Alle-Kiski Laurels & Lances
By The Tribune-Review
Published: Thursday, Jan. 30, 2014, 8:55 p.m.
Lance: To the Burrell School Board. Board members flat out told their counterparts at New Kensington-Arnold there was no way in hell they would meet to discuss merging the districts. That was decidedly impolite. Having a sit-down in no way obligated Burrell to do anything. Maybe they could have found some common ground for reducing costs for equipment and supplies, shared resources or discovered they could offer a class or two to students at both districts that neither does now. Several members said that now isn't the time to discuss merger. We guess when Harrisburg calls and says, “Merge. Now,” that will be the time.
Lance: To the WPIAL. The Leechburg Area sports teams almost jumped last year from the WPIAL to District 6, a decision driven by its terrible showing in recent years in football. But the school board ultimately had the district stay put. So how did the WPIAL say thanks? By putting the Blue Devils in the same Class A football conference with perennial powers Clairton, Jeannette, Greensburg Central and Monessen. Ouch! Look for a revived effort to bail from the WPIAL.
Lance: To hypocrisy. If you want to go to one of Pennsylvania's casinos and drop $10,000, the state will smile and nod in approval. But that “buck-a-square” Super Bowl board at your local VFW or Moose club? The state police said this week they'll be vigilant in busting the club if they find a board there. Illegal gambling, say the state boys. Idiotic, says us.
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.
- Sunday pops
- Florida’s midterm harbinger: Democrats’ losing hand
- The Box
- The ol’ switcheroo
- Saturday essay: An Irish stew
- Armstrong’s nursing home dilemma: Tough to buck trend
- Pittsburgh Laurels & Lances