Category: default || By jt3y

Where, oh where, will the nasty geese of Renzie Park go? Doesn't anyone think about the poor geese?

You see, as Jonathan Barnes writes in the Post-Gazette, Lake Emilie is being dredged and cleaned "in accordance with a Department of Environmental Protection mandate given to the city about a year ago, Mayor James Brewster said."

The spillway dam at the end of the lake is being reconstructed, and new fish beds will be installed in the middle of the lake and near the dam, where the lake bottom will be dredged to 12 feet to allow the water to flow more freely and to give more room for the fish to proliferate, Brewster said.

According to Barnes, the fish are being scooped up out of Lake Emilie and relocated by the Fish and Boat Commission, while city police are looking for a catch of their own: A gun that was allegedly used in a crime and thrown into the lake afterward.

In last night's Daily News, Josh Yohe reported that a minor-league pro basketball team --- the "Pitt Bulls" --- is scheduled to move to Our Fair City, and will be playing its home games at Penn State McKeesport Campus. A press conference was set for today. (The article doesn't seem to be online.)

(Ed. Note: This entry has been edited to remove incorrect information.)

Over in North Huntingdon, Michelle Brokenbek writes in the Norwin Star, there were some "unusual words" at a planning commission meeting: "trust, faith and integrity." (Kind of a shame that those words are considered unusual, which is not a reflection on North Huntingdon Township's government ... at least in my experience.)

Developer Bob Shuster is giving his personal pledge that a new residential plan on the grounds of the Lincoln Hills Country Club will be "aesthetically attractive," Brokenbek reports:

With just a concept plan presented at this stage of application, the planning commission would have to take the builder's word in how the prime real estate would be developed. The board would have to trust, said Allen Cohen, planning director.

"What if you die?" asked commission member Stump.

Shuster replied that his two sons and a daughter are very involved in the daily operation of his business RWS and they hold the same ethics. "They'll be around in 30, 40 years," Shuster said projecting faith, which Cohen also said would be needed toward the project that will take three to four years to build out.

"Trust, faith and integrity" should be the norm in government --- and in all human interactions --- not the exception. But that's just me; I could be wrong.

...

Now, speaking of "faith" ....

OK. I promised I wasn't going to write about national politics again for a while. This is the Tube City Almanac, after all, not the ... um ... the something else.

So skip this part if you like, and I'll see you Friday.

"Alert Reader" responded to Wednesday's rant, which was a screed bordering on a "tirade." (He calls it "atypical" for me, and I appreciate that.) Staying up all night to watch the election returns come in can make one ... erm ... cranky.

I was venting some frustration over Bush, who I think has been a mediocre President, and Kerry, who I think would have been a mediocre President. Your indulgence and tolerance is appreciated.

Anyway, here's part of Alert's comments:

"Four more years of 'faith-based' policies that fly in the face of science, reality and common sense?"

Come on, now, do you really want to go there? 90 percent of the American people claim to believe in God, the vast majority of them in the Christian God of the Bible. The name of God, in a general sense, is invoked in many of the founding documents of this nation and, for that matter, by the Supreme Court and Congress every day they are in session. ...

Don't we all get our instructions directly from God? If not, we should. The Ten Commandments would be a good place to start. And I believe Jesus said the greatest commandment was to love God and to love one another - also a great idea. Whether you believe in Jesus as Deity or not, I think that's sound advice. And while I am not a Buddhist or Confucian, there is some fine moral material to be found there, too.

I've written here that I consider myself a practicing Catholic, so I'll count myself among that clear 90 percent majority of Americans with faith.

My problems with the President's "faith-based" policies is not that they're based in his faith in God, but rather his faith in his own, narrowly-constructed world. Confronted with evidence that conflicts with his own opinions, this President buries the evidence or fires the people who brought it to him. Good leaders don't do that.

I try to read stuff that I don't agree with, because I'm interested in hearing what the other side has to say. This President brags about how he doesn't pay attention to what his opponents think. So much for being a "uniter."

As for accepting the influence of God or a higher power, I myself do, and I have no problem with the President accepting a higher power. But the President's public statements to conservative Christian publications have gone beyond the idea that he gets inspiration from the Bible; instead, he's been implying that God wants him to be President and carry out his (or is that "His"?) policies. In other words, the President says that God has selected him to be President. Didn't the kings of Europe think the same thing?

Now, as someone told me last night (when she called me to vent her frustration with both Bush and Kerry), "Either (Bush) is lying or he's delusional." She, by the way, thinks Bush is lying, not crazy. I guess that's better. (The Republic has survived lies by Presidents before --- witness LBJ, Nixon, Clinton, etc.)

(I suppose there's a third possibility --- that God, in fact, has selected Bush to be President. How one proves or disproves that is, literally, a mystery.)

Alert continues:

(I) don't think the United States is suddenly a laughingstock because Bush was re-elected, except for those people on the other side who would have us believe it is so. And if there are issues here, I don't think the faith-based issues are the ones to be concerned about. They might just even be the solution.

The "laughingstock" comment was too harsh, and it isn't the word I should have used. But our traditional allies are watching us with utter dismay. One British newspaper asked this morning, "How can 59 million Americans be so dumb?" That's not an uncommon attitude right now, worldwide.

I don't think we should be paralyzed and afraid to act in our own best interests (Kerry's discussion of a "global test" made me cringe), but as the biggest, toughest kid on the block, we do need to act with a lot more care for our neighbors.

We also need to realize that we cannot afford to act unilaterally --- the world is too big, and our power and influence are spread too thin.

As for Michael Moore, he's a dingbat. And the ACLU ... well, they scare me sometimes, but the Patriot Act scares me more. Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Putting a tool as powerful as the Patriot Act into the hands of people who say they're divinely inspired makes me extremely nervous.

Anyway, to loosely quote Stephen Decatur: "My country --- may she always be in the right --- but my country, right or wrong." He's our President, and I respect that, even if I have grave reservations about his policies.

Another reader, Tom, writes:

My Democratic Party took another hit .... isn't it time we started asking some serious questions to our leadership and not blaming the opposition which is oh so easy to do these days. I would venture to say that some flexibility on one or several issues would have clenched the last two elections, however, we have let our party become what it is now and the sad part is that I don't know what it is.

I tend to agree. The national Democratic Party has insisted, for the last 20 years or so, on being the party of reaching a broad consensus, instead of setting clear goals and working toward them.

Try to get any 10 Americans to agree on what they want to eat for lunch, let alone what direction they think the country should take. It's borderline impossible.

President Bush and the national Republican Party, love 'em or hate 'em, tell you exactly where they stand, and what they're gonna do. Consensus? Phooey. You're with 'em, or you're against 'em. If you don't like the Republican Party, get out of the way.

The Democratic Party also insists on pandering to its far left wing, which wants to keep abortion legal right up until the eighth month after conception; and which is pushing for socialized medicine, among other things. Like most Americans of faith, I have some severe moral reservations about abortion, and socialized medicine would be a disaster.

In exchange for this pandering, what does the far left do for the party? It attacks the moderates, allows the party to be tarred as "too liberal," and ultimately doesn't vote for the party's candidates anyway --- they go off and support the Greens or Ralph Nader in the name of "making a protest vote." Gee, thanks, folks, for nothing.

As far as I'm concerned, it's long past time for the Democrats to write off the far left and set out some clear ideas of what kind of a party the Democratic Party is, and what it is not. Because I agree with you, Tom: I don't know where the heck the Democrats stand any more, and it's pretty obvious to me that 51 percent of the country doesn't know, either.

Thanks, Tom, and "Alert Reader," for writing.

Now, enough national politics! Back to the same old crap that you come here for: Half-witted local commentary and lame attempts at japery.