Jan 22, 2012
Zok commented on It Was Always Hard to Imagine Penn State Without Joe Paterno, or Vice Versa.
@62
You're talking out of your ass. PSUSD aren't a bunch of Barney Fifes. In fact, they're the serious side of law enforcement in the Borough. By State Statute...
(Section 2416.1 of the Administrative Code of 1929 (Act 57 of 1997) and Section 2416.1 Campus Police Powers and Duties)
...They have the same authority as cops in Phlly and Pittsburgh.
Give-up dude. You're getting your ass kicked.
You're talking out of your ass. PSUSD aren't a bunch of Barney Fifes. In fact, they're the serious side of law enforcement in the Borough. By State Statute...
(Section 2416.1 of the Administrative Code of 1929 (Act 57 of 1997) and Section 2416.1 Campus Police Powers and Duties)
...They have the same authority as cops in Phlly and Pittsburgh.
Give-up dude. You're getting your ass kicked.
Jan 22, 2012
Zok commented on It Was Always Hard to Imagine Penn State Without Joe Paterno, or Vice Versa.
@60
The only thing you need concern yourself with is:
Would you, im Joe Paterno's position, been reasonable in your thinking in assuming that; by calling the person charged with overseeing law enforcement, and; having expressed the seriousness of the offense; in the presence of others; and being told it would be looked-into, been comfortable in thinking that had reported the incident?
No?
The only thing you need concern yourself with is:
Would you, im Joe Paterno's position, been reasonable in your thinking in assuming that; by calling the person charged with overseeing law enforcement, and; having expressed the seriousness of the offense; in the presence of others; and being told it would be looked-into, been comfortable in thinking that had reported the incident?
No?
Jan 22, 2012
Zok commented on It Was Always Hard to Imagine Penn State Without Joe Paterno, or Vice Versa.
@52
Wrong. Joe Paterno was never a Board Member of Second Mile. (If you insist, cite references please.)
Further, get your timeline straight. In 1998, the rumors were refuted as to be unfounded after an in-depth investigation. At the point several years later that Paterno heard a first-hand recounting of a crime, he acted immediately by calling the guy in charge of campus polices (FYI, PSUPD is as big as the Borough of State College police dept.)
Is there any evidence you have that says this isn't true? Because if not, just admit you've misjudged the fact of the case and only mindlessly repeated your loser friends.
@53
No, in fact "Joe Paterno" didn't give Sandusky access to "the football facilities." Sandusky was named an emeritus professor in the School of Physical Education (on the Academic side of the institution, not Athletics). His offices were in the East Area Locker building, across the street. That's how he had access.
Jesus, you two are gullible if you simply believe and regurgitate everything Rachel Maddow serves-up.
More...
Wrong. Joe Paterno was never a Board Member of Second Mile. (If you insist, cite references please.)
Further, get your timeline straight. In 1998, the rumors were refuted as to be unfounded after an in-depth investigation. At the point several years later that Paterno heard a first-hand recounting of a crime, he acted immediately by calling the guy in charge of campus polices (FYI, PSUPD is as big as the Borough of State College police dept.)
Is there any evidence you have that says this isn't true? Because if not, just admit you've misjudged the fact of the case and only mindlessly repeated your loser friends.
@53
No, in fact "Joe Paterno" didn't give Sandusky access to "the football facilities." Sandusky was named an emeritus professor in the School of Physical Education (on the Academic side of the institution, not Athletics). His offices were in the East Area Locker building, across the street. That's how he had access.
Jesus, you two are gullible if you simply believe and regurgitate everything Rachel Maddow serves-up.
Jan 22, 2012
Zok commented on It Was Always Hard to Imagine Penn State Without Joe Paterno, or Vice Versa.
Wrong again.
Paterno understood that there were rumors about Sandusky in the late 90's. Sandusky was previously advised that an extensive 1998 police investigation (Borough of State College, not PSUPD) had revealed allegations, but had not uncovered grounds for prosecution.
Wrong again.
Paterno understood that there were rumors about Sandusky in the late 90's. Sandusky was previously advised that an extensive 1998 police investigation (Borough of State College, not PSUPD) had revealed allegations, but had not uncovered grounds for prosecution.
Jan 22, 2012
Zok commented on It Was Always Hard to Imagine Penn State Without Joe Paterno, or Vice Versa.
@35 and @42
Thank you for proving (again) that you're fucking idiots. Even a passing understanding of the facts of the case would belie your imbecilism.
The grand jury found, and EVERYONE acknowledges, that Paterno called Gary Schultz, the VP of Operations at Penn State BECAUSE he was the chief administrator in charge of the police department that had jurisdiction in the case. He didn't call Institutional Affairs, University Relations, as one would in a cover-up.
Nope: He called the guy whose only possible inclusion in the proceedings was because of his senior-level representation of law enforcement.
The fact that DID...
- Instantly respond.
- Call his boss.
- And calling the chief admin. overseeing the police
- And gave a complete recounting
And DID NOT
- Delay in responding
- Avoid anyone with law-enforcement responsibility
- Call campus image-makers
- Tell a partial story
- Call the accused to warn him
Would seem to dilute any standing your argument against him as covering-up a crime.
Sorry if the facts are inconvenient to your agenda.
(But at leest your intellectual dullness is amusing.)
More...
Thank you for proving (again) that you're fucking idiots. Even a passing understanding of the facts of the case would belie your imbecilism.
The grand jury found, and EVERYONE acknowledges, that Paterno called Gary Schultz, the VP of Operations at Penn State BECAUSE he was the chief administrator in charge of the police department that had jurisdiction in the case. He didn't call Institutional Affairs, University Relations, as one would in a cover-up.
Nope: He called the guy whose only possible inclusion in the proceedings was because of his senior-level representation of law enforcement.
The fact that DID...
- Instantly respond.
- Call his boss.
- And calling the chief admin. overseeing the police
- And gave a complete recounting
And DID NOT
- Delay in responding
- Avoid anyone with law-enforcement responsibility
- Call campus image-makers
- Tell a partial story
- Call the accused to warn him
Would seem to dilute any standing your argument against him as covering-up a crime.
Sorry if the facts are inconvenient to your agenda.
(But at leest your intellectual dullness is amusing.)
Jan 22, 2012
Zok commented on It Was Always Hard to Imagine Penn State Without Joe Paterno, or Vice Versa.
Wherever did someone get the impression that idolization of Joe Paterno was a necessary condition for objectively assessing the conditions and circumstances?
Joe Paterno -- citizen, and entitled to blind justice -- called authorities immediately. He gave a complete accounting of what he knew and heard. You don't dispute that do you?
The suggestion that he was covering for the rapist isn't supported by any facts any reasonable assessment. And suggesting that only people who will stand-up for someone else, do so only because their "idol" has "fallen" is simply part of the lame narrative of negativism, typical of the Sloggish.
Yes, far better to trash a college coaches life of work with slanted hysteria, than to make a meaningful contribution in your own spheres. Bitch bitch bitch about contributors in society isn't doin much to better your own sorry lives. He's not an "idol" of mine in any way. He's a guy who stumbled in the course of making the correct step.
You should hope others would defend you when you try to do the right thing, and stumble, when others would rather you be kicked down.
More...
Joe Paterno -- citizen, and entitled to blind justice -- called authorities immediately. He gave a complete accounting of what he knew and heard. You don't dispute that do you?
The suggestion that he was covering for the rapist isn't supported by any facts any reasonable assessment. And suggesting that only people who will stand-up for someone else, do so only because their "idol" has "fallen" is simply part of the lame narrative of negativism, typical of the Sloggish.
Yes, far better to trash a college coaches life of work with slanted hysteria, than to make a meaningful contribution in your own spheres. Bitch bitch bitch about contributors in society isn't doin much to better your own sorry lives. He's not an "idol" of mine in any way. He's a guy who stumbled in the course of making the correct step.
You should hope others would defend you when you try to do the right thing, and stumble, when others would rather you be kicked down.
Jan 22, 2012
Zok commented on It Was Always Hard to Imagine Penn State Without Joe Paterno, or Vice Versa.
Slog readers are so wanting (check: emotionally needing) to rebut traditional figures that it clouds their thinking: The first thing Joe Paterno did was call his boss, and separately called the University Administrator who was in charge of the police. Two calls. Right away. He then gave a complete accounting of what he heard. Nobody disputes this.
He did not actively pursue any subsequent enquiry, as he admits - though had been told (by the chief of the police) that it would be looked into.
However: Keep in mind that the child rapist had not been an employee of Paternos for something like 10 years, and since Paterno had broken his pelvis, was not frequenting his on-campus office. Consequently, he had virtually no contact with the rapist.
So, in hindsight. Joe Paterno was a good man who appears to have made a good decision, but not a sufficiently good decision. In hindsight, he recognized that shortcoming and rather graciously accepted the consequence.
In the full light of the facts, Slog readers come-across as socially damaged angerphiles, so intent on finding fault with a symbols of "traditional values" that they are willing to throw a hard-working educator onto the pyre. The only thing that fire illuminates is there own deficiencies and self-hate.
More...
Slog readers are so wanting (check: emotionally needing) to rebut traditional figures that it clouds their thinking: The first thing Joe Paterno did was call his boss, and separately called the University Administrator who was in charge of the police. Two calls. Right away. He then gave a complete accounting of what he heard. Nobody disputes this.
He did not actively pursue any subsequent enquiry, as he admits - though had been told (by the chief of the police) that it would be looked into.
However: Keep in mind that the child rapist had not been an employee of Paternos for something like 10 years, and since Paterno had broken his pelvis, was not frequenting his on-campus office. Consequently, he had virtually no contact with the rapist.
So, in hindsight. Joe Paterno was a good man who appears to have made a good decision, but not a sufficiently good decision. In hindsight, he recognized that shortcoming and rather graciously accepted the consequence.
In the full light of the facts, Slog readers come-across as socially damaged angerphiles, so intent on finding fault with a symbols of "traditional values" that they are willing to throw a hard-working educator onto the pyre. The only thing that fire illuminates is there own deficiencies and self-hate.
Dec 19, 2011
Zok commented on Ron Paul-Loving Teabagger Turns Out to Be Huge Racist.
Ummm... Even a basic search of Google shows that this guy hasn't been referenced anywhere as anything more than a solo crackpot.
It the Slog/Stranger so hard-pressed to find real news, (or a shred of objectivity) that it is relegated to propping-up freak-show loonies as emblematic of a broad, middle class support for Libertarian ideals?
For those that thought opposing character portrayal was only a tool of the Fascists: Thanks Slog, For all that you
do in lowering the collective stock of intelligence on the Left.
Ummm... Even a basic search of Google shows that this guy hasn't been referenced anywhere as anything more than a solo crackpot.
It the Slog/Stranger so hard-pressed to find real news, (or a shred of objectivity) that it is relegated to propping-up freak-show loonies as emblematic of a broad, middle class support for Libertarian ideals?
For those that thought opposing character portrayal was only a tool of the Fascists: Thanks Slog, For all that you
do in lowering the collective stock of intelligence on the Left.
Dec 16, 2011
Zok commented on Christopher Hitchens.
Why didn't the Stranger run this anti-Feminism video (particularly at :35)?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bpA7pfR0F…
Or, Hitchen's expressing his anti-abortion/pro-life stand (and at 2:15, expllcitly removing the 'right of choice" from women:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B8HhTKzmv…
(I have this hollow, sinking feeling the Hitchens, post mortem, is a actually turning-out to be a disappointing surprise to the Stranger.)
Why didn't the Stranger run this anti-Feminism video (particularly at :35)?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bpA7pfR0F…
Or, Hitchen's expressing his anti-abortion/pro-life stand (and at 2:15, expllcitly removing the 'right of choice" from women:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B8HhTKzmv…
(I have this hollow, sinking feeling the Hitchens, post mortem, is a actually turning-out to be a disappointing surprise to the Stranger.)
The Stranger
RSSSeattle Art & Performance Quarterly
A complete guide to Seattle's current art, film, dance, and theater season.
Facebook
Twitter
A for-profit publication that rails against the exploitation of the workers on May 1st – whose reportage comes from unpaid interns. That's rich.