Anyone else find this gleeful cheering especially heinous in a thread about child molestation? Note – this is NOT an accusation of pedophilia. This is an accusation that Starving Artist is a callous, insensitive, bastard.
There’s something extremely disturbing about that. Not sexually disturbing, but no sense of compassion. No sort of empathy, or concern for any of the victims – whether the kid in the shower was one of them or not.
That is indeed an incredible coincidence!
That is so precious 
A. That was a looooong sec.
B. Let me guess, you only have a sec cause real life is beckoning?
:D:D:D
What a coincidence that NLP just logged out 
Sorry to disappoint but I’m female and post pubescent 
Oh, come on, now, Guinnypoo, that’s not very fair of you. I’m not being gleeful at child molestation and I’m pretty sure you know that. The subjects of my glee are the wrongheaded imbesiles and maroons who are to be found in abundance in this thread who have called me a pedophile and made many other stupid accusations and commments, and the reason for my glee is that finally after almost a year I can point to no evidence having surfaced to connect Joe Paterno to covering up any of Jerry Sandusky’s child abuse, and a jury rape verdict which proves that Joe Paterno is absolved of accusations that he knew about and covered up for a rape in the shower room. As you well know, you and these other maroons have cast many vile aspersions my way and called me many vile things and accused me of many vile things for nothing more than suggesting that for which I’ve now been proven right may be the case.
So hell to the yeah, I’m gonna delight in rubbing your noses in it!
Duh, duh, dut, dut, duh…I’m lovin’ it! (happy dance smilie)
And on preview: Don’t frown, EG, the offer stands.
And now I’m out again.
That is so sweet of you to offer, and I don’t want to hurt your feelings or anything…but I’m going to have to pass. It’s…it’s not you, it’s me. I mean you’re an “interesting” guy and all, it’s just that elderly perverts have just never been my type. Given our differences, I think I just want to be “friends”.
:D:D:D
my gf say you are a starving idiot…I guess that means another D vote
Penn State has a large senior-adult-ed program, does it? Or maybe they’re well-known for their massive “Steve Martin Impersonation Studies” department.
Are you assuming McQueary knew about this reputation before the 2001 incident, and thus was inclined to assume the worst in whatever it was he witnessed that day? I have a follow-up question, depending on your answer to this one.
Nope. You may think you did, but you didn’t. You’ve said things like “Sandusky was old so he couldn’t bend his knees”, and “a tall man can’t lower his pelvis enough”, but then you said that a tall person could in fact have sex in this position. The “too old to bend his knees” is patently ludicrous. You are cornered. You have no way out. In your fear, you will lash out like a honey badger.
But you have lost. You have lost.
I am victorious! You have as much as admitted that yes, it’s possible and plausible that Sandusky could have been raping that boy in that position. You’ve said nothing reasonable that could contradict that.
I AM VICTORIOUS!!!
Don’t know if you have noticed but we are not on a jury and this is not a trial. The only thing people are trying to refute is your assertions that it was impossible the rape happened. You know, the whole thing you set up an experment to prove? Paper towel tubes? Sound familiar? I know you will say “I never said that.” Then someone will quote where you said that. Then you will ignore it.
The Grand Jury said rape was probable. You said rape was impossible. You are wrong. That is all.
Now I am off to walk in the park, solve the housing crisis and cure cancer. But my sock will be here to answer any questions.
What if SA doesn’t know it’s a sock? What if SA is like Sybil or Tara and just goes into these trances where an alternate personality emerges? Maybe these “long bike rides” are just a euphemism?
Bad luck, SA, that your alternate personality is also an illogical douchebag. But you can only work with what’s available.
Evidently the first rule of anal rape club is talk at length about anal rape club.
You say shower hug, the jury says unlawful contact with minors, corruption of minors and endangering welfare of children. Must be the accent.
Right.
Not the first time I’ve had to fix an analogy, but it’s like someone heard the terrorists planning the 7/7 attack and coming to the conclusion that fewer people will die than on 9/11 so it’s not worth reporting.
Flipping through the internet and saw this interesting piece of history.
Wait, are al Qaeda the hiders or hidees of the Soap in this game? I’m so confused.
Colour me baffled why that would inspire expletive-laced anger instead of mild annoyance, unless Paterno was some kind of control freak who figured obedience was more important than results.
As an additional note, Sandusky’s privileges at Penn State were sharply curtailed after the second reported shower incident, weren’t they? Sounds like the staff at Penn knew he was doing something suspect - they just didn’t want him doing it on Penn grounds. I’m sure they figured (or at least crossed their fingers and hoped) that would be the end of it, as far as they were concerned.
Oh, well, I’m going to disagree with that opinion. I’ll propose an alternate one: that Starving Artist has, with this thread, found a more or less foolproof way to troll the shit out of persons he doesn’t like on this board, most of whom he has clashed with at some time or other in one of his endless political hijacks. This has gone far beyond any conceivable point that either side may make regarding Paterno; I am reminded, on both sides, of the old joke about the hunter and the bear that ends, “You’re not really here for the hunting, are you?”
I’ll admit I’ve been just as easily drawn into this blatant trollfest as anyone else, but whether S A happens to think so or not, in the reality that exists outside the Starving Artist distortion field, Sandusky remains convicted of having molested Victim #2, and both Penn State as an institution and Paterno as an individual have been sanctioned and disgraced for inadequate action in response to the allegations about Sandusky brought to their attention.
Well, in an effort to update the vote total since my last vote tally (#5046):
A-I have participated in the thread and I AGREE with Starving Artist’s arguments.
1, since NoLittlePlans expressed something akin to agreement with Starving Artist’s arguments, though not an explicit “A” vote (#5075), and Starving Artist has explicitly denied having an “A” vote (#5050)
B-I have participated in the thread and I DISAGREE with Starving Artist’s arguments.
35
C-I have NOT participated in the thread and I AGREE with Starving Artist’s arguments.
0
D-I have NOT participated in the thread and I DISAGREE with Starving Artist’s arguments.
14
I’m not including RaftPeople’s girlfriend’s “D” vote (#5200). The pace of voting has clearly slowed, so I guess we can call this election: 49 to 1, against.
For what it’s worth.
Okay… that clarifies things somewhat. I thought from the earlier description that Paterno was angry at McQueary, and I couldn’t figure out how the opposing coach was involved…
See, Starving Artist? Loach clarified matters with an actual cite, not stuff he just made up. See? See?
Video of the incident. Not that it has anything to do with the topic of the thread but I thought it was interesting to see Paterno and McQueary back in the day. And to see Saint Joe acting professional.
I gather not adding a touchdown to a game you’ve already effectively won is considered a courtesy.
Sort of like not interrupting somebody’s ongoing shower-time fun.