Pittsburgh Laurels & Lances
Laurel: To the Pittsburgh Pirates. The Battlin' Bucs exceeded all expectations but their own this season. They broke an embarrassing string of 20-consecutive losing seasons. They made it to the postseason. They won a wild-card game against Cincinnati. And then they took perhaps the toughest team in Major League Baseball, the Cardinals, to a deciding fifth game in the divisional series before a disappointing loss Wednesday night. But in all they did, they did it with class, from Manager Clint Hurdle to every player and every member of the support staff. Yes, the Pirates are back. But they'll be back even better next season.
Lance: To Veterans Affairs. It promised a review of the outrageous $63,000 bonus given to departing regional director Michael Moreland at the height of the Legionella scandal. But now it's acting as if the point is moot, given Mr. Moreland's convenient “retirement.” But it's not, not by a long shot. And it's painfully obvious that more heads must roll to put a stop to this cluster-clucking arrogance.
Lance: To the Steelers. On Thursday, the NFL franchise hosted a blatantly partisan event at the publicly financed Heinz Field. It was a rah-rah-sis-boom-bah affair promoting ObamaCare, that mess of a law that fully half of the American people oppose and has been front and center in the government shutdown. The Steelers don't own Heinz Field, taxpayers do. And it's a nose-thumbing the latter should not forget.
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.