Pittsburgh has much to tout, so why the ridicule?

In reference to Rob Rogers' May 2 "Brewed on Grant": We understand that it is an editorial cartoonist's nature to be cynical, but why can't Mr. Rogers, for once, recognize the multitude of positive attributes that Pittsburgh has going for it? Together, these attributes have enabled Pittsburgh to earn well-deserved recognition, such as being named "America's Most Livable City." While outsiders recognize what a great city we have, we remain our own worst critics.

We should take pride in this honor, just as we should in being named the "Best Arts Destination" among mid-sized cities this year by American Style magazine. We're pleased that such an esteemed publication as Forbes magazine recognizes the city's transformation by ranking Pittsburgh among the Top 10 of the "World's Cleanest Cities." This kind of recognition helps to erase the negative stereotypes (perpetuated by cartoons such as this one) of the Pittsburgh of yesteryear.

We take pride in knowing that Pittsburgh was also named one of North America's top three "Cities of the Future" by an affiliate magazine of the Financial Times. The city also ranks among "America's 50 Hottest Cities" for business relocation and expansion, according to Expansion Management magazine. We've got one of the best ballparks in the nation, according to Major League Baseball, another well-deserved distinction of which we should be proud.

Thanks to our proximity to top-ranked engineering schools and other factors, Pittsburgh ranks seventh for "Top Cities for Geeks" by Wired magazine. Our marriage and divorce rates earn us the No. 1 place in the country for baby boomers to find love and keep it.

Perhaps Mr. Rogers would better serve Pittsburgh residents by embracing these well-deserved honors instead of ridiculing them.

JEFFREY W. LETWIN
Chairman, VisitPittsburgh
Downtown

---

Faculty unfairness

In response to the May 4 article "Faculty Letter Takes Bush to Task": I am well aware of the liberal bias that permeates academia today; however, the faculty letter concerning President Bush's commencement address at St. Vincent College surprised even me.

I understand disagreement over the Iraq war, as mistakes have obviously been made, but I have a problem when the faculty of an accredited college criticizes the president over the economy, the environment and free speech. The economy isn't even arguable. We have historically low unemployment rates, increased personal income, a record stock market and low interest rates. What aspect of this economy concerns them?

The environment is questionable at best. Contrary to the media and the leftist elite, there is no consensus on global warming. Two years after Katrina (a storm supposedly caused by global warming), we are now told wind shear caused by global warming could cause fewer hurricanes. More hurricanes mean global warming; fewer hurricanes mean global warming. Convenient.

As for free speech, the faculty's letter welcomed protesters. The purpose of the protesters? Simple. Take attention away from the president. Limit the effect of his speech, if you will. I wonder, if Al Gore were speaking, would the professors invite protesters who disagree with his controversial view of global warming? Doubtful.

By taking such a strong stand on such questionable topics, the faculty out themselves as the leftist tools they are. It's sad that we spend so much money to send our children to a college, not to be educated, but to be indoctrinated.

JONATHAN V. JONES
Irwin

---

They taught us well

As a member of the St. Vincent College Class of 1969, I write in support of the recent letter of protest issued by 29 members of the faculty. Having had my St. Vincent experience during a time when our country was embroiled in another highly controversial war, I find this visit by the president to be especially troubling. Thirty-eight years ago, we were challenged to look at both sides of the discussion, yet the school never allowed itself to be caught up in the political rhetoric. So, I am very sad to see it doing just that at this time.

Of course I have heard all the denials from the college administration that there is nothing political about this and that it is all being done with the best interests of the graduates and the college in mind. Well, I do hope that the folks making these statements realize that St. Vincent educated us in such a fashion that we can listen to such statements and readily recognize them to be as phony and absurd as they are.

TOM HEMPEL
Brighton Heights

---

Our ailing street

It was refreshing to see that many City Council members and Democratic committee members will have their streets repaved this year ("Peduto Pushing for Politics-Free Paving," April 24; "Council Will Decide Best Path for Paving," May 3) -- especially when the city street I live on is in deplorable condition and has never been paved.

The residents on my street would be happy if they would just send a street cleaner down once in a while to remove the weeds that pop up between the cobblestones and curbs or a brush cutter to take back the areas that do not have house fronts -- but, of course, those machines might fall into a sinkhole on the street and be frozen there when the city "forgets" to salt us next winter, so never mind.

JEFFREY YOT
Beechview

---

False about Israel

In the May 1 article "Olmert Says He Won't Quit Over Lebanon War" (May 1) the statement is made that, as a response to the thousands of missiles launched by Hezbollah and Hamas into Israel last summer, "Israel's bombardment of civilian targets in retaliation was strongly condemned by the international community." That statement contains both truth and falsehood.

It is a patently false implication that Israel deliberately targeted civilians (unlike Hezbollah, Hamas and Islamic extremist suicide/homicide bombers who do deliberately target civilians). Yes, civilians were injured and killed, but by accident, as unfortunate bystanders and as captive human shields for Hezbollah and Hamas weapons and installations.

It's true that Israel's self-defense actions were "strongly condemned by the international community." The community referred to is the same international community (comprised mostly of Arab states and others who hate Israel and the West) that condemns Israel for anything it does.

AL K. DeROY
Wilkins

---

The region is hurt by the delay in the smoking ban

My wife and I moved here from Boston a year ago so that she could finish her physician training at UPMC. Massachusetts is a smoke-free state and it was wonderful. We both lived there before it went smoke-free and it was not wonderful. The debacle that is the ongoing stymie to the proposed smoking ban is an embarrassment to Pittsburgh ("County's Smoking Ban Halted by Court," May 2).

First, the ban must apply to all bars and restaurants, not just ones that have significant revenue from food. This is the only way to be fair, especially in the South Side with its high density of potential exemptions.

Second, the argument that proprietors would lose business is completely unfounded. We do not patronize 90 percent of bars and restaurants in Pittsburgh because we cannot stand the noxious smoke. If the ban is implemented, businesses would retain their current clientele, as they have in all other regions of the country where there is a smoking ban, and would gain our business as well.

Also, shame on UPMC for not being a stronger and much more vocal advocate for this incredibly obvious and critical health issue. How about taking down some of those "We are among the nation's best hospitals" banners and replacing them with "Go smoke-free, Pittsburgh!"?

DAMON DEMADY
Squirrel Hill

---

A little pleasure

To smoke or not to smoke, that is the question ("Ask Nonsmokers," May 3 letters). As for the answers, there are plenty on both sides of the issue. There is no doubt that cigarettes can be addictive and unhealthy. I must also agree with the older smokers who remind us that when they started to smoke, nobody knew cigarettes were addictive and unhealthy except perhaps the tobacco companies. Shortly thereafter, they were hooked without even realizing it.

They married, became parents, worked and led productive lives. They enjoyed watching Edward R. Murrow, the epitome of sophistication, on TV, broadcasting with his ever-present cigarette.

Fast-forward to 2007. They are now grandparents, even great-grandparents, and mostly widows and widowers. If they have been lucky enough to have found a bar or a restaurant in which to meet old friends, how can anyone dismiss them and whatever little pleasures they have? How many politicians are willing to see to it that oldsters can still light up if they choose, in a bar or restaurant or, yes, even a bingo game?

It might be a challenge for many of us to think about others first. Try it. You might be glad you did.

RUTH RUPP
Lawrenceville

---

We welcome your letters. Please include your name, address and phone number, and send to Letters to the Editor, 34 Blvd. of the Allies, Pittsburgh 15222. E-mail letters to letters@post-gazette.com or fax to 412-263-2014. Letters should be 250 words or less, original and exclusive to the Post-Gazette. All letters are subject to editing for length, clarity and accuracy and will be verified before being published.

---