Share This Page

Shameful GOP display

| Friday, Oct. 12, 2012, 9:00 p.m.

On Oct. 3, the GOP members of the state House refused to vote on debating House Resolution 520, adjourned the House and fled the floor. HR 520 calls for a full investigation by the U.S. Justice Department of the state Attorney General's Office's investigation and handling of the Jerry Sandusky case.

I would love to hear our local representatives' statements as to why they fled the floor instead of standing up for our children. It's a shameful display and one that shouldn't go unnoticed by voters in the upcoming election.

These “representatives of the people” chose to defend Gov. Corbett and what may or may not have been done by his office over the welfare of the children of Pennsylvania when he was attorney general. I'm certainly no defender of Penn State, but it's funny how all these same people were so up in arms over getting every single person at Penn State who had any involvement whatsoever.

Now, all of a sudden, when the investigation turns toward the governor, these same folks don't want to hear any more about it. You either want to know the whole truth or you don't — which is it? This is an indefensible and shameful display by our representatives.

Bob Rendar

Hempfield

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.