Penn State open thread *UPDATED*

For those of you who have things you want to say about the goings-on at Penn State (the sexual abuse, the cover-up, the firings, and the riots), have at it.

My take is that it’s worth contrasting this appalling sexual abuse with the claims against Cain. I know that a greater wrong doesn’t cancel a lesser one, but it should make any rational person look twice at the woman now claiming Cain’s monstrous crime was that he gave off a vibe.

UPDATE:  Here are three articles from today’s Investor’s Business Daily, all discussing different aspects of the allegations against Herman Cain.  I think this is an appropriate place for these articles, because of the nice contrast between Cain, a victim of modern anti-male, anti-corporate harassment laws, and Sandusky, an actual child rapist.  Again, Cain might have been a boor, but so far there’s not much else.

Will someone tell us what Herman Cain did?

David Axelrod’s pattern of sexual misbehavior

No-fly zone over Clinton, JFK sexcapades

UPDATE II:  Greg, at Rhymes With Right, introduced me to a post that sums it up as perfectly as any could:

These things should be simple:

1. When, as an adult, you come come across another adult raping a small child, you should a) do everything in your power to rescue that child from the rapist, b) call the police the moment it is practicable.

2. If your adult son calls you to tell you that he just saw another adult raping a small child, but then left that small child with the rapist, and then asks you what he should do, you should a) tell him to get off the phone with you and call the police immediately, b) call the police yourself and make a report, c) at the appropriate time in the future ask your adult son why the fuck he did not try to save that kid.

[snip]

You know, there’s a part of me who looks at the actions of each of non-raping grown men in the “Pennsylvania State University small-child-allegedly-being-raped-by-a-grown-man-who-is-part-of-the-football-hierarchy” scandal and can understand why those men could rationalize a) not immediately acting in the interests of a small child being raped, b) not immediately going to the police, c) doing only the minimum legal requirements in the situation, d) acting to keep from exposing their organization to a scandal. But here’s the thing: that part of me? The part that understands these actions? That part of me is a fucking coward. And so by their actions — and by their inactions — were these men.

Read the rest here (and, really, do read the rest).

Be Sociable, Share!

Comments

  1. Mike Devx says

    Well, Sadie, if Cain had won a Senate seat, he would have been only 1 of 100.  That may not be enough power to really upset the status quo, so that may be why they didn’t go after him.

    In addition, he was never REALLY a threat to take the seat away from Isaacson (right name)?  If he’d been closer to achieving a runoff against Isaacson, perhaps they would have gone after him then, or during the runoff itself.

    So it may be that no one took Cain to be a serious threat during his run for the Georgia Senate seat.

    But yes, I do agree with you, it is incredibly odd that all of the Cain allegations revolve only around his time spent leading the National Restaurant Association.  He has done so much more, leading across other industries.  The behavior described, limited to just that two or three years?  It is *extremely* unlikely!  So where are all the other accusers across all those other years?  And all the accusers (as the details emerge) are tied into theDemocrat propaganda mouthpiece Politico and/or the Chicago Axelrod machine…  and Obama has gotten where he is due to repeated Axelrod manipulations of opponents’ sexual history.  It’s very very interesting…

    The story that destroyed Obama’s Republican opponent for the Illinois Senate run, probably should not have destroyed him.  It left Obama with no opponent at all, it came so late in the campaign.  (Yes, I know, they flew in Alan Keyes to run against Obama at the last moment, but that was *never* going to succeed.)  Illinois Republicans should have fought and stuck it out and probably would have run.  And there would then be no President Obama today.  Strange how these things work.

    The Illinois Republicans should have fought back then.  And we all should definitely be prepared to fight back now.  Keep your powder dry a little longer, because all the details and all the story hasn’t emerged yet.  Just a little more time…

     

  2. SADIE says

    The story that destroyed Obama’s Republican opponent for the Illinois Senate run….
     
    That would be Jack Ryan, whose sealed divorce records in California were unsealed and sealed the seat for you-know-who.  Another coincidence?

  3. Michael Adams says

    No time to put in a link, but go to Ann Coulter’s column yesterday on the matter.  Talk about cutting to the chase! She points out that all the complaints come from Chicago, one of the women actually living in Axelrod’s building. It all makes sense.

  4. says

     
    @DofA and Michael:  About personal space….
     
    My “wake-up” to this was when we went to Bolivia for a year right after we were married.  I found myself constantly moving backward whenever talking to someone who’d grown up in country….if in a room, I’d end up with my back against the wall, feeling uncomfortable.  Gail and I talked about it, figured out what was going on, and simply disciplined ourselves to overcome the discomfort of having someone a few inches inside the invisible line defining our comfort zone.
     
    Then, of course, we’d laugh every time we’d see a Bolivian talking to an American, as the American kept moving backwards and the Bolivian forwards, each attempting to fulfill their respective need for the “proper” distance. 
     
    People are funny – unending pleasure to watch!

  5. says

    Everybody was saying the same thing about Sarah palin when they said she or her husband was something or other. Don’t people remember? Or did Leftist brainwashing psychops remove that little “doublethink” already.

     

  6. says

    My personal space is defined by the length of my arms. People I talk to stay at that length, or risk becoming rated by me as “potentially hostile”. Distance is the number one prerequisite to violent attacks using hand to hand, melee, or polearms. When a person gets within arms length, they can now headbutt, launch attacks, use knife stabs, and you’re ability to see it and react in time, are significantly decremented.

     If someone tries to get close, a simple block using one’s arms at full extension will usually get the message across. A firm verbal warning and a direct escalation to more forceful means if the verbal warning is not obeyed, will command obedience and restructure human behavior to fit. Like dogs, humans will chase retreating foes, whereas a standing wall of a human will exude gravitas and aura enough to stop both human and canine in their tracks.

    In point of fact, it is rather dangerous to get too close to people who know how to use violence, particularly lethal force, at H2H/melee range and have the power to do so using tools they have on them or just their bare hands. The only reason “societies” in the world have developed such a close tolerance for space means that their “citizens” are nothing but sheep, with no fangs, tooth, nails, or claws that can present a threat. Once you are within arms reach of a person that can utilize lethal force using no tools whatsoever, you basically have a loaded gun pointed at your head, except you don’t realize it.

     

  7. says

    In Georgia, there’s a sort of expectation or civic duty that expects civilians to stop crimes in process. This has resulted in broad concealed carry permits (unlike specialized and limited permits in California where only the powerful, like Feinstein can get em, who then try to limit them for others via regulations, fines, and laws). It has also resulted in a the Bowie knife law where anyone with a concealed carry is also authorized to carry long bladed knives (daggers really).

    Basically, if a law can be proven to have been attempted, and the force utilized stopped that crime, and nobody else was harmed as a consequence of that force other than the criminals, most prosecutors will not or even cannot prosecute, given the laws and the opinions of juries. This is slightly different for Atlanta, ruled by black Democrats, but the laws constrain them as well. They don’t get the meta-support in places like New Orleans. The culture and the law still impacts them. In the hinterlands of Georgia, near the Appalachian mountains (mountain people), things are much purer in essence.

  8. Mike Devx says

    It appears I have a huge moral blind spot, the same one that the assistant coach who witnessed Jerry Sandusky raping a 10-12 year old boy in a shower has.

    I read the account of that incident: The assistant coach was puzzled by the lights being on when they shouldn’t have been, heard the showers running, heard a “slap,slap,slap” flesh noise, walked back to the showers and observed the rape in progress.  He then LEFT – admittedly badly shaken – went home, and called his father to discuss it, and then the next morning reported it to Joe Paterno, who reported it to his AD.

    The moral blind spot:  Why did the assistant not immediately intervene, stop the rape, get that boy the hell out of there to some protection, and call the police?  That is the only moral action possible!  He didn’t do it.  And as I read through the account, it simply didn’t occur to me either.  I’m still troubled by that.  Basically, what the hell went wrong with him in observing it and not acting; and what the hell went wrong with me, in reading the account and not immediately realizing, “Hey, you idiot! You should have immediately rescued that boy and called the police!  Immediately!”

    Maybe because I was reading a grand jury report clinically, detached?  Not an excuse, not good enough.

    It’s bothered me so much, I hope I’ve reset my moral compass.  Even as I’ve read what others wrote, and about the pressure that assistant has come under in the last few days, I still think I didn’t accept the moral failure seriously enough.  His in action, mine in reading about it and not reacting.  It’s very disturbing to me.

    The first half of this article really brought it home to me today.  Something about the way this was written broke through to me, finally.  Perhaps worth a read for others!

    http://whatever.scalzi.com/2011/11/10/omelas-state-university/
     

  9. says

    I’m wondering, Mike, if the guy simply couldn’t believe what he was seeing, ie, he didn’t react because his mind refused to accept his eye’s data.

    Here’s another theory: in this day and age of moral relativism, maybe he didn’t understand that what he saw was wrong. To him, it might have been “private.”

    As for your reaction, you read it, you didn’t see it. A different part of the brain was engaged.

  10. suek says

    I’m still undecided about the official stuff – who should have done what when.  Some of the stuff that’s coming out leads me to believe that there’s even greater moral wrong doing than we even suspected initially – and that’s the reason reason the report was ineffective.  But who should “pay”?  I don’t know.  Not yet.  Maybe never…but it’s becoming a bit clearer.
     
    Still – I’ve been shocked by the riots.  Some articles seem to indicate that the riots are just events looking for any wayward cause, but in this case, the cause they’ve landed on seems to be to blame the young man for _reporting_ what he saw.  Not for not stopping it, not for not reporting it to the police – but for taking the apparently ineffective step of simply reporting it to his superior.  He’s apparently received death threats.  For reporting the rape of a young boy.
     
    I can’t tell you how deeply this makes me wonder about the students there. 
     
    Cut their football.  I wouldn’t care at this point if the closed down the whole university.  It seems to be akin to Sodom and Gomorrah.  Let it burn to the ground.

  11. Michael Adams says

    Duchess,  You may have  misunderstood my reference to Black and White Southerners.  Both races demand a wide berth.  Do not touch a Black person, if you desire, eventually, to become friends. (Nor White, of course.) My side point was that is one of those things that rather unites the races, of which there are more than many people suppose. Since Mr. Cain is from Georgia, I have no doubt that he would want others to keep a proper distance, which makes that woman who was hugging him seem really out of line. 
     
    In some churches I have attended, the Passing of the Peace includes a lot of hugging. People think I am joking when I insist that I only hug on Christmas and Easter. They soon learn.  No, I don’t hurt them, but folded arms, backing away, hand held far out to shake it, eventually convey the message to even the most culturally dense. I had a priest who would insist on hugging me.  I think it was like that thing where Kerry was always hugging Edwards, dominance. Notice, I “had” a priest.  It was not the only reason we changed churches, but it would have been enough.
     
     

  12. Mike Devx says

    As far as I can tell, the Penn State students rioted because JoePa had been fired.  They overturned a van and smashed its windows and “rioted on into the night”, as one report put it.

    I could accept taking the opinion that he should not have been fired.  He *thought* the police had been notified correctly.  He violated no university code or law.  But it is easier to understand him being fired than not fired.  These university students are adults.  Riots by so-called adults?  Inexcusable.

     

  13. SADIE says

    Mike McQueary the assistant head coach in 2002, who witnessed the rape of a 10 year-old boy in 2002 and who NOT only did not STOP it, who did NOT call not the police and did NOT report it to Paterno, until he spoke with his own father first. I’ll take a guess here.. McQueary, was worried about his job and his future at Penn State. Remember, Sandusky was not “officially” working for Penn State –  he left in 1999 and very oddly, was never offered another coaching job anywhere at any time for another college (COULD IT BE THE WORD WAS OUT ABOUT HIM in 1998) and yet, access to the facilities were part of his perks. Paterno was quite aware of 1998 and 2002 and yet Sandusky still had access.
     
     
    To the rioting (tipping over a TV truck) my best guess is that it was an emotional response to Paterno. It’s like hiding your eyes during a scary part of a movie or turning the page quickly when reading a thriller – if you do it quickly enough, you don’t observe or have to absorb the really horrible.
     
     

  14. Duchess of Austin says

    I have no sympathy for McQueary.  He witnessed a crime and not only did he not stop the crime in progress, he didn’t report it for more than 12 hours, at the very least.  So, even if Paterno had called in the police after McQueary reported to him, enough time had passed that any physical evidence against the perp would be degraded at best, and possibly lost or unusable.
     
    If he had done the right thing, in the moment, with no concern for anything but saving that child, he might not have been given the job he had until today as a payoff for his loyal silence.  How many children could have been spared the loving attentions of a monster?  Sure, even 10 or 12 years ago, the scandal would have been a black eye for PS, but now?  Devastation.  Of the athletic department and possibly the university itself.
     
    Karma’s a bitch, isn’t she?  All the machinations of the powerful, their loyal minions and the conspiracy of silence did nothing but stave off the inevitable….actually making it worse.

  15. Michael Adams says

    Ymarsakar in #57 hit on a difference in culture, which has produced a difference in law.  The expectation that individuals will act is incorporated in law, as mentioned above, for one example, that, in Texas, everyone who knows about child abuse has an absolute legal duty to report it, while PA has a chain-of-command approach written into their law. Note, I did say that there are plenty of management types  in Texas who want you to report to them, up the ladder.  I’ll add that certainly many Pennsylvanians would act independently, but they are perhaps not the majority. We are talking about a big divide, here, one that produces, among other effects, Red and Blue states. It would seem that long-term changes would involve initiatives that encouraged individual responses, like celebrating the Shanksville attempt, Boy Scouts, firearms training, even CPR and first aid classes, every one of which gives people a sense of individual empowerment and therefore of individual responsibility.  Note here that the non-reacting graduate assistant was a product of the University. As far back as forty two  years ago, we were being taught in our classes about the superiority of collective action.  The extracurricular stuff, i.e. campus radicalism, went further, but was  different only in degree, not in kind,  from what we were getting from most of the profs.
     
    Contrast this with the response to Charles Whitman.  In the summer of 1967, he climbed to the top of the Tower, in the middle of campus, and with a couple of rifles and a telescopic site, started shooting people below him. Students went to their dorms and their off-campus apartments and got their guns, and started shooting up at the top of the Tower, keeping Whitman pinned down while the police climbed up and took him down. These guys were not Fight Club types.  They went on to get degrees in engineering and Greek and math, and are now grandads, approaching or past retirement age from quite ordinary jobs, but that, right there, is the key difference:  Although they were destined to very ordinary lives and professions, they still understood the individual duty to act, and,  some of them, at least, answered duty’s call.
     
    A few years ago, when I still listened to NPR, I heard a very shocked All Things Considered piece about a National Rifle Association chapter in the Northeast that held shooting classes for slum kids. NRA actually does a great deal of this, happily only attracting occasional notice from NPR, but we need to do a great deal more of it. Karate classes in Oakland would be another good example of, well, setting good examples, because the  discipline and self control learned in martial arts would encourage a more thoughtful, less emotional response to life. America is not so far gone that most of us alive today could see the effect in our own lifetimes, of a rebirth of individualism. We could yet make #Occupy Resolute Desk irrelevant.

  16. says

    Scalzi was and is a big Obama supporter. He was telling people on his blog that Obama would fix what Wall Street and the banks “broke”, and how Republicans can’t talk about fixing the economy when the Republicans crashed the economy. He told people to believe in Obama’s ability to “fix” other people’s messes, and was rather downright obnoxiously arrogant about it all. He, like most people, think his expertise in one field magically transfers *gasp* to other stuff he touches, like Midas.

     

  17. says

    Scalzi is guilty of not just sitting back and letting Obama rape Americans all year long, take their property, and gloat over it, but Scalzi was an Active Participant in the looting. Anyone that tries to raise Scalzi as an opinion worth noting, will be treated by me appropriately given the circumstances of Scalzi’s previous guilt and sins.

     So when Scalzi starts talking about some guy somehow “seeing” stuff going on and did nothing, Scalzi is a hypocrite. What does he expect, for people to recognize evil and do something about it? Did Scalzi do a Fing damn thing to help fight evil in 2008? Hell no, he freaking helped it along and gloated about it, that’s what. So Scalzi, he can just shut up and die in my view.

     Universities like Penn State don’t teach critical thinking. If someone sees something they are unsure of, and sexual conduct, drug use, crime, and rape are all things people tend to shy away from, then the person that can use critical thinking would first determine what exactly they are witnessing. They would ask questions, interview, and gain more information. They wouldn’t jump to conclusions, either right or wrong, concerning what happened. Information is what is required to make decisions. When people ignore their own brain’s demand for information, of course they are going to screw up the decision making process. If they ignore it, that is so. If they assume something happened that didn’t (Duke Lacrosse), that is so. If they assume it didn’t happen, when it did, that is so too.

     Such things are not “experiences” most people are familiar with. Rape, violent crime, people just don’t understand how it is done, nor have witnessed it. So when they read the word, they imagine that it is easy. Nothing about personally witnessing violence or crime is “easy”, especially for the green horn desk chair monday quarterbacker.

     

  18. Duchess of Austin says

    I’m sorry, but what is it that is confusing about what one should do when a 6’4″, 250 pound former quarterback *walks in* on an old guy standing naked over a *child* who is turned to the wall with his hands on it, as he is hearing rythmic *slapping noises?*  Huh?  What is confusing about *stop the attack?”  Why should anybody cut this man-boy any slack at all for not doing the right thing?
     
    Why should McQueary, or *anybody else* associated with what must have been an open secret in the football community, be excused for their appalling lack of judgement? 
     
    McQueary did what he did to protect numbers 1 and 2.  Himself and Paterno.  He was rewarded for his silence with a cushy coaching job and all the perks that go with it.  There is *nothing* confusing about that and all the wishy-washy wussies claiming “fight or flight” syndrome are just full of it.  The bottom line is that the program had to be protected at all costs and the kids were merely collateral damage.  Paterno and Sandusky were good friends for years and Paterno must have had some idea of what a monster Sandusky was when he was forced into *retirement* at the age of 55, well over 10 years ago.

  19. Charles Martel says

    What Duchess said is spot on. I don’t have an ounce of sympathy for Paterno. When the chickenshit McQueary reported what he had seen, Paterno knew full well what Sandusky had been up to. JoPa showed his own moral cowardice by kicking the issue upstairs. Had Penn State actually done something about Sandusky’s rapes, Paterno could have plausibly said that he was not the one who’d fingered his good ol’ buddy.  

  20. Mike Devx says

    Charles M said #70: When the chickenshit McQueary reported what he had seen, Paterno knew full well what Sandusky had been up to. JoPa showed his own moral cowardice by kicking the issue upstairs.

    Charles is spot on.  All the Penn State higher ups already knew about Sandusky before this shower rape incident.  They already knew!  The assistant coach may have frozen at the moment of moral decision – and collapsed – but the higher ups deliberately turned their back on these poor kids.  Now that more details are coming out, it’s clear the firings are entirely justified.
     

  21. Michael Adams says

    Generally speaking, the news of other people’s sin is supposed to be the signal to search our own souls, not to assure ourselves that we would do differently, but to find the weakness, the bad leaven, that would cause us to behave the same. I am hard pressed to do that, here. McQueary is ten inches taller than I am, and I am damned sure that I could stop  the rape of a little boy, or, at the very least, make it much less fun. McQueary did  nothing.  It’s a funny thing, but the academic departments like to belittle the intellects of the athletes. Sound to me like the athletics  faculty for rationalization was equal to anything the academic faculty could muster.
     
    While ripping a scab off the athletic program at Penn State does not offer us many individual moral lessons, it is definitely true that it reveals a depth of moral necrosis in academia that many people will try to say is vastly different from their own establishments, as Americans saw the corruption of New Orleans exposed, policemen who  did not report for duty because they never existed, evacuation plans never implemented, levy improvement funds piddled away, all of which exist in dozens of American cities, and all people could see was George Bush’s supposed racism.
     
    The lesson is there, if we would but learn it.

  22. says

    I don’t excuse anything the individuals involved here have done. They are not beholden to me, but nor am I to them. Thus I make no judgment of things people claim happened. If you believe X over there should have done something when he was there, that basically means none of us were there and thus our opinions are not his opinions nor could it have led to any decisions on his part.

     It’s legitimate to question actions after the fact when people can usually mull over their options. It’s not legitimate to second guess the experiences of other people vis a vis crime as it is happening to or around them, because most people, and I’m talking about you all here as well, have little to no experience dealing with real crime or criminals. Thus their view is neither expert nor particularly sound. Much of what people pick up about crime… is when they hear about it being talked about by other people on the news. Like Penn State. They lack the experience and wisdom required to make a judgment, and plus they don’t have the facts of what actually happened. Maybe if they were seasoned criminal and citizen guards that deal with crime and criminals like child molestors all the time, maybe they could intuit what should have happened based upon scant evidence, but that doesn’t apply here.

     So the whole prejudice thing comes from moral expectations, not realistic or sound judgment of the facts on the ground. Let’s be clear about that. People who want to second guess, monday quarterback, and all that stuff just wish for people to have “better” behavior. They’re not actually forming a judgment of how to make people have better behavior utilizing personal experiences. Morality is not truth. The facts on the ground do not always lead to a moral solution acceptable to society. Morality is dumb, basically. It doesn’t know how to determine truth; it can only force people to behave or misbehave.

    People think that because they went to college, they know how something like Penn State works. They have no clue. Evidence one, they had to be told about the corruption before they ever figured out. Big fat lot of good their “college” degrees allowed them to figure that out ahead of time. So basically, if you were ever an administrator or made hiring/firing decisions, you will more easily see why corrupt people had to be fired at Penn State. However, if you have most of your life experience dealing with crime, then you might have higher expectations rightly about how Penn State or the authority figures should have acted. But those things don’t cross each other. A person that believes Penn State should be purged, is not making the same judgment as monday quarterbacking what people should have done upon witnessing what they thought was improper behavior on campus grounds. This also applies to muggings. People who have been mugged, like Robin, don’t have any better judgment concerning serial killers and arsonists, just because they were knew how muggers work. One does not follow the other.

    This is another example of the popular human tendency to believe their experience and expertise in A somehow magically transfers over to all kinds of other human fields and experiences. It doesn’t.

  23. suek says

    >> Now that more details are coming out, it’s clear the firings are entirely justified.>>

    Now that more details are coming out, I’m wondering how long each of the members of the board have been on the board, and – assuming they were in fact members of the board for the last five years – why they should be held any less guilty. Seems to me they should resign en masse.

    Or find out where the buck stopped ….

  24. SADIE says

    suek
     
    To be honest, I don’t know how many sit on the board. There are honorary board members such as Governor Corbett and several of his administrative staff.



    Anyway, here’s a snip and more at the rest at the link.


    Even though Paterno himself had told the grand jury that McQueary saw “something of a sexual nature,” Paterno said this week that he had stopped the conversation before it got too graphic. Instead, he told McQueary he would need to speak with his superior, Athletic Director Tim Curley, and with Schultz.

    That meeting did not happen for 10 days.


    http://bcfoley.blogspot.com/2011/11/mike-mcqueary-in-protective-custody.html

Trackbacks

Leave a Reply