TheGNote

Hey Digger, when I read posts like yours, the conspiracy theorist in me thinks it must be a ploy cooked up by Bud or his editors to get responses to his columns. Your comments are SO stupid, they couldn't possibly be serious. Could they? By the way, you don't know how to punctuate, so please refrain from doing so. When you write pseudo-clever garbage, and don't punctuate properly, it leads one to believe that YOU are using a thesaurus--which isn't a bad thing, by the way. Bud's style, which you mock, has been consistent (and, as far as I'm concerned, very easy to read) for the last few decades, and he's always insightful without being heavy handed. Nice job, again, Bud.

Wow. WOW. Mr. Farrington, I almost fell out of my chair reading your post. I could've written it! I didn't grow up with Frank, but I play those same albums CONSTANTLY, have the same admiration (bordering on worship) of his interpretive mastery, voice, etc., and think of "Wee Hours" as the Ava Gardner album. I've read extensively about him, and have gobbled up as much of his music as I could find (or buy). You and I could have a quite a conversation!

I wasn't there, but apparently you'd like us to guess, so I will: I'm guessing their anti-social behavior was sparked by their anger and frustration over the idea that something so potentially destructive to a basic necessity--drinking water--is even being considered. They couldn't believe that ANYBODY would even THINK about endangering the water supplies of millions of people. Maybe they watched "Gasland," and were horrified by the soulless businessmen's responses to the concerns of the families who were now--INCREDIBLY--able to light water from their faucets. And finally, I would guess that the "pro" drilling people--industry flacks like yourself--understand something clearly: if you tell a lie long enough, and loudly enough, and enough politicians can be successfully lobbied (which, as you know, comes with time), you will eventually get your way, the people be damned. There is no reason for the businessmen and industry spokeswhores to get emotional at these meetings; it only undermines their/your cause. And crazedmaniac, you are 100% correct: much of our energy has everything to do with violence and death. But that doesn't mean that we should poison our drinking water to get more of it.

Asked by reporters how he felt, Fine responded, "Probably more often than I should have." Jim Boeheim, asked about the allegations against his right-hand man of 36 years, sought to distance himself, saying, "Let me be clear: I was never aware of which hand he used." Reached via telephone by a reporter, Laurie Fine said, "Can you speak a little louder? I can't hear you. There's some annoying kid in the basement screaming for help."

Uh oh. Bad news for Bernie. Apparently, they found a blue dress . . .

I don't know Mr. Fine or his accusers. I hope he's innocent, and I think it's unfortunate that somebody can merely accuse somebody prominent and have it get to this point; I think they needed more supporting evidence before publishing this story, and there are a few holes and weirdnesses about the whole thing (I don't know how you can sexually harass a 27-year-old male, for example). BUT, this statement from Mr. Fine (or his lawyer) is weak. VERY weak. If he's innocent, he could easily have made the language MUCH stronger without getting himself into any legal entanglements. I don't know if this is the full statement, but the second sentence of the statement presented in this article talks about the investigation, advises the reader on how to evaluate accusations, and so on, ending with advice on how we shouldn't be in a rush to judge. (As O.J. "I'm looking for the real killers" Simpson's lawyers advised us.) This is FAR from a strong statement of "I am INNOCENT! This is PREPOSTEROUS!" Again, I have no idea. But if he's innocent, I wish he would've been a little--no, a lot--louder and confident sounding in his declaration.

Hey "bright observor" (what a name!), what is your point? My guess is, there is none. At the VERY LEAST, he should've called security. Or, heaven forbid, he should've run into the shower, knocked Sandusky on his a$$ (McQueary was a former QB, after all), put a towel around the kid and whisked him out of there and then called security. Or the police. Suppose Sandusky had been punching the kid in the face, violently. Would THAT have necessitated intervention? He's not being made a scapegoat; he's getting off easy. What Sandusky did to that kid was horrendous, to put it mildly, and for this 28-yeaer-old grad assistant to run to a phone and call his daddy, and then report it to Paterno THE NEXT DAY, is ridiculous. RIDICULOUS. He put himself and his worthless career aspirations ahead of a defenseless child's safety. Scapegoat . . . yeah, right.

Hahahaha! To AGo75 and choozliberty:

An in-depth discussion with either of you would be a colossal waste of time, but a quip from George Carlin would serve this moment well: think of how stupid the average person is, he urged, and realize that half the people are dumber than that! Unfortunately, the two of you reside in the shallow end of the gene pool, where forever you will remain. The rest of us (born with a modicum of intelligence) float uneasily above you, wondering whether your ignorance will eventually give rise to some kind of revolution, cheered on by your puppeteers (i.e., religious "leaders," flag-waving conservatives and talk-radio charlatans and profiteers). I will say one thing to you, AGo75: I practically spit at my screen from laughing when I read your take on science. The problem with idiots like you is that you cannot take God or your precious bible out of the equation. Those things were created to control the befuddled masses, of which you are a proud member. As you continue to hate and mistrust all that you do not understand (which pretty much covers everything, I suppose), I am certain that the bible (or, Bible; I'm so sorry)--that grotesque tool of oppression that has been so destructive to mankind--will continue to guide you. In that journey, I wish you luck.

Mike, I think you "dunno" a lot of things. I also suspect your old man thought you deserved a few "beat downs" when you were a kid. And that's sad.

You mean all the people smarter than you? You're probably right--or, as you non-whiners would say, "Your probly write." Idiot.

I disagree. He came way out of position to make that flip, and if he hadn't been there and made it, there's no way they would've gotten the runner (Jeremy Giambi, I believe). He was lauded for having the instincts to be there in case the throw from the outfield wasn't quite there (and it wasn't). That's the difference, I think: instinct, and doing something slightly extraordinary (which, I guess, is an oxymoron). (Of course, many people argue that Giambi was safe anyway, but I digress . . .). I don't worship Jeter, or any athlete, but I do admire his ability to stay focused and conduct himself with class.

Who is Jerek Jeter?

Oh, they finished their business all right. Last night, they took a dump right on national t.v.

That's what I figured, obviously. The reason I asked is because it struck me that you made some good points about a juvenile-acting actor but undermined your arguments with a juvenile screen name. Now, don't get ticked (yet), because I'm sure you're getting ready to tell me to eff off. I don't have a problem with your name (or you telling me to eff off; that's the beauty of anonymity, eh?), but I just think you should post serious comments under another name, or risk not being taken as seriously. Now, you can tell me to eff off, and I fully accept it. I realize this is hair-splitting, but I'm working at home here, and it's getting boring, so I've got to fill my time with something.

Hey seemikeawk, may I ask what your screen name is supposed to mean?

In other news, Generalissimo Francisco Franco is still dead . . .

I've got a better idea, rabbit! How about if we cut YOUR pay, say, 25%? That'll save your employer a boatload of money. After all, no matter what he/she is paying you, it MUST be too much! How do I know? Because, like you, I'm an EXPERT at budget austerity! Yes, cut all teachers' pay! No matter how long they've studied or worked, or how many ridiculous hours they put in every week, they deserve a cut in their mostly meager salaries, because they're the new scapegoat for everybody's problems! Why should these stupid teachers get a decent paycheck or, God forbid, a pension for their troubles? These greedy people DO NOT DESERVE to make a living! The only people who deserve to make a living are the people who keep throwing stones at them--you know, posters like you--who surely work much harder and deserve much more money than they're currently making.

mickee, you make too much sense, so expect your post to get hammered. My wife is a teacher, and we know VERY well that the points you make are too true. The fact that she works LITERALLY 80 hours a week to make an average salary means nothing, or that we spent $25,000 of our own money--which was basically everything we had--so she could get her masters--well, that means nothing either. She's a member of a union, so she's the devil.

Of course there are bad teachers, but for the most part, they work ridiculously long hours, and are at the mercy of their students' natural intelligence, desire for learning, and upbringing. The looming pay-for-performance model is beyond insane, and will only cause frightened teachers to do everything they can to improve kids' grades--which is not the same thing as teaching them.

Our world uses scapegoating as a crutch; teachers and their unions are a convenient target. There's no point in making an argument for unions; they have pros and cons, but the pros far outweigh the cons, but the anti-union types only see red meat. It's like the word liberal: both words have been demonized by interested parties to the point where serious discussion is impossible.

I guess people don't understand why unions came into existence in the first place. The teachers are wearing the scarlet letter these days, so now they'll get rid of teachers and assistants and the burden will be even greater on the teachers. The good news, though, is that we'll continue to build breathtakingly expensive bombs and defense systems and warplanes and ships galore, well in excess of anything we could ever possibly use, which the flag-wavers will defend to the death, yet there isn't enough money for things like education. Amazing, isn't it?

And your point about the private/charter schools is dead on. More wool being pulled over too many unsuspecting eyes. Ditto the testing phenomenon, which is just a$$ covering taken to extremes. Fire away, Mr. Lowengard. I'm sure the kids will benefit immensely from fewer teachers. Eventually, the angry taxpayers can get their pay-for-performance teachers, and then their kids can benefit from the teaching methods of a person who has to lift grades or be fired. Intelligence can't be manipulated, but test scores and grades can. Watch for scores to miraculously improve as the "market forces" that the ignorant so badly crave come into play.

I wonder, honestly, what the "tinkering and perfecting" part of the process was like. I assume they had to use live models some of the time. What the heck does THAT involve?

Thanks. I do feel better.

Here's a guess: probably because the FRONT PAGE story, with a BIIIIGGGGG headline, was all about Rob Long, so for Bud to write another piece on Long would be redundant. (I doubt you get the newspaper. Am I right?) Also, people are probably wondering about Casullo's reaction to this, since they were seen bickering on the sidelines just before Casullo was fired. Now, I realize that with a name like exlax (or, as I prefer to think of you, "ex-lax"), nobody should expect anything but a certain substance to come out of you, time after time. But I'm curious about your CONSTANT criticism of everything Bud writes. Are the words too big for you to understand? Are the thoughts a little too complex? I've noticed that when Bud writes about somebody no longer directly connected with the program, you're quick--and oh so clever!--to bring that up, as a reason why he shouldn't be writing about that person. Can you enlighten me with your timetable? How long does a person have to not be at the school for them to be unsuitable as the subject of a column? Does that mean that no alumni or ex-coaches should be written about? Guess he should never write about the Ernie Davises or Jim Browns of the world, huh? After all, they're no longer at Syracuse? Do you have ANY idea how stupid and petty you sound? How stupid and petty you ARE? Why don't you read a Dick and Jane book. Those books have plenty of room for your index finger to move slooooowly over the letters, so you can read more comfortably. Running your finger over a computer monitor must be uncomfortable. Moron.

"Missed me." That'll go down in infamy. If that one phrase doesn't encapsulate everything that's wrong with this (ongoing, never-ending) situation, nothing does. They probably won't miss next time, though; victim one day, perpetrator the next. It's a bizarre continuum, and police resources get chewed up day after day in a vain attempt to fix it. Won't happen, ever. The train has forever left the station . . .

Chase7628,

Are you the store manager (or assistant) at Best Buy, or the district manager for the area? PLEASE don't deny it. Nobody would mention the ad AND the reward points AND the interest AND the number of years AND the commission structure unless you are, in fact, associated with the store. There's no other reason to attack a store and/or compare it to a competitor. Next time you want to put in a plug for your store, try not to be so obvious.

To Diane Williams and the rest of Savon's family, My heart goes out to you all. All the love you have for Savon will help him tremendously in his recovery.

Very naughty, Bob. You know how desperate we are in this town ("The NameOfTownGOesHere AM/PM is now carrying two sizes of bagged ice!"). Cough up your doozies, will ya?