I disagree. I don’t think ETF’s cats having access to handguns poses an imminent threat. They’re probably just trying to bag bigger game than mice and birds. It’s when they learn to forge your signature that you have to be careful.
I dunno, I once had a cat who was pretty crafty. She could probably have figured out how to make me buy gooshy fud and tuna. If she had thumbs. Which she didn’t. She was, however, one hell of a mouser.
Let’s split the difference on being on topic.
Nobody should be worried about cats with access to handguns.
Now, cats with cardboard tubes asking you to squat? Run, keep running, and don’t look back.
If you hadn’t declawed your cats, thus making you worse than Hitler on PCP, they wouldn’t have to resort to gunplay.
thsi iz edytedyfrdy we want moar gshyfud we wnt tuna we haz paswurds now tel strvin artis fill tubes with gshyfud no not thet we wnt tuna gshyfud send to edytedyfrdy now or etf gets it
Wait. They always told me that on the Internet, no one knows you’re a cat.
No, there’s definitely catlike typing. So, yes people can tell you’re a cat on the Internet.
Hey! I just learned how to use my voice to dictate a post! How cool is that?
Waaall, looky heyah! Ah kin use mah voice ta dictate one uh thet thar post thangies, too!
(Aww, sheckydarns. Now evvahbody gunnah know ah gots me a ack-cent!)
Many of you have already overdosed on the MSM’s “coverage” of the Sandusky Scandal by now.
But I’d implore you to check out this potential game-changer from, of all places, ESPN The Magazine:
**~ Politics in play at Penn State University ~
**
Exclusive artifacts of Interest:
[ul]
[li]“The Note”[/li][li]Paterno’s Notice of Termination[/li][li]Paterno’s Response to Sandusky Scandal (speech canceled by the BOT)[/li][/ul]
MSM
Really? My ass itches anybody uses “MSM”.
As for the scandal, none of that changes this basic fact:
Paterno, REGARDLESS OF THE FAILINGS OF ANYBODY ELSE AT PENN STATE, had an ethical and moral responsibility to do MORE than the legal minimum.
Those articles indicate that beyond Paterno losing his job, maybe other people should ALSO face some consequences. That doesn’t change the fact that Paterno was no simple scapegoat.
- 10,000.
That simple.
Maybe… but I’m not entirely “sold.”
After reporting McQueary’s concerns to his superior, AD Tim Curley, and VP Gary Schultz who served as the supervisor of the Penn State Police Force (managing a team of 500+ armed police officers), what more would you suggest Paterno should have done?
JVP followed up with Mike McQueary several times to make sure he was comfortable with the university’s response to the allegations against Jerry Sandusky, and every single time MM reassured JVP that he was indeed satisfied with the actions undertaken in the investigation.
Welcome to the party, you fucking idiot. Have you not seen that this thread is 71 goddamned child fucking pages long? Perhaps you’d like to peruse, oh I dunno, just the middle 30 before you come in here with that bullshit.
Jesus christ.
This is the thread that doesn’t end,
It just goes on and on, my friend …
I understand you’re tired of the story, but if you’re going to pretend there was nothing new or significant reported in the Politics in play at Penn State story, then you’re just not being honest with yourself or anyone here.
Did the article impact your perception of the dynamics at play behind the scenes of the Sandusky Scandal in any meaningful way? This is the first major media release that I’ve seen addressing a very strong undercurrent of suspicions that have been repeatedly expressed here at StraightDope and, well, pretty much everywhere else in America.
I say we dig Joe up and give him his job back.
I think we need a paper towel tube demonstration.
What makes these artifacts interesting, other than the fact that they’re pictured in the linked article?
Personally I don’t think the article sheds much new light on the issues discussed here. But that’s because I thought all along that the BOD decision to fire Paterno was nothing but CYA PR, as I’ve posted previously, so the article’s indication along similar lines is nothing new.
However, a lot of other people seemed to be pushing the notion that the BOD decision was some sort of independent validation of the charges against JP, and these people ought to read - and respond to - the article’s take on that.
No, my opinion on the matter hasn’t changed. Because you know what? Even if they had been looking for a reason to get rid of him, the one that ultimately resulted in him getting relieved was a pretty damn good reason in my book. It’s like saying, “well it’s not fair that they fired poor old Tom, they really had it out for him!” and it turns out the reason Tom was fired was for embezzling money. Well, yeah, maybe they did have it out for Tom. But embezzling money is still wrong, and it’s still why Tom was fired.
Bottom line: Paterno may have thought at the time he was doing the right thing, he admitted in retrospect that he wished he had done more, and we do too. Nothing in that article refutes any of those points.