Dann's posterous

Nothing an angry mob loves more than the biggest name. That's you, Joe Paterno.

Watching all of the rage of the media and the mob unleashed on Joe Paterno got so disappointing, I almost started to feel like they'd gotten worse than Penn State had. Here's why:

First, go read this timeline of the Sandusky nightmare: http://j.mp/uVtW3Y

Now, re-read the part from 1998 (Victim 6) through Spring 2008 (Victim 1, when someone FINALLY got things going that ended ended with criminal charges). Find and list all of the people from that period that actually did something that resulted in Sandusky being restricted from access to a victim or access to locations he'd used to assault victims.

Here's who's on that list:

- Victim 6's mother (probably. Her or whoever told Sandusky he couldn't "see Victim 6 anymore")

- The GA that reported what he witnessed to Joe Paterno

- Joe Paterno, who reported to his AD

- Whoever was involved in Sandusky's locker room keys being taken away

- Victim 1's mother (and finally the law enforcement that acted on her report)

Here's who is NOT on that list:

- Detective Ronald Schreffler, State College Police Department Detective Ralph Ralston, and Jerry Lauro, an investigator with the Pennsylvania Department of Public Welfare.

All involved in the Victim 6 report/incident. All directly heard Sandusky admit to showering with Victim 6 and/or hugging him in the shower. During this 'investigation' Sandusky won't promise not to shower with young boys anymore, admits that it's wrong to do so, and wishes he were dead.

- Centre County District Attorney Ray Gricar, who decided not to file criminal charges.

(It was discussed as kind of odd that Sandusky abruptly decided to retire in 1999. Although he had also been informed he would not be the next head coach shortly before. Not that the job would have been open for another 10+ years.)

- A janitor (James Calhoun) and other janitorial staff (whom Calhoun told) as well as Jay Witherite, his immediate supervisor.

- Office of Physical Plant employee Ronald Petrosky and other physical plant employees (more janitors, similarly informed)

Witherite tells Calhoun to whom he should report the incident. Calhoun was a temporary employee and never makes a report.

EVERYONE on this list witnessed or was informed of Sandusky's actions BEFORE (by ~18 months) the GA informed Paterno. Through the GA, Paterno and the AD, Second Mile is informed for the FIRST TIME (according to the linked timeline). Some sources indicate that Penn State reported to Second Mile that they'd done an internal review and found no wrongdoing. Even if true, how does the Second Mile just take that at face value?

WHAT. THE. FUCK.

Let me be clear: Paterno did what amounts to the utter minimum in regards to dealing with this. He was in a position to do a lot more (like, say, call the police), and didn't. We don't know how detailed Paterno was when informing his AD, or how detailed the AD was one level up. We have an idea of how detailed the GA was in his report to Paterno, and that's about it.

We don't know what Paterno was told from above when they took Sandusky's keys. Maybe he knew that Second Mile was informed (probably), maybe not. If he did, and Sandusky was not only still involved with the charity but freely allowed to spend time with young boys, maybe he assumes that (like the campus and local police and the goddman DA did FOUR YEARS EARLIER) Sandusky has stopped molesting boys. So, sans keys he's allowed on campus and around the football program. Oh, as a reminder: WITH YOUNG BOYS FROM HIS CHARITY. THAT WAS INFORMED BY PENN STATE.

And yet, the mob can be sated by nothing short of Joe Paterno's head. Not the Campus Police, not the local State College Police, not the DA, not The Second Mile. Nope.

I wonder why (rhetorical question). Because anyone who was a fan or or respected Paterno and Penn State now feels shameful, and that's the easiest place to direct their rage in order to feel better about themselves.

Sure, let's tar and feather Joe Paterno while we turn a blind eye to the charity that continued to let Sandusky interact with young boys even after notified by Penn State that there was some questionable behavior going on. Let's turn a blind eye to all the law enforcement folks who did nothing in 1998. Because really, who's going to feel better for having been a Penn State fan when Ronald Schreffler, Ralph Ralston, Jerry Lauro and Ray Gricar lose their jobs?

Did Joe Paterno deserve to lose his job? Probably. I'm not the guy loudly insisting he should be fired now vs. the end of the season, but I'm also not shouting down people wanting him fired now.

Is he the guy who should be burning in effigy, the head on the pike at the entrance to campus? No, he really shouldn't. Talk all you want about him being what amounts to Top Dog on campus, but at the end of the day he's probably not even in the top 5 group of people that should be the target of rage here.

Not that it matters. Mobs don't care. And the media is just a smaller mob, but with cameras and microphones.

Shame on all of them.

Spirit Day 2011 #spiritday

I always feel like the "Do something with color X" to support causes is an empty gesture (for me, it's not an attack on people who do it or support it), so instead of doing purple related something in support of Spirit Day, here's a letter I wrote to my School District's Board of Education (Saline, MI where we live/my high school age daughter goes to school).

Background: The board had just voted against expanding the non-discrimination policy to include LBGT students. Thus, I was supremely pissed.

-----

Greetings,

As a parent of a Saline High School student and as a taxpayer, I want
to take a moment to say that I am disappointed (that's actually a huge
understatement) by the board's recent vote against expanding the
non-discrimination policy.  It is astonishing to me that a group of
people who are, I assume, well educated can somehow fail to understand
concepts like "...all men are created equal..." and "...unalienable
Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of
Happiness."  Maybe it's a reflection of how U.S. History is taught in
the district, or maybe it's just an indication that some members of
the Board need to take one or more of these classes again.

The idea that the non-discrimination policy includes religion as well
as marital status (which in itself is surprising in a policy
explicitly applied to students), both of which are undeniably
*choices* an individual makes while excluding “sexual orientation,
gender identity and gender expression”, which may or may not be
*choices* is indefensible. Even if the idea that students in the
excluded groups have made choicesl is conceded, that puts them at the
same level as religion and marital status, but somehow treated as if
they are not.

The suggestion that the "anti-bullying" policy (which, as I'm sure you
know, does not explicitly include the groups in question) already
covers this is a pathetically weak cop out at best, and an attempt to
justify bigotry at worst.  I assume that the claim is made based on
the phrase: "but not be limited to", a phrase that can just as easily
be used to exclude these groups as it can be used to include them.
This cop out is an implicit statement that it is perfectly acceptable
to discriminate against students in these groups as long as they are
not "bullied".

This is not something that I want taught to my daughter, or to any
other student.  As trustees of the District, I had hoped that you
would feel the same way.

To the four of you who voted against this change, please know that you
will not be receiving my vote when you are next up for re-election.  I
will also do what I can to explain your cowardice and/or bigotry to
fellow taxpayers, in the hope that they will also decline to endorse
this behavior by choosing not to vote for you.  It would not surprise
me in the least to learn that none of you care about this statement,
but I make it with the small hope that you do care and that it might
lead you to reconsider your position.

To the three of you who voted in favor of this change, thank you.  I
want you to know that I appreciate the example you are trying to set
for the students and staff of the district.

  - Dann Fuller

-----

Dann's Awesomed By Comics Awards - 9/14

So, I'm stealing the bit from @EvieN and @AaronABCP's Awesomed By Comics Podcast and flagging the good and bad from this week's books. Yay, I guess?

Cover of the Week: Batwoman #1 - J.H. Williams III. A no-brainer.

Panel of the Week: A tie between ASM #669 (Dan Slott/Humberto Ramos), with Venom saying "'cause the last thing anyone wants here...is Spider-Island, the Sequel!" and Herc #7 (Greg Pak/Fred Van Lente/June Brigman), where he's chugging a keg of just stolen beer and thinking "angst...fading". Because of course Herc's spider-sense goes off when beer is nearby.

Hero: Maybe cheating a bit, but so what. Dex-Star in Red Lanterns #1 (Peter Milligan/Ed Benes). Because a cat with a power ring on it's tail ripping scalps off chumps, that's why. Only problem is that he gets punked out far too easily.

Villain: Mephisto in Journey Into Mystery (Kieron Gillen/Richard Elson). As Evie and Aaron have said, nobody writes Mephisto like Gillen, and possibly nobody else should be allowed to.

Surprise: The last page of Pigs #1 (Nate Cosby/BenMcCool/Breno Tamura). Not gonig to spoil it. If you've read it, you'll agree. If you haven't, buy it right now.

Crap: Mr. Terrific #1, with Red Lanterns #1 a very close second. Mr. Terrific should have been so much more than this. What could have been a fun, smart, Bond/Holmes type adventure quickly turned into a kludgy, cliche-ridden, poorly fact checked mess.

The only thing worse than moving the iconic 'Fair Play' from his jacket to bicep tattoos would have been to have the lettered tattooed on his fingers. On top of that, Power Girl has (so far) been rubbed out of the new DC universe, leaving Karen Starr to be a super-rich booty call. At a fancy dinner party, Mr. Terrific's secretary/assistant (who has a crush on him) is jealously staring at Karen, prompting Karen to assure her she's just friends (with benefits) with Michael, and then to ask if the disapproval is because she's white. That's dumb on its own (given Michael's dead wife was black), but the assistant counters with "It's not because you're super-hot, because I'm super hot too. It's because you're rich!" Uh, why would that matter to the third smartest man in the world, who is super-rich himself?

And finally, the stupidest part of the issue (mostly because it's a science/techy book about the 3rd smartest man on the planet) is the scene at the police deptartment. Putting aside the poorly done exposition as explanation for why the police brought him in (btw, isn't known that Mr. Terrific is Michael Holt? Why is it so important that they have a special way to contact him securely?), when they show him what the suspect has been writing Mr. Terrific says "see these integers?" and "these are differential equations". The problem is, the few integers on the paper are basically irrelevant AND the equations aren't differential. It's poor writing (using 'integers' instead of something like 'equations'), and poor art (not bothering to google 'differential equation' to have an idea of what to put on the paper).

Here's the one bright spot of the issue: After saving some folks in the opening scene (who, by the way, are totally calm even though the London Eye was just mangled during their ride), they ask who he is. He tells them, and then they poke fun at him about only being the third smartest man in the world. He takes it in stride, retorting "Actually, a simple 'Thanks, black guy!'...will do." Even better, one of those people is black themselves.

*sigh*

First/Last book of the week: Demon Knights #1 (Paul Cornell/Diogenes Neves). This is just fun comics, with clever nods to lesser known bits of the DC universe that can pay off later if they want them to.

Book of the Week: Criminal: The Last of the Innocent (Ed Brubaker/Sean Phillips). I'm not even sure how to describe this, other than to say my only thought at the end was "Damn." The hero isn't a hero, the happy ending doesn't feel happy. The 'bad guys' get retribution that is ludicrous overkill, and the collateral damage is gut-wrenching. Lizzie is the only one who ends up happy, and that's just a matter of 'ignorance is bliss'. And yet, it's all done brilliantly.

So, there you go. Enjoy, I guess?

Hey @RyanStegman & @NateCosBOOM! You're in great company:

Treenis

Don't call it a sell out. #comics #ntac

I keep seeing people refer to how Comic X has sold out, and it drives me nuts.  First: It's either wrong or misleading. Possibly intentionally (and foolishly) misleading.  Comic X hasn't "sold out" in the way most people understand it.  It hasn't even reached stores yet! Hey man, did you hear Comic X sold out? I can't wait to go buy it on Wednesday when it hits store shelves!

What it means in this sense is that the print run has been entirely sold to retailers.  This is a good thing, because that's all the publisher cares about. Retailers are on the hook at this point, and anything they don't sell they're stuck with.

(Actually, in the case of the DC relaunch, 40+ titles are technically returnable with a  $.20 charge.  The idea being that DC wants retailers to be willing to over-order without worry of being stuck with boxes of unsold books. People who know more than me have said this is really just a white elephant/red herring because the return process is such a pain in the ass that very few retailers will bother to return books. On the one hand, that's bullshit. On the other, I hope it ends up not mattering.)

What the TRULY good news would be is to report that Comic X has *sold through*.  That'd mean the *retailers* sold out, and there's no more copies available for customers to buy.  That's what people associate something being "sold out" with, and that's just not the case here.

Aside from me being hungry right now (which makes me extra-dickish, ask my wife), what bother me about this is that it's actually discouraging for an interested customer to hear this. If someone tells you that the <insert ragingly popular musical artist(s) here> concert has sold out, you're bummed (if you wanted to go).  You know you're either paying extra for scalped tickets or you're not going.  You're out of luck.

Instead, if someone tells you that Comic X is sold out, you can still go to your local comics shop (LCS) on Wednesday and *probably* buy a copy right off the shelf for cover price. Some of what that LCS ordered will be held for people who pre-ordered, but most of what the LCS has will go on the shelf for people to buy first-come, first-served. Maybe if you go in on Saturday it really will be sold out, maybe not. I'm sure some Comic X's will be truly sold out very early, and some won't be sold out for a week or two after hitting shelves. But crowing about being sold out before a book is on sale is pointless at best, and stupid and shooting yourself in the foot at worst.

High-five cat high-fives

We taught our cat to high-five for treats. Go us.

(download)

Click here to download:

IMG_0389.MOV (11.63 MB)

Bagging/boarding comics, just now realized how cool the covers to Booster Gold #32 & #33 are side-by-side:

Why would the Bears intentionally kick off from the 30 yard line?

So, the Chicago Bears kicked off from the 30-yard line twice in their first pre-season game, rather than the 35-yard line as set in a rule change made during the offseason.  The rule is well intended, hoping to create more touchbacks and/or less returns in the hope of reducing the number of "freight train" hits by kick coverage running at full speed.

The Bears had permission from the league, until they were told they no longer had it after kicking twice from the 30.  But why would they want to in the first place?

There's really only one reason that I can think of: You believe your kick coverage is good enough to pin the other team inside the 20, so you WANT them to return the kick.  The Bears have said it was so they could evaluate their kick coverage, which you can't really do on touchbacks.  Fine, but both reasons have a more useful solution: Have your kicker learn to kick the ball higher and shorter from the 30, so it's being fielded around the 5-yard line.  I suppose you could also play the clown and just commit an offsides penalty on every kickoff to get pushed back to the 30, but I bet the league offices would be calling after week 1.

Even if you think your coverage is good enough to encourage the other team to field the kick, you're probably wrong.  In 2010, the BEST team defensively had an opponent's average drive-starting position at the 25-yard line (well, 24.6).

*shrug* I'm not an NFL coach, so maybe I'm missing something.

Horse Show 2011

(download)

Click here to download:

KHorseShow.MOV (77.77 MB)