ShareThis Page
Pittsburgh Laurels & Lances |

Pittsburgh Laurels & Lances

Steven Adams | Trib Total Media
The historic Garden Theater block along North Avenue in the Allegheny City Central section of Pittsburgh's North Side, June 15, 2015.

Laurel: To the big soccer match. The United States, this year’s World Cup champion, hosts Costa Rica on Sunday in a women’s exhibition match at Heinz Field. And this is no little deal. Tens of thousands of tickets have been sold. Let’s just hope those PennDOT detours, an unmitigated disaster last weekend, don’t spoil it all.

Lance: To failed justice. Former Washington County Common Pleas Judge Paul Pozonsky has been paroled after 30 days in jail (with most of that in work release). Mr. Pozonsky was convicted of obstructing justice and theft for stealing cocaine that was evidence in cases he heard. Many of those he sentenced were not so coddled. The phrase “miscarriage of justice” doesn’t do this miscarriage justice.

Laurel: To Mt. Lebanon. It’s on a deer-culling roll. Fast on the hooves of approving a bow cull, it now will consider a gun cull to thin its out-of-control deer herd. And that’s good news for the ecosystem and motorists. It’s also a victory for common sense and a defeat for the forces of ignorance.

Lance: To government “development.” A decade after it was seized in an eminent domain battle, the North Side’s Garden Theater still hasn’t been developed into anything. Officials tout how the theater is being sold to yet another developer. Perhaps, again, at a fraction of the initial cost to taxpayers? Talk about a cluster-cluck.

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.