If after 50 f'n pages, you are still trying to engage SA; YOU ARE DUMB!!

As a side note, I was amused by how that ATMB thread Starving Artist started to complain about how he’d been insulted was being used as a flimsy excuse for people to insult Starving Artist in ATMB.

I presented it, you fucking utter retard. In Pennsylvania, it is per se (that means automatically, CSI-boy) illegal, unlawful, forbidden to:

One could argue all day (no one couldn’t) about how a naked old man grinding on a naked little boy in a shower was, or was not, “likely to offend, affront, or alarm,” (no one couldn’t, it is more than likely, it is guaranteed), except one need not indulge in such a stupid dumb fuckery. Because, unlike in many instances, Real Life steps in and solves the “likely” question: McQueary was “shocked” and “distraught” at seeing Sandusky’s showering lessons. That more than meets offend affront or alarm.

Naked man-on-boy showering contact is, per se, illegal under the Pennsylvania statute. That is a law that you now “know of.” You are forbidden from further denying that you “know of” such law.

Now you’ll “retract” (these things write themselves)? Didn’t think so.

You dumb, sick fucker.

I am going to admit it: I have no purpose in this post except to bump this disgustingness to the top. No other justification, no argument to add. I just think, having been victimized myself by reading this perversion, I’m going to drag the rest of you down with me. Sorry.

I had in mind an exit strategy for Sandusky that he was, of course, not man enough to take. Neither will this creep be, I fear, much though it would be the best of a bad situation.

Huerta88, your “poll” in IMHO has shown you are completely disingenuous.

Thus unfortunately, you are making SA look good.

And the title of the Grossest Partisan Poster on the SDMB goes to…

*:::drum roll:::: *

Starving Artist – who’s also managed to come in second and third in said category.

Congrats.

Nope. Far from it. If nothing else, I get the laffs of seeing his single lonesome vote for the most contorted unrealistic purported hearing of “fondling.”

The fact that I have a point to prove (here) has nothing to do with the fact that I posted a neutral (and understood-clearly-by-95%-of-the-readers) poll (there) to gather anecdotal data in support of the (hardly needs to be said, if SA were not a perverted stubborn lunatic) modest proposition that fondling means, and always means, molesting to 99% of everyone in America, and Paterno gets no out on some imaginary distinction-without-a-difference between “fondling” and “sexual contact.”

What’s your problem, anyway?

You posted a disingenuous “poll” with a OP that is basically a flat out lie in IMHO in order to prove some sort of point here in the PIT.

SA is a troll at times, no doubt (but sometimes a fun troll) . You are a liar & a pissant. At least SA is honest in his strange opinions.

First of all, dumbass, my OP is posed as a hypothetical. To the extent I rely on the results of the poll here, it is my job to convince the posters here that the hypothetical maps to the actual facts here and has relevance (hint: I’m not too worried about my ability to do so convincingly).

Second of all, if the hypothetical in my poll were to be applied/compared to the facts of the PSU case (which you claim you haven’t followed, so I don’t know how you’d know), which part is a “flat out lie?”

Don’t be a dumbass unless you’re prepeared to back it up, and think twice about supporting one of the sickest fuckers to make himself known in these parts.

Since this thread is, at this point, basically identical to the Paterno pit thread, I’m going to close this one. Feel free to carry any on-going arguments over to that thread.