I'm Sick of the Raiders' Tom Cable Drama
Lay off the bacon, BSPN. Enough with trying to drag this guy through the mud.
What's that you say? You failed to meet your Raiders dissing quota for the month? So you were forced to stick that last Raider rub down in there at the end of October.
It's just really old. Raider Nation knows the team hasn't been what it once was. We know that your partner in crime, the NFL, does not like Al Davis. We know both of you are waiting for Davis to fall over for the final time so you can buy rights to the Raiders, officially change their name to the "Fairies" and change their colors to pink with purple poka-dots.
What's my point? My point is this: Momma always told me if you don't got nothin' nice to say, don't say anything at all.
Apparently, you do not respect your mother enough to respect her wishes, BSPN. In court there is this thing called a burden of proof.
On most of your shows there is this thing called a suspected suspicion. In other words, you provided a 20-year-old letter—which Cable actually admitted to—saying it was one of his biggest regrets in his life. God only knows what the circumstances were, but the fact that all other parts of the two-page letter were omitted reeks of conspiracy.
Not to mention there was no investigation into what prompted Cable to react violently. Did she mess around with his best friend? Who knows? Not your viewers, because you were only kind enough to give us five percent of the story.
I'm not saying he should be "off the hook" for hitting a woman, but it was 20 years ago. He apologized, and everyone except your OTL staff has moved on with their lives.
Also provided were some divorce papers that very well could've been doctored, because the alledged second party in the papers declinded to be interviewed, and later realeased and statement that said, "In all the years I was married to Tom Cable, never once was he physically abusive to myself or our children."
On your shows, a suspected suspicion is as good as a burden of proof is to a court of law. On your shows—when it comes to Oakland, at least—it is guilty until proven innocent, or until the next suspected suspicion.
As far as your Outside the Lines report on Oakland head coach Tom Cable goes, I guess you are right to call it "outside the lines." Because if it were called "inside the lines," it would still be being penalized by NFL referees.
Note: They like to penalize anything that involves the Oakland Raiders.
The second after I saw your bogus report, I thought to myself, "I wonder how much they paid these two broads?"
In the closing moments of your report, when your reporter asked the Hispanic woman why she had stayed with Cable if he was so abusive, I actually went so far as to answer the question aloud that she nearly could not bring herself to answer.
"Because he was about to a make a lotsa dinero," was my response.
Anybody who could not tell she was lying, just look at the real facts and not the fake dialect fed to you by Raider Nation's favorite sports news reporter, BSPN.
I am almost as sick of "Cable Bash '09" as I am of the whole Brett Favre saga that BSPN airs on a daily basis.
I think the first wife was being close to honest, and that's why she got a ton less airtime then the woman who was obviously full of it.
I didn't even take the time to look up their names for this article, because frankly, I'll be quite taken aback if I ever hear either of their names again.
However, the "girlfriend" lady is obviously bitter about being dumped in favor of Cable's new wife. BSPN's next news report about her will be about how she is going to marry Randy Hanson and live happily ever after.
I suspect with reasonable suspicion that Tom Cable will not only remain the coach of the Raiders, but will also be granted a second season by owner Al Davis, because he is a straightforward guy. And that, BSPN, is a straight-up fact.
Seriously, though, give it a rest, guys. Enough is enough.
Is Oakland ready to take the next step? www.fanhuddle.com/oaklandraiders
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?