Krieger's bad choices II
By The Tribune-Review
Published: Sunday, April 7, 2013, 9:00 p.m.
As a Christian, a taxpayer and a veteran who still fights to protect our Constitution, I am tired of our local typical politicians. The failures of state Rep. Tim Krieger, R-Delmont, who claims to be a protector of the Constitution and a fiscal conservative, continue at the expense of taxpayers.
His new “anonymous lawsuit” bill will strip concerned citizens of their protections and rights, while costing taxpayers more in lawsuits. His “Corbett” budget votes have already stripped our children of education and health-care funding, and his new law would no longer protect a child's name in a lawsuit or their parents' names. For someone who is a lawyer, he fails to see the unconstitutionality of his own bill. If he wants openness, let's look at his record.
In almost six years, he has yet to pass a single bill of his own. Not one! Here's a list of what he has done: one less jail for criminals, which lost jobs for hardworking local families; higher unemployment; watered-down education; a blank check for Gov. Corbett — and, like President Obama, he wants government to tell women and families what health-care decisions to follow.
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.
- Saved her life
- Lebo’s coyotes
- Fix icy hazard on Rt. 66
- Zealots’ tactic
- We pay to keep poor warm
- Weakness shows
- Corbett’s budget claim