ShareThis Page
The Thursday wrap |

The Thursday wrap

| Wednesday, June 4, 2014 9:00 p.m

Researchers are cautioning that a move away from handwriting could impair children’s motor skills and memory. Common Core de-emphasizes handwriting, reminds The New York Times. Next! … Democrat gubernatorial candidate Tom Wolf has a 20 percentage-point lead (51-31 percent) over Republican Gov. Tom Corbett in the first poll since last month’s primary. Indeed, it’s early. But what Camp Corbett has to find troubling is that only 59 percent of polled Republicans support him. Five months is a short time to win back your squandered base. … The Society of Professional Journalists says passage of a federal “shield law” for reporters “is about protecting the ability for (sic) Americans to receive the information they need to adequately self-govern.” How, pray tell, does effectively giving the federal government the de facto right to license journalists do that? …Opines The Toledo, Ohio, Block Bugler, in response to the United States swapping Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl for five Taliban prisoners: “The arguments against the exchange … are astonishing in their heartlessness at the plight of a young soldier.” The Bugler also says opposition is “clear evidence of the ends to which President Barack Obama’s opponents will go not to give his government credit for anything.” Conveniently missing from the editorial is the fact that Mr. Bergdahl appears to have gone AWOL and that those five Taliban “prisoners” are high-ranking members of the terrorist organization’s command structure. But, hey, why let the facts get in the way of blind adoration?

Categories: Editorials
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.