↓ Archives ↓

Posts Tagged → child

“Death is healthy, safety is dangerous”…wtf?

Few events have highlighted the sweaty, crusty butt crack separating America’s Left from the Normal people like the few recent US Supreme Court holdings over the past week. These holdings on Second Amendment rights, improper judicial legislating from the bench (Roe v. Wade), and religious liberty fly in the face of decades of Leftist activism and common establishment media narratives, and have elicited wonderfully violent public statements, violent actions, and promises of more violence from the Left and its Sinn Fein, the Democrat Party.

If the Democrat Party can’t control Americans with freedom-crushing iron-fisted laws, then they intend to control us through more murder, destruction, and mayhem.

As a long-ago former member of the Democrat Party, I am mystified how more Americans don’t walk away from this corrupt and morally bankrupt organization. How can it be that people are loyal to this lawless anti-America movement when its leaders:

  • cannot tell us what is a woman, but then say that women’s rights have somehow been diminished by allowing the fifty states to determine among themselves when a child can be killed by its mother
  • tell us that the death of a living, breathing child is “healthy” or is “healthcare”
  • say that a wide-open southern border over which child traffickers and deadly fentanyl pour daily unchecked and undocumented and uncontrolled is “fair”
  • catch and release violent criminals back into society, instead of jailing them, so they can continue committing violent crimes against innocent people
  • demand civilian disarmament to prevent citizens from keeping legal firearms close to them for protection because armed law-abiding civilians are “dangerous”
  • say that the practice of religion by just one person in public is the equivalent of establishing an official religion

We could easily have this list go on and on, but anyone paying attention to what is happening around our homes and families and businesses already knows that there is a significant percentage of Americans who do not identify as Americans, and who are attempting to use our collectively owned government to destroy America from the inside. This is not a what the f*ck (wtf) thing, it is a crystal clear philosophical separation between two different groups of humans.

These two groups could easily be associated with groups from the past, like the Democrat Party slave owners of 1861 and their Republican Party abolitionist (anti slavery) opponents. I think the choices facing Americans today are easily as stark as they were in 1861, except that instead of controlling a few million African slaves like in 1861, the Democrat Party is now trying to enslave all of America. All of us. You and me.

Tamper Resistant Language, Bomb Proof Love

When I was at Penn State in the 1980s, one of my Spanish professors was an older gay man. How did we know he was gay? It seemed evident to us students that this small, shy, demur, effeminate, carefully dressed man was probably a homosexual. That he also lived a quiet life with another man in a beautiful old stone house with perfect lawncare and meticulous flower beds on the historic north end of campus pretty much cemented our conclusion.

We did not care about his sexual identity, and he did not demand or expect that we did care. He never mentioned it, and instead lived and taught in dignity. We gave him our loyalty and respect because he was a phenomenal teacher, who taught 400-level Spanish language literature from a place of deep passion and personal resonance. He could easily have been an English literature professor quoting Shakespeare, exhorting his students to comprehend the subtle nuances The Bard emanated from the stage to his audiences. But instead, he taught us The Aleph, among other deep and inspiring masterpieces of the Spanish language. This professor did not only teach us the most complex spoken and written Spanish, he also taught us to think carefully. About symbols, potential meanings of words, and the whys of writers of all languages; the reason for the idea-conveying purpose of literature, in any language.

His courses required real contemplation and reflection, and they strengthened our brain muscles. As a result, our professor lived on in our lives as a great teacher who greatly rounded us as individuals.

Fast forward to today, and every aspect and angle of human sexuality is daily artificially and forcefully thrust upon all of us, regardless of our age, with demands that we embrace all of it and simultaneously abandon thousands of years of shared human culture, religion, and biological science. This brutal, crass sexuality is the dominant subject of just about every subject, be it science, math, or language. This is a shock-and-awe, beat-you-over-the-head, we-will-destroy-you, revolutionary assault being led by people whom reporter Salena Zito calls the curators of culture. That is, people with careers in academia, education, and journalism. As in, writers of fact and fiction, reporters of human behavior, the (historically speaking) diligent and careful chroniclers of human culture.

Contrasted with Dark Ages monks carefully preserving the written word and human knowledge behind stone walls, and even with academics of the recent past like my gay Spanish professor who was devoted to the rules of Spanish language, these modern day curators of culture are neither diligent nor careful nor deep nor meaningful. Rather, they are rampaging intellectual rapists and murderers, leading a grotesque attack on what had been one of humanity’s most tolerant, productive, and vibrant cultures, ever, America.

The biggest of their sexual assaults is the demand for new pronoun uses, for which the English language, like all languages except Esperanto, is unprepared and thus will never naturally accommodate. For example, you could not write a literary masterpiece using the bastardized pronouns now hobnailed onto daily English usage, except maybe as a farce to highlight the ridiculousness of the self-appointed pronoun police and culture-raping revolutionaries. Like all languages, and probably more so than most, English is a mix of different languages (German, French, Celtic), and has its own long-developed unique rules that render it tamper-resistant.

If you try to communicate in English using the revolutionary pronouns (e.g. they for a woman who self identifies as both man and woman), you fall flat on your face, because this attempt to bodger English just doesn’t work. It can’t possibly work, because all languages are designed to help humans maximally communicate with one another. All languages have rules that maximize their effectiveness so that people may fully comprehend one another.

Which means that this sexual revolutionary assault via pronouns is not really about erasing lines between people and bringing people together. Rather, it is about erecting barriers and causing confusion. Religious Americans have identified the new pronoun mis-use as a modern day Tower of Babel situation, just begging for divine intervention. It certainly seems to be that significant to me.

However, whatever linguistic rules of English may be daily axe-murdered by woke pronounsters, my primary objection to them is that they fail the one universal language spoken by all humans: Love. While deliberately sowing confusion and fierce disagreement about the most elementary aspects of science and human relationships, the revolutionary pronounsters are also trying to destroy (not expand) the concept of love. Love, the truest, most pure universal language which can bind all humans to each other in the truest of relationships, and has been known humanity-wide since the dawn of our species by fidelity, commitment, and truth, is now being exploded by this sexual assault by mispronoun. Every human culture has sanctified love through marriage and commitment, family, honesty, and truth, baseline values all now being thrown out the window and publicly burned at the stake by the wokesters.

Love is a simple thing, and it is the one thing that all humans around the globe immediately understand. Love is bomb proof and it will get us through this turmoil, misused pronouns notwithstanding. Dear child, I am your parent, I created you, and I will always always always love you, no matter what f**king asinine pronouns you have been disinformed and misinformed to use by evil people who are misusing you as cannon fodder in their inglorious revolution against God knows what.

Some conservatives are sounding cruel about Ukraine

Yes, we know that Ukraine has been a money laundering pedophile child pornography child prostitution child slave trade playground for American elites and especially for children of the Democrat Party. Ukraine is also the locale of Burisma, the corrupt natural gas company that just happened to hire crack-addict Hunter Biden for a million dollars a year to do what, no one knows. Even Hunter Biden has admitted in an interview he was hired only because of his dad, then-VP of the USA.

And Ukraine is also the locale of the federal prosecutor fired by the Ukrainian government for investigating Burisma and Hunter Biden, because Joe Biden bragged about threatening to withhold a billion dollars in American aid to Ukraine if the prosecutor wasn’t fired. This is Corruption 101, and we all see it.

Yes, there are a surprisingly large number of Americans whose allegiance to the corrupt and immoral Democrat Party is so certain (why why why?) that they will overlook all of this disgusting, horrible sickness and they will try to explain it away with nonsensical blather. And it is this nonsensical blather that really gets the goat of a lot of conservatives, and makes our side say some dumb things.

Like lots of conservatives are openly cheering on the Russian invasion of Ukraine, because dictator Vladimir Putin is corralling and exposing the Democrat Party illegalities and corruption there. They say that because Russia is exposing the deep state’s dirty little hidey hole, everything that Russia is doing there is just fine. Tear it all down, they say.

Say what?

Conservatives used to pride themselves on being humane, conscientious, pro-life. And yet here a fair number of American conservatives are cheering on the utter flattening of Ukrainian society, made of innocent people who have no skin in the corruption game, no dog in the corruption fight. They simply own simple little homes and apartments where they eked out a small, simple life, until Russia invaded and violently destroyed everything these people owned.

It is possible to oddly respect cruel dictator Vladimir Putin for his love of his country, and for his rough handed defense of Christianity and traditional human values, without simultaneously cheering on his latest war crimes against humanity.

What Putin’s Russia is doing to Ukraine is barbaric and cruel, it is wrong, it is wantonly destructive, and everything bad that can happen in return to Russia is something that Russia has earned ten-fold. Watching the videos of Ukrainian peasants, the simplest and humblest of people, crying over their dead children, their crumbled homes, their crushed cars, their villages reduced to rubble, we realize that these innocent people are caught in the crossfire between a corrupt Ukrainian government and a brutal, inhuman Russian government.

It is possible to relish the blown cover the Democrat Party is running from in Ukraine, while also cheering on the heroic defense of homeland by the Ukrainian people. They are fighting the good fight against a ruthless invading army. Cheering on the Ukrainian fighters doesn’t mean you have to love Ukraine’s president Zelensky, although he too has risen to the moment and is providing quality leadership the likes of which eastern Europe has not seen in a very long time. Even though he is also a mini dictator.

Like we all know now, eastern Europe is a giant knot, a huge mess of intertwined allegiances and back and forth brutalities going back five hundred years, at least. It is a difficult place to make sense of at any time, and especially now. We Americans both like to root for the underdog and for the good guy, and in this fight both sides, Russian and Ukrainian, have both good guys and bad guys, especially at the upper echelons.

But if there is one thing a real American disagrees with, it is watching innocent people get crushed by an evil ruthless dictator. C’mon, people, don’t let anyone think we conservatives are cruel, that we have no heart, and that we are okay with the working people of Ukraine being abused and destroyed in the process of a Russian dictator outing bad Democrat Party members from America while he tries to add more land to his empire.

We patriots can simultaneously cheer on the brave Ukrainian people defending their homes, and not cheer on their corrupt leaders; and we can appreciate the public service Russia is inadvertently doing by exposing American political corruption in Ukraine without actually cheering on the Russian war crimes in Ukraine.

This ain’t difficult for conservatives. Don’t put us in the same category as convoluted Democrats trying in vain to explain away their party’s dramatic descent into Hell.

 

White liberals confessing they are systemically racist

The bizarre phrase “systemic racism” is being bandied about an awful lot these days. Mostly it is being used as an accusation against the whole of America, as though racism is everywhere in America. We shall see about that in a moment, but first let’s consider what this phrase even means.

When something is “systemic” it means that the infection or disease is coursing throughout the body, and that it is system-wide. In medical terms, something that is “systemic” probably cannot be fully treated. The body is probably going to die from this system-wide infection. Which is what makes this accusation so intriguing in political terms. It means that America is supposedly, allegedly, so racist that it is going to die, and needs to die.

The people using this phrase the most are white liberals, those lawless hardcore partisan Democrat Party adherents who have been goose-stepping, vandalizing, burning, looting, and murdering throughout American cities over the past year. White liberal politicians at every level, white liberal judges, white liberals employed by activist organizations and at purported “news” outlets like CNN and the New York Times, white liberal charitable foundation staff, white liberal teachers, white liberal public employees etc are all in on promoting this allegation of “systemic racism.”

And yet what is so intriguing is that when we look at the basic statistics (violent deaths, violent crime, joblessness, children born out of wedlock and into poverty, failed public school systems, failed public services with high taxes, urban blight etc) behind the human behaviors resulting in the deaths and mayhem attributed to “systemic racism,” we find….these are all Democrat Party-run cities across America, run almost entirely one way or another by…white liberals!

Gees, you try rubbing, you try scrubbing, and no matter what, these darned white liberals keep popping up everywhere as the problem child in every disastrous American city. White liberals run literally all of the institutions that run the cities harboring all of the victimized minorities.

Just about every major city in America is run by the Democrat Party and its local police force, and we are told that the police forces in these cities are “systemically racist.” Because these big city police forces are staffed by and run by the Democrat Party and its systemic white liberals, this means that white liberals totally own this issue. If there is racism of any sort on these police forces, or in the policies and ordinances these cities have, then by gosh, they are wholly owned and caused by white liberals. White liberals are the genesis, nexus, and end-result of all this racism and racial discrimination. The minorities living in these urban places are totally victimized by their white liberal overlords.

America itself is not systemically racist. At least not the regular hard-working, tax-paying, community-volunteering white people who live outside the big urban shitholes run by the Democrat Party. America is overwhelmingly populated by really nice, tolerant people who don’t give a crap about skin color or other people’s religious views. But they are up against a bizarre group of psychologically twisted white liberals who accuse everyone else of what white liberals, they themselves, are – freaking rampant racists.

Because white liberals tend to politicize everything, like every little thing, it is logical to see this false broad accusation of “systemic racism” against America and against America’s really nice heartland citizens as a political punch. And yeah, it is that. But it is also something else, much deeper and more important. This accusation is a subconscious effort by white liberals to come clean about what is really going on in their own heads.

This false accusation against America is really a gigantic confession by white liberals that they are racist as hell and they want forgiveness from everyone living around them.

The question is, given just how badly white liberals have treated all of the minorities living in Democrat white liberal Party – run urban shitholes, can they be forgiven? Or are white liberals such a systemic problem and such a dire threat to the American body politic that they must be utterly eradicated, like any other disease that threatens the body?

Why are there syllables in my bread?

The other day I made the mistake of looking at the the ingredients label on the bag containing a loaf of sliced bread I brought home from the Giant store on Linglestown Road.

Can you believe the chemicals and additives and preservatives that are in that loaf of bread, according to the label? These are seriously long, serious-sounding, polysyllabic words that I have trouble pronouncing, no matter how long I have to spell them out slowly.

Words this long do not belong in the human body.

It made me wonder, Why are all these syllables in my bread?

Shouldn’t bread just be something like flour, water, salt, sugar, eggs, baking powder, maybe some fresh yeast, plus fire? For the past five thousand years, bread has been successfully made with slight variations on this theme of basic ingredients.

One of my kids has a health issue, and for most of her life it was treated with scary chemicals.

One by one, the chemicals stopped working. We were left with few options.

Then a researcher in Israel began a study, where kids with this health issue would go on a basic diet: No processed food, no canned food, no frozen food except what you freeze yourself. Everything fresh. No soda, no powdered drink mixes. Etc.

Guess what? She went into remission. It was attributable solely to the lack of processed food and the attendant polysyllabic chemicals she was otherwise ingesting when she ate “food.”

Today our friend Roberta came over, delivering Girl Scout cookies that only our boy can eat (well, I could easily eat them, but my body needs no extra calories or fat). We caught up in the kitchen over fresh coffee. Turns out she has changed her diet, and is feeling a lot better than before, plus she is lean and feeling energized.

What is her diet? No processed food.

Seeing that bread label got me thinking. Seeing my beloved child get better from a serious health issue got me thinking. Talking with our family friend of nearly twenty years got me thinking. Here is what I am thinking:

Syllables and food do not go together, unless it’s Italian. Certainly not in English.

Chemicals and food should not go together.

Chemicals are not food.

Chemicals and body health probably do not go together, except as a treatment for a serious health issue.

I just ate a pile of fresh carrot sticks. They were not nearly as satisfying to me, as they don’t taste great, as something processed. But it’s the beginning of something good. And it reminds me to start preparing seeds for the summer garden.

And one more thing: Giant also sells freshly baked bread. This bread lacks the preservatives of the bagged bread. It’s my new go-to bread, and as I do most of the food shopping for our family, it is what we are going to have going forward.

Your dog sniffed my crotch

It was bound to happen. Two lovely days on a wilderness trail with my young son ended as we rounded the trailhead and aimed for our truck 100 yards ahead.

Two recently arrived hikers were actively calling for a dog, and they asked us if we had seen it.

“No,” I said, and I quickly added that I’d appreciate the dog being leashed when it finally arrived.

As usual, the dog’s owner went into a description of his dog’s fine qualities, its gentle disposition, etc. and then out of nowhere, she appeared. And she made a beeline for me, barking aggressively right up to my knees.

Having been attacked by dogs, my reaction was not “Oh, your dog is so cuddly poofy sweetums wonderful.” Rather, I prepared to give the vicious beast a face full of heavy hiking boot. Thankfully, the owner intervened, but in a minute, the dog was off and running around, again. My small and vulnerable son was not yet into the truck, because I was still trying to get the keys out of the extra large pack.

And it all followed an online debate pitting clueless dog owners against dog lovers who prefer not to have their crotches sniffed by unleashed dogs on wilderness trails, far from help.

No surprise that I described my concerns to the owner, a nice young guy named Garrett, and followed it up with an email to the district ranger, asking that the state either require dogs to be leashed in that region, or banned altogether.

Folks, your dog may walk on water. He may fetch your slippers, keep you warm, and make you feel loved. That’s great. But he doesn’t have the right to run up to me and smell my crotch, any more than someone could do that to you. It’s so undignified, threatening, and uncomfortable. What’s truly sad is that it’s not the dog at fault, but its owner, who has put it in a no-win situation. A leash is just a few bucks, and can turn a potentially disastrous day into a happy day for everyone.

The Joe Paterno Empire Strikes Back

The family of late Penn State University football coach, icon, leader, and hero Joe Paterno has struck back at the “investigative” report by former US FBI director Louis Freeh.

Releasing an analysis of Freeh’s report that is similar to one posted on this blog last year (https://joshfirst.com/blog/2012/08/16/the-sandusky-disaster-kids-lose-penn-state-loses-ncaa-loses-theres-still-no-lesson-here/), the Paternos have taken an important step in regaining lost ground.

Lost ground was rapidly created by an uncritical press, willing to serve up maudlin caricatures of what may have happened around convicted child rapist Jerry Sandusky, rather than carefully scrutinize the facts and evidence we have in front of us, and then wait for the facts and evidence that we do not have but yet expect to see come out in the upcoming trials of Spanier, Curley, and Shultz.

A rush to judgment has never been so well documented, and then so well defended by a sea of armchair quarterbacks using 20/20 hindsight. Analyzing the comments on internet sites, like Forbes, ESPN, and any other reporting or opinion venue, you’d think that Joe Paterno was the real culprit, and not Sandusky.

Freeh’s report is as bad as a report can get. It is more representative of a Kremlin kangaroo court than the best America has to offer. After a career-start seven-year stint in Washington, DC, spent writing federal policy and law, my take on the Freeh report is that it is outrageously flawed.

Its worst defect is its use of wild conjecture (e.g. relying on hearsay in one email from Tim Curley to Graham Spanier and Gary Shultz about an unnamed “coach”). Nowhere does it say “While key facts are lacking or presently unknown, it is prudent to await casting judgment….” Rather, Freeh’s report is judge, jury, and executioner all at once, and it clearly aimed to destroy one person: Joe Paterno.

Importantly, Freeh’s report exonerated the sitting PSU trustees, most of whom had sat idly by and never challenged Spanier, even when one or two trustees began to ask him hard questions. Were those lazy trustees culpable? Why not?

Most important, Freeh was used by PSU and the NCAA to lower the standards bar, to decrease expectations in college football, rather than to elevate them. By arguing that Joe Paterno was deeply flawed and a hypocrite, Freeh made the classic morally relative argument that we are all pathetic losers, that there are no real heroes, that there are no really good men, and that no one should expect any to show up anytime soon.

Finally, if the PSU trustees fell down on the job and used the Freeh report to cover up their failings, one cannot escape the sense that at least some of the Paterno family members do not grasp the positive way that Joe Paterno is still viewed by many of us Nittany Nation members.

Last year, while communicating with one of the Paterno kids, I was struck by his inability or unwillingness to recognize the breadth of Joe’s legacy. That is, if Joe Paterno left a legacy, then it is beyond the family to solely claim, because it is carried by his believers. Joe’s legacy belongs to all of us, because he was representative of all of our values, hopes, and expectations, and our support is not about the family, but about the symbol that was Joe Paterno.

To that end, wouldn’t it be refreshing to see the family rally the troops, rather than look so deeply inward. Casting the Freeh report as a culture war attack on rare core values, rather than on a person, would more accurately frame this subject.

Unlike the vast majority of people with an opinion on this subject, I have actually read the Freeh report. It sucks. It is unprofessional. It is unworthy of Louis Freeh’s name, and it is unworthy of Penn State University’s name. It is nearly useless in understanding all of what happened with Jerry Sandusky, and how he continued to molest and rape little boys when some adults around him either suspected or had been told he was a pedophile. Shedding light on 33% of an issue raises more questions than it answers. Truth is not what was sought, but it is what is at stake. Bigger truths, like traditional core values that are under attack everywhere, suffer from this.

So, it is my hope that the Paterno family, and former governor and US Attorney General Dick Thornburgh, will continue their efforts, and also expand them to encompass the bigger picture. Good luck, folks, we are standing with you.

The Sandusky Disaster: Kids Lose, Penn State Loses, NCAA Loses & There’s Still No Lesson Here

The Sandusky Disaster: Kids Lose, Penn State Loses, NCAA Loses & There’s Still No Lesson Here

By Josh First

August 16, 2012

With the mish-mash medley of legal, leadership, and National Collegiate Athletic Association results spilling out of the Jerry Sandusky child rape conviction, you’d have to believe that justice has been done, lessons learned, and responsible adults have reasserted control over one of the world’s leading academic institutions, Penn State University.

Sadly, you’d be wrong; it’s just not the case.

Instead, the best opportunity in decades to talk about child molesters, sexual abuse, pedophilia, increasingly bizarre social norms, and educational institutions has been missed. Sandusky’s legacy is so painful, so gut-wrenchingly disturbing, that everyone seems to be looking the other way down the street. Scapegoats are in demand, and the PSU football program is serving handily.

After reading the related press reports and the Louis Freeh report, the only person who stands out as a leader is the one un-named Trustee who persistently dogged former PSU president Graham Spanier, demanding information and explanations along the way, even as Spanier sandbagged, obfuscated, lied, and blustered. Louis Freeh’s report is otherwise itself deficient enough to demand another analysis of the facts.

One of the Freeh Report’s biggest deficiencies is its preachy tone and clear aim to discredit Coach Joe Paterno. A real investigation dispassionately uncovers facts, leaving the inferences and judgmental conclusions to decision makers. Diverging from that mode, the now re-corrected Freeh Report uses damning language, and makes recommendations, inferences, and insinuations that aren’t supported by the evidence.

One example is how Freeh uses Paterno’s statement that he “didn’t want to interfere with their weekends” as evidence of Paterno’s supposed reluctance to address Sandusky’s brand-new crimes after Michael McQueary reported one to him at 2:00 AM. As though waiting from 3:00 AM to 9:00 AM Sunday morning is a shockingly long time to wait to tell the most senior school administrators that you’ve been told that a grown adult with the highest standing is really a child rapist. This demonstrates that Freeh either missed the irony in Paterno’s statement, or he deliberately took it out of context in an attempt to smear Paterno by making him seem reluctant to report, and more culpable for Sandusky’s actions. Either way, Sunday morning calls about a Sunday morning child rapist do ruin your weekend, and they were made nonetheless.

But the worst example is Freeh’s reliance upon two emails from former Athletic Director Tim Curley, in which Curley invokes the paraphrase “Coach wants to know” to either pry information from VP Gary Schultz and Spanier or to encourage a decision about Sandusky’s future. In those two emails, Curley represented to Spanier and Schultz that he had communicated with former Coach Joe Paterno about their collectively developing understanding of Sandusky’s crimes, and he hinted that Paterno was apprised of the facts that we all now know after all of the reporting, investigation, and trial.

The problem with drawing damning inferences about what Paterno did nor did not know from just these two opaque emails is that lots of people misrepresent what public figures say and what their bosses say, said, believe, or want. They do it especially when they know that getting that person’s actual opinion will be difficult. I have participated directly in the politics of PSU’s Old Main, both as a PSU student leader and as a professional decades later. Like all educational institutions, that administrative wing is rife with intrigue, lies, posturing, one-upsmanship, deceit, conceit, gigantic egos backed up by zero, undeservedly high salaries, and worse. For Curley to invoke Coach Paterno in the emails without actually consulting him on a personnel issue, as opposed to a recruiting issue, would be par for the course. It would actually make Curley more human.

Those two emails tell us nothing about Paterno’s knowledge of the situation, only what Curley said.

But the Freeh report relies on them almost exclusively to establish that Paterno was not only tracking the Sandusky developments, but then actively quashing any public decision or exposure about them. By mistakenly (falsely?) claiming that Paterno maintained that detailed level of involvement, the entire football program has, by extension, become smeared and then punished.

In its rush to condemn Paterno, and by extension the entire PSU football program, the NCAA has relied on Freeh report’s single most judgmental, problematic word: “Culture.” As in “A culture of reverence for the football program that is ingrained at all levels of the campus [sic] community,” surprise, surprise; find me a top college football program that is any different. As in, Freeh’s inference goes, a university-wide culture of lying and cover-up; which is unsupported by the facts.

The problem with Freeh claiming that a culture of cover-up and sacrificing little boys’ bodies and souls on the altar of college football existed at Penn State is that no one outside of four senior people really knew what was going on with Sandusky. And one of those people, Paterno, not only followed protocol and notified his superiors, but also then spoke openly with a reporter and others in a way that indicates he believed he did what was required and regretted not doing more. Not to mention the 1998 police cover-up and Ray Gricar’s failure to prosecute Sandusky and then his mysterious disappearance….

Note to Louis Freeh and the NCAA folks: Three or four people do not make an entire university culture. Rather, The Culture that Joe Built was, and still is, made of millions of adults, nearly any one of whom would have gladly taken a baseball bat to Sandusky, and then notified the police that a pedophile had been discovered and justice had been administered. The great call to arms against Penn State is that, supposedly, the real culture beneath the surface is one of lies and deceit. The open horror within the PSU Alumni community at Sandusky’s crimes and at the cover-up by three leaders there belies Freeh’s insinuation and the NCAA’s grotesque penalty.

The NCAA’s rush to judgment, to be PSU’s judge, jury, and swift executioner without any due process, is clear evidence of a truly deficient culture, the same culture that Freeh decries about Spanier’s own similar leadership style.

The PSU Board of Trustees’ rush to embrace the NCAA’s ridiculous penalty is a shallow mea culpa and self-expiation through supposed self-sacrifice by a bunch of weak people who lacked the strength of character to act when they should have acted decisively, back in 1998, 2001, 2008, and 2010. Any Trustee wishing to now demonstrate his or her agreement with the NCAA’s penalty should immediately resign from the PSU board as a true sign of self-sacrifice. Current PSU president Rodney Erickson is cut from the same pathetic cloth, and he is also tainted by his long, weak-kneed proximity to Spanier: Resign immediately, Mr. Erickson. Get away from us.

And about that un-named Trustee: Whoever you are, I nominate you to be Penn State’s next president. You alone have demonstrated the strength of character and leadership that has been missing from the beginning until the end of this debacle. Please step up, whoever you are.

Follow the discussion at www.joshfirst.com and on our political page on FaceBook