Share This Page

Greensburg Tuesday takes

| Monday, Feb. 4, 2013, 9:00 p.m.

The police quandary: Gov. Tom Corbett says the state, once again, needs to consider how it provides police services to municipalities without their own police departments. But many communities — including Hempfield and Unity — have resisted any serious consideration of the alternatives, such as sharing police services with neighboring communities or paying for the level of state police protection they receive. Better for these locales to examine their best option, now, than to await a state solution.

Cafeteria cleanup: Reports that two former Charleroi School District cafeteria workers allegedly skimmed food-service money and used it for gambling has left administrators with egg on their faces. Oh, they caught up with what's being called the “Lunch Ladies Lotto,” only the suspects reportedly burned through nearly $94,000. Apparently the person responsible for the cafeteria account must have been out to lunch.

Say what?: The Toledo, Ohio, Block Bugler editorializes that “There's no civil right to big, sugar-heavy sodas.” Seriously? Allow us to translate: Government is our master. Government should be our dietitian. Government knows best. It's par for the course from a newspaper that once opined that taxpayers have no right to complain about how their tax dollars are used because once those taxes are paid, it's not the taxpayers' money anymore.

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.