Any suspicions that I may have had about John Lawless were thoroughly reinforced by his comments about President Graham Spanier yesterday. "We saw the Clinton-esque come out in this man today," Lawless said. "He probably doesn't have any problem with cigars either." I would like to ask Lawless exactly what cigars have to do with budget appropriations?

Now he is threatening a student? The student who sent the e-mail to John Lawless was wrong and way off base to make fun of anyone's physical disability. However, I would expect Lawless to be above that level of immaturity.

However, Lawless has once again proven that he is hypocrite. Lawless apparently does not respond well to personal attacks on himself, but he fails to explain why he in turn made personal attacks on President Spanier. What exactly was it that Spanier did to deserve comparisons to former President Clinton, and what exactly did Lawless mean by the "cigar" comment? What did President Spanier do to deserve this unwarranted personal attack, except for the fact that he is standing up for the rights of Penn State students, all of which should be considered adults who have those rights guaranteed by the Constitution.

This is the same man who circulated to members of the General Assembly a letter that accused two administrators at a state-owned institution of having extramarital affairs.

Now Lawless is perhaps insinuating that Spanier is having an affair with an intern? What else could Lawless mean by his comment? At the very least, if Lawless did not intend the comment to mean what it sounded like, it was an immature and foolish statement to make. It seems like Lawless has been making a lot of immature and foolish comments recently.

I sincerely hope that the members of the Pennsylvania Legislature recognize that this man does not deserve to be in such a position of trust and power.