And who exactly were they? Someone in the football program? The president of the university? Names, please.
This is just ridiculous. Do not try and make this about homosexuality. There are literally millions of homosexuals who never touch or even think about touching little boys and girls. These men were cowards. It had nothing to do with liberal or conservative.
And at least one homosexual named Sandusky who does touch little boys. I agree. But what were they afraid of? Confronting a homosexual predator. If Sandusky had been caught raping a girl they would have reacted much differently.
It's a ridiculous explanation and you know it. The explanation is that these men were, like most people, more concerned about themselves than they were about these boys. They were cowards, plain and simple. It has nothing to do with homosexuality or liberal academia.
I think this went above the President of PSU, possibly to political people in the state, upto and including the Governor.
And what about the heterosexual rape of children? I guess conservatives will try and make it acceptable to marry pubescent girls again? It's consistent with the kind of traditional values they embrace, am I right?
Doing the right thing. Going against the grain. Challenging their peers. Rocking the boat. Damaging the Penn State football program. What a load of BS.
Doing the right thing and turning Sandusky over to the police might have caused a flurry at the time but rather than damaging the program, would have been a testament to upholding the values they so proudly espouse. By choosing the football program over the welfare of the children, it's brought them ALL down and IMO, deservedly so.
Well they already had one of those in the SF Supervisors named Harvey Milk, and they gave him a state holiday.
I absolutely agree....... this whole thing was called CYA - Cover Your Ass - the minute the whimpy, spineless 28 yr old McGreavy (what ever his name is) witnessed the rape of a boy, but ran to his daddy, instead of stopping Sandusky and calling the cops rite there... The next morning he told Joe P ....... how in the hell could a person SLEEP after seeing that and knowing that boy was still in Sandusky's clutches? That coward who witnessed the rape and did nothing but run to daddy should never work w/kids .... he's proven he's not capable of protecting them from harm.......
You better believe that I believe what I'm saying. You're not even able to deal with Sandusky as a homosexual without going off on a tangent about heterosexuals who rape girls. Your reaction explains why libs can't accept Sandusky as a gay man who rapes boys. You think it will hurt the narrative of homosexuals as victims.
I don't understand how she could have been so blind as to his behavior around these boys..... he had to have some spend nights w/them? They had their own kids, including adopted kids? He had to spend time alone w/the boy in their basement and she didn't wonder why?
I usually agree w/you, but can't on this.... rape is rape whether homo or hetero and I have my doubts that that ballless coward would have helped a girl. I don't see politics in this and it shouldn't be .... I see a bunch of POS's who were more terrified of their beloved castle come tumbling down around their ears if the scandal hit the airwaves......... But then, Mac - m/b you're right and it's dirty politics also ... I don't know. It's just so dam sick that so many have lost their morals, sense of humanity where a 28 yr old so-called man would witness the brutal rape of a boy and he'd run away to talk to his daddy about it.... and then the CYA game started....
It's quite possible. Currently, there are rumors circulating that Sandusky used his charity to help pimp children out to rich donors of the university. Regardless of whether or not there is any truth to this, there were clearly people in high positions of power that spent at least a decade covering up Sandusky's abuses. McQueary wasn't the only person to report Sandusky, and it looks like there is evidence that even law enforcement was aware of the situation. If Sandusky ends up dead in the next few weeks, it's probably going to be sold as a suicide, but given the circumstances, he might be someone with information that could implicate some very powerful people.
Let me see if I can clarify something. A pedo can be gay, but a gay person isn't usually pedo. You keep acting like they're mutually inclusive.
To me, that's more understandable b/c Sandusky had kids - you know, the family scene? - but for his wife not to wonder why he'd want to spend time alone in their basement w/the boy, which would mean he'd tell wife & his kids to leave them alone? And to take the boy on a trip to AZ .... was his family with? If she & kids didn't go w/them..... Bells & whistles should have been going off in her head.........
You have quite an imagination. It wasn't liberalism that inspired the "looking away." It was most likely the fact that he was a good coach. When you consider how much money a successful athletics program can generate for a college, then you start to understand how people can put profit ahead of even the safety of children. It was greed and cowardice that inspired the coverup -- not liberalism.
Um... that list is going to get rather long. If I'm not mistaken, Pennsylvania doesn't have the death penalty anyway.
