Media

New York Times Self-Parody Watch

|

Today's official New York Times summaries of the regular columnists' contributions:

Stay tuned!

Advertisement

NEXT: Obama 2008: "Opposed" to Health Care Mandate

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. regular columnists’ contributions:

    After reading some of their stuff I’m pretty regular myself.

    1. A steady diet of NYT should induce diarrhea.

      1. Yes, you got the joke! Yay for you!

          1. That only works when’s its actually rectal, but your head is so far up your ass you don’t rrealize the name is a PARODY.

            I realize you think you own the forum, but your inability to see a parody for what it is is no excuse t spam the fucking thread AGAIN.

            1. +1 Epi

            2. +1 me

              U MAD BRO?

              1. That only works when’s its actually rectal, but your head is so far up your ass you don’t rrealize the name is a PARODY.

                I realize you think you own the forum, but your inability to see a parody for what it is is no excuse t spam the fucking thread AGAIN.

                1. +1 me

                  I set the rules, bitch.

                  U MAD, BRO?

                  1. That only works when’s its actually rectal, but your head is so far up your ass you don’t rrealize the name is a PARODY.

                    I realize you think you own the forum, but your inability to see a parody for what it is is no excuse t spam the fucking thread AGAIN.

                    1. Pointjack!

                      +1 for sloopy.

                  2. “U MAD, BRO?”

                    Says the guy chasing white imbeciles shadow 24/7

                    Jesus, he really got to you…

                    1. “U MAD, BRO?”

                      Says the guy chasing white imbeciles shadow 24/7

                      Jesus, he really got to you…

                    2. “U MAD, BRO?”

                      Says the guy chasing white imbeciles shadow 24/7

                      Jesus, he really got to you…

            3. I realize you think you own the forum,

              Lies!!!

              I own the forums!!!

              1. You are all squatters.

          2. Yea. Another junior high sandbox full of poo.

            1. Thanks Episiarch!

            2. Then don’t post, JohnSukiBot.

  2. Am I the only person in the world who wants to reserve judgment on the Penn State case until more facts are known, or is my skepticism merely a manifestation of my “privileged position in society as a white male which blinds me to the evils of an institutionalized rape culture” (as I was told on a liberal blog I commented on).

    1. “Am I the only person in the world who wants to reserve judgment on the Penn State case …”

      Yes

    2. I’m also curious as to why the Sandusky allegations are the worst evil imaginable, but the Michael Jackson allegations were a laugh-riot.

      1. It’s the glitter in the pubic that makes all the difference.

        1. Sandusky was actually witnessed hiding the sausage. Conjecture and circumstances make it easy to believe that Michael Jackson did it too but IIRC there were no witnesses to the actual event. That probably explains substantially the difference in reaction.

          1. There is ONE eyewitness to each of TWO counts.

            Eyewitness testimony is known to be incredibly unreliable at the best of times.

            Certainly, one would think that we would wait for all the evidence to be weighed before we start acting in such a case, but people get so emotional about this sort of thing that an allegation is sufficient in itself. That’s why moral panics are called moral panics.

            1. Sandusky was overheard confessing his crime to one of the victims’ mothers.

              You need to get real on this. The guy is as guilty as anyone has ever been.

            2. Eyewitness testimony is known to be incredibly unreliable at the best of times.

              I agree that eyewitness testimony can be very unreliable in terms of identifying criminals/victims who were unknown to the witness. But in the Sandusky case, the witnesses had known him for years. Plus, there’s not a lot of leeway to be mistaken on the whole “naked in the shower with an underage boy” thing.

            3. And furthermore, if people were making these kinds of accusations about me and they were completely false, I would immediately go public and say so.

              Sandusky hasn’t done that. In fact, since he posted bail he’s gone into hiding and has yet to say a single word.

            4. Eyewitness testimony is known to be incredibly unreliable at the best of times.

              So a coach failed to identify another coach? Or misinterpreted what was going on?

              Both are possible, but it’s one thing for a witness to pull in the archetypal unfamiliar young black man he saw through the shadows and quite another to identify a person he sees on a daily basis.

              The guy deserves his day in court like anyone else, but my best guess is these allegations turn out to be credible.

        2. How is Michael Jackson like caviar?

          They both come on a little cracker.

          1. How is Michael Jackson like caviar?

            They both come on a little cracker.

            I personally don’t think Michael Jackson sexually abused children…he had a unhealthy fixation with children and childish things he could indulge with his fortune, but he wasn’t a criminal deviant with children. He was too weird for even that. I wouldn’t be surprised if Michael Jackson was damn-near a virgin all his life.

            If he was a kid-toucher, the prosecutor Sneddon sure picked the worst possible example. I remember that trial and the accuser and especially the accuser’s mom were an absolute farce.

            But that joke is damn funny!

          2. What’s black and comes in small white cans?

      2. Were the Michael Jackson allegations a laugh riot? I don’t remember them being that way.

        1. Did you watch any Letterman, Leno, Conan, or SNL back in 2002?

          1. That’s because Michael Jackson himself was a laugh riot and Sandusky isn’t.

            1. “The King of Pop…ping little boys’ anal cherries.”

          2. Then complain to Letterman, Leno, and Conan, not to Me.

        2. They were before Palin rape jokes displaced them

      3. Because MJ was entertainment and football is religious.

      4. ’cause Jackson was a retard, and likely pedophile, set up by grifters. Also, it was a huge story in the early 90’s. Made that bozo O’Reilly’s career. BTW, if you read the sexual harassment court case against Billy, it seems he may have had some similar interest while vacationing in Bangkok.

    3. You want more facts?
      You sick bastard.

      1. It’s just surreal with everyone asking everyone to “remember the ‘alleged’ victims.”

        I guess I’d like to save my thoughts and prayers for actual victims.

        1. Everyone does seem to be treating this as fact which is weird. Has Sandusky admitted it? I assumed he did which is why it moved so quick to condemning everyone who apparently knew.

          1. This isn’t a courtroom, and we’re not a jury.

            Innocent until proven guilty doesn’t apply.

            1. What? I mean somebody said they saw something. I didn’t know it was common knowledge.

          2. Jared Lee Loughner hasn’t confessed to shooting anyone, so I guess we shouldn’t be talking about victims in that case either, right?

            1. Tulpa, there were dead bodies found at the scene. Whether or not Loughner did it, there is clear evidence that some people were shot to death. THAT’S why it’s appropriate to mourn those deaths.

              1. Tell me, was there any public expressions of prayer for Michael Jackson’s alleged victims like there was for Sandusky’s alleged victims at the Penn State game yesterday?

                1. Why do you care? I suspect it comes from some allegiance to football or Penn. The guy will get a trial, presumably, and if he is innocent, he can defend himself thusly.

                  Again, why do you care?

                  1. My initial comment just expressed a feeling I had about the case. Subsequently, I encountered many of the same arguments I’ve seen elsewhere. I just wish someone could convince me to adopt the popular viewpoint on this case so I didn’t feel like I was living in a nation with a lynch-mob mentality.

                    1. I admit that I’m being awfully contrarian on this topic. I just feel like it’s worthwhile to inject some healthy skepticism into the matter.

                    2. The duke trial is evidence that the popular assumptions aren’t necessarily the correct ones

                    3. About 10 minutes into that fiasco . Anybody with a brain could see the “victim” was PROBABLY full of shit. Except the feministing morons, of course.

                      I have no idea if the allegations about what happened at penn are true. IMO, THAT is not “the scandal”. . The scandal is the coach receiving a report of what allegedly happened and NOT calling police.

                      No LEGAL liability there, but an absolute moral failure.

                      And of course if the report had been received in a Timely manner, future incidents could be prevented, And rape kits could be done that would either help exonerate OR incriminate the suspect. Years later, it all comes down to he said he said bullshit.

                    4. “No LEGAL liability there, but an absolute moral failure.”

                      I’ve seen this statement repeated in the news but I’m not sure if it is factual.
                      He would have signed a teaching contract with a moral’s clause for the school’s financial protection.

                      It could be used for a legal action, and he’s hired a criminal defense attorney

                    5. Could a fart in a jar be used for legal action? I’ve been looking for years for alternate uses for those that I have stored.

                    6. The scandal is the coach receiving a report of what allegedly happened and NOT calling police.

                      To me the scandal is sending a report to the coach INSTEAD of calling the police.

                  2. Seriously, it’s only due process, the fact that courts have to adhere to that silliness doesn’t me we should.

                    /mimicking epi’s stupidity

                    1. That only works when’s its actually rectal, but your head is so far up your ass you don’t rrealize the name is a PARODY.

                      I realize you think you own the forum, but your inability to see a parody for what it is is no excuse t spam the fucking thread AGAIN.

                    2. another 1 for me

                    3. “U MAD, BRO?”

                      Says the guy chasing white imbeciles shadow 24/7

                      Jesus, he really got to you…

                    4. +1 to me, for no particular reason other than I am the Ayatollah of Rock-a-Rolla.

                  3. Innocence is no defence against such charges – and even if by some miracle Sandusky is found innocent beyond a shadow of any doubt at trial, the public will punish him anyway. That is the nature of these allegations.

                    1. Found ‘not guilty’ is not innocent, and yes, this charge carries a stain but it is our system

          3. He admitted over the phone (according to one of the victim’s mothers) that he showered with the boy and “hugged” him and that he was ashamed of himself, wished he were dead, etc.

            The fact that there are at least 8 alleged victims, and that one witness actually saw the anal rape in progress, and that Sandusky looks like a molester are all important factors. Ok, maybe not that last one. Plus Penn State took the allegations seriously enough to take away the man’s keys!!

            1. You shoulda seen some of the sick shit I did with those keys.

            2. You realize that in some countries hugging is not considered the most despicable crime possible?

    4. I hope you reminded them how guilty Roman Polanski is.

      1. Yeah, I doubt Woody Allen or Martin Scorcese will be coming to Sandusky’s defense anytime soon.

        1. So basically your case is, other people have had their rapes/child sexual abuse incidents treated lightly by the powerful elite, so we should do the same here?

          1. Exactly.
            And we should continue winning awards.

          2. No, every case deserves its fair share of skepticism.

            1. I was a skeptic on here the other day. A few posters pointed out some stories that have a lot of damning evidence about the program’s reaction and the fact that they buried this guys behavior for around 13 years.

              I have since changed my mind in light of the overwhelming evidence that these rapes were occurring and the school was not only enabling, they were actively hiding his behavior.

              I hope they raze the entire school and the BigTen invites Maryland or UVa to take their place.

              1. I hope they raze the entire school and the BigTen invites Maryland or UVa to take their place.

                Easy there. I said pretty much the same, and three out of three libertarian commenters took offense at the idea that public institutions are less than immortal. Never mind private research labs routinely fail, but goddamn, if there is one less public sector physics department in the world, that is the end of civilization.

                1. I said pretty much the same, and three out of three libertarian commenters took offense at the idea that public institutions are less than immortal.

                  Uh, if there was a child rape scandal at Google, would you be demanding they be dissolved as a corporation?

                2. chris,

                  You completely misunderstood what we who disagreed with you were trying to say. When you objected, you refused to respond to our criticisms and proceeded to build and attack strawmen. I’m not even sure why I’m responding to you now: you characterized me as “rabid” for saying that your suggestion to destroy an entire university, all the potential scientific and humanistic good it could do in the future, the reputations of its students, faculties, and alumni, was a bit of an insane response to the callous actions of a subset of the school’s administration.

                  1. Given your response above, I read you perfectly. You are a rabid defender of public institutional privilege. The funny part is how you say the things you do and are not aware of how they come across. That blind spot is what you are calling a straw man.

                    Uh, if there was a child rape scandal at Google, would you be demanding they be dissolved as a corporation?

                    That is the sort of relativism is exactly what I would expect from you, Tulpa. Public and private institutions are not on an equal moral footing due to the non-coercion principle.

                    Realistically, I would not even need to advocate there dissolution. If the principles of Google engaged in the cover up of a child rape scandal in the Penn State magnitude, the market would take care of that problem for us. They would have to have the deep social tendrils of the Vatican to have any hope of survival.

                    See what I mean, sloopyinca?

                    1. That is the sort of relativism is exactly what I would expect from you

                      That sort of relativism . . .

                      Nuts, corrected it, but a misplaced cntrl-z put it back in place.

                    2. Chris, this is another example of your, uh, unique reading comprehension skills. Careful, you’re starting to exhibit classic troll-sign.

              2. I’ll do you one better. I hope they decide that taxpayers should stop paying for collegiate athletics and disband public college sports that aren’t financially self-sustaining or completely separate from the school itself. Taxpayers should not pay for athletic scholarships. It’s b.s. that states are going deep into debt and burdening taxpayers for something so completely non-essential. Of course, I know that’s not a politically popular stance, but someone has to say it.

                1. I’m sure Penn State Football is self sustaining. That is the kind of program that is in the black.

                  1. I’m sure Penn State Football is self sustaining. That is the kind of program that is in the black.

                    Depends on how the accounting is done.

                    And if it is self-sustaining, then it should be forcibly removed from the school and operate as a professional organization on its own.

                    I stopped playing football as a youth after about 10 minutes because the coaches seemed like creepy perverts. Sandusky seems like the rule, not the exception.

                2. I have detested Graham Spanier’s hat-in-hand begging to the Pennsylvania legislature throughout his tenure as president of the university. He has increased the university’s take of tax dollars by hundreds of millions, if not billions, of dollars, and squandered it on building unnecessary new buildings, expanding the campus, and attempting to make Penn State too big to fail in the state’s eyes.

                  To be accused by some asshole like Chris, who has never once heard me debate fellow alumni on the policy of state funding for universities, or to read Proprietrist respond sympathetically to chris’s mischaracterization of my statements, is terribly frustrating.

                  You, chris, do not get to judge whether I am a libertarian by extrapolating from my comments about destruction of a university to a false accusation that I support it no matter what. I was not always a libertarian, like you, who must have sprung fully formed from the forehead of Hayek, so cut me a little slack. Part of what makes me a libertarian is what I learned about public universities, and their twisted incentives brought about by government funding.

                  1. You, chris, do not get to judge whether I am a libertarian by extrapolating from my comments about destruction of a university

                    Yes I do. Telling me I can’t is unlibertarian.

                    1. “An argument is a collected series of statements intended to establish a propositio. Contradiction is just the automatic gainsaying of any statement the other person makes!”

                      “No it isn’t. “

                    2. Speaking of contradiction, you are not making any fucking sense as either a libertarian or a statist. You state you are not defending fundamental existence of public institution in your db|11.13.11 @ 10:20PM|# post after doing just that in every post before that one, and then you call me contradictory for being entirely and wholly consistent. I can only conclude that you must be one of rectal’s many personalities.

                  2. my comments about destruction of a university to a false accusation that I support it no matter what

                    See, you are not a very honest debater. With the exception of jokingly calling you a foppish dandy, I did not extrapolate about you. I limited my observations entirely to what you presented, you overly sensitive nitwit.

              3. A few posters pointed out some stories that have a lot of damning evidence about the program’s reaction and the fact that they buried this guys behavior for around 13 years.

                This is the same school that exonerated Michael ‘hockey stick’ Mann for ethical misconduct evidenced in the Climate Gate emails.

                1. What could they do? Michael Mann’s investigation of Michael Mann revealed nothing improper.

          3. My problem is with how over-the-top the moral indignation is compared to other similar (or worse) crimes.

            If you remember the Baylor basketball scandal, for example, there was a dead body involved, and nobody was shrieking for Baylor to get the NCAA death penalty. I’d think you can recover more easily from being sexually assaulted than you can from being a cadaver.

            That, and there’s this attitude that if you don’t show enough moral indignation, you must favor molesting children. So much of the reaction seems to be, “Look at how virtuous I am for showing how disgusted I am by all of this!”

            1. The Baylor coaches paid players and one of those shot another. They didn’t cover for a serial murderer or rapists. How are these cases similar?

              nobody was shrieking for Baylor to get the NCAA death penalty

              You made this up.

        2. Woody Allen and Roman Polanski are writing the screenplay right now.

          1. Touched: A World Full of Gym Showers.

        3. And Woody Allen’s thing wasn’t child abuse, it was incest (and only in a very technical sense as there was no blood relation). Sun Yi was an adult.

          1. There’s a lot fo doubt about this. Also, the Connecticut AG initially said there was good evidence to prosecute Woody over photos of a foster son as well, but the investigation went away quietly.

            With Soon Yi, it strains credulity to think that Woody was just sitting there minding his own business until she hit the age of consent, and suddenly their romance blossomed (albeit in secret).

    5. The facts that are already known are damning enough to warrant judgement.

      Please give an example of facts that may become known in the future that would mitigate the guilt of Sandusky, Paterno et al.

      1. AGAIN, whether or not rapes happened IS in question

        what is not in question is that the head coach was told by his “underling” that he had witnessed same, and he had a moral duty to call the police, which he did not do.

        if he had done so, it could have been investigated and hopefully if FALSE an innocent man could be cleared and if not, a guilty man could be convicted.

        and of course future victimization could be prevented, or at least made less likely

        i agree that there is little doubt that a report should have been made based on what he was told by mcqueary.

        1. I’d agree with that argument but that’s a different outrage.

          1. a different outrage, yet McQueary is the one getting death threats. Yes, he could have done more and likely reminds himself of that every day, but he did not assault a single child, did not do like Paterno and change a reported assault into fondling, or do like the AD and act like nothing happened.

            1. How do you witness a child molestation and not intervene?

        2. Sorry, we Only have McCready’s word against Paterno’s as to what McCready told Joe. Not facts. McCready’s memory is surprisingly detailed for something that happened 9 years ago. I think many are rushing to judgment because JoePa was a sanctimonious

          1. Even what JoePa was told is enough that he should have investigated it himself if the AD buried it.

            If I heard that a professor in my department was spotted taking a shower with a 10 year old child without the parents around, I wouldn’t stop making a stink until I found out more details or was satisfied that someone else was investigating it.

            And it would be FAR more difficult for me since I’m not the fucking University Messiah that JoePa is at PSU.

          2. “McCready” may sound like “McQueary,” but they sure as shit don’t look the same. Why do you dumbasses have strong opinions on things you haven’t lifted a finger to learn anything about?

            Also, what Tulpa said.

    6. Wait, wait, wait… which blog?

    7. I think there are people involved whom we have enough facts to render judgement. According to his own testimony, McQueary witnessed a child being raped and then he walked away. The absolute best possibility for him is that he is a despicable coward; the worst is that he is a despicable liar. Similarly, other people in the PSU administration seem to have received reports of the alleged crime and also did nothing. Sandusky’s guilt or innocence has nothing to do with the way we judge the actions of these other men.

      1. Base on their testimony alone, I can definitely understand the judgment against these men. It’s the judgment against Sandusky, and to some extent Paterno (whose mention in the Grand Jury Report is possibly the shortest of all parties involved), that has me desiring a more skeptical view of the case.

      2. At the time, he was probably a 23 year old graduate assistant coach and this was a famous coach. We don’t know the whole story, maybe he made a noise that caused the rape to stop but did not say anything directly to Sandusky.

        He did everything correctly after that, as far as I am concerned and as far as the law is concerned. He told multiple people in authority and they followed up with him several times and acted as if they were taking care of it. He could have gone directly to the police himself I guess and gone around personally to all the schools Sandusky raped little boys at but I think he did a lot and does not deserve too much criticism.

        1. Bullshit.

          Any normal human being would have called 911 immediately.

          1. agreed – some crimes need a real investigation.

          2. Also agreed. Telling your boss is not the same as calling the police. Furthermore, why didn’t he mention it in his testimony if he did try to help at the scene? He certainly knew how to intervene in violent situations; he had apparently physically stopped a knife fight at one point.

            Even if he were “only” 23, which he was not, 23 is still nominally adulthood. If you haven’t learned by then that you should do everything you can to stop the rape of a child (or anyone, for that matter), you are something less than human and whoever had the responsibility to form your moral sense has grossly failed. I don’t give a fig about his legal obligations. He dropped the ball on his moral ones.

            1. He also WAITED A DAY before telling his boss.

          3. Are you so sure? If the boy was screaming “stop” or “help me”, of course. But what if there was no such indication?

            I work in a public hospital that was recently successfully sued by a transsexual because we had ‘male’ and ‘female’ restrooms — now all our restrooms are either/or (they are all singles). We are forever taught about tolerance. I even had a supervisor tell me there is nothing wrong with a man having sex with an underage boy, as that is how most gay males had their first sexual experiences, and they looked back at them positively. When you work in a overly-sensitive bureacracy like this, it is very tough to try to go directly to the authorities and bypass your employment rules.

            If you are a young employee and you see something like this going on, you are told by your employee policy that the proper thing to do is to report it to your supervisor. That’s what this guy did. What if he did call the police, and it turned out that the kid only looked ten — and was really 18, and this was consensual sex? Had he done anything besides what he was supposed to do — which is what he did — he would have put not only his career but his personal life in extreme jeopardy.

            I think most “normal” people think of themselves first and would just walk away and not even tell anyone about it. Getting involved is a very good way for you to suffer, with very little chance for a good outcome for you.

            1. So, let me get this straight…a ‘bad’ outcome for you (reprimand from higher up or even losing your job) is worth not intervening or calling cops for CHILD RAPE?

              A 10-year-old is not capable of consenting to sex with a middle-aged man.

        2. He was 28 years old. You’ve now spent more time opinionating than learning the most basic facts.

          1. That makes it worse, not better.

            1. obviously

              1. Ah…thought you were responding to someone else.

        3. If it were a case of sexual harrassment or something, I’d be OK with the “I reported it and my hands are clean” approach.

          But if you see a guy anally penetrating a 10 year old boy in the showers, and then years later you see him still allowed to use the facilities and no consequences…I don’t give a shit what the higher ups are telling you, you have to call the cops.

    8. I’m kind of with you there. I have not followed the story closely, so I don’t know what the facts that have come out so far are, though.

      There are plenty of examples of teachers being falsely accused of sexual abuse though, so I would not be hugely surprised if it came out that the witness or the students involved were lying.

      1. I will be surprised Hazel. This is completely different. The boys are old enough to be reliable. No psychologists or hypnosis involved that I have heard of. There are too many of them and they are from different places where they met him. Plus his behavior fits the pattern of establishing trust, etc. And why in the hell would he be taking kids back to the locker room and taking showers with them at night? That part seems pretty consistent in all the stories.

      2. that’s tangential. nobody knows if the rapes occurred.

        we do know (it’s not in dispute) what mcqueary TOLD him had happened, which was more than enough to warrant a call to the police

        IF he had done so, the case could have been investigated.

        that was an absolute duty and he failed miserably

        let me give you an analogy.

        say the coach walked outside and saw a man bleeding to death on the sidewalk.

        the coach says “fuck it” and keeps on walking . doesn’t call 911

        is there ANY legal liability?

        no.

        is he a piece of shit, should he be fired, and should he be shunned?

        yes

        1. Do you know exactly what McQuery told Patreno? Do you exactly what steps Paterno took or did not take to follow up? Do you know eactly what Paterno was told in response? What if Paterno wa told that it was investigated and that Sandusky was cleared? Does your opinion change? Do you know that didn’t happen? If you go with the sports reporters speculation, well then yeah, hang ’em all, but I agree with CalebT that further investigation is warrented before completely trashing JoePa’s reputation. If he knew one of his caches raped a child and he did say “fuck it” than yeah, he’s a piece of shit and we’ll eventually find that out.

          1. Guess I’m too lazy to check spelling today.

            1. I know what the parties are both conceding was said. He DID NOT KNOW one of his charges DID anything. He only knew what another person claimed had happened. And he should have reported it

              1. Does every allegation deserve a report? Certainly child rape deserves at the very least an immediate call to campus police, not a conversation with someone’s boss a day later. If the eyewitness/accuser treats the incident so casually, why would anybody expect differently from a non-witness?

          2. So you’re suggesting that Paterno might be hiding his follow up efforts from the GJ and the press? Can you imagine any scenario where that makes a bit of sense?

            1. No. But he hasn’t said much to the press. That’s not to say he’s “hiding” anything. I’m just saying it’s possible and even probable we don’t know the whole story yet.

              1. Of course we don’t know the whole story yet. I just want someone, anyone who says this to give a potential explanation for JoePa dictating the terms of his new contract at the same time Sandusky was bringing boys with him to closed practices. How could someone more powerful than the BoT not at the very least be able to keep Sandusky away from his football program?

                1. One potential explaination could be that JoePa was told that it was looked into and there was nothing there. I’m not saying that is what happened and it’s very possible that after the investigation JoePa looks even worse. I’m just saying that we’ve seen enough of these media persecutions where it turns out the media was completely wrong (Duke LaCross, Atlanta Bomber, etc) that I don’t think it’s unreasonable to wait for the full story before condemning the man.

          3. Do you know exactly what McQuery told Patreno?
            —————————–
            we know what the grand jury testimony says McQueary told Paterno, beginning with hearing sounds of slapping flesh as though someone were having sex then being confronted with the last thing he expected to see. McQ’s testimony is crystal clear as to what Sandusky was doing.

            One other thing we appear to know, or at least seems the case based on testimony, is that JoePa changed the story of assault to one of fondling or horseplay. Point is, the grand jury testimony is available and can be weighed against public statements. It is not pleasant reading and it does not make anyone associated with PSU look good.

            1. Grand jury testimony, with no cross ex, is not fact. McQ could be exaggerating or simply embellishing with ‘useful’ details.

              1. That’s true. But it doesn’t say much for Paterno that he only allowed a serial naked fondler of little boys to hang around his showers.

                1. I don’t want to give Paterno a pass on this. I want to know why he’s getting a worse media beating than McQueary. That guy witnesses what he called a rape and his decision was “I’m gonna tell my boss about it tomorrow”???

                  Telling your boss the next day doesn’t absolve you of your responsibility as an adult.

      3. Yes, a recent accounting in Great Britain found that over half such accusations were entirely baseless, and most of the rest were not true (but had circumstances that might charitably be called suspicious).

    9. I on the other hand believe the Penn State allegation, because State College is a weird-ass little berg. However, I could almost believe Michael Jackson’s Neverland Ranch defense, because I think he may have actually been crazy enough to just want the kids there, and not for sex.

      So you could say:
      State College=crazy
      Neverland ranch= So crazy it comes back around the other side to normal

      1. Right. It’s plausible that Michael Jackson actually thought he was Peter Pan and just wanted to play with GI Joe dolls in a sandbox all day.

  3. Jesus Christ, Tulpa, it’s called a douche. It may help you get the sand out of you vagina.*

    *No offense to any of our female commenters, but I don’t know what the male equivalent here is. Sand in your urethra?

    1. It’s all good, I was about to offer him some Midol.

      1. Is there a prescription strength version of Midol?

        1. Yeah, a bottle of Jack Daniels.

          1. “I set the rules, bitch.”

            Why so mad?

    2. Preparation H?
      It helps when you have a sore butt.

    3. No offense to any of our female commenters, but I don’t know what the male equivalent here is.

      Drink 4 L of grape soda in two hours and you’ll find out for yourself.

  4. One pretty much gets everything out of those summaries. Which says nothing good about the depth and content of the actual contributions: the summaries themselves end up being more entree than appetizer.

    There’s also something unnerving regarding the fact that the short summary of Maureen Dowd’s piece is still able to show the level of insufferable pedantry which is the hallmark of Ms. Dowd’s intellectual output.

    1. the summaries themselves end up being more entree than appetizer.

      Sooooo, not like Kraft Dinner?

  5. BTW, I bought my copy of Atlas Shrugged: Part One, and I did not buy it through Reason store.

    Ha! Take that, Koch brothers!

    [BTW the movie is far better than what the critics have alleged.]

    1. You’re right, it’s not complete shit, it’s just shit.

      1. WHY ARE YOU SO HATEFUL?

        I mean, the cinematography is good, right?

    2. Now that it’s on Pirate Bay, no one else is buying it, either.

    3. Does yours have the error text calling it a “compelling story of self-sacrifice” that the Randians were all upinarmsabout?

      1. Re: Tulpa,

        Does yours have the error text calling it a “compelling story of self-sacrifice”

        “Self-sacrifice”? I don’t think so; besides, the price tag squarely pasted on the front would obviate such sentiment.

  6. By the way, that crackdown on Cambodian brothels should make Tony The Pederast quite unhappy. Why, next thing you’ll see, is these kids working in a factory making Nike’s! Unacceptable!

  7. If Friedman managed to work something about how gay iPads are into his column, the NYT is officially Totally Gay today.

  8. Why does Jerry Sandusky like shopping at Old Navy?

    Because boys pants are usually half off.

    1. …Wait! Are you serious?! Which outlet?

      1. He’s not serious, Jerry…But, if you’re lookin’ for something, try Wal-Mart restrooms.

  9. Say what you want about Jerry Sandusky, but at least he drove slowly through school zones.

  10. If an older woman who chases young men is called a Cougar, can we call a middle aged man who chases little boys a Nittany Lion?

  11. How is Jerry Sandusky like a tortoise?

    He gets there before the hare.

  12. When is bedtime t the Sandusky house?

    When the big hand touches the little hand.

  13. And the Colts continue to Suck for Luck.

    1. Aw, WTF? Cowboys with a pick 6 just got you back in the game.

      My debauched lifestyle is gonna cost me anyway. And when I had been a good boy all week til late Saturday night.

  14. I signed up to Penn States as a tight end but graduated as a wide receiver.

    1. Hey! Mike McQueary is the wide receivers’ coach!

  15. Not sure if he was ever disciplined for tardiness, but I heard Jerry Sandusky was always coming in a little behind.

  16. NYT – tl;dr

  17. It’s imbeciles all the way down.

    1. Looks like every thread will be that way for a long time.

      1. Do your share and stop posting.

      1. Suki,

        Learn the art of farting in a jar. All will be better.

    2. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time.

      I’m surprised the powers that be haven’t shut down this chat room by now. It must be a huge embarrassment to those who still take libertarianism (and libertarians) seriously.

      1. “It must be a huge embarrassment to those who still take libertarianism (and libertarians) seriously.”
        You’d think that those posters who encourage the vermin shit would be embarrassed, but some do so and then gripe.

        1. Narcissists are never embarrassed, as they are certain of their own superiority.

  18. We suggest that those who are sick of shit like this will not post on Monday’s morning links in a form of silent protest.

  19. It has been reported that Jerry Sandusky was often late for work…

    Which is understandable as he liked to come in a little behind.

      1. *baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaarf*

        1. No barfman – fart in a jar, not barf in a jar. You can’t burn barf in your car.

  20. Well, this is a steaming heap of stupid. Remember when Sachs was Mr. Shock Therapy and advising on privatization and shit? Neither does he. Now, apparently, the luminaries of Occupy Wall Street are about to usher in a new progressive golden age, which is a great thing because government just isn’t spending enough and as a result is about to “die by fiscal asphyxiation.”

    1. With the budget caps enacted in the August agreement, domestic discretionary spending would decline to less than 2 percent of G.D.P. by the end of the decade, according to the White House. Government would die by fiscal asphyxiation.

      Que?

    2. What a pile of crap.

      Washington still channels Reaganomics. The federal budget for nonsecurity discretionary outlays ? categories like highways and rail, education, job training, research and development, the judiciary, NASA, environmental protection, energy, the I.R.S. and more ? was cut from more than 5 percent of gross domestic product at the end of the 1970s to around half of that today.

      Where is the drop in spending?

      1. Where is the drop in spending?

        Major cuts in hyperlink training programs.

    3. The government is about to “die by fiscal asphyxiation.”

      Sounds like a party. I presume this will be in the Morning Links when it happens?

  21. I think the gap between what has already happened and what Thomas Friedman is “predicting” is widening at a accelerated rate.

    By 2014 he will be “predicting” the telegraph.

  22. I fart in jars yeah yeah yeah, I fart in jars yeah yeah yeah, with a fart like that you know you’re gonna smell bad.

  23. Wow, that Sachs piece is a masterful example of what I believe we used to call the “Frog’s Eye” concept, which boils down to, “You see what you are looking for.”

    1. That about sums it up. Reality is such an inconvenience, it’s really more fun to make grand predictions about new eras and movements and uprisings and leave that pesky reality thing out of it.

  24. Penn State journo student calls The FAN. Hilarity ensues.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5xm3bvrGVZ0

    1. I remember Craig Carton when he was on 610 WIP in Philly. So that’s where he is now. The Fan?

      1. After Imus got fired, Boomer got his time slot somehow and brought Carton along.

  25. Recent comments on this blog are still going downhill fast.

    1. Are you kidding? This weekend was a major improvement.

      1. Apparently, some geniuses on this board think that insane 2300 post threads are preferable to this. Also, some of these geniuses think that ignoring the troll has an effect on its behavior, because trolls often post 2300 post threads solely because people are responding to them.

        1. “Also, some of these geniuses think that ignoring the troll has an effect on its behavior, because trolls often post 2300 post threads solely because people are responding to them.”
          Non sequitur.
          And just keep feeding the vermin in the hopes vermin will shit elsewhere.

        2. I never said the first thing, and the second thing usually does work (though it’s usually not really accomplished as there’s always someone who feels it necessary to feed the troll).

          I hope you don’t seriously think that plus-oneing yourself makes trolls go away. I’d hate to think I was overestimating your rational powers.

        3. I enjoy a good debate with Tony when it doesn’t seem like too obvious a spoof, and an occasional jab at White Indian when I’m in the mood. But I agree, this place has gone insane the last month or two.

          1. “and an occasional jab at White Indian”

            ‘and an occasional feeding of vermin so we can all enjoy vermin shit’
            FIFY; thanks a lot.

      2. Warty – a few weeks ago you posted a link for a strength training book on Amazon (for Lord H, I believe). What was the name of that book? I remember it had numbers in the title.

          1. From the table of contents: “Moving North of Vag”? Is this an acronym or is it what I think it is?

            Fun fact: the Vancouver Art Gallery is abbreviated as VAG. So you’d say to your friends: “Let’s meet at the vag,” or “last weekend I spent a few hours wandering around the vag” and so on.

            Also, I’ve been lifting real weights for the past few months and results = awesome.

            1. It’s exactly what you think it is. He also sells shirts.

              Training Ideology #1: Moving North of Vag

              I can’t take credit for this name. I wish I could, but both the idea and the name come from my good friend Jim Messer. Jim and I have been friends since junior high, and we have the kind of friendship that doesn’t require us to talk every week. Or even every year. This is more of an idea. A concept, if you will. Jim started training with the 5/3/1 method without my knowing it, and he’s had great success. He emailed me and let me know about this. Here’s part of an email he wrote to me:

              I feel compelled to tell you that after a few months of using the now-legendary 5/3/1, I have now moved somewhat north of being an utter vag. I f**ked my body up pretty badly last winter, stopped all physical activity, and thought that was pretty much gonna be it. Just another skinny f**king wimp. It’s been a really long time since I’ve felt this good physically. By God, last week I puked in my mouth and almost blacked out squatting. I’d thought that time in my life was over.

              After I stopped laughing, I began thinking about his statement and about how many people seem to be moving and staying well south of vag. To quote Black Sabbath, this is a symptom of the universe.

              1. You had posted a link to some magazine article about the truth of weightlifting. I read it, thought it was awesome, but now I can’t find it. Do you still have that link?

                1. It’s not ringing a bell. Do you remember any details?

                  1. Some reporter who thinks he knows everything about lifting travels to a gym and is taught how to really lift. Says most people are just wasting time listening to music and using machines that do nothing to increase results.

                    1. Thank you sir!

            2. Also, I’ve been lifting real weights for the past few months and results = awesome.

              I went to a jiu-jitsu tournament a while ago that was being held in the same building as an IPF powerlifting meet. A bunch of my buddies who don’t lift were amazed at the high quality of the female powerlifters’ asses. Squats are magical things.

              1. Squats were the first thing I started doing! When I read the crazy weights that men do, I am amazed. I can now do 5 reps, 3 sets of 120 lbs, but that’s as high as the weights go up in my apartment’s crappy gym. I think I could do more.

                I think having stronger legs improves my running too. I’ve always been a runner but now I’m banging out 6 minute miles like a boss.

                1. Stupid shitty apartment building gyms.

                  This place is reputed to be awesome, and it’s in Redmond. If it’s in range, you should check it out.

                  1. From its About Us page:

                    For those who want to focus on improving strength and power development or on the sport of Olympic weightlifting (for sport-specific development, competition, or recreation), our barbell club meets three times a week (Mon & Wed evenings and Friday afternoons, for approximately 90 minutes). We have experienced coaches, providing intelligent program design and organized training. We maintain high-quality equipment to support athletic strength and power development (power racks, quality Olympic bars, bumper plates, platforms, jerk blocks, etc.).

                    Yes. You should go there. I wish my place had jerk blocks.

                  2. As it happens, I am out in Redmond for work a few days a week. I just might forgo sitting in traffic one evening and check it out. Thanks.

                    1. I asked the Google and came up with this place in Seattle: http://www.drivelineathletics.com/

                      It sounds like it’s a scary, dirty grunt-dungeon, which means it’s awesome.

                2. You could do 3 sets of 6 or 4 sets of 5. That’s more last time I checked.

              2. oh agreed – I got my wife to start doing squats – holy sh*t, I could’ve had this ass for the past twenty years instead?

          2. Yep, that’s it, thanks. I remember glossing over the book’s description and it looked interesting. I’ve been plateaued-out on my poundages for what seems like forever, and trying to find something to shake things up.

            1. It’s an incredibly simple percentage-based program. You can get everything you need to know about it by poking around the internet, but it’s nice to have the book.

              1. I’ve been working this routine for a few months now, with limited success. The 40 rep burn sets are fucking whores. God I hate those things.

                1. I get tired just reading that. Try 5/3/1.

    2. Did you know I once got a blow job from Janis Joplin!

      I mean . . it was no big deal, or anything. I rarely even think about her.

  26. Da BEARS!

  27. this thread needs more penn state jokes. here’s my contribution:

    its unfair to blame paterno for his not thinking kid diddling was a big deal, the guys so old I’m pretty sure socrates played for him.

  28. Is self-parody really possible? Don’t you have to be credible in the first place?

  29. “Bob Costas tickles the Penn State scandal”

    Did I just hear that correctly? Scraping the bottom of the barrel, NBC?

    1. Scraping the bottom of the barrel, NBC?
      —————————
      now, that would be redundant.

    2. We used to have Seinfeld, remember?

  30. Am I the only one who’s noticing that in the Orakpo Geico commercial, the only actual word that’s put down is “CAT”?

    And I don’t think you can spell NEANDERTHAL with 7 tiles anyway.

    1. Re: Tulpa,

      And I don’t think you can spell NEANDERTHAL with 7 tiles anyway.

      Yes, you can. Look:

      C-A-V-E-M-A-N

      1. RAAAAA-CIST! And I’ll have the duck, with the mango salsa.

  31. Maureen Dowd:

    It’s sorta meta: the star who played a fictional law enforcement officer breaking rules for what he sees as the good of society makes a movie about a real law enforcement officer breaking rules for what he sees as the good of society.

    Dirty Harry came out looking cool, though. The dirt-collecting Hoover comes out looking creepy.

    What’s she saying? All rule breaker’s should be regarded as creepy? Or none should?

    I don’t read the NYT enough to get the inside track on this thinking.

  32. A SHOOTING YOU WILL NOT READ ABOUT IN REASON…

    (this woman is LUCKY to be alive. poor doggie. they used a POLE after she shot at them. now, THAT’s restraint)

    BONNEY LAKE, Wash. – A woman was shot by Pierce County sheriff’s deputies Sunday after she opened fire at them during a bizarre chase that followed an abortive traffic stop near Highway 410, sheriff’s officials said.

    As the incident unfolded, a deputy was struck in the face with glass when a bullet went through his windshield and the woman’s pit bull was killed when it lunged at officers.

    The woman is in critical condition following the shooting.

    Sheriff’s officials said the incident began at about 3 p.m. when the woman was spotted driving at high speed through a parking lot adjacent to Highway 410 near Bonney Lake.

    An officer pulled her over, but then she roared off, speeding down the roadway in the opposite direction of oncoming traffic, said Detective Ed Troyer of the Pierce County Sheriff’s Office.

    More deputies joined the chase, and one patrol car was able to stop her car using a special manuever.

    At that point, the woman pulled out a gun, rolled down her window and opened fire at the pursuing deputies, Troyer said.

    Two patrol cars were hit by the gunfire, and one deputy was injured when a bullet went through the windshield, cutting the deputy on the face and ear.

    Deputies fired back and hit the woman.

    As officers approached her vehicle on foot, a pit bull inside her car lunged at them. The pit bull was shot and killed by deputies.

    The deputies then approached the injured woman, who was still in the car with a gun still in her hand, Troyer said. Ultimately, they were able to knock the gun out of her hand with a pole, pull her from the car and get her onto a stretcher.

    The woman was later rushed to the hospital, where she is listed in critical condition.

    “Obviously, you’re not expecting a female to lean out the window and open fire on you at a traffic stop, but it just goes to prove that any type of call any time can go extremely dangerous very fast,” Troyer said.

    A gun was later recovered at the scene, officials said.

    Investigators are working to determine the woman’s identity.

    Highway 410 is closed in both directions from 166th to Myers Road during the investigation of the incident, according to the Washington State Patrol.

    http://www.komonews.com/news/local/133778018.html

    1. ANOTHER STORY YOU WILL NOT READ ABOUT IN REASON: DOG BITES MAN

  33. A SHOOTING YOU WILL NOT READ ABOUT IN REASON…

    Don’t worry too much about that, I watch “Cops” and read Reason. Pierce County, WA is one the favorite venues for “Cops”.

  34. Oh Reason, you’re just so *mean*

  35. There was nothing in the article indicating that they needed a SWAT team to deal with her. It’s not like she’s a truly dangerous person, like a drug suspect sitting around at home with her MJ plants. *That* would have needed a SWAT team and dynamic entry.

    But yes, good on the deputies for risking their lives to take down a very dangerous person.

    1. whether or not they NEEDED a SWAT team, SWAT teams are impractical for vehicle pursuits and takedowns, since by the time they are mobilized, the pursuit is over

      however, on warrants, officers have the benefit of TIME, and thus that is why SWAT teams are frequently used – since when used properly and when warranted, they reduce the risk of injury/death to all involved – officers and suspects

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.