The Thursday wrap
The Federal Emergency Management Agency has announced that it's now taking applications for the 2013 Individual and Community Preparedness Awards. Pardon us but wouldn't FEMA spend its time and your money better by managing emergencies? ... The Hill newspaper says the fact that the Boston Marathon bombing suspects were not licensed to have the firearms they used in shootouts with police “will likely add fuel to calls for tougher gun laws.” Given that the pair broke the law by possessing firearms, exactly what new law would have changed anything? ... Rep. Mike Kelly, R-Pa., continues to spearhead the fight against the odoriferous U.N. Arms Trade Treaty. His efforts now center around denying funding for implementation should it be ratified by the Senate and signed by the president. After all, defending American freedom and sovereignty is a most worthy fight to pick. ... The Examiner of Washington reports that Honeywell, a $25 million beneficiary of President Obama's “stimulus” program, created all of 10 jobs. It's the latest example of “progressive” economics. ... Monday, of course, was Earth Day. And Secretary of State John Kerry used it as an opportunity to shill for measures to counter “climate change.” Said Mr. Kerry, “The science is screaming at all of us and demands action.” Actually, the science is screaming because it's being tortured for political ends.
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 â 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.