ShareThis Page

Sunday pops

| Sunday, May 21, 2006

The Hill newspaper reports that Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., will be repaying junior colleague Rick Santorum for the latter's 2004 support in Mr. Specter's razor-close primary win over then-Congressman Pat Toomey. If we were Sen. Santorum, we'd say, "Thanks, but no thanks." ... Heritage Foundation scholar Bridget Wagner says the lesson from Pennsylvania voters ousting more than a dozen pay-jackers last week is to "get engaged." She says so many upstarts upsetting so many entrenched pols "will give encouragement to those who might have been tempted to sit on the sidelines." And new, truly conservative blood is exactly what the Pennsylvania Republican Party needs right now. ... Sidney Blumenthal, the liberal vomiteer who once advised President Bill Clinton, equates conservative calls to crack down on illegal aliens to "a virulent nationalism." Leave it to a former Clintonite to attempt to redefine one of the building blocks of the American republic -- the rule of law. ... Speaking of Boy Bill, Canada Free Press columnist John Burtis likens Mr. Clinton to those fast-talking itinerant attorneys on the stump: "Do you know why they have rubber pockets in their suits• So they can steal the soup." It's a brilliant assessment.

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.

click me