ShareThis Page

Laurels & Lances

| Friday, Nov. 25, 2011

Laurel: To Jake Haulk. The president of the Allegheny Institute for Public Policy continues to do what he does best -- slay shibboleths. His latest effort calls into serious question the conclusion of an American Public Transportation Association "study" that says Pittsburgh motorists could save $9,201 a year by taking Port Authority Transit. As per usual, the facts show the APTA hyped the numbers. Thanks for the reality check, Dr. Haulk.

Lance: To the Allegheny and Westmoreland Intermediate units. Stung by the growing exodus of taxpaying public school customers to charter schools (which typically consume a fraction of the educratic establishment's per-pupil expenditure), they're planning to use more tax dollars to begin an advertising campaign to spin public education's victims. What a racket.

On the "Watch List": The Christmas shopping season begins in earnest today. It's what has come to be known as Black Friday. The deals are said to be legion. And the expected hordes of shoppers likely will try the patience of just about everyone. Be careful out there. After all, you need to be around for Cyber Monday, right?

Here we go: The 7-3 Steelers hope to stay in the playoff hunt on Sunday in Kansas City. Former Pitt quarterback Tyler Palko will start again for the Chiefs. Pittsburgh quarterback Ben Roethlisberger is nursing a broken thumb on his throwing hand. Nonetheless, he vows to "git er done," so to speak. Here's to sticking the fork in K.C.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using 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.