What role did the outsized influence of college sports play in the Penn State child sex abuse scandal?
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
As the Penn State child sex abuse scandal continues to grow, there are more questions about how the situation got so out of hand.
And at least part of that answer lies in the outsized influence of sports teams on college campuses around the country.
At Penn state, football is a religion; and for almost five decades, legendary coach Joe Paterno was a god.
That could be why officials looked the other way when they learned an assistant football coach, Jerry Sandusky, was allegedly raping little boys.
It appears that Penn State cared more about protecting the football program than protecting the children - sort of the same way the Catholic Church responded to its own child sex abuse scandal.
Of course, big sports also means big money for these colleges. With big money comes the potential for corruption and misplaced priorities. Oftentimes, people affiliated with these sports programs develop a sense of entitlement.
As one expert tells The Boston Globe, "You're making a deal with the devil. These programs become larger than life. It has nothing to do with higher education."
What's ironic is that Penn State was a college known for running a clean football program, yet it has still managed to land itself in what is arguably one of the worst scandals to ever hit a college campus.
Some people think it's way past time to take a hard look at the role of college football or basketball teams. But others say it won't make much of a difference; that the culture is way too powerful and deeply entrenched.
Here’s my question to you: What role did the outsized influence of college sports play in the Penn State child sex abuse scandal?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
How do you see the super committee concluding its business?
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
The so-called super committee is turning out to be anything but.
With little more than a week to go before its deadline, things are looking pretty grim for the bipartisan panel tasked with cutting $1.2 trillion from the national debt over the next decade.
For starters, Politico reports the committee has "all but abandoned" its full-panel meetings. Instead, a series of small bipartisan groups now dominate the negotiations.
And the six Democrats on the panel can't even come to a consensus. That makes chances they'll be able to agree with Republicans slim to none.
Plus, key lawmakers are talking about dragging out the process.
They're now talking about a "two-step process" to reform the tax code and entitlements.
The super committee would set a figure for increased tax revenue; but then individual House and Senate committees would have to craft the legislation. In an election year? Yeah, that'll happen.
This is outrageous. If it happens, it would make the super committee just one more group of politicians to kick the can down the road when it comes to our nearly $15 trillion national debt. And we can't afford that.
Oh yeah - and remember that automatic trigger that's supposed to go into effect if the super committee can't agree to cuts? Well, our lawmakers are trying to weasel out of that one too.
One super committee member says it is "very likely" Congress will try to dismantle those across-the-board cuts to defense and entitlement spending.
All the while, both sides are busy trading accusations about who would be to blame if the super committee fails.
Our government is broken, and we are losing the country because of it.
Here’s my question to you: How do you see the super committee concluding its business?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
@jackcafferty on Twitter
Recent Comments