A blog quoting an unnamed “friend” having unstated credentials? That’s your refutation? You are kidding, aren’t you?
… in a post by *another * such imaginary “friend”? 
I do so love irony.
His name or credentials don’t really matter if his words are correct, yes, no? After all, he’s addressing statements and information that we can all look at and assess for ourselves. Why are you attacking his credentials and identity rather than the perfectly valid points he’s made? If he’s wrong you should be able to show where easily enough.
It is easy to demonstrate how wrong you douchebags are. It has been done over and over.
What is impossible is to get you to understand or to stop being wrong and stupid.
I, for one, make it a point to never converse with dummies. They creep me out.
Oops, Too late.
Oh, I doubt that. I’d bet you read along and move your lips with every post you write.
“All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.” – Edmund Burke
That’s pretty much it, Starving Artist. If Paterno was a good man – and let’s say he was – he still did nothing. Fact. Period. Evil triumphed.
And if you’re more concerned with Paterno’s legacy than those kids Sandusky abused, then you’re allowing it to happen again. Fact. Period.
With the events of the last few days its comforting to see this thread back up at the top of the Pit. It’s like visiting an old friend. An old creepy friend.
“All that is necessary for the triumph of idiocy is for the mindlessly hysterical and willfully blind to prevail” – Starving Artist
Fact 1: Paterno did not do nothing!
He reported what he’d heard, fully and completely and without reservation the very next day to the very person he was supposed to report it to in his perceived (although not factual) role as mandated reporter.
He then met with Curley and apparently joined in a decision that included the both of them along with Spanier and Schultz to attempt to force Sandusky into treatment by threatening to report his alleged conduct to the Second Mile charity and to the Pennsylvania Dept. of Human Welfare.
He was a football coach, not an investigator or child abuse counselor. Furthermore, there is no evidence that he knew Sandusky was engaging in such serious sexual crimes as oral and anal sex and therefore very likely failed to appreciate that whatever Sandusky was doing may have been injurious to the children involved and therefore was focused primarily on trying to come up with some effective way to deal with whatever was wrong with Sandusky.
Fact 2: Kiss my grits! 
Seriously, I can hardly bring myself to take your second allegation seriously. My concern over the monumental injustice done to Joe Paterno the man and subsequently to his legacy has not and will not have the slightest effect upon the sexual activity, voluntary or forced, of any child anywhere at any time, much less that it results in the raped children to be raped all over again.
You know who’s responsible for all those kids getting raped?
Jerry fucking Sandusky, that’s who! Him and nobody else. It wasn’t Joe Paterno’s fault, it wasn’t Curley, Schultz and Spanier’s fault, it wasn’t Penn State’s fault, and it damn sure wasn’t the fault of all the students and athletes who’ve now been victimized by the stigma that you idiots have imposed on any and all things Penn State.
The only way any of those people could have prevented what happened over the next ten years was if they had happened to be mind readers! Period! You and all your lunatics-in-arms can insist otherwise from now till the end of time but it will change nothing.
Here’s a little analogy for you: A cop in the days before Breathalyzers (Paterno likely didn’t know about boy/man mouth/buttsecks, recall?) stops a guy for speeding. Smells a little alcohol on the guy’s breath, but the guy doesn’t seem seriously drunk so he lets him go with a warning. The guy proceeds with his drinking and ratchets up to blind drunk and rams into a car, killing everyone inside.
Now, does everyone who hears about this go batshit crazy and start blaming the cop who stopped the guy earlier that night, insisting with all their might that knew or should have known the guy was an incorrigible drunkard and was gonna kill someone that night…and not only that, he didn’t even fucking care?
No, of course they don’t! Kids aren’t involved so they use their brains. They realize very naturally and without even having to think about it that the cop wasn’t a fucking mindreader or fortune teller and he did what he thought was appropriate under the circumstances based on what he knew at the time. And that’s exactly what Joe Paterno and the rest of those guys did.
Period! End of story!
And them’s the facts. :dubious:
This Paterno chap sounds rather dim, wot?
OK, let’s forget mandatory reporting for a minute. Instead let’s talk about Joe Paterno.
For about a gazillion years he was held up as a leader, as a coach that molded men out of the boys that came to play for him. A moral compass to young men that came and played for him. They erected a fucking statue for Christ’s sake he was such a great leader.
OK, if you are a great leader, a moral compass, a molder of men, and you hear even a hint of Sandusky butt fucking little boys in the shower do you:
A: Don’t do a damn thing
or
B: Tell Sandusky (at the very very minimum) that he is to never shower with boys again, and (more likely) fire his ass, ban him from the premises, and call the cops?
JP chose A which to my mind makes him an asshole. He was probably worried about damage to his football program, instead he just about destroyed it, and his personal reputation. Nice job Joe.
You need to re-read “Fact 1” in my post to Guinatasia.
Wouldn’t it have been a good idea for them to get an investigator and a child abuse counselor? If Paterno, Curley, et al. were so lacking in experience and knowledge about these sorts of situations, that’s exactly the time to bring in people who’d know more about it than they did. They could have tried to find out what Sandusky had done to the victim McQueary told them about, whether there were any more, and how likely it was that Sandusky would abuse more children if left alone.
But they didn’t do that. If we are to take your narrative at face value, Paterno and the other Penn State administrators didn’t know how seriously the victim in the shower was abused (but assumed it wasn’t serious), didn’t know if there were other victims (and didn’t look for any), and didn’t know if Sandusky would take more victims (but didn’t seem to watch him too closely, and he did). In each case, they took the action that left their friend free, their own reputations intact (at least temporarily) and put children at risk. And that is sufficient reason to Pit them.
Except that this didn’t happen in the days before Breathalyzers. A better analogy would be this: A cop sees someone driving erratically. He pulls the driver over, but then sees it’s his good friend Jerry. Now, the cop knows that if he tests Jerry on the Breathalyzer, he might fail; and then the cop will have to arrest his good friend and take him to the station. He lets him go with a warning, Jerry crashes into another car and kills someone.
Jerry should go to jail, and the cop should lose his job.
And you need to stop using all sorts of male ED crap to be able to flaccid-fuck anything you can think of in your warped, so-called “mind.” Put a thimble & some Depends on both.
The fact that SA is feverishly masturbating over the details of this case is merely an indication of his utter lack of worth to anything relating to the human race.
I haven’t been speaking to what the other guys did. But again Joe Paterno was a football coach. He was not trained to investigate child abuse cases, and said himself that he turned it over to others whose job it was to investigate crimes and assumed they would take the appropriate actions. Then later on when was apparently approached with the idea of forcing Sandusky into treatment he went along with it, seeming to feel as the others appeared to feel, that this was the best option - a feeling most likely engendered by his belief that this is what the guys who knew about these things thought was best.
No, it was before Breathalyzers because Paterno almost certainly didn’t know child abuse could involve man/boy oral and anal sex. That was the purpose of that qualification.
And Sandusky was not a good friend. Paterno had grown quite pissed at Sandusky because of his ever-increasing devotion to the Second Mile charity at the expense of the his football team, and IIRC more or less forced Sandusky into early retirement. And there was no hint in Paterno’s report of McQueary’s account that he hedged what he’d been told or tried to minimize it or spin it in some way to protect his “friend.”
Look, Joe Paterno was a guy who cared about Penn State and his football team more than just about anything in life. Anything but the kids who played for him that is. He was concerned about their education and their welfare later in life, and was so determined that they be prepared to make it in the world that he would quite readily bench them and lose football games and even bowl games if they didn’t keep their grades up. So why is it that it would care so much about 17 to 22-year-old kids and their schooling and future welfare as income earners and providers for their families, and then be so utterly unconcerned about the damage and impact upon their future welfare and happiness that serious sexual abuse by one of his former coaches would have upon small children far less developed and far more helpless than the almost grown kids who he’s willing to sacrifice football games for? It just doesn’t make sense. And it doesn’t fit the narrative of the way he lived his entire life.
This thing surfaced in the wake of the grand jury investigation becoming public and everyone immediately jumped to the conclusion without a speck of evidence that Joe Paterno and Penn State itself colluded to cover up for Sandusky and enable all his abuse for the sake of the Penn State football team. And as the evidence slowly began to emerge and it became more and more apparent that no such thing had happened, the scope of their complaints about Paterno began to shrink ever and ever smaller, but with the same insistence upon culpability so that by the time all was said and done he’s allegedly just as guilty for not calling the police as he allegedly was for intentionally covering up the abuse. It’s ridiculous. The police themselves early on praised the way he handled what he was told, and his not calling the cops only became an issue when one of Pennsylvania’s state police officials went on the air and bragged that if only Paterno had notified his agency as he should have, they could have investigated and stopped it all from happening…which was a self-aggrandizing load of bullshit that was in no way correct. But that was all the anti-Paterno crowd needed to seize upon and it’s been the only thing they’ve been able to use ever since to try to justify the horrendous injustice that they perpetrated against him. It’s pure and utter bullshit concocted by a vengeful and unreasoning modern-day lynch mob, and it’s certainly opened my eyes to the continued existence of a certain kind of mentality in this country that I thought had died out long, long ago. And it absolutely gave me a much greater appreciation for rules of evidence and police and courtroom procedures as well.
Ah, the Chewbacca Defense…
The incident McQueary witnessed took place in March of 2002. The details of the sexual abuse by Catholic priests within the Boston Archdiocese had broken in January and February of that year. The information I’ve found online says that Paterno was Roman Catholic. I don’t find it credible that he would not have known how seriously allegations of sexual abuse should be treated.
Who is this “anti-Paterno crowd”? You say they “seize[d] upon” this. Where is there any evidence of such a large group just waiting and looking for something to use against him, and why would there be? I had heard of Paterno before this case, but had no strong feelings about him one way or the other. I am not sitting here thinking “ha, we finally got the bastard.”
And to call it a “lynch mob” is tremendously overstating things. All that actually happened to Paterno is that he lost his job and a few lines in a record book of college football were changed. That’s not a lynching, more like wagging your finger in someone’s face. Compared to what some people suffered in this case, Paterno got off very lightly.
So the plan to dig up Paterno’s corpse and photograph it in lewd poses is off, then?
Hmph, some lynch mob…
Once again – you care more about the tarnished legacy of Paterno than anything Sandusky did. IF, a big IF, Paterno did nothing wrong, then he shouldn’t have been blamed for what went on. BUT, forgive me if I feel a lot more compassion and empathy for Sandusky’s victims – and you seem to be forgetting them.
“WINNING!” or not.