Pittsburgh Laurels & Lances
Published: Thursday, June 27, 2013, 8:55 p.m.
Laurel: To the Pittsburgh Pirates. They enter their weekend series with the Brewers of Milwaukee as one of the two top teams — not just in the Central Division of the National League but in all of Major League Baseball. The Battlin' Bucs share the league's top spot with the St. Louis Cardinals. Could “There's always next year” be here? We'll hold off on singing “The Bucs are goin' all the way.” But we will offer a hearty “Let's go, Bucs!”
Lance: To UPMC. In a counterlawsuit, the medical giant claims that a City of Pittsburgh lawsuit challenging its tax-exempt status violates its constitutional rights to due process and equal protection under the law. If that's the case, no lawsuit ever could be filed against any entity — including UPMC's countersuit against the city. UPMC certainly has a warped view of the law.
Laurel: To Luke Ravenstahl. Pittsburgh's mayor declined an invitation from the United States Olympic Committee to submit a bid for the city to host the 2024 Summer Games. Considering the erstwhile Steel City would have to raise up to $3 billion as the host city — and that's simply nuts — Mr. Ravenstahl made a wise move.
Here it comes: The Pittsburgh Three Rivers Regatta bows Tuesday next on and along the shores of the city's three rivers. It's a grand three-day event of surf and turf happenings built around Pittsburgh's Independence Day festivities. Here's to a safe celebration.
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.
- ‘Merit selection’ for judges? No thank you
- Corrections reinvention
- Anti-fracking scandal: More junk ‘science’
- Pittsburgh Tuesday takes
- Selling GM stock: A $10 billion public hook
- Accord in Geneva: Smelly side deals, too
- Alle-Kiski Tuesday Takes
- Greensburg Tuesday takes
- Thanksgiving 2013: Pausing in unison
- The coming holidays: Get out & enjoy
- Operation Santa Claus: Sustenance for all