ShareThis Page

Sunday pops

| Saturday, March 23, 2013, 9:00 p.m.

Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., essentially blamed sequestration for the deaths of more than a half-dozen Marines in a horrible training exercise accident. The Marine Corps fired back, accusing the Democrats' majority leader of “political posturing” on the victims' backs. And here we thought “despicable” could not be redefined. ... Rep. Rob Bishop, R-Utah, has introduced legislation calling for a new design competition for the proposed Dwight Eisenhower memorial on Washington's National Mall. The original design, by architect Frank Gehry, has proven to be a disaster. Critics, including the Eisenhower family, say it's not representative of the career of the great general and Republican president. The sad thing is that millions of dollars already have been spent. It's time to get it right. After all, we're talking about Ike. ... A new Texas A&M study concludes that raising the minimum wage retards job creation. Additionally, the study says raising the government-dictated wage floor would not stimulate the economy. It's so simple and fundamental that even a “progressive” should be able to understand it. ... George F. Will notes that The New York Times' headline on this month's Conservative Political Action Conference story — “GOP divisions fester at conservative retreat” — would have, had it been a Democrat retreat, read, “Healthy diversity flourishes at the liberal conclave.” Throw another liberal on the fire, honey; it's getting hypocritical outside.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using 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.