Today on Blogcritics
Home » Culture and Society » Penn State Coach Joe Paterno Must Go. Today.

Penn State Coach Joe Paterno Must Go. Today.

Please Share...Tweet about this on Twitter0Share on Facebook0Share on Google+0Share on LinkedIn0Pin on Pinterest0Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

Penn State has a long and distinguished history, as both a football program and as an actual, you know, university. Its athletics program has never been tainted by any sort of scandal before, and that may well be because it has not, in fact, cheated (as opposed to the method employed by so many other schools, which is to cheat but not get caught). But make no mistake, Joe Paterno’s unprecedented run as Penn State’s head football coach, which practically dates back to the early 17th century, has far less to do with integrity than it does winning. At various points in recent years there have been rumblings in the PSU community that it was time for Joe to go, and all of those instances correlated directly with a failure to win on the field. When Paterno has bounced back and posted strong seasons the sniping has predictably died away.

That the program knowingly tolerated a pedophile like Jerry Sandusky in its midst, and that it afforded that pedophile access to young boys, is a grave charge and if a word of it is true, anyone and everyone even vaguely implicated should be gone as a matter of principle. At this stage reports suggest that Paterno acted in accordance with his legal requirements in the matter (although details continue to emerge). However, where this sort of crime is concerned, satisfying your legal obligations and meeting your moral obligations are very different things.

Unless Paterno has something exceedingly compelling to say in his defense (such as “I called the police and they dismissed it”), there is simply no way he can ever recruit again. Even that might not be enough. Kids of this generation have powerful expectations of adult authority figures and even those who have never met the man likely feel betrayed by him already.

Then there are the parents to consider. Under what circumstances would you allow your son to enter a program that deals with pedophilia like it’s an archdiocese? You have to trust people to hand your children over to them and “We’re sorry, we won’t make the same mistake again” isn’t likely to be sufficient.

If you cannot recruit, you cannot win. And in the world of Big Money Football, if you cannot win it’s like what I used to say at closing time when I was a club DJ back in college: “You don’t have to go home, but you can’t stay here.”

Reports suggest that Paterno is on the way out even as we speak, although nothing official is being reported at this time. I feel bad for the Penn State community (I have a number of friends who went there) and horrible for the victims. Given what I’m reading from that quarter today (words like “disgust” and “revulsion” are nowhere near the worst I’ve heard), I know that this is striking at a level that transcends mere sport.

So it’s likely the end of the line for JoePa. The sooner the school can clear the decks of everyone involved in this scandal, the sooner the healing can begin. I hate it for Paterno, who strikes me as a fundamentally honorable man. But he needs to be gone, and it needs to happen today.

Powered by

About Dr. Sammy

  • watching helplessly

    I’m not a football fan, but this news has left me feeling deeply distressed for days. How do these “football gods” sleep at night knowing what they allowed to go on? They have no souls. They all (college president, coach, grad assistant and his dad) must go NOW and hopefully to jail.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writers/dr-dreadful/ Dr Dreadful

    It beggars belief that time and again, organisations think that the default option in situations like this is to sweep it under the carpet.

    It’s classic human short-sightedness, I guess. The reality that the truth WOULD be discovered, and that there would be far more damage done in the long run than if they had simply come clean and dealt with it in the first place, probably didn’t even occur to those at Penn State who participated in the cover-up.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    It’s the usual case of cover-up ending up being worse than the original crime.

  • Igor

    IIRC, when Paterno called his boss instead of the police he became an accomplice in a felony.

    At the least, any decent person would follow up with the boss to see if it was turned over to the police, and call the police himself if boss took no action.

    “Winning isn’t the most important thing, it’s the ONLY thing”, some football nut said. I guess that Sandusky and Paterno were ‘winners’.

  • Arch conservative

    Do the students at Penn State supporting Paterno and rioting in the streets truly not understand the what an abhorrent and traumatic thing is the sexual molestation of a child? Isn’t that a given to any and all with requisite mental faculties needed for adult thought?

    Aside from what Sandusky actually did it would seem that the most disturbing aspect of this story is the fact that so many, from administrators, to alumni to current students are so eager to turn a blind to the harsh reality of what happened so as to not tarnish the Penn State image or their golden god Paterno.

  • zingzing

    “Aside from what Sandusky actually did…”

    i’m not particularly defending paterno, but a) sandusky’s guilt is a question, not a certainty (although i doubt he’s innocent, i don’t know the facts, and neither do any of you); and b) paterno did what he was legally obligated to do, as far as i know. he hasn’t been charged as of yet, at any rate.

    did he do all he could have done? no. but no one’s asking him to go hunt down child molesters. he may have participated in the cover up, or he may have been kept in the dark about what happened with the information once he reported it.

    it’s possible that the board at penn state knows what actually happened and that’s why paterno was fired yesterday. or, perhaps, paterno became a scapegoat. if paterno wasn’t fired, penn state would always be seen as being soft on the crime, even though no legal judgment has been made. they had to clean house.

    i think it’s a bit of a shame that this man’s career is over so suddenly because of these allegations. (if sandusky actually is guilty, and paterno did participate in the cover up, i’ll surely change my mind.) although it would have undoubtedly been a distraction, i think paterno deserves better after so many years of service to that community. he deserves the benefit of the doubt. he didn’t molest any kids. and i have a hard time believing that he’d let someone else do so.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Wow!

  • Igor

    FWIW, my understanding of how this all came to light is that in 2002 a coach (whose name is “McLeary”, or some such) came upon Sandusky in the Penn State showers having sodomy with an 8 yr. old boy and reported to Paterno who bucked it upstairs to his boss. In each case the coaches thought that their CONTRACTUAL arrangements with Penn State had been satisfied and no report was required to the police.

    How strange! By what magical contrivance does a private contractual agreement supersede actual law, one might wonder? And yet this peculiar notion seems to be taking hold throughout American society. For example, I recollect when some cute administration spokesperson was called before a congressional committee to testify and she huffily retorted “when I took this job I took an oath of loyalty to The President!”, whereas, actually she had sworn the standard Federal oath to uphold the Constitution. Apparently, she had found it easier to be loyal to the president than the Constitution.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writers/dr-dreadful/ Dr Dreadful

    zing, it’s not whether or not Sandusky is guilty that’s the big deal here, it’s the cover-up – and cover-up there undoubtedly was.

    I’ve read the grand jury report, and it has the ring of verisimilitude – it’s not one of those pseudoscientific “recovered memory” loads of bollocks that destroyed so many innocent lives during the satanic abuse hysteria of the 90s. This is serious shit.

    The police are on record as saying that Paterno fulfilled his minimum legal obligation by informing his boss: unfortunately, part of the problem is that the police were part of the cover-up (never understood why universities need their own police forces in the first place). That aside, whether he ended up being an active participant in it or not, he became part of the cover-up by not pursuing the matter further after it became obvious that neither his boss nor the university generally were going to do fuck all.

    Not that I don’t have sympathy for Paterno: if I were in his shoes, I’d have a very hard time accepting that someone I’d known, befriended, worked with, trusted and respected for years might be a kiddie diddler. As head coach, though, the buck stops with him as regards the behavior of the faculty members under his control; and again, this sort of shit is about as serious as it gets. The university did, finally, take the right action.

  • Igor

    I really find this hard to believe: “…The police are on record as saying that Paterno fulfilled his minimum legal obligation by informing his boss”.

    Huh!?

    By what logic does THAT proceed? How did it come about that his private contractual agreement superseded The Law?

    Sounds to me like the cops AND Penn State are covering up. And that both are criminal accomplices.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    “(never understood why universities need their own police forces in the first place).”

    Used to be because it served as a buffer against municipal police coming over and playing it rough.

    But even this is changing nowadays as Berkeley, the most radical of municipalities and liberal arts colleges, is undergoing a process of retrogression as a result of its inability to understand and deal with OWS.

    As to zing’s non-committal, let’s consider all possibilities type of response, it’s only to be expected. It’s typical of, and comes part and parcel with, the liberal mindset whereby morality and moral considerations always take a back seat to the avowed standard of “reasonableness” and “legality-grounded thinking.”

    If only I could cure my liberal friends of this disease — the subject of my final BC article — we could all march to the same drum, but that’s the obstacle, the only obstacle!

  • Jordan Richardson

    The vision of all of us marching to the same drum isn’t as attractive as you think, Roger.

  • http://cinemasentries.com/ El Bicho

    “The vision of all of us marching to the same drum isn’t as attractive as you think, Roger.”

    Especially if Roger is going to be the drum major. And can you stop with the Farewell Tour? Gene Simmons thinks you’ve milked it too long now.

    Plus, you’ve misread zing (again, or will you claim it was intentional?) in your desire to put down liberals. He didn’t say anything about considering all the possibilities. He said slow down the ill-informed witch hunt, which Igor exemplifies by thinking Paterno broke the law, which he didn’t.

    Should Paterno have done more? If what’s alleged is true, likely, but was he involved in a cover-up? Or was that his superiors and possibly law enforcement as it is starting to sound like as more reporting is taking place, including the disappearance of a local district attorney. This story is not even close to being fully told.

  • zingzing

    doc: “whether he ended up being an active participant in it or not, he became part of the cover-up by not pursuing the matter further after it became obvious that neither his boss nor the university generally were going to do fuck all.”

    as more stuff has been coming to light, and as i’ve had more time to think about it, i am thinking that, as a human being, paterno should have done much, much more. it seems to me, he did what he had to, nothing more, then washed his hands of the matter. turning a blind eye to the matter does him no favors, and perhaps he should be fired for it.

    that said, unless it’s shown that he played an active role in the cover up, it’s hard to pin anything on him outside of moral outrage. so fired, yeah, i’m on board with that now. there’s no way he could have stayed at this point.

  • zingzing

    roger: “As to zing’s non-committal, let’s consider all possibilities type of response, it’s only to be expected.”

    i’m just not ready to hang the man for something he may not have done. if you want to do so, that’s on you, not me. do you think you know everything that happened? not just about the crimes, but the decade that has elapsed since paterno was told about them?

    if you do, go ahead and be judge and jury. if not, i don’t know what your problem is.

  • zingzing

    doc: “zing, it’s not whether or not Sandusky is guilty that’s the big deal here, it’s the cover-up – and cover-up there undoubtedly was.”

    wait, if sandusky is innocent, that’s got nothing to do with it? (and if he is innocent, what is there to cover up?)

    what if someone called me up and said they’d found you balls-deep in a tweenager and i followed up and figured out that no such thing happened? would i be guilty of covering up something because i didn’t alert the police?

    i’m not saying sandusky is innocent. i really doubt he is. but the question of his guilt does hopefully have a role to play in this whole thing, right?

  • http://blogcritics.org/writers/dr-dreadful/ Dr Dreadful

    By what logic does THAT proceed? How did it come about that his private contractual agreement superseded The Law?

    Contrary to popular belief, failure to report a crime is not, generally speaking, a crime in itself. The laws of most states, however, make an exception in cases of child abuse. In Pennsylvania, it is a third degree misdemeanor.

    Pennsylvania law is, however, a bit vague as to what actually constitutes having reported the crime. There is a hotline phone number which “persons required to report” – a class which, as a college faculty member, includes Paterno – can use, but there doesn’t seem to be anything in the statute stipulating this as the only method. And it would be a bit daft if there were such a stipulation, since it would exclude other perfectly reasonable methods of reporting, such as calling the police.

    There’s also a good faith clause, which probably covers Paterno if he believed that by reporting the incident to his boss it would then be referred to the police or social services.

    However… that third degree misdemeanor gets amped up to second degree if there is a subsequent failure to report. If Paterno knew that Sandusky was still abusing boys and knew that the university and the university police hadn’t done anything about it, he may have been breaking the law by staying silent. It’s a big If, though. I wouldn’t like to be the DA who had to prosecute that.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writers/dr-dreadful/ Dr Dreadful

    what if someone called me up and said they’d found you balls-deep in a tweenager and i followed up and figured out that no such thing happened? would i be guilty of covering up something because i didn’t alert the police?

    If you were sure of yourself, zing, no, but Penn State didn’t even do that. They just looked the other way and hoped it wasn’t true.

  • zingzing

    “If you were sure of yourself, zing, no, but Penn State didn’t even do that. They just looked the other way and hoped it wasn’t true.”

    do you know that for a fact? is that something in the grand jury report? i wonder if penn state has released all their documents (assuming there are some) about the events. do you know? you seem very sure of the fact that penn state did absolutely nothing, so i’m just asking where that sureness comes from.

    but that’s beside the point. my point is that you’re at least partially assuming sandusky’s guilt, which has not yet been decided. i realize that deciding this could take a long time and penn state couldn’t wait for that before taking action. but there had to be something to cover up, if there was a cover up. and that question is yet to be resolved.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writers/dr-dreadful/ Dr Dreadful

    is that something in the grand jury report?

    It is the gist of the narrative in the report, yes.

  • zingzing

    that would seem really, really stupid of penn state then. i’m sure the higher ups around there probably didn’t have much experience in dealing with this sort of thing, but i’m shocked that the lawyers penn state employs would have “hoped it wasn’t true.”

    there’s undoubtedly much more to this story. it seems too stupid, too simple and too lazy to be true. then again…

  • Jordan Richardson

    Consider Mike McQueary’s grand jury testimony. He said he witnessed the assault of a 10-year-old boy in the showers and went to administrators. From there, they never reported information to law enforcement. If that’s not a cover-up, what would you call it?

    Sounds like a resounding case of “looking the other way” to me, from top to bottom at Penn State and all in the name of protecting “football” and the school’s reputation.

    Sandusky has 40 charges of child abuse, zingzing, including a pile of allegations that he showered with young boys and so on.

    I understand erring on the side of caution and not proclaiming someone guilty until proven so, but the school’s position of doing next to nothing certainly doesn’t help matters. It provokes, right or wrong, the sentiment that football and college reputations are more important than the welfare of 10-year-old boys.

  • Jordan Richardson

    i’m sure the higher ups around there probably didn’t have much experience in dealing with this sort of thing

    What “experience” do you need to report allegations of child sex abuse to the proper authorities?

    it seems too stupid, too simple and too lazy to be true.

    Football is life, as the idiotic “riots” seem to indicate.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    I’m not about to enlist for the drum major part, Bicho, far from it. Used it as a metaphor, and apologize for the fact you missed it.

    The point was Zing’s apologia, and it still is.

  • zingzing

    “Consider Mike McQueary’s grand jury testimony. He said he witnessed the assault of a 10-year-old boy in the showers and went to administrators. From there, they never reported information to law enforcement. If that’s not a cover-up, what would you call it?”

    well, doc says that the university police were involved in the cover up. so obviously… well, are university police really police? if they are, then it was reported to law enforcement. the fact that you don’t think the allegations were ever reported to law enforcement, while doc says law enforcement was involved in the cover up leads me to question how much any of us know at this point.

    “Sounds like a resounding case of “looking the other way” to me, from top to bottom at Penn State and all in the name of protecting “football” and the school’s reputation.”

    that may be true. i simply don’t know. the court of public opinion is a remarkable thing. it’s possible for a person to only know the barest of facts and yet know enough to condemn whole swaths of people. amazing thing. it’s already claiming victims before anyone steps into a court room.

    “What “experience” do you need to report allegations of child sex abuse to the proper authorities?”

    the first allegations against sandusky are actually from 1998, while he was still the defensive coordinator, if i recall correctly. the allegations were never prosecuted. so i guess they did have some experience with this stuff, and even with this guy being accused of this stuff. you might get a little jumpy or protective if false or at least non-prosecutable allegations had been made about a member of your staff not four years earlier. who knows what was going on in their minds. why don’t we wait and find out, eh?

    “I understand erring on the side of caution and not proclaiming someone guilty until proven so…”

    that’s all i’m really trying to say. i don’t KNOW anything for sure, from sandusky’s guilt, to penn state’s reaction, to joe paterno’s role in a cover up that may or may not exist. i don’t see how anybody can say they know enough to judge the situation at this point. that’s why we have a justice system. hopefully it will find the truth before everyone finishes fashioning their nooses around here. fuckin lynch mob up in these parts…

  • zingzing

    roger: “The point was Zing’s apologia, and it still is.”

    yeah, except you missed the point by a mile. good as ever, roger.

    you seem to have missed the following statements completely: “i doubt [sandusky]’s innocent… did [paterno] do all he could have done? no… he may have participated in the cover up… it’s possible that the board at penn state knows what actually happened and that’s why paterno was fired yesterday… [penn state] had to clean house…”

    why is it that only certain words count and others don’t?

    and do you or do you not believe that people deserve a fair trial?

    or have you become a god walking amongst us, capable of handing out perfect, all-knowing judgment without needing to know pesky things like facts?

  • zingzing

    doc: “It is the gist of the narrative in the report, yes.”

    do you believe they should hold a trial, or does the grand jury report satisfy that requirement for you? should we just skip right ahead to the penalty phase?

    obviously, i’m being a bit sarcastic, but why does no one else seem to think that a trial should determine these peoples’ fate?

    it boggles the mind…

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    zing, and you if you support him, are moral zeroes. And I don’t give a fuck now if, as you say, I misread you.

    That’s how I fucking read you.

    End of argument, end of story.

    If you continue with this argument, then I will conclude that you’re as perverse as our zingo, but I seriously doubt it, my man. I think I know you’re better than that.

    Just can’t help living up to your nom de plume of “El Bicho,” can you now?

    You shouldn’t let your handle influence who you are!

  • zingzing

    roger, you’re the one with a perverse sense of justice. your morality only extends as far as your opinion, the truth be damned. you simply don’t care.

  • Jordan Richardson

    zingzing, my understanding is that in 2000 a school janitor spotted Sandusky giving oral sex to a young boy and reported it to his supervisor. That incident was not passed on to either school or police officials.

    From there, McQueary reported witnessing a sex act in the showers involving Sandusky and a young boy (this was in 2002). He told Paterno, who told the school’s athletic director but not the police.

    Prior to 2000, however, Penn State police “were aware” of two victims and even had a wire recording of Sandusky copping to showering and having physical contact with one of the victims. The Penn State cops didn’t press charges.

    So it looks like a complete picture of incompetence from top to bottom at Penn State, with nobody in a position of power pressing charges or seeking the authorities in any of the above instances.

    What this issue centres around, at least from my view, is the issue of moral obligation. You could argue that the “wait and see” approach is beneficial, but at what point do school officials have a responsibility to take things to another more credible level? The school knew enough to prohibit Sandusky from bringing boys on campus, after all. Two Penn State administrators have since been charged with perjury and failure to report, so it seems the courts smell trouble as well.

    I understand that it’s a sensitive issue, but Penn State appears more interested in protecting its brand than anything else.

  • http://cinemasentries.com/ El Bicho

    Roger, I know what a metaphor is but it sounds like you already have the part as you attempt to lead a parade of participants in the new symposium/venture you have been discussing with Troll and others.

    “the first allegations against sandusky are actually from 1998, while he was still the defensive coordinator”

    Yeah, and shortly thereafter he “retired” at 55, way too young for a coach. More likely he was forced out quietly in the hopes that nothing more would surface on while he worked for them, similar to the Catholic Church moving priests around.

  • Jordan Richardson

    why does no one else seem to think that a trial should determine these peoples’ fate?

    Maybe I’m misreading the conversation, but I’m interpreting the problem most people have as being with school administrators for not doing enough/anything reasonable in light of these allegations. Clearly they knew something was going on if they banned Sandusky from having boys over, so why didn’t they go to the next logical step and go to the proper authorities?

    That, if you ask me, boggles the mind and smells like a case of putting brand before morality.

    Even if Sandusky is as pure as the driven snow, Penn State looks like they passed the buck to save their rep. It doesn’t look good.

  • zingzing

    it certainly does not look good, jordan. and penn state surely fucked up somewhere. it should have been reported to the authorities. (and if you believe doc’s account, it was, and the “authorities” were just as much a part of the cover up as the university was.)

    “The Penn State cops didn’t press charges.”

    but it sounds like they were told of the allegations, correct?

    i don’t really doubt that sandusky is a dirty old perverted criminal. and i don’t really doubt that penn state took part in a cover up. i could be wrong about both those things, but this kind of thing practically begs for a cover up. look at what it’s done to penn state since it was uncovered.

    my questions is, what was paterno’s role in all this? did he have one beyond doing his legal obligation and going upstairs with it? if you can answer that with anything other than “i don’t know,” i’d be surprised.

  • http://cinemasentries.com/ El Bicho

    Well, zing sets a high bar (or would that be low bar?) for perversion but I do support his position regarding the rush to judgment, so think of me as you must. Would have thought you held a higher regard for justice as opposed to running with the mob.

    With all the reports, Sandusky looks guilty, but I wouldn’t be on his lawn throwing bricks through his house window just yet as some did last night. There needs to be a serious, thorough investigation because quite a number of people over the years have let this monster roam free because of some perverse idea to protect the college’s image, which is insane.

    Back in 1998, if they had turned him over and gotten him locked up, they would be heroes. By hiding what took place, they look worse, complicit in every crime that took place afterwards.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Zing,

    Truth and morality are inseparable, so why are you trying to make a distinction.

    And furthermore, if you want to be treated as a moral equal rather than just a pretender. why don’t you answer the question I put to you a couple of weeks ago. Did you receive my email attachment concerning my analysis of O’Neill, Beckett, etc. or did you not?

    A simple yes or no would do, nothing more elaborate is required. But until you answer this little query, as far as I’m concerned, you’re just a one big balloon, hot air and all.

    Need I say more?

  • Jordan Richardson

    but it sounds like they were told of the allegations, correct?

    I honestly don’t know how they became aware of the allegations prior to 2000, but it doesn’t sound like their being informed of said allegations did any good in the larger scope of things. Perhaps the buzz around Sandusky’s alleged conduct with boys was part of what led to his being banned from bringing them around and/or his “retirement.” Perhaps not.

    I think what you’re missing is the moral obligation factor. That’s what repulses most people. Did Paterno do all that was “legally” necessary? Maybe, I don’t know. But with respect to morality, he didn’t.

    For a man cited as being in “in absolute control of Penn State athletics” and akin to a god in college football parts, do you really think Paterno didn’t know? H

    He damn well SHOULD have called the cops nine years ago when he was first alerted to the alleged misconduct. He had clout and Sandusky was his friend, so it appears as though Paterno made it go away. At the very least, from a moral standpoint, he didn’t do nearly enough in light of the allegations.

  • Jordan Richardson

    Need I say more?

    No, but I bet you will.

  • zingzing

    “Truth and morality are inseparable, so why are you trying to make a distinction.”

    i’m not, you dope. i’m saying your morality is false. if, say, you found yourself in the same situation as sandusky, would you call for your own head? or would you want and deserve a fair trial? your bloodthirsty “morality” would change completely, now wouldn’t it? you don’t care about the truth, so your “morality” is anything but. it’s just your opinion masquerading about.

    “And furthermore, if you want to be treated as a moral equal rather than just a pretender. why don’t you answer the question I put to you a couple of weeks ago. Did you receive my email attachment concerning my analysis of O’Neill, Beckett, etc. or did you not?”

    i have no idea why you think this matters, or why it puts you on a higher moral plane than me, but yes, i did get it. didn’t see your question about it. have i been on the thread since you asked the question?

    “Need I say more?”

    if you’re really trying to make a point with this, i guess not. it’s not much of a point though. kind of pathetic. you aren’t the center of my world, roger.

  • zingzing

    jordan: “At the very least, from a moral standpoint, he didn’t do nearly enough in light of the allegations.”

    if the allegations against sandusky are true, then he certainly didn’t do enough. even if they aren’t, he’s treading on questionable grounds. as i said earlier, i now believe that there’s no way he could have survived in his current position with this floating over his head, no matter what the outcome of the eventual trial. firing him was the only option that penn state had.

    “I honestly don’t know how they became aware of the allegations prior to 2000, but it doesn’t sound like their being informed of said allegations did any good in the larger scope of things.”

    you don’t know. i don’t know. all i know is that’s all i’m saying.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    You still didn’t answer my pointed question, did you receive my email or did you not?

    Until you come up with a straight yes or no, don’t expect me to take you seriously or to take seriously anything you say.

    Do you understand?

  • Jordan Richardson

    I’m not speaking to Sandusky’s guilt or innocence, just to be clear.

    All I’m concerned with at this point is Penn State’s lack of reasonable response to the allegations in the first place, which is why Paterno finds himself with his career in ruins at the moment.

    In that regard, I think we’re at least somewhat on the same page.

  • Jordan Richardson

    Roger, he answered you in #38 (“but yes, I did get it”).

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Did he really, Jordan. I admit, I don’t read all bullshit comments that closely, but if I recall, my specific question was about a piece of literary criticism I wrote, a damn good piece if I be allowed to blow my own horn. And all I got in return is the same ole’ bickering, not even a sign of acknowledgement, not a solitary comment.

    I don’t need validation because I know the value of my own work. But come on, Jordan, what’s fair is fair. Even a word edgewise would have been better than no word at all. The man treated me as non-entity, not even as much as acknowledging the receipt of my work, never mind taking his time to comment on it, which I invited.

    And now he preaches to me about morality?

    Come on!

  • Jordan Richardson

    I don’t really own a saxophone, Roger, but I appreciate your concern. I also don’t agree with where you stand on immigrants, but that’s beside the point.

  • zingzing

    “Do you understand?”

    yes. you clearly don’t. and now you’re acting a fool. if you ask a question, but don’t read the answer, that’s your fault, not mine.

    “The man treated me as non-entity, not even as much as acknowledging the receipt of my work, never mind taking his time to comment on it, which I invited.”

    i don’t have to do your bidding.

    “And now he preaches to me about morality?”

    in this case, your “morality” is clearly just you wandering about, yelling. if the tables were turned, you’d be singing an entirely different tune and you know it.

  • zingzing

    “in this case” means the penn state thing, not your asinine blathering about “your work.” that’s got nothing to do with morals whatsoever.

  • zingzing

    jordan: “we’re at least somewhat on the same page.”

    yep. although i do think sandusky’s innocence or guilt does have a role to play in how things proceed from here. if he’s innocent… penn state’s going to have a boatload of “wrongful termination” suits. for legal reasons, they probably will anyway as people charged and fired protest their innocence. although i don’t know the laws on how criminal and civil cases trump each other in this instance. can they proceed at the same time?

  • Jordan Richardson

    I think his guilt or innocence has a role to play from here, sure. But I think that Paterno could’ve saved both his job and his face by doing the right thing initially. As it is now, he appears linked to some sort of institutional cover-up and that’s not good for anyone.

  • zingzing

    it’s true… just the appearance is enough for him and those above him to lose their jobs. if it ends up being true (the rapes, the cover up), then, obviously, they fully deserve both that and some time in jail showers getting raped. even if it’s not true, sandusky is innocent and the administration of the university was just not responding to unfounded allegations, it’s what penn state had to do in order to move forward, even if it’s not fair. penn state would then get their ass sued off like never before. unless, of course, it’s all true. then penn state would get their ass sued off like never before.

  • zingzing

    roger: “I admit, I don’t read all bullshit comments that closely…”

    your dedication to getting the facts before making a judgment is astounding, roger. i salute you. thanks for making my point for me.

  • http://www.RoseDigitalMarketing.com Christopher Rose

    Truth and morality are not inseparable; indeed, I don’t see what they have to do with each other at all.

    When you get such fundamental matters wrong, Roger, to say nothing of your excessive intellectual certainty, which doesn’t seem to be based on anything than your own presumption, you lose credibility…

  • Deutsch

    I’m not about to enlist for the drum major part, Bicho, far from it. Used it as a metaphor, and apologize for the fact you missed it.

  • Frise

    roger: “I admit, I don’t read all bullshit comments that closely…”

    your dedication to getting the facts before making a judgment is astounding, roger.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Sorry, can’t help you there, Chris. If it’s a puzzle for you, let it remain a puzzle.

  • http://www.RoseDigitalMarketing.com Christopher Rose

    You’re right that YOU can’t help ME, Roger, but what exactly do you consider I find to be a puzzle?

    If you are referring to my rebuttal of your bizarre assertion that truth and morality are inseparable, which is clearly false, the only puzzle is how you manage to link them. That said, you’re not known for your clarity of thinking or your coherence of expression, so it is probably just random noise…

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    And no, I don’t read bullshit comments, zing, and a great many of your comments don’t rise beyond that level. I might give them a cursory look, that’s all.

    So what’s your complain? You buried a word of admission in the middle of a page-long soliloquy and you expect me to spot it like some needle in the haystack?

    The larger point, and you know it, is that my email to you was a gesture of friendship with the idea of repairing our going nowhere relationship, and that’s how you respond to me? On three separate occasions I asked you that very question to have finally gotten a meek “yes” for an answer.

    Neither have you responded to my apology to you guys posted two weeks ago or so. Jordan was the only one with decency enough to respond.

    So you think about it, zing, and then tell me what am I to think. We might talk then.

  • Igor

    IMO everyone accused of a crime should get a fair trial. We have to find and prosecute people who have committed crimes. Part of ‘finding’ criminals is that citizens report, to the police, their observations of crimes. As far as I know, there is NO private agreement that can supersede a citizens obligation to report a crime to the police. How could that possibly be? What gives a private party the privilege of skirting the law? Did the Penn State staff have the right to make pedophilia a non-crime?

    I am afraid that we, in the USA, are establishing a two tier legal system in which horrendous penalties come down on the poor, the weak, the un-influential and the scorned, while the rich, powerful, and admired can skate away free! Yet who does the most damage to our society?

    If we truly had laws equally applied to all citizens there would be thousands of bankers going to jail after the frauds bankers committed against US society routinely for the past 20 years. Remember, after the S&L scandals in the 80’s over 1000 bankers were sent to jail. Now, we routinely see political cronies of the powerful excused from prosecution or pardoned.

    By contrast, consider the fate of the poor guy who’s sitting on death row awaiting execution, not because he killed anyone, but because the actual killer fingered him as an accomplice to make a plea bargain that reduced the killers sentence to a few years in jail. And all that waiting guy did was drive his friend downtown, unaware the guy was going to stickup a liquor store and kill the clerk.

    We are in danger of turning our legal system into a joke that no one takes seriously, and allowing these Penn State scofflaws to avoid prosecution just contributes to that.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Well, it would speak better of you, Chris, if you were to consider it a puzzle. But since you don’t, now I really can’t help you.

  • http://www.RoseDigitalMarketing.com Christopher Rose

    Roger, I’ll give you one thing, you certainly have a very large ego, although I am struggling to understand what you base that upon.

    You can’t read properly, you can’t think coherently and you can’t express yourself clearly either.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Far bigger ego than yours, Christopher, I can assure you.

    But since you’re casting doubt on my abilities to express myself clearly, try this one for size:

    You’d be far better served if you were to devote less of your energy and thinking prowess on defending your ignorance, more on battling it.

    Is this clear enough for you?

  • http://blogcritics.org/writers/dr-dreadful/ Dr Dreadful

    Far bigger ego than yours, Christopher, I can assure you.

    Roger, I don’t think he intended it to be a compliment…

  • http://blogcritics.org/writers/dr-dreadful/ Dr Dreadful

    zing, of course Sandusky should be tried, as should, probably, a number of other people involved in the [alleged] cover-up. And I do withhold judgement till then.

    However, what seems to be escaping you here (and I’m surprised, since the distinction shouldn’t confuse you as it seems to confuse many other commenters around here) is that the justice system is not the be-all and end-all. There were at the very least some serious administrative and disciplinary issues at Penn State that don’t seem to have been addressed.

  • tired

    Is anyone else tired of the ongoing saga of Roger and Chris? If you can’t agree, (or can’t disagree in a professional, appropriate, intellectual manner) stay off the same threads. This pissing contest has gotten old. I thought Roger was going to take his toys and go home anyway – or did I misread the other article’s thread?

  • Zingzing

    I understand that, doc. Waaaaaaaay back in my first comment, you’ll see I addressed that: “Penn state had to clean house,” I said. All I was saying is that some people were coming off like a lynch mob. And at least 4 or 5 people have already lost their jobs. I’m sure more will follow.

    Obviously, when one speaks of “innocent until proven guilty” in the context of child rape, one is walking a line, as people tend to lose their head about such things…

  • Zingzing

    Roger, I simply did not see your questions, nor your apology. I can’t keep up with everything, and you’ll excuse me if I got tired of a certain thread, if that’s where the apology is (I’m guessing, so tell me the name of the thread or threads in question and I’ll go check it out).

    Next time you ask a question, however, I suggest you look for the answer before going off about it. And your #56 is just as long as my #38, where I answered your question. I took the time to read your comment. You should do the same.

  • Zingzing

    Tired, glad to see you have discovered the Internet! It’s basically a place you can go for petty squabbles and cat videos.

  • zingzing

    yeesh. on page 7 of the grand jury report, paterno copped to the grad asst telling him that sandusky was “fondling or doing something of a sexual nature to a young boy.” that’s not a direct quote from paterno, but it seems pretty damning, because it puts those words in paterno’s mouth from the start. in other parts of the doc, penn state’s line seems to be that the grad asst reported “horseplay” and other, vague sorts of things. but if paterno testified that he was told of “fondling” and things of a “sexual nature,” and he testified that that’s what he reported to his superiors…

    what a difference a week makes.

  • http://www.RoseDigitalMarketing.com Christopher Rose

    Roger, the fact that your perception is that I am defending my ignorance is lavish proof of your inability to understand what is being said to you.

    If anybody needs to battle their ignorance, to say nothing of smug, lazy complacency, it is clearly you…

    “tired”, I don’t know how I could disagree with Roger in a “professional, appropriate, intellectual manner”, nor am I at all clear what that would be.

    I am expressing what I genuinely believe in an open and honest matter. That you perceive it as a “pissing contest”, whatever that is, probably says more about you than anything else, particularly as you chose to hide your identity for this one comment only…

    Roger has said that he is going to write articles for another site rather than this one in the future (although he apparently intends to keep gifting us the wisdom of his comments) but is indulging in a prolonged farewell tour for reasons that escape me although I could hazard a guess.

    My genuine wish is that he would do less posturing and engage in more honest, naked (not physically, of course!) and forthright participation and communication, qualities he seems to admire in the Occupy movement but doesn’t feel the need to embrace in other areas.

  • tired

    I guess it just seems to me that you both push each other’s buttons and LOVE doing so. But Chris, I didn’t intend that part about “professional, appropriate, intellectual manner” to be about you. Frankly, I do feel like Roger tries to enrage people and overlooks points that might change his perspective. For example, here he said he doesn’t read BS comments…. but he clearly does. Anyway, it’s none of my business, really…. I think I’ll move to a Kardashian thread where the commentary is more high brow. (just kidding)

  • http://www.RoseDigitalMarketing.com Christopher Rose

    “tired”, I genuinely wish Roger did track things properly and engage in conversation, which I think I would be correct in saying is also what most participants here feel, but he is apparently locked onto a different path and clearly doesn’t want to let go of it, which is a loss for all of us.

    I am a very direct person by nature and am trying to address that directly, which is possibly not the right way to go, but I don’t have time or the inclination for extended philosophical debate anyway. I’m really not interested in button pushing at all.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    @68

    Not my perception, Christopher, but my judgment.

    I’m not going to argue now that my judgment is always infallible. Just like anyone else, I too am a human and prone to error, always ready to retract whenever I’m proven wrong.

    But let’s call a spade a spade. Judgment is what it is, and you feeble attempt to call it perception is but an exercise in Orwellian doublespeak.

    You’re a native speaker, Christopher, and I surely don’t fancy myself to be in the position to be giving anyone lessons in rudimentary English, especially when they’re native. That’s not my life’s ambition, no thank you.

    So let’s both try to be sensible, shall we?

  • http://www.RoseDigitalMarketing.com Christopher Rose

    Roger, that you try to make a meaningful difference between a perception and a judgement is the root of the problem here. You are just playing with words which, in my “judgement” would be indulging in pointless word wanking to no purpose or benefit.

    That you then have the gall to call it “Orwellian doublespeak”, in my “judgement”, shows that you are nothing more than a dull intellect that throws out phrases without understanding what they mean.

    In other words, you are an imposter, pretending to intelligence and indulging in empty posturing, whilst failing to understand what is said to you, the first requirement of both perception and intelligence.

    Like others before me, I am simply going to cease wasting time trying to communicate with you, a frustrating and utterly pointless exercise alas. Pretty much like your most recent article in fact…

    I’m done with you though, you are literally a waste of time, which is one of the worst social crimes in my book.

  • Igor

    I’m sorry, but I think I’m stupid here, and I missed something, so please explain it to me: if Sandusky had been fired in 2002 as a result of Paterno reporting to the University, would that have acquitted everyone of their responsibilities?

    And if Sandusky had gone on to another job and committed the same crimes, would Penn State be exculpated because they had successfully solved their problem by following their protocol?

  • zingzing

    igor, i doubt it, but certainly the uproar would have been less. penn state would then just be a player in a bigger game. as it stands, penn state’s role in covering shit up is getting more attention and public criticism than the, you know, raping.

    paterno is, through his lawyers, investigating his ability to limit the number of suits that can be brought against him. maybe he’s just being smart, or maybe he knows he’s fucked. shit’s getting dark anyway.

    my question… is mcqueary a hero? or should he also have contacted the police?

  • Igor

    My problem is that I can’t find a single excuse for anyone NOT notifying the police when they knew what was happening.

  • Igor

    The real cause of dismay here is the overgrown football mania that haunts US universities. Until we get rid of that this sort of thing will continues to come up.