Share This Page

Sunday pops

| Saturday, April 20, 2013, 9:00 p.m.

Secretary of State John Kerry says the United States is “making progress” in holding accountable those who murdered Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans in Libya last September. Good grief, it's been seven months, man. Americans want answers, not “progress.” ... Treasury Secretary Jacob Lew is telling European leaders to pursue pro-growth policies. That's all fine and dandy until you understand what Mr. Lew actually means by “pro-growth” — more government spending. That's simply more government interventionism to mask the lie of all of the preceding government interventions. It's what bureaucrats propose when they don't know what they're doing. ... The Supreme Court has ruled that police should seek warrants before extracting blood from suspected drunken drivers — but only when they believe a blood sample can't be obtained in a timely fashion (i.e., before the alcohol can dissipate in the bloodstream). We didn't know the Fourth Amendment came with a time stamp, did you? ... Erstwhile Pennsylvania GOP U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum, formerly of Penn Hills and still with a postal drop box in Verona, had the great courage of his convictions (ahem) to come out against the Toomey-Manchin gun bill Wednesday last — but only after it was abundantly clear that it would fail. And to add insult to his safe-harbor stand, he misrepresented the measure. What a guy. They trap weasels in Iowa, don't they?

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.