I have some questions...

As the title indicates, I have some questions related to the reaction to the Travon Martin / George Zimmerman saga. I understand that the emotions on this subject are very raw. So, I promise to tread lightly.  And, I'd ask you to do the same in your response. But, please help me understand the targets of the outrage in the Travon Martin case. 

I, like many, am surprised that George Zimmerman was not found guilty of anything. An unarmed kid was killed. However, unlike many, I don't think this is the best example of civil rights to kick over furniture about. 

You don't like the verdict. OK. I get that. But, there are only a few things you can get upset about there. 

The jury, which was chosen by both the prosecution and the defense, could only make their collective decision on the facts that they were presented in the constraints of the laws as they are defined in the state and the ability to guess what level of force necessitated the use lethal force as self defense.

Therefore, if you're upset about the verdict, I'd feel people should be upset at the charges that the prosecution chose to pursue, the prosecution falling short of presenting facts to support their chosen charge or the definition of the laws that do not enable prosecution of a perceived crime. But, bottom line, that's your run-of-the-mill court room burden.

But, an even bigger issue comes in when you try to make more of this case than an accused crime. To elevate this to a civil rights case is a long haul.

To make this a racially motivated killing, you’d need some kind of substantiation that this went beyond a situation where a bi-racial (white/Peruvian) neighborhood watchman went after a stranger in a community where recent crimes had been committed. There are already laws to determine whether he went beyond the scope of his duty or if he committed a crime. And, those are in play.

To substantiate that this was somehow racially motivated, there would be a need for witnesses, some pattern of demonstrated racist behavior or some kind of direct evidence. Otherwise, the entire civil rights violation claim relies on trying to guess what was in Zimmerman’s head. That’s a high stakes gamble to try to advance the discussion of civil rights.

Undoubtedly, with this many people this quick to anger, there needs to be an ongoing discussion about civil rights. But, if the hope is to make that discussion one of legitimacy, why base it on trying to guess what was in the head of an individual when this is believed to be an institutional issue?

In my opinion, there are likely much more clear examples of violations based on discrimination. But, for the crimes themselves, regardless of motive, there are laws built to handle those situations. If the law fails to protect people in a way that they see fit, then the people need to vote in officials that will enact the laws the people deem necessary. That’s democracy.

To me, this was very clearly a case about defining ‘just force’ in self defense. This was very clearly a case looking at the spectrum from self defense to murder. To me, this is not very clearly a guns rights case nor a civil rights case. There are, in my opinion, better ways to illustrate the need for discussions in these areas.

So, what is it about this case that makes people want to kick over furniture? Is it based on implying what was in Zimmerman’s head? 

• Is it the shortcoming of the prosecution to substantiate violation of the laws? 
• Is it the definition of the laws in Florida? 
• Or, is there truly a demonstrated piece (or stream) of evidence that I’ve missed that shows Zimmerman’s racial intent to hunt and kill an innocent person because of his skin color and a systemic conspiracy to advocate it? 

You're All Going to Make Me a Proper Alumni Yet...

Let it be said that I'm basically the worst kind of PSU alumni. I went to Penn State for four years, I got everything I could out of the experience, I was handed my diploma and I left. I was done.

I still didn't "know the God damn words" to the alma mater. I didn't sign up for the alumni association. I didn't send donations back to the University. And, I watched Penn State football with the same interest I watched all other college football. 

For most colleges and universities, that's pretty normal behavior--to walk away. But, as a Penn Stater, that kind of behavior is sacrilege. Graduating a Penn Stater is supposed to be a badge of honor that you wear for a lifetime. And, I think that's where a lot of the resentment and hostility builds up against Penn Staters. The fact that (most) Penn Staters are so obvious and numerous about their pride for their alma mater. It's a mystery of exclusion for those that did not graduate from Penn State and an easy, low-hanging target for criticism for those looking to make light of it. 

But, never having been much of a fan boy, I packed that badge of honor away with my high school letterman coat. My experience, however, is that these same people that would fault you for your chest-beating PSU pride, are the same people that are disappointed if you’re not ‘one of those kooks.’ 

When people know you’re a Penn Stater they love to run to you with every tidbit they hear about PSU. Most often, it’s sports related—a great play, a big game, a score and the like. It’s a means by which people want to relate to you. As a result, I have to pay a little more attention to Penn State scores or highlights so I don’t seem dumb or crass. But, this act makes me ‘one of those guys.’

When I’m out and about and I’m not wearing blue and white, people think my best PSU gear must be threadbare so friends and family buy me Penn State gear—never thinking there was a chance I just didn’t bother to buy any. In showing my gratitude, I wear the gear out and about, making me ‘one of those guys.’

Really, these things end up being little more than token placations to maintain the social norm. But, the one thing I’ve found is that once they’ve pegged you – or made you – ‘one of those guys’ they also feel it’s an open invitation to wax poetic on what’s wrong with the people that are chest beating Penn Staters and they see it as an open invitation to vent about what they dislike about the university.

Most of these criticisms are simple barbs about the sports program, which I have no problem with. Hell, I’ve been very open about saying that I thought JoePa should’ve retired when Penn State joined the Big10 because he coached an antiquated form of football. So, I give people a bit of a pass. But, at the root of it, feeling that you have an open invitation to walk up to me and criticize something I might identify myself with seems a little disrespectful.

I don’t walk up to people in church clothes at restaurants and point out that their kid is being bad and say, as the bible prescribes, you should take that kid to the elders of the village and have him stoned. There’s just a level of respect you have for your fellow man and what they identify themselves with. 

So, enter the events surrounding Jerry Sandusky. If anybody on this planet should be stoned to death, if these allegations prove to be true—as it seems they will, he should receive every inhumane punishment you could imagine. And, those that willfully distorted or hid details to save face should be punished as well. As it seems has been the case. 

Well, because it’s in the news and people have read a headline or two, suddenly they feel they have free license to make statements to me or around me that are disrespectful and worthy of a solid punch in the face. 

I don’t mind a researched, well-thought out argument. I don’t mind differing views or opinions. I don’t mind openly exchanging intelligent debate on events or philosophies. But, when people feel justified to make uneducated, blindly angry comments to me or around me without any consideration for where I may stand on an issue (politics, life, sports, whatever…) shows a complete lack of respect. And, surprising to me, I've kicked a few people to the proverbial curb for showing that lack of respect. 

And it has more than surprised me how much this type of behavior has irritated me related to Penn State. And, weirdly, it seems to have my blue and white blood flowing. I’ve talked more to fellow writers from our college newspaper, The Daily Collegian. I’ve talked with a number of fellow alumni related to this issue. I’ve ardently defended the institution from the individuals. And, I’ve written more in this blog in three days than I probably have in years. I’ve found myself really fired up about this issue, but I think it’s in response to the way this is being handled, the accusations and the disrespect more than a tried and true spirit for the blue in white.

I haven’t defended Sandusky. I haven’t defended the university police that investigated early allegations. I haven’t defended the executives that may have interfered with investigations. I haven’t defended any of the numerous witnesses to crimes in progress that did nothing. I have defended the larger University, its people and, surprisingly, Joe Paterno. 

Making any blanket statement about the students, faculty or alumni has drawn fire from me like I’d never expect to react. The misguided witch hunt for JoePa, the only name people know at the university, has shown a blind anger that gets my face hot. 

Surprising to me, I’ve gone to great lengths to show the testimony that stated JoePa likely new NOTHING about the 98 allegations which were dropped. In fact, testimony on page 7 of the proceedings show JoePa may not even have been aware of the details of allegations of an act witnessed by a graduate assistant against a man JoePa had worked beside for decades without issue. But, regardless, JoePa put the allegations of a grad student that didn’t stop an alleged crime in the hands of people that were trusted to investigate. If JoePa is guilty of anything, he’s guilty of doing what the university prescribed and trusting the system. In hindsight I’m sure it all seems clear in the eyes of the blind rage, but I digress once again. 

Bottom line is that somehow this event has forced me into a position where I’m fighting for Penn State in a way I’d never expect. Sure, it’s built around the perception that people are being willfully disrespectful of me without knowing where I stand on the issue. But, much as I’ve somehow ended up wearing blue and white, following scores, watching news, connecting with alumni and defending the university, I guess I should just say it. 

We are….Penn State!

I'm Calling Bullshit on Forcing JoePa Out

Let's take a deep breath and look at this from where JoePa sits. Now, full disclosure, I've already said, I think JoePa should've stepped aside a LONG time ago, but nothing I have read has given me any reason as to why JoePa should be implicated in this. To support that, based ONLY on what I've read, let's look at this from where JoePa sits:

• Sandusky became a coach at Penn State in 1969--becoming a co-worker to Joe Paterno.
• Unless there is something we don't know, JoePa never knew anything but on field results until, potentially 1998. Even then, he is cleared. So, as far as a co-worker goes, just a strange event. 
• Twelve years later, a janitor is alleged to have witnessed a crime of Sandusky with a child. The janitor did not stop the crime, but only reported up to his supervisor. No indication that Paterno was made aware. 
• Two years after that, a graduate assistant witnesses a crime. Again, this person did not stop the crime but rather only reported up--a day later! 
• After learning of what the grad assistant saw, JoePa, like all those in the past that could've ended this, reported up on something that HE DID NOT WITNESS.
• The graduate assistant detailed his report to JoePa's superiors. These superiors were to have investigated and dealt with the issue. 
• Again, as far as JoePa was concerned, this incident was investigated, and was told that there was no evidence of a crime. 
• So, if there was dishonesty, it was from either the witness, or those that 'investigated' and found no wrongdoing. 
• Regardless, Sandusky was retired for the 99 season and prohibited from bringing kids from his charity to Penn State programs. 
• Sandusky continued to use his CHARITY as a picking ground for his alleged rapist activities--not Penn State, not JoePa's office. 
• JoePa was not one of two (maybe three with the wrestling coach) people that WITNESSED RAPE, but did not stop the crime nor call authorities.
• JoePa was not the University Police who investigated the first crime reported in association with the University in 1998. 
• JoePa was not the AD nor the witness. 
• JoePa was only a go-between from a witness and authorities who investigated. There are many before him that should be held accountable vs. JoePa that was just the conduit between a witness and those that were to investigate the alleged witnessed crime.

So, if what I've read was correct, JoePa could only go on the information he was told. And, if he was told that it was investigated and resolved, you would take it at its word. But, regardless, Sandusky was retired and banned from bringing kids from his program. 

Imagine that situation in your office. An intern comes to you and says Bob in accounting was up to no good yesterday. You'd say, let's go talk to the boss. You'd let your boss handle it. And, if your boss says there was nothing to concern yourself with, you go on working your job--keeping an eye on Bob--or in this case Sandusky.

All that said, JoePa's day is long done. He should've retired some time ago. But, he didn't. He should retire at the end of the season. And, it should have nothing to do with this horrible series of crimes.

• Jerry Sandusky, if convicted, should be punished within an inch of his life. 
• Sandusky's charity, which he used as a picking ground, should be dismantled.
• Anybody found to have interfered or was otherwise dishonest, should be punished
• Those that did not stop crimes in progress that they witnessed should be reprimanded.  
• The University needs to examine its policies and protect the innocent.
• JoePa needs to retire at the end of the season and call it a career.
• And, those with passion about this should work to help the victims of this series of alleged crimes and other such crimes. 

Playing devil's advocate...ten comments on this Sandusky situation

I don't proclaim to know anything more about this situation than anybody else. I only know what I've read. And, I guess this is more a reaction to the reactions I've seen from the angry mob.

1. Why isn't anybody calling for the head of the PSU grad student that witnessed the Sandusky incident and only 'reported up?' Or the janitor? Or the wrestling coach? Anyone along that line could've easily called the cops. But, all of them felt that reporting it up the chain was the correct thing to do.
2. There are lots of reasons JoePa should hang it up, but 'reporting up' as prescribed isn't one. He reported it the next day, and the grad assistant detailed what he saw to university officials.
3. It's in the hands of the law, give the torches and angry town folk a night off. The facts will emerge with or without your angry chorus for any name you know from PSU to be stoned to death. I know it's all the rage to be part of an angry mob online and topple villages, but the process is in motion.
4. Sandusky was removed from the football program as well as any campus-related activities involving children once Paterno was alleged to have been made aware.
5. The people who should've acted, but did not have been removed once it came to light that they acted dishonestly. If it comes to be that others were aware and aided in a cover up, they too should be dealt with.
6. Should Sandusky prove to be guilty, he should, and will be dealt with aggressively.
7. Should the officials that acted dishonestly prove to have obstructed legal process or enabled the continuation of these alleged acts, they will be held accountable as a party to the crime.
8. Large institutions have lots of people--some good, some bad. A lot of good people work at PSU and most have good intentions. Let's remove the infected appendix without killing the patient.
9. Second Mile has publicly known of accusations against Sandusky since 2002, but he still had unsupervised access to kids through that program, leading to at least the 2005 incident. He wasn't restricted in access until 2008 and wasn't removed from the org until 2010. Why isn't there an angry mob darkening their towers?
10. People can only operate on the information they are given. How many of you would be surprised that a co-worker beat their kids or kept bodies in their refrigerators, but acted and functioned normal at work? I don't pry into the personal life of my co workers. And in a large institution, it's easy to see how bad seeds could be under your nose without ever knowing.

Bottom line, a lot of good goes on at Penn State. Like any large institution, there are good and bad people. All indications are that the issues are caused by individuals, not the institution. The bad people should be dealt with appropriately. It is the job of the institution to fix the situation, remedy what it can and restore its greatness. This is in the works regardless of rallies to throw the babies out with the bath water. Still have extra energy, focus on the victims, donate to programs, learn from the situation and be vigilant.

Monday Morning Hipsters

Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE X-NONE MicrosoftInternetExplorer4

"Omigod, I can just imagine the dread of people discussing a current event that they all shared interest in last night. How dreadful and unoriginal," drone all the hipsters after any disappointing loss around Pittsburgh. "It's just like that time I predicted those people would cry at that funeral. How mundane." 

When you're from Pittsburgh, it is culturally significant to be passionate about your football teams--and sports in general. You are not promoted up the food chain in any way by hipishly pulling a finger from your mocha espresso to point accusingly at people discussing a significant community event. 

Of course, in pointing this out, I've indirectly created a third level of meta-cool-hipster that points out how cool I am by blogging about hipsters that are so cool that they've pointed out that people are going to talk about a major sporting event the day after it happens. It may well tear a hole in the time-space continuum, but I digress.

Pittsburgh is a community that had its industrial rug and heart ripped out from under it at just about the time two major, local sports teams were emerging. The City of Champions was a fine hook to hang our hats on while the rest of our lives were hurting. And, true to our nature, Pittsburghers are industrious and helpful. We do not simply moan and say there's a problem. We try to identify a way to fix it -- often mixed with the passion we have for our sporting programs. 

Sure, there are different plays, players, aspects and influences that stand out in the minds of people with varying levels of understanding of the sport, but the bottom line is that when a loss occurs there is something wrong with something Pittsburghers care deeply about, and therefore, we're trying to do something about it. It's like seeing the potential in your kid and pointing out behaviors that can help or hurt progress.

There's not a formula, there's a consensus on the pathway to progress. Consensus is built through trial and error and cultural exchange of ideas and opinions. People rise to new heights and levels of understanding though studying these exchanges. Some are happy to yell it out on the sidelines or at their TV's. Some discuss it among their friends. Some hone it into a skill that enables them to write and discuss it through a medium. Some take it to a level where they are professionals, coaches and advisors. But, it all starts in the examination of what works and what doesn't.

So, it's funny to see the hipsters don their evolved, original analytic cap and braggishly post to their social media commoners how boorish it will be to hear people be upset about a passionate loss. And, it's twice as funny to hear sports media personalities don their hipster high horse saddles.

That's why sports talk shows exist--as a forum for these passionate sports fan folk. Without these folks, the show hosts wouldn't have a forum nor the access that gives them the shard of increased knowledge they're given by having access to the them--to share with their audience.

But, in all honestly, if this level of access or their access to a medium made them any more knowledgeable than the rest of the people discussing it, they'd be coaching or rich by cashing in at a Vegas sports book.

And, the hipsters that sneeringly scoff at the differing perspectives of analysis, well, I'm sure that's just one of many instances in their lives where they blame their lack of belonging or contributing to the community on their evolution in originality. 

 

They're Everywhere: People and Plates from Out of State

Something interesting is afoot around Pittsburgh. It might not be obvious if you're walking around, looking about town. But, hop in your car and travel about the airport corridor. Look at the cars around you. Look at the licence plates. Specifically, look at the states of the plates around you. There are suddenly a lot of out-of-state people coming to Pittsburgh.  

Like most kids, I grew up playing the licence plate game on trips. Playing the license plate game always had to be on trips, because, at the time I was growing up, people were leaving the area--not coming here. 

Around here, it was always just PA plates and you'd have to hope for the occasional over-the-road truck passing through with an out-of-state plate. As a result, punch bugs, counting cows or cemetaries had to suffice for trips within the area. 

But, that has seemingly changed recently. Even on my 30 minute commute, it's nothing for me to see license plates from 15 states, which is awesome. It means people are coming to Pittsburgh from other places. And, it's not just people passing through. These are people here daily for the business commute. 

Maybe it's a result of more movies being filmed in town. Maybe it's because Pittsburgh is continuously voted a most-livable city. Maybe it's because our property is relatively inexpensive, stable and spacious. Maybe it's the emerging green living trend here in Pittsburgh. Maybe some of it is rental car traffic through the airport. But, popular consensus seems to be that a lot of these people are here to work.

People are coming to Pittsburgh to work for Google or CMU. People are coming to Pittsburgh to work in medical research. People are coming to Pittsburgh to work in the natural gas drilling boom that's happening in the area. Jobs are bringing people to Pittsburgh. That's something I haven't seen most of my life. 

It's been more than a couple of generations since Pittsburgh was stood on its head by unemployment from the fall of the industrial age. There's a reason that Steelers fans are everywhere. It's not just because they're an honorable, winning franchise. It's because Pittsburghers were scattered about the nation in search of work after our industrial heritage became passe. 

So, to see people coming to the area--in some cases, coming BACK to the area, is fantastic. It's validation that Pittsburgh has turned the corner and is returning to its prominance as more than a place to visit--it's a great place to live. Take a look the next time you're out and about. See how many plates you see representing people coming to our area. 

Life Axiom: All the Drama

• Life Axiom: A person uttering the phrase, "I'm done with all the drama," is positively correlated to being a contributing factor in said drama.
  • Add the word SO to that phrase, "I'm SO done with all the drama" and they're defnitiely the source of said drama.