shaming of slumlords. That's all fine and dandy. But perhaps it also should pass legislation allowing the public shaming of any council member (think Bill Peduto) who wastes the public's dime and time by honoring music “stars” (think Wiz Khalifa) who wear hats imprinted with the word “DOPE” during the honoring ceremony.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.