Primary 2013: Elect Sue Means
Voters in Allegheny County Council's 5th District have an opportunity on Tuesday to use their franchise to right a political wrong.
When marginal Republican Vince Gastgeb of Bethel Park, a 13-year veteran, left the council in February to do Democrat Chief Executive Rich Fitzgerald's bidding for the county Airport Authority, the GOP had the opportunity to name a replacement. It chose Krista Harris of Mt. Lebanon. Actually, she was a “chit choice” — a spoils appointment for the work of a political operative relative.
Voters in the district composed of Bethel Park, Bridgeville, Mt. Lebanon and Upper St. Clair deserve better than such rank political spoilage. That's why they should vote for Sue Means, 61, of Bethel Park.
Mrs. Means is no stranger to conservative political circles. Trained as a nurse, she's long been engaged in politics — she's run, twice unsuccessfully, for the Pennsylvania General Assembly — and in community service in the South Hills. She's a good, engaged and decent person. And if you don't know her personally, you'll recognize the name of her family's business, Brookside Lumber.
Because there's no Democrat in the primary, the winner of the GOP primary on Tuesday will serve out the remaining two years of Mr. Gastgeb's term. Fifth District voters would serve their best interests (and that of the political process) by rejecting representation by proxy and voting for representation by Sue Means.
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.
- Recasting the EPA: Devolving power to the states
- Another carbon credit scheme
- School funding canard: Money isn’t the answer
- Public records: Updates needed
- Rejecting Common Core: Flawed school standards
- More foreign aid is no answer to border problem
- Another LCB fumble: The status-quo stupor