SandBoxBlogs: Town Hall/John Ransom "The Mental Illness Behind Anonymous"

The common man sat back during the 2000 election cycle and watched Al Gore and John Kerry begin the distortion of main stream media into a very one-sided liberal stream of political propaganda.

In the 2004 election cycle, conservative media began to fight back and soon got the hang of how the game works.  As Joe Hyde said of the media in general during the 2012 Rick Perry campaign: "..it's an ego driven profession..".

The folks responded in 2000 by trying out (what was then a rather covert type of communication) the fairly new 'blogosphere' in order to get their voices heard.  The result was that  George W. Bush was elected and the debacle that was Florida was exposed to the world at large.

By the time the 2004 election cycle came around, major news outlets were monitoring the voices in that blogosphere.  There was an air of excitement from lead anchors who seemed to relish calling out avatar names as if they were some kind of spies living in hidden lairs that conveniently had internet access. No one really stopped to think that just maybe those voices in the blogosphere might be the common man voter.

In 2008 it all became a free-for-all of voices clamoring for attention.  The Tea Party was born and Ron Paul commandeered the radicals in cyber politics out of which he empowered a small army of powerful voices.  The blogosphere became a legitimately recognized power that no politician can control.

In the 2012 presidential cycle the blogosphere has settled into the single most powerful media tool in the world.  One that smart politicians recognize they have no hope of ever controlling.  A true wild card that can now micro-blog as well.

How long will it take this time to get rid of the attempts by the establishments of both parties, ruling kings and presidents to try to discredit the voices of the people they serve by bullying them, censoring them and manipulating their credibility with disinformation?  Another four years?  Less?

Please do not flood the mailbox with ranges of hate mail or disinformation that 'SandBox' condones what the 'Anonymous'/LulzSec' group(s) have done with their time and effort.  We do not condone illegal acts or the spreading of viral information that has been distorted.  

One of the things we do support with any 'anonymous' commentary is the freedom to speak and to do so under the protection of privacy.

Since the 'takedown' of 'Anonymous/LulzSec' this past week, 'SandBoxBlogs' finds the mainstream media push to try to discredit those voices by labeling them as 'mentally unstable', 'terrorists', etc. etc. unconscionable.  Go after ferreting out whether or not illegal acts were committed by anyone, such as true hacking, and administer justice.  But if to get that done, you have to resort to outright lies through distortion of facts, that is not only unnecessary it is wrong.

A thank you goes out to John Ransom, somewhere out there on Town Hall, for showing the quoted voices of 'Anonymous' so that you can decide for yourself.  

John Ransom:
"Ca7 wrote: It's cute that you would try to paint this as "democrats don't think of unemployment insurance fraud as a crime" when your only specific example of unemployment insurance fraud is one where all the parties involved were actually arrested on fraud charges.- in response to How Stimulating: Unemployment Benefits for Murderers

Dear Comrade 7,
Actually the specific examples (plural) that I included did include one example where someone was arrested on fraud charges- because he was unlucky enough to be incarcerated for murder. Local authorities got involved where the feds likely wouldn’t have. And like the typical progressive, you point to the exception and ignore the rule.

The rule is that $16.5 billion was paid out in fraudulent claims, with less than 5 percent of that money recovered. And under Democrats, unemployment fraud has jumped another 11 percent year-over-year. One would think perhaps someone in the federal government who has the responsibility to administer the program might actually do something about it.

But nope.

“We don’t think this is mostly about fraud—we think it’s a lack of clarity of understanding what eligibility is,” Jane Oates, Assistant Secretary for Employment and Training Administration at the Department of Labor, told the Times.

Tortured words and tortured reasoning for not enforcing the law just leads to more crime and encourages people to steal.

Rob Mitchell wrote: Perfect example of conservative truth distortion. Nowhere in fact is Pelosi advocating for benefits for convicted murderers. I hope they do not pay you to write this stuff.- in response to How Stimulating: Unemployment Benefits for Murderers

Dear Comrade Rob,
Why yes I do get paid to write this stuff. I’m guessing that you are wondering how to tax it. The Stamp Act has already been tried. But hey: Maybe Democrats can bring it back and just call it a fee? Three cheers for King Obama!

Pelosi doesn’t have to advocate for convicted murders to get unemployment. They already collect the benefit according to the example cited above. And why wouldn’t they? The “Clarity of Understanding” training that they’ll make these gang-bangers go through as punishment probably won’t be much of a deterrent to people who make a living breaking the law.

If Pelosi advocated policies that forced us all to live with our doors and windows wide open, I’m guessing crime would go up. And when it did, you wouldn’t just blame the criminals, but rather you’d blame the people who made our property and families unsafe to begin with ala Fancy Nancy...." 
(Read more?  Click title)

"Unapologetically pursuing and tracking patterns within the news others make since 2010."