ShareThis Page
Sunday pops |

Sunday pops

| Sunday, March 30, 2003 12:00 a.m

  • Well, DUH! : The Marines escorted reporter Philip Smucker back to Kuwait Thursday. The Pentagon says a package that Mr. Smucker, an independent scribe, filed with CNN on Wednesday gave, “in real time, positions, locations, and activities of units engaged in combat.” Loose lips sink ships.

  • Coors constituency: Gov. Ed Rendell made a serious mistake when he attempted to leverage state legislators with his two-part budget plan. And he might just have made a fatal mistake, politically speaking, with his proposal to thrust his hand deep into the pocket of Joe Six-Pack. Mr. Rendell wants to raise the tax on a gallon of beer — by 210.5 percent. The Barley and Hops Fairy won’t pay that increase; the guys and gals buying a draft will. And they vote.

  • Bogus comparisons: One of the defenses guys like Fast Eddie and his shills (including the Toledo, Ohio, Post-Gazette) use in advocating tax increases is that, hey, compared to other states, Pennsylvania’s tax burden isn’t that bad. Oh, spare us. Taxes in this nation, as a percent of the economy, are at all-time highs at the state and national levels. The intellectual dishonesty of public larcenists knows no bounds.

  • Peter Propaganda: Speaking of shills, the war isn’t even two weeks old and already Peter Arnett is shilling for the Iraqi government. When a blast rocked a Baghdad market last week, killing 14, Mr. Arnett, formerly of CNN (and now offering cutting-edge reports for National Geographic and NBC), was quick to spread the Iraqi line that the explosion came from a U.S. cluster bomb. There’s growing evidence that the blast came from an Iraqi misguided missile. Peter, Peter, Peter.

    Categories: News
  • 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.