Okay. I suppose.
I was going to go with, “Why, were you fucking a ten year old boy while eating it?” but then, “couth,” has never been my middle name.
If you think this is all about you, fine. Some of us still believe the central issue of this thread is that Joe Paterno’s inaction (or deliberate cover-up) allowed a child molester to remain free for ten years and claim at least one more victim.
Bullshit. Well, since the current percentage of posters who think this was legit appears to be zero, I guess any amount would be much higher.
I certainly have never said that frottage is fine and dandy. Further, if the board’s early lunatics had been lambasting Paterno for covering up for Sandusky’s having committed frottage I’d have had little reason to argue against anything but the lack of evidence for his having done so.
But nooooo! They knew, as do you and I perfectly well, that anal rape is a much more traumatic, painful, humiliating and heinous crime than mere frottage, and in their frantic lunatic passion to pin Sandusky’s wrongdioings on Joe Paterno and Penn State and cast them in the worst light possible, they immediately seized upon the rape scenario and used it and the pain and suffering it allegedly induced to make Joe Paterno’s fictional crimes seem as horrible as possible.
So from my standpoint it’s simply a matter of what was the truth rather than what would be the most effective weapon to smear Joe Paterno truthful or not. Again, if people had merely been honest I’d have had far less to contend with, and far less reason to contend with it.
Can’t say as we can as there’s no record of his ever having held his tongue before. Voluminous grand jury testimony exists to this very fact. Why you insist on demonstrating your dishonest and duplicitous nature in this way is a mystery to me, but one that I’m quite happy to see exists.
And now, it’s off to burn some calories. Just remember:
No rape.
No Joe Paterno evidence.
No “Winning!”
WON!
There’s just no way around it, kids. 
You know, if your claim is that exaggeration is some sort of major offense in your book, you maybe shouldn’t employ it so much yourself.
Poll created.
Enjoy!
Well, then we’ve established Paterno was guilty, then. SA is just arguing over exactly what he was guilty of.
If there was the merest shred of evidence to back up this “belief” you might want to do yourself a favor and post it.
And now I’m out. Really and truly and absolutely this time. I shall not allow you to derail yet another beautiful day of bikeage and the wind is already beginning to pick up.
Chow! 
Wow, that lake is getting smaller every day, isn’t it?
Well, let’s see…
-
Sandusky was convicted of a felony for the incident with victim #2 in the Penn State locker room.
-
That conviction was based on the eyewitness testimony of McQueary. That testimony would have been available to prosecutors ten years ago, had Paterno chosen to make state law enforcement aware of it.
-
Among Sandusky’s convictions are those pertaining to victim #1 for crimes which took place at least three years after McQueary’s report to Paterno.
And if SA’s “sausage” were buried up to the “eggs” in a child’s anus, Paterno would’ve waved hello and gone about his business being a Man of Integrity.
The fact that JoePa was informed of what was at the very least extremely inappropriate behavior going on involving a child, and chose not to inform law enforcement. That’s it. He should have told the police (as McQueary should have, and higher up that JoePa did tell should have, etc).
…and closed. Nice try, anyway.
Huh, Idle Thoughts killed that enthusiasm faster than Romney at a rally.
“and not only did they find the threads they created unwelcome by the mods…”
AHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
And so we mark another one down in the “Starving Artist was right!” column!
Hoo, hoo, boy…the hits, they just keep on coming!
I’m out of here, bozos! 
Okay, I changed my mind. You *should *be banned because you’re a fucking idiot.
I like how you characterise the 1998 incident. The jury you place so much faith in concluded based on this testimony that said shower hug constituted unlawful contact with minors. Choice quote:
Just four years before the incident involving victim one.
Bullshit. We were talking about how you’re now the biggest joke in the history of this place. Then you tried to deflect by claiming only 15-20 people were against you, and used this thread as your cite (without even counting, apparently). Most people gave up on your stupidity long ago, and aren’t bothering to waste their time with a moron like you after 96 pages.
I’m shaking in my boots.
You’re the one who wants to quantify the situation, you total fucking waste of air. Now you’re too chickenshit to see. Don’t call me an idiot for taking you up on it, especially not after typing the word “mmkay” dozens of times in a single thread. That alone should remove all doubt.
You’re going down, bitch.
Once again, he’s quitting the thread!!
What Idle said was that I’m free to pit you. I don’t want to pit you. It would be like taking candy from a baby. And, with you in this analogy being a baby, I’m afraid you’d use it to justify fucking yourself. Which is more than I could handle, frankly.