Pittsburgh Tuesday takes
Poor form: When the Pittsburgh Penguins fired General Manager Ray Shero a few weeks ago, they gave the clear impression that it would be up to a new GM to determine the fate of Head Coach Dan Bylsma. Well, Mr. Bylsma was fired last week by new GM Jim Rutherford after Bylsma was left to twist in the wind on a burning rope for three weeks. And it's more than suggested from Mr. Rutherford's statements that “his” decision was a fait accompli. Why play such a game?
A wise move: The City of Pittsburgh's decision to drop its bid to host the 2016 Democratic National Convention is a positive sign that more astute heads are running things these days. While the rah-rah-sis-boom-bahers were pushing for the city to make a formal bid at all costs, the likely $60 million price tag was a bar too high at this point in time for a city on the rebound but still attempting to work its way out of state receivership.
Serving a need: Allegheny County's Kane Regional Centers soon will have a second 45-bed unit devoted to “memory care.” That covers ailments such as Alzheimer's and other forms of dementia. A similar unit has been open in Glen Hazel since 2000. The new center, awaiting state approval, will be at the Kane facility in Scott, filling a vacant wing. While the need for such care is a sad sign of the times, it's a positive sign that such care increasingly is available.
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.