“This was blown way out of proportion. Yes Oprah could have done a little better on her homework but her intent was not to insult and look down on the people of India. What reason would she have to do that growing up as a child who had no where near the amount that Indian family has. Oprah has shown time and time again to be a very caring person and to skew the content of her words on asking a question for the interview she was conducting is ridiculous.
Furthermore, unless you are from India or have lived there we are all ignorant on Indian customs as I'm sure they are on our customs in America. I wouldn't be insulted if a person from India asked me "You still eat with your hands?" if I was eating a cheese burger and the same should go for the types of food that they eat as well”
happygilmore08 on Jul 25, 2012 at 14:17:46
“Agree. This is being blown out of proportion. I watched the whole episode, and it was just a question.”
Jul 25, 2012 at 12:51:22
“I don't see this really going far. People follow twitter accounts because of the content in which that person or brand is twitting. That being said the only followers they are going to get are people who just want followers, so the content which they are tweeting will be a lot less influential as to a twitter account who has 1/10 of a following but followers are engaged in what the twitter account is tweeting.”
“The question is with the death penalty, if they were to receive that instead would you still sanction the penalties PS was given, limit then, or throw them away altogether?
I think what they got was fair and would use the same argument PS fans are currently using about their sanctions now. The death penalty would be completely unfair to the university as a whole for the acts of one individual and 3 others who didn't have the moral judgement to stand up and say something.
Furthermore, how can you even try to compare OSU to PS as to compare this situation with an other scandal ever to happen in the history of the NCAA. This scenario is the first of its kind and trying to compare it to anything else would be like comparing apples to oranges.
And finally, the only school who ever got and deserved to get the death penalty was SMU because players were just as involved in the scandal as the school's head administration and boosters which meant the entire football program was corrupt.”
pdxbuckeye on Jul 25, 2012 at 14:32:16
“ON SMU v Penn StateI would just go back to my bullet number two, the entire school is trapped in the wicked brand Joe Pa and the quest for revenue over the well being of children AND their own institution. Here is just a few decisions that demonstrate this:1. They continued to play football games after the indictments and it was clear the "program" was aware, after all they did appoint a special investigator rather quickly.2. They did the whole new head coach hunt dog and pony show as if they were replacing a coach in a normal type NCAA scandal situation complete with pressers and all.3. A current new Trustee campaigned and got his seat defending JoePa and still thinks Joe Pa should be honored.4. The board struggled with the decision to stop venerating the enabler of child rape with a statue.5. The board continues to venerate the enabler of child rape by leaving his name on one of their buildings. The corruption here is vast and deep. Some of it innocent in nature even, they are not aware of the corruptness even, that is why the death penalty is called for.”
pdxbuckeye on Jul 25, 2012 at 14:24:47
“On the fairness question:1. The culture of the institution was the problem. McQuary felt unable to do more within that culture, it is not just the people who did not act that are a part of the culture it is everybody.2. Evidence can be found of that culture contuniuing by the Trustees strugglong to take down the statue and leaving his name on the library. Also by the fans defending brand JoePa. On the comparison1. You can compare apples and oranges though. One is sweet and juicy, the other can be crisp and tart, that is a comparison.2. I am not comparing the act itself, just the quanitfiable measure of punishment related to the act. Enabling a rapist for at least a decade is only two to 4 times worse than taking a relatively small amount of illicit benefits as established by these two penalties.”