Randy Cassingham's Blog

Posted by Bob in Oklahoma on January 23, 2012:

I won't let a single event color my respect for the life and career of an 80-year-old man. He did what he was supposed to do, and expected those above him to do what they were supposed to do.

Where's the outcry against Victim One's HS principal and coach, who tried to get his mother to drop the issue in 2002, and let Sandusky keep taking the boy places?

Where's the outcry against everyone else who failed these kids? I feel like Paterno is the easy target.

---

Bob, did you even read the page? This isn't about a listing of everyone who's culpable, it's my asking why there is idol worship of one man who is culpable. That's the question. What's your answer? But: please do actually read the page first: we're not talking about a "single event" but rather ignoring a pattern for years after he was informed of it. -rc

Posted by Claudia - Thousand Oaks on January 23, 2012:

Now if it were Cardinal Law who had died, the first thing mentioned would be his cover up of clergy abuse, not the good he did for his diocese.

BUT nowhere in the death notices of Paterno did I see his coverup of sexual abuse in the first 10 paragraphs. That is where the sports worship is greatly evident.

There needs to be a quid pro quo, abuse of children in any form, at any time, in any place, needs to be front and center and it overshadows everything till one is acquitted. The damage done to the children is FOREVER, and so should be treated as a dire deed.

Posted by Mike, Weirton, WV on January 23, 2012:

Yes, he should have followed up and certainly not allowed Sandusky to be anywhere near the locker rooms. As for the "idol worship," I think it's not accurate to just label Paterno a "football coach" as though he were the same as any coach out there today. In a world where coaches leave for the NFL or move to better opportunities every few years, Paterno was there for decades. He made sure his players got their education -- Penn State and Stanford have the highest overall (and minority) graduation rate in college football. Paterno lived in a modest house and signed over checks to the school ($100K each year to the library fund, for starters). Whether or not he deserves the "idol worship," he was not on the same level as your typical college football coach. And, to the poster who says it's the players who win the games, it's the coach who recruits and trains those players, who decides who plays and what strategy they will utilize, what plays to run, etc. The coach is most definitely part of the "win."

---

Thanks, Mike: after more than 150 comments on Facebook, you're the first, I think, to actually answer my question (and in a reasonable way). I appreciate your giving me a better understanding your point of view! -rc

Posted by Pete in Virginia on January 23, 2012:

I'm sorry this had to be moved because of one "older writer's" squeamishness -- going through the comments prior to Maxim's first post on the matter I did not see any profanity for profanities sake. Maxim if a frank discussion bothers you then by all means exercise your right to not take part in it but do not interfere with my right to take part in it. Obviously it bothered Robert enough to call me and others "liberal" and to have made the comment of "showing my true colors" by posting a timeline of events from both NPR and CNN.

Honestly I'm sorry that Paterno is dead -- but there should be NO separation of his football career and this scandal. Fact of the matter is Paterno did not do enough to stop Sandusky nor was Paterno the only one who failed to do so.

At any rate it is a really interesting discussion, Randy.

---

More people will see it here, anyway, so I was glad to be "forced" to move it here. -rc

Posted by David, Canada on January 23, 2012:

I actually think you're barking up the wrong tree of a sorts, Randy. Even if the sexual abuse scandal never happened at all (and believe me, I wish it didn't, chiefly for the sake of the victims) why is there hero worship of this man? It seems to be based primarily on the fact that he was a very effective football coach. So? Why does that warrant him being idolized?

I have friends that have made a difference in people's lives -- volunteering at homeless shelters, coordinating microloans for third world businesses, and setting up organizations to encourage righting of injustices (working with victims of the child trafficking industry, the poor, and those who have destitute lives). *Those* people are deserving of hero worship, but I'll bet each and every one of their deaths will be more obscure than Paterno's -- even without his scandal.

---

I'm not sure that agreement with my point means I'm "barking up the wrong tree". I do agree with your more precise point, though. It's exactly why I started the "Honorary Unsubscribe" feature in TRUE in the late 90s: I felt we were giving "celebrity" to the wrong people, such as athletes. -rc

Posted by David, Billerica, MA on January 23, 2012:

I worry about people who elevate Football, or any other sport, to religious levels. I love to watch sports as much as anyone, but both collegiate and professional sports have become such a passion/obsession for so many, that it clouds there perception of reality.

The fact that JoePa spent so many years in one job is remarkable. However, he is a coach of a extra-curricular sports team, not a deity. Since he died, I have heard many extol that JoePa would have "done anything for the college he loved." This apparently was true. He made sure that nothing would sully his precious football team or Penn State. I'm sorry, but putting school/team pride ahead of human life is wrong. Nothing can alter the egregiousness of Paterno's inaction. He may have been fatherly and a great guy, but his morals were not evident when he did so precious little when faced with allowing a predator of young children to continue to run amok in society. If after reporting it to the proper officials, JoePa had seen Sandusky again on campus (or anywhere else), it should have been his #1 priority to make sure Sandusky remained as far away from children as allowable by law.

JoePa was a human being, not a deity. Football is only a game, not a life.

Posted by Marchell in Houston on January 23, 2012:

I have to agree with you Randy. Paterno stated that he probably could have done more and I agree with him. The law defines 'minors' as those that must be cared for, looked after and protected by the majority. It is our responsibility and duty to protect ALL children. When a complaint is brought forward, it is our responsibility and duty to prevent any further instances of possible harm to the child. This is not a liberal point of view. I believe that if Paterno had been told that Sandusky was beating boys instead of raping them, he would have reacted much more strongly. It was the sexual connotation that prevented him from reacting properly. Unfortunately, he didn't view abuse as abuse, whether physical or mental. I can't respect him for allowing abuse to happen without investigating -- it was his responsibility and duty.

Posted by Anne, Mariposa, CA on January 23, 2012:

I agree with David from Billerica "Nothing can alter the egregiousness of Paterno's inaction" and with Randy.

While I'm sure his family is sorry he's dead, I couldn't muster up any particular emotion. He didn't stop Sandusky from further opportunities to molest kids. He could have stopped him.

I do feel sorry for his family; always hard when you lose someone. But Paterno isn't a hero. Not in my book.

Posted by Michael, London on January 23, 2012:

Randy, I would never ever unsubscribe just because you say somthing I do not agree with, not that that has happened so far.

I find your opinions always sound and common sense, sometimes I have to ask myself, how can an intelligent person think otherwise....

---

The key is "intelligent". You aren't so invested in preconceived notions that you can't stand being asked "Why?" You have the ability to answer rationally, and/or to change your mind. What's sad isn't that there are people who thought Paterno was great (and he was great at his profession), it's that any dissonance to their thought pattern causes brain freeze, and the only thing they can do is scream "Liberal!" (or whatever) to put "opponents" in a different box -- the "enemy" box because they insist that others must be "with me or against me" -- and act accordingly. What a sad, tiny world they live in.

And to be sure, I'm not categorizing "anyone who disagrees with me" that way. Mike in Weirton, WV, disagrees with me in a comment above, but he didn't go into brain-lock over it: he calmly stated his reasons "Why" -- and I honestly appreciated learning more about his point of view. See how easy it is? Well, easy if you have (and can use) a brain, at least. -rc

Posted by David, State College, PA on January 23, 2012:

I appreciate the discussion. I live in State College, I work on campus (not for PSU), but my wife is faculty and our oldest is a student. I am not a PSU grad, but my wife and son soon will be. As such, I am very close to this. Furthermore, our middle son participated in some 2nd Mile events. We definitely feel like we dodged a bullet there and our hearts break for those who were victims of this atrocity.

I do take issue with assumptions I have read here. Paterno blew it. He needed to be fired. But that is not the same as covering it up. He did not grasp the magnitude of what he was told...and apparently he was not told everything. But is the myopia of an old man equivalent to an intentional cover-up? He could and should have done more. He did not use the influence and moral authority he had earned over the years to prevent the continuation of abuse. For that he should be held accountable.

Although his influence stemmed largely from the money flowing to and through the football program, his moral authority came from his character and his commitment to PSU, to his players, and to the students. He loved them. He gave to them. He invested in them. He lived in a modest home within walking distance of the campus, despite his wealth. He raised millions for PSU, but he gave millions as well. He truly was a father (or grandfather) figure to everyone. He shopped locally. He was part of the community. He was one of us.

I am not excusing his inaction in the Sandusky matter. He could be oblivious to things...players in trouble with the law being an example. But when he was confronted with realities that he had not accepted before, he acted. Lawbreakers were dismissed. Starters were suspended or expelled. The entire team was made to clean Beaver Stadium after several transgressed to make the point that they all shared responsibility, and he was there cleaning up with them.

Living here, I think the reactions for and against the coach have devolved into histrionic excess. Defend the man and you are condoning child rape. Hold him accountable and you are dismissing an entire lifetime of achievement and investment in the lives of others. Both are ridiculous. He was a man. Flawed and great. Wise and foolish. Prone to excess in both selfishness and selflessness. To one degree or another the same could be said for all of us.

Some months ago you had an Honorary Unsubscribe for that poor Chinese baby killed on the street while people watched. Were those people worse than everyone else? Or were they emblematic of a more deeply seated failure of the human condition? The neighbors who heard Kitty Genovese scream for her life, were they so different? The soldiers at Abu Graib, or My Lai? It is easy for any of us to say what should have been done. And we are right to hold those accountable who had the opportunity to stop an atrocity and failed to do so.

But we need to be careful when riding an ethical high horse, because history and experience tells us that many -- maybe most -- fail that same test. Paterno had an opportunity to act more decisively and failed. That sin of omission haunted him to his grave. We should all learn from that. But he is not the first, he is not the worst, and sadly he will not be the last. He was a great man, but he was just a man. And for good AND bad, we all share that DNA.

---

I did not use the term "cover-up", but others did see it that way, and I allowed them to post their thoughts and conclusions, just as I'm letting you post yours. I do not agree, however, that "maybe most" of us would fail similar tests of ethics. I have reported lawbreakers, I have testified against them in court, I have put myself on the line -- and I do not think I'm unusual in being willing to do so. I also reject that to expect such out of our community leaders -- or any human -- is being on an "ethical high horse". That notion is what gives cowards cover. We all must demand not just high ethics, but action from our fellow citizens, let alone community leaders and, of course, those in education who have a positive "duty to report" such lawbreaking. Or indeed, we should be "haunted to our graves." -rc