<p>
</p>
<p>Oh good lord, how many times do we have to say it? No one is claiming that any individual student or group of students who enjoys a PSU football game is “morally bankrupt” or “depraved” or even a “part of the cult.”</p>
<p>ljrfrm - thank you so much for your commitment.</p>
<p>I think Spanier is a LOT more to blame than Paterno. He was President of the University. The buck stopped on his desk. Really, if he just picked up the phone and called the police, what could Paterno (or anyone else) have done. There is no excuse for not calling, no reason not to call. An immediate phone call would have been a few days of media–but mostly “we called asap because we have honor”. It would have blown over with little impact on the football program, and so many children would have been spared.</p>
<p>When reading about these events, I have to remind myself that it all unfolded over a long period of time. I doubt Paterno’s hold on PSU was consistant over all that time. There seems to be a significant portion of the PSU community who wanted him to retire.</p>
<p>Kayf - I just want the faculty to focus on providing the same outstanding quality of education that they always have and to prepare the students for their future careers and endeavors.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yes, and his name is still on a library, and Peachy Paterno ice cream is being served on campus.</p>
<p>If Sandusky had died, do you think they should have continued serving “Sandusky Blitz” ice cream? Hey, it doesn’t matter if students are eating ice cream bearing the name of a child rapist, right? Because he’s dead!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>As it should. Until Penn State finds someone to pay back the money that Joe Paterno and his wife donated to the school to build it.</p>
<p>I can see the point re the library (if Paterno funded it), but please explain rationale on the ice cream?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>**soph·ist·ry **/ˈsɒfəstri/
noun, plural soph·ist·ries.<br>
- a subtle, tricky, superficially plausible, but generally fallacious method of reasoning.
- a false argument; sophism.</p>
<p>You can save your pity, Mini. I am confident that we raised him to discern right from wrong, to think independently and to esteem integrity. As an aside, he doesn’t have to study in Paterno Library and doesn’t. I’m laughing, but since you’re really concerned, he made it to church yesterday too. </p>
<p>Hope your day gets better.</p>
<p><<…please explain rationale on the ice cream? >></p>
<p>Maybe it’s good!</p>
<p><<as an="" aside,="" he="" doesn’t="" have="" to="" study="" in="" paterno="" library="" and="" doesn’t.="">.</as></p>
<p>LOL! I only went to the library (not Penn State) when I needed to do research. Never studied there. And the only time my son has been there was during his campus tour. He studies in his room, in the HUB, or in the ENGR building.</p>
<p><< ljrfrm - thank you so much for your commitment.>> </p>
<p>Thanks!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Mom2M, you may not be aware of an incident which happened several years back. Spanier went to JoePa’s house for the purpose of firing him. That meeting ended with Paterno not only refusing to be fired, but ejecting Spanier from his house for having the gall to suggest it. If it wasn’t clear before then, it certainly became clear that day: Paterno was the more powerful of the two.</p>
<p>Further evidence of the real-life pecking order is the crisis which arose in 2001 with Mike McQueary’s eye-witness report. Spanier and Curley determined that they could no longer ignore the Sandusky problem. At long last, they were going to do just what you suggest: notify the authorities. But that never happened. Why? Because JoePa vetoed the plan. </p>
<p>Yes, on the organizational chart, Spanier out-ranked Paterno. In reality, Spanier knew very well that he was not in charge, at least, not when it came to the football program.</p>
<p>“As it should. Until Penn State finds someone to pay back the money that Joe Paterno and his wife donated to the school to build it.”</p>
<p>How does that follow? If a rich ax murderer donated money for a library, and then was found out, the university wouldn’t even consider paying back the money nor consider leaving his name on the building. How about the Madoff Library? Sound okay to you?</p>
<p>Mini, it appears you need this definition…</p>
<p>soph·ist·ry /ˈsɒfəstri/
noun, plural soph·ist·ries.
- a subtle, tricky, superficially plausible, but generally fallacious method of reasoning.
- a false argument; sophism.</p>
<p>I simply asked you how it follows that the university is required to keep the name of a criminal facilitator of child sex trafficking on a building because he gave them money.</p>
<p>So now you’ve changed from “the ax murderer” to a “facilitator.” Penn State istelf was a facilitator. Should they also remove that name entirely?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Way to miss the point I tried to make about divergent opinions, Pilot. </p>
<p>Would you feel better if I said I agreed in general with Coureur. I could have said the same thing about Mini, and God knows how many times I have disagreed with them on finer points. Do you really expect me to dissect every line of their posts and analyze each elements separately … only to be further dissected by others? Do you really expect me to comment on the accuracy and relevance of Coureur’s post, and explain why people can comment on the post-nazi years in Germany without intimating that PSU is engaging in 1930’s behavior? Was his line
not clear enough?</p>
<p>There are 8,000 posts in this thread. Want to go dig deeper for more? This is really silly.</p>
<p>“So now you’ve changed from “the ax murderer” to a “facilitator.” Penn State istelf was a facilitator. Should they also remove that name entirely?”</p>
<p>I think they should rebuild that name, and can help do so by removing the name of facilitators of child sex trafficking from their buildings. And I do not at all see how they’d need to “pay back” the money in order to do so. What are the Paternos going to do - sue them? And open up the entire JoePa can of worms?</p>
<p>You still haven’t answered my question, but I can appreciate why you are avoiding doing so.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Great, you say you get it, but do you also “get” the why some of us still believe that all those great things you enumerated pale in comparison to what was really needed, namely a lengthy death penalty for the football team.</p>
<p>For the record, all those good things you mentioned are not be ignored nor derided. They ARE good steps in the right direction, but football is still played by PSU, and THAT is and will be a problem. A problem that will not be erased by any amount of goodwill … or denial.</p>
<p>I guess you do have time to look at spelling though.</p>
<p>You said: Since you named me, I will respond. What is your basis for your OPINION that some of us confuse opinion with facts, and are trying to pass opinions for facts? And why should that tendancy(sic) you noted be a fact --as opposed to your opinion?</p>