Greensburg Laurels & Lances
By The Tribune-Review
Published: Thursday, Dec. 12, 2013, 8:55 p.m.
An observation: There is no consolation in using private money from the state-run Neighborhood Partnership Program to erect a barrier around the long-shuttered, deteriorating Monsour Medical Center and to raze adjacent buildings. Instead of devoting that money to a worthwhile public need, it's earmarked to mop up the mess left behind by Monsour Medical Center Inc. because the hospital's rightful owners have eluded that responsibility. And that's inexcusable.
On the “Watch List”: The Greensburg Catholic Diocese. First came outrage from some parents over the firing of Denise Myers as principal of Greensburg Central Catholic Junior-Senior High School. Then came word from the diocese in October that an outside audit confirmed “financial irregularities,” which still haven't been detailed. Now a statement from Bishop Lawrence E. Brandt informs that Trent Bocan no long serves as superintendent of schools for the diocese. At some point in this unfolding melodrama, the diocese owes an explanation to the parents and parishioners who financially support its schools.
Laurel: To Fayette County Judge Nancy Vernon. A sweetheart house-arrest deal offered to a shop foreman, accused with three other ex-employees of stealing $600,000 in stainless steel from a former employer, didn't cut it with the judge. She rejected this “slap on the wrist,” noting that Robert Showman's alleged involvement could have bankrupted the company. The proposed plea bargain would have been a gross injustice.
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.
- ‘Un-American’? That’s Harry Reid, the Senate’s lowly smear artist
- Market perversions: Chrysler retreats
- The market speaks: Cadillac dealers reject another electric folly
- Sunday pops
- The new SAT: Rigor gets a pass
- ‘Climate change’: Politics over science
- THE BOX