I don't have a clue about Schultz. But I'm willing to bet that one of the reasons this is being slow played, is the knowledge that Spanier and Curley will be very vocal when their cases are resolved.
Sandusky Scandal Costs Approach 1/4 Billion.
- Thread starter moofafoo
- Start date
What "legal restrictions" - if any - require that the "A9":
- Support Ira Lubert as the BOT Chairman?
- Require the "A9" to approve the wasteful squandering of hundreds of millions of PSU funds? (As "stewards", are they not duty-bound to diligently protect those resources?)
- Remain silent as the Scoundrels and Administration lie to the stakeholders of the University? (We could create a list as long as an "internet arm".....but we could just start with the "I'll get back to you" nonsense from Barron regarding the funding sources for capital projects
- Remain mute to one act of governance malfeasance after another?
Need we go on?
Or is that all A-OK because "the Scoundrels are even worse"?
Or because ........."Football, 409, and Louis Freeh"? 
Six months ago would have been a lot later than most people expected, a few years ago.
all of this must make Ira and his gang smile.
you can mark this word down for all 3:
"DOCUMENTED"
that's why the trials have dragged on. they won't just be vocal, they have documents to back it up
I really don't know Gary or Graham. But during this entire 5 years I followed a simple formula. If my life depended on the integrity of one individual and I had the opportunity to choose.....from the following: Mark Sassano, Randy Feathers, Frank Noonan, Tom Corbett, Linda Kelly, John Surma, Kenny Frazier, Karen with the flies on her Peetz, Spuds McMasser, Judas Joyner, Paul Suhey, Rod Erickson or Joe Paterno and or Tim Curley. I wouldn't need a second to choose.
Yes the BOT molested children and failed to alert the police to the guy that did. Get a clue. One call to the police by MM, Paterno, Curly, or Spanier would have saved PSU that cash.
Only they weren't required to make a call, Charlie McCarthy.
Yes if we all just had the character of John Surma.
Sad that Debbie Reynolds didn't live to see 2017, but you did.
The vast majority of the endowment is locked into specific used via the endowment guidelines which are legally binding (PSU is somewhat unique in that aspect). Anyone saying that the endowment is going to pay for this doesn't understand how an endowment works nor do they understand the limitations that the University has with endowment funds.
The BOT knew more than Paterno ever did. They could have called police, unfortunately they had so many no bid contracts with psu and money hidden with the second mile that they couldn't risk that.
You prove to be more of an idiot every day.
It doesn't matter what a specific dollar is spent on.......you twit (trying to use "less harsh" words
)Dollars don't know or care "where they came from". They have no intellectual ability, nor any memory.
Since you are probably truly too stupid to understand (and don't feel bad, the "A9" apparently doesn't understand either - or, at least they pretend not to), a simple example to illustrate the point:
Let's suppose that one of the "approved usages" of endowment funds is to provide "scholarship support" (as opposed to being specifically allocated to the "putting $$$$ into Lubert and Dambly's pockets" accounts
)So......the dollars used to "put $$$$$ into Lubert and Dambly's pockets" has to come from somewhere else - lets say the general budget via the Capital Expense allocation. (Gee, ya' think?
)Which means the educational operating funds - the shit that tuition dollars SHOULD be going towards - ends up short-sheeted..........so the University has to raise tuition.........but that causes a supply/demand market condition that requires greater "scholarship support"....which (TaDa!!) comes from the Endowment $$$$$.
Which means - the net effect is EXACTLY THE SAME as it is if Lubert/Dambly Inc were to simply cut themselves a check straight out of the Endowment fund.
_______________________
Now....this is the part of the conversation where YOU say:
"Golly gee, thanks Mr Fenchak.
Thanks for taking the time to explain that to me - - - I am a much more informed participant now."
And I say....
" You are welcome Mister Jive. We are all better served by having a less "stoopid" constituency"
Last edited:
Like in 1998, right?
Funny how Louis Freeh and his zombified acolytes love to say Penn State did not alert the authorities in 2001 (when Jerry was not on staff) because they wanted to "protect the brand," but ignore the fact that Penn State DID contact the authorities in 1998 when Jerry WAS on staff.
Oh, and PSU did report 2001 outside the Univ to a mandated reporting agency in The Second Mile.
Let's keep it simple, @Osprey Lion. Who failed in this scenario:
It's not in this case. These funds are typically spent down to the purpose that they were intended regardless of the sanctions.
So - and don't even mention the "endowment" - why don't you enlighten us O Sage One:
When Lubert pops $100,000,000 from PSU, to pay off 2nd Mile kids......where does that money come from?
You prove to be more of an idiot every day.
It doesn't matter what a specific dollar is spent on.......you twit (trying to use "less harsh" words
Dollars don't know or care "where they came from". They have no intellectual ability, nor any memory.
Since you are probably truly too stupid to understand (and don't feel bad, the "A9" apparently doesn't understand either - or, at least they pretend not to), a simple example to illustrate the point:
Let's suppose that one of the "approved usages" of endowment funds is to provide "scholarship support" (as opposed to being specifically allocated to the "putting $$$$ into Lubert and Dambly's pockets" accounts
So......the dollars used to "put $$$$$ into Lubert and Dambly's pockets" has to come from somewhere else - lets say the general budget via the Capital Expense allocation. (Gee, ya' think?
Which means the educational operating funds - the shit that tuition dollars SHOULD be going towards - ends up short-sheeted..........so the University has to raise tuition.........but that causes a supply/demand market condition that requires greater "scholarship support"....which (TaDa!!) comes from the Endowment $$$$$.
Which means - the net effect is EXACTLY THE SAME as it is if Lubert/Dambly Inc were to simply cut themselves a check straight out of the Endowment fund.
_______________________
Now....this is the part of the conversation where YOU say:
"Golly gee, thanks Mr Fenchak.
Thanks for taking the time to explain that to me - - - I am a much more informed participant now."
And I say....
" You are welcome Mister Jive. We are all better served by having a less "stoopid" constituency"
I know you love hypothesizing about things you are not intimately familiar with, so this post doesn't surprise me.
PSU spends close to 100% of the income generated by the endowment, in which funds are legally binded to support student scholarships. If that is 50 million for student support, the endowment itself is paying 50 million towards it. That income is generated, allocated to individual budget/funds and disbursed.
I understand the idea behind the fungibility of money, but the endowment does not apply. A great example of this is for endowed scholarships that support students in a major that no longer is available. The University does not have the authority to take the income generated by that endowment and use it for any other purpose. What ends up happening is that those funds sit in their individual account and do not get touched until either the donor agrees to a new endowment guideline or if the University goes to orphan court (if no donor is available) and legally changes the eligibility requirements for that scholarship. If those funds were truly fungible, they should be able to be spent for a different purpose. The notion that the endowment is this great piggy bank to be used to "pay" for the Sandusky fines due to fungibility is nonsense.
The general fund. Not the endowment. Perhaps PSU will offer less internally funded (non-endowment) scholarships to help pay for it. The endowment is still paying out the same for scholarships regardless.So - and don't even mention the "endowment" - why don't you enlighten us O Sage One:
When Lubert pops $100,000,000 from PSU, to pay off 2nd Mile kids......where does that money come from?
That is just about as retarded a response as I would expect from you.
Thanks!!!!
You will NEVER reach the level of Circle-Jerk excellence that GTASCA rose to - - - - - but thanks for playing!!
Carry on!
Last edited:
General fund? lol, nice try. Rod already blew it with his "Rainy Day Fund" slip.
There is a very limited way that the endowment could be used to cover the funds lost from fines and that would be if a hybrid Endowment (something like a Professorship or Directorship) was involved. If say a director had a Directorship and wanted to hold the funds generated from that endowment to be used in future years for a major project, but internal (non-endowed) scholarship funding was cut, the director could then use those funds to supplement. However, the amount of funds that would be available to do this are relatively small (far, far, far less than a quarter of a billion dollars), and it is highly unlikely that is occurring anyway due to the fact that PSU has significantly increased internal scholarship funding since the scandal.
Nice try? How much of the general fund (ie, tuition and taxpayer dollars) is made up of endowment funding?
This is like the JFK Assignation. Either they all have to be dead or we have to be dead before they release the truth.
Looked all through today's Wash. Post--nothing about MSU. Don't really understand why no coverage at all--has there been any thing scrolling on ESPN (don't watch it)? but there certainly hasn't been on the main news. Maybe the media needs a name people recognize to latch on to to get the clicks (e.g. Joe).
The next time someone comes to me and says they believe they just witnessed a crime and what should
I do? I'll tell them to contact a mandatory reporting agency.
Last edited:
You must be the head of a public relations firm. The they weren't required to argument
would really play well with the general population.
The general population, like you, doesn't matter. They weren't required to make a call PL puppet head.
There's a special place in hell reserved solely for liars like you, called Gehenna.
Tom...
This is NOT about the BOT members who you mention. It is about THE POLITICALLY DRIVEN CESSPOOL that the executive BOT members reside in that is the problem.
From the beginning, we have made excuses for the how effective the BOT has been with everything that has happened in the Sandusky matter. We have offered excuses for them in by saying "..they are mis-informed, mis-guided, unsophisticated...etc...". Truth is the ENTIRE BOT has had its hands tied by the executive BOT. It is the executive BOT that is in the pocket of PA politics. It is that group that is the problem...and that problem IS BY POLITICAL (and legal) DESIGN.
I am NOT usually a conspiracy guy, but sometimes if it looks like a duck, it quacks like a duck, it swims like a duck - you have to come to the reality that what you have is a duck. Sorry to say we have a quacking politically based conspiracy here...nothing less!!
Our executive BOT that has CONSISTENTLY done exactly what has been necessary to advance a story that is FULL of suspicious issues, misinformation and lies. It has been used as an essential component of a coordinated "political hit" and after 5 years....there are still a ton of Penn Staters that miss the fact that out BOT as a group has been hijacked by a politically connected "elites" who needs Penn State's public criminal fabrication to hide somethings very bad for someone close to (if not in) Harrisburg!
Our BOT is not the problem...a BOT that the State Government controls via a puppet Executive BOT (where all the power is) is our problem.
We just need to be more precise with who we target our BOT anger at. It is not the BOT in total. It is where the REAL power at resides at PSU...the executive BOT. We need to leave the general BOT members out of this. They are just there to make all this look somewhat legitimate.
He's already forgotten that he was there...
Is this the "info" you referred to that was dumped in your lap, shortly before your lengthy "disappearance" from this fine board? I suspect it is
I wouldn't say that the executive committee is being manipulated or controlled by Harrisburg. They're working in cahoots.
