How Balloon Boy Proves The Innocence of Tom Cable By Transitive Property
Today, Richard and Mayumi Heene plead guilty to charges related to the infamous "Balloon Boy" stunt.
Mr. Heene pled to felony charges, while Mrs. Heene pled to misdeamenor charges.
I would prefer to avoid the jargon of that story and go straight to the point, that being "Balloon Boy" is a lesson for an era based on reality-TV and people that get attention for acting terribly.
In their case, they claimed that their son was in danger when the Balloon escaped. All a hoax to get public attention.
At this point, I merely think of people who create drama and make incendiary claims as Pop Culture Peons, because like PCP, they will act like unsocial animals and believe that they are invincible.
I can't help but be reminded of the current situation in which ESPN has allowed people to accuse Raiders coach Tom Cable of abuse and have called for his suspension based on their reports.
It is effing stupidity to believe incendiary claims made to the media when there is no evidence. It is effing stupidity to believe incendiary claims made to the media, when the only thing to report is word of mouth.
In all three "reports" that ESPN claims have "documentation" (translation: the charges had been investigated but were not prosecuted for lack of evidence), there is no substantiable proof, and yet ESPN has attempted to assassinate the career of Tom Cable.
ESPN employees (Jay Mariotti, Bill Plaschke, etc) have called for Cable's suspension when they had remained silent on the issues of sexual assault by Ben Roethlisberger and accusations of violence against women by Shawne Merriman.
As you can see, ESPN has no conscience. I thought they did, but clearly they don't (maybe some, but definitely not the majority and definitely without power). All ESPN has is an agenda to malicioulsy attack those who don't fit their agenda with gossip.
If you need more clarity on why I believe that, or more about the issue, please read my related article:
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?