Share This Page

The Thursday wrap

| Wednesday, May 14, 2014, 9:00 p.m.

Robert Jubelirer has been elected to the Penn State board of trustees as a “reform” candidate. Talk about a gross perversion, considering the former president pro tempore of the Pennsylvania Senate, thrown out of office by voters in the May 2006 primary, was one of the architects of 2005's self-serving legislative pay raise. What an affront to the word “reform.” ... Former U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum, R-P.O. Box Verona, must be running for president again. After all, why would he go on CNN and pander to the left by saying conservatives should support an increase to the federal minimum wage to avoid alienating working-class voters. “I think you just have to be reasonable about it,” Mr. Santorum said. In Santorum's warped economic view, throwing “working-class voters” out of work — which is what such wage floors do — is “reasonable”? Good grief. ...The New York Times reports that the stubborn cool spring in the Midwest has produced the most dismal start to the nursery season in decades. Darn that “climate change.” ... The same New York Times was snookered — BIG TIME — by those handling Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Corbett's re-election campaign. It reported Sunday that Mr. Corbett has “honored a pledge not to raise taxes.” Never mind that whopping increase in the Oil Company Franchise Tax. But, hey, why let the facts get in the way of politics.

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.