home

Limbaugh

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Media
Posted on Thu Oct 15, 2009 at 07:35:23 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

I figure people want to talk about it. But it was so obvious that to me the only thing worth discussing is what was a sharp guy like Dave Checketts thinking?

Checketts ran NBA teams. He knew what having Limbaugh would mean to his bid didn't he? Pretty surprising given the fact Checketts was really a very good executive in the NBA.

As for the whinefest over Limbaugh, well, there is nothing of merit to even address. The idea that the NFL would want Limbaugh associated with them was insane. It was a business decision. And an obvious one. Last I heard, businesses are allowed to make good business decisions.

Speaking for me only

< Thursday Afternoon Open Thread | Friday Morning Open Thread >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Limbaugh | 98 comments (98 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    I would not have a problem... (5.00 / 2) (#1)
    by Jerrymcl89 on Thu Oct 15, 2009 at 07:42:12 PM EST
    ... with Limbaugh buying into a team purely on the basis of his politics, and I don't think the NFL would, either, although they probably wouldn't love it (they haven't stopped Olbermann from working their games). But Limbaugh's been saying racially divisive things for twenty years, and there is zero percent chance he would stop now. The league would have to be profoundly stupid to walk into that PR hit voluntarily. It's not like they need the guy.

    true steve. (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by cpinva on Thu Oct 15, 2009 at 09:33:51 PM EST
    I'm sure it couldn't have been nearly as bad as "We're ashamed the President of the United States is from Texas."

    but then, the dixie chicks aren't trying to buy into an NFL franchise.

    i really don't know what mr. limbaugh is complaining about, surely this gives him sufficient "victimhood" material for the next several years. that has to be good for a fluffy new contract.

    I am just wondering (none / 0) (#12)
    by Steve M on Thu Oct 15, 2009 at 09:37:51 PM EST
    what Mr. Limbaugh's position might have been on the Dixie Chicks.  I'm guessing it probably had something to do with people's inalienable right to do business or not do business with whomever they choose.

    Parent
    he accused them (none / 0) (#28)
    by cpinva on Fri Oct 16, 2009 at 01:59:25 AM EST
    of lip synching, and faking orgasms.



    Parent

    and i have no clue (none / 0) (#29)
    by cpinva on Fri Oct 16, 2009 at 02:00:05 AM EST
    what happened to my link.

    Parent
    Nice reframe (none / 0) (#40)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Oct 16, 2009 at 09:23:09 AM EST
    The Dixie Chicks weren't trying to buy a sports team and major media didn't spend three days attacking them.

    Parent
    the one thing i will point out (5.00 / 1) (#22)
    by The Last Whimzy on Fri Oct 16, 2009 at 12:42:07 AM EST
    is the likelihood that all the african american players that spoke out against rush, i'm going to go way out on a limb and suggest they were bush -- and possibly mccain -- voters based strictly on income tax issues alone.

    is it enough to just to say the nfl acted out of strict self-interest?  sure.  that's obvious.  good that in our society self-interest and racial justice intersects at least on some level.

    but i have still found in some situations that it is quite simply impossible to have a rational discussion about something.  in my view, before rush said what he said, I did actually believe -- thinking rationally, looking at the numbers, analyzing the games --  donovan mcnabb was overrated.  of course it never occured to me to consider the motives of those who did overrate donovan mcnabb, i believed what i believed nonetheless.

    but then rush said what he said and then it became impossible to for me to make what I believed was then a rational assessment of donovan mcnabb without in turn sounding like rush limbaugh, and thus risk being called racist.

    so at some point i just stopped having an opinion about donavan mcnabb one way or the other.

    it wasn't worth the trouble.

    i guess the main point above is that Rush is PR poison to any kind of entertainment that relies on -- or enjoys -- catering to and winning the devotion of all kinds of people regardless of race, religion what have you.

    politics -- most especially race politics -- and sports don't mix.

    yep.  i know michael vick is now teaching kids how to be kind to animals.  so maybe i guess if rush apologized and started calling nutso conservative protesters racist, then he could THEN get back in the ownership mix.

    Not going to happen.  So here we are.

    Progress.

    The NFL didn't "act" (5.00 / 1) (#26)
    by gyrfalcon on Fri Oct 16, 2009 at 01:25:15 AM EST
    The group Limbaugh was to be a partner in to buy the Rams tossed him out of their bid.

    Don't know what the NFL (ie, the other team owners, who get to vote to approve new owners) would have done about it if his partners hadn't thrown him under the bus, but they didn't get the chance.

    Parent

    I don't know G... (none / 0) (#69)
    by kdog on Fri Oct 16, 2009 at 12:58:14 PM EST
    if you read between the lines of the commish's statement, he all but said if Limbaugh is in the bid is cooked.  Irsay said flat out he'd vote against.  The writing was on the wall in the league's handwriting.

    Parent
    one thing (5.00 / 2) (#36)
    by pitachips on Fri Oct 16, 2009 at 08:27:05 AM EST
    "going out on a limb" = "im about to make sh1t up"

    Parent
    I would disagree (none / 0) (#32)
    by nyjets on Fri Oct 16, 2009 at 05:40:51 AM EST
    '...I did actually believe -- thinking rationally, looking at the numbers, analyzing the games --  donovan mcnabb was overrated.'

    I would have to disagree with that statement.
    Look at the offensive talent on that team. For most of donovan mcnabb's career, he has had very little talent to work with. Other than Westbrook, he has not had a great running game to work with. And Westbrook is not an everydown back.
    He has never had great WR to throw to, except for Owens, and if you notice McNabb had great numbers during that one year.
    Also, if you look at post season success, donovan mcnabb has a very very good record. 5 conference championship appearances speak for itself. Yes he lost 4 of them, but those losses were not all donovan mcnabb fault. I always felt the lack of offensive talent merely caught up with the Eagles.
    For all of these reasons, I thought Rush was completly off the mark when evaluating McNabb. I always considered him close to the second best QB in the league. (Tom Brady is the best and as a Jet fan it disgusts me to have to type that :))

    Parent

    The issue wasn't (none / 0) (#53)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Oct 16, 2009 at 11:11:36 AM EST
    McNabb's abilities. It was Limbaugh's note that the media had him over rated because they wanted a black QB to succeed.

    And he was right. Just as the media wanted black coaches, black policemen, black pilots, etc., etc. all the way up to a black President.

    Nothing wrong with any of that so why deny it? Why not admit that we pull for the disadvantaged and want them to succeed?? Why, I think some colleges and universities have who programs devoted to that....

    Parent

    First of all McNabb isnt (5.00 / 0) (#78)
    by jondee on Fri Oct 16, 2009 at 03:44:44 PM EST
    overrated and if he were, Ried probobly wouldnt start him and McNabb wouldnt have lead them to a Super Bowl and the playoffs numerous times.

    But Rush just had to make it all fit into his Affirmative Action, Liberal media conspiracy theory that he trys to use in order to play one disenfranchised class against another and distract attention from him and his rich butt buddies.

    Look around, Jim. There really are programs for people like you, too. But first you have to want to be helped.

    Parent

    Learn how to read and not play the race (none / 0) (#85)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Oct 16, 2009 at 11:42:38 PM EST
    card.

    I never said McNabb was overrated. I said the issue was Limbaugh's comments about the media.

    And Limbaugh, as I noted, was correct.

    It is sad that you can't divorce your bias from the situation.

    Have a nice day.

    Parent

    Oh, I see (none / 0) (#112)
    by jondee on Mon Oct 19, 2009 at 04:39:11 PM EST
    Limbaugh was saying the media had him overrated, but Limbaugh WASNT saying McNabb was overrated. Just that the liberal, affirmative action pushing media had him overrated.

    It's sad that any time a conservative sacred cow, (or in this case pig), is under the microscope, you swing into action like a flustered mother hen defending it's brood. Speaking of biases.

    Have a nice day.

    Parent

    Selective amnesia (5.00 / 1) (#31)
    by lentinel on Fri Oct 16, 2009 at 05:16:58 AM EST
    I don't like to think about Steinbrenner being the owner of the Yankees. I consider him to be a very strange fellow with bizarre political inclinations. But I don't think of him at all when I watch a Yankees game.

    Compared to Limbaugh, he is a shrinking violet, however. I don't think I could bear to watch anything with which Limbaugh is associated.

    Too bad... (5.00 / 2) (#35)
    by kdog on Fri Oct 16, 2009 at 08:19:59 AM EST
    I was really looking forward to buying a team once I make the big score...all my knuckleheaded comments over the years killed that idea.

    There is always the NBA...if they'll let a Russian billionaire buy a team they'll take all comers.

    I'm almost to the bottom of the comments (none / 0) (#55)
    by oculus on Fri Oct 16, 2009 at 11:16:47 AM EST
    but no one yet has mentioned Michael Vick.  Why?  Must an opera afficiando be the one?  What is he doing for the NFL brand?

    Parent
    If he plays at a high level... (none / 0) (#60)
    by kdog on Fri Oct 16, 2009 at 11:51:59 AM EST
    that is the NFL brand, or should be...the best football players on the planet.

    Parent
    But wait Kdog (none / 0) (#93)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Oct 17, 2009 at 07:36:46 AM EST
    I thought the issue is the political position and away from football comments........

    Parent
    Poor Rush (5.00 / 1) (#43)
    by ruffian on Fri Oct 16, 2009 at 09:30:50 AM EST
    He'd probably be disappointed to learn how little attention he gets in Left Blogostan. With the exception of MediaMatters' constant vigilance, and the attention paid to this NFL development, I see mercifully little discussion of Rush. and that's the way I like it.

    But what about Amendment XXVIII? (none / 0) (#2)
    by steviez314 on Thu Oct 15, 2009 at 07:52:38 PM EST
    The right of the blowholes to have an NFL franchise shall not be infringed.

    I couldn't figure out the Checketts (none / 0) (#3)
    by nycstray on Thu Oct 15, 2009 at 08:14:32 PM EST
    deal either.

    Sadly, there are not enough (none / 0) (#4)
    by downtownted on Thu Oct 15, 2009 at 08:18:42 PM EST
    small towns and cities in the United States to which the NFL could award a franchise for this amendment to fulfill its destiny. The U.S. Census counted 25,375 places in 2000. Maybe it could be amended to allow 50 or 100 or 10,000 to share.

    Whatever Rush may have said (none / 0) (#5)
    by Steve M on Thu Oct 15, 2009 at 08:42:32 PM EST
    I'm sure it couldn't have been nearly as bad as "We're ashamed the President of the United States is from Texas."

    I thought that was a gross (5.00 / 1) (#11)
    by CoralGables on Thu Oct 15, 2009 at 09:37:19 PM EST
    mis-statement, as I was ashamed he was from any of the 50. They were far too kind for my taste.

    Parent
    I never knew before this week that he said (none / 0) (#6)
    by magster on Thu Oct 15, 2009 at 09:00:51 PM EST
    James Earl Ray should be given a medal.

    Rush has a reservation in Hell when his time is up.

    There do appear to be some (5.00 / 1) (#25)
    by gyrfalcon on Fri Oct 16, 2009 at 01:20:20 AM EST
    particularly outrageous quotes floating around out there, like the one you cite, that were totally made up.  Limbaugh is loathesome, but he's not stupid.

    Parent
    I'm pretty sure he never said that. (none / 0) (#7)
    by Jerrymcl89 on Thu Oct 15, 2009 at 09:15:36 PM EST
    Limbaugh's said plenty of insensitive and inflammatory things. But the worst things that have recently been attributed to him have been made up.

    Parent
    That depends (5.00 / 2) (#8)
    by Steve M on Thu Oct 15, 2009 at 09:21:21 PM EST
    on which ones you consider the worst, I guess.  But the real ones are so bad it makes you wonder why anyone felt the need to embellish.

    Parent
    What are the real ones?? (none / 0) (#14)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Oct 15, 2009 at 10:09:34 PM EST
    I'm no fan of The Big Guy, but this is pure racial nonsense. Provide some links.

    Parent
    Do your own research (5.00 / 2) (#15)
    by Steve M on Thu Oct 15, 2009 at 10:12:04 PM EST
    I'm sure you wouldn't see anything racist about the real quotes anyway.

    Parent
    You don't really have anything (none / 0) (#16)
    by prittfumes on Thu Oct 15, 2009 at 10:47:28 PM EST
    except what you have "heard" do ya?

    Parent
    The irony is palpable (none / 0) (#17)
    by Steve M on Thu Oct 15, 2009 at 10:59:35 PM EST
    you "heard" they're all fake eh?  I love it!

    Parent
    Didn't say they're ALL fake. (5.00 / 1) (#27)
    by prittfumes on Fri Oct 16, 2009 at 01:36:58 AM EST
    I have never had a problem forming my own opinion and doing my own thinking and deciding. I would assume you don't believe everything you "hear". I certaily don't.

    However, "Do your own research" seemed a bit evasive.

    Researching the alleged public utterances of any controversial public figure (not just Limbaugh) will reveal that what he/she actually said and the often-enhanced version(s) people come to believe via repetition by a variety of "news" sources, are not necessarily one and the same.

    The degree and the direction of the spin are dependent on nothing more than which side the "reporters" are on.

    Parent

    And your opinion of Limbaiugh is? (none / 0) (#73)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Oct 16, 2009 at 02:01:27 PM EST


    Parent
    My comment as to my opinion (none / 0) (#79)
    by prittfumes on Fri Oct 16, 2009 at 05:01:15 PM EST
    was in response to this:
    you "heard" [can't determine for yourself] they're all fake eh?
    The best answer I can give you is: as far as I'm concerned, inaccurate quotes, outright untruths and spin don't change based on whom they are about, nor on my personal opinion of a particular individual -- whether that person is an Olbermann, a Limbaugh, or somewhere inbetween.

    Parent
    And you opinion of Limbaugh is? (none / 0) (#80)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Oct 16, 2009 at 05:02:44 PM EST

    I thought I would ask again since you did not answer it the first time.

    Maybe you were just blowing off some steam.

    Parent

    He is an ultra-right-wing (none / 0) (#81)
    by prittfumes on Fri Oct 16, 2009 at 05:16:55 PM EST
    talk show personality who receives far more attention than he deserves. That do it?

    Parent
    Does it for you? (none / 0) (#82)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Oct 16, 2009 at 05:26:42 PM EST


    Parent
    Yes. (none / 0) (#83)
    by prittfumes on Fri Oct 16, 2009 at 05:37:04 PM EST


    Parent
    Fair enough (none / 0) (#84)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Oct 16, 2009 at 05:41:21 PM EST


    Parent
    Burden on proof (none / 0) (#56)
    by Samuel on Fri Oct 16, 2009 at 11:30:17 AM EST
    on the person purporting that Rush is racist and evidence exists.  That's just how it works brah.  

    Parent
    Listen to his show, Hayek (none / 0) (#76)
    by jondee on Fri Oct 16, 2009 at 02:19:45 PM EST
    "Barak Hussein Obama ..mmm..mmm..mm" (think yazza boss, or sho' nuff)

    If he's not a racist, he's definatly pandering to them.

    Parent

    Sure. (none / 0) (#111)
    by Samuel on Mon Oct 19, 2009 at 09:48:21 AM EST
    Whatever you say.

    Nonetheless, burden of proof is the responsibility of the proposer.  

    Parent

    You made the claim (none / 0) (#38)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Oct 16, 2009 at 09:20:11 AM EST
    So being a fair and balanced type I am sure you have dozens of links from credible sources.

    Oh. You don't?

    Parent

    Post some (none / 0) (#33)
    by Wile ECoyote on Fri Oct 16, 2009 at 08:09:45 AM EST


    Parent
    He can't. (none / 0) (#39)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Oct 16, 2009 at 09:20:36 AM EST


    Parent
    It's funny (none / 0) (#51)
    by Steve M on Fri Oct 16, 2009 at 10:51:14 AM EST
    that quite obviously, neither of you has even tried to check out the matter yourself.

    Parent
    You made the claim. (none / 0) (#54)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Oct 16, 2009 at 11:13:22 AM EST
    So obviously you have the responsibility to prove the claim.

    Parent
    Wrong (none / 0) (#57)
    by Steve M on Fri Oct 16, 2009 at 11:34:26 AM EST
    I have no obligation to waste my time providing a bunch of quotes and links just because some yahoo shows up in a thread and demands that I do so.

    If you choose to believe that Limbaugh never said any of those things, I find it kind of sad and you could certainly educate yourself in about 5 seconds with Google, but reality does not change based on whether I provide you with a link or not.

    Reality is that the guy said the NFL was like the Bloods and Crips without the weapons, and quotes like that are why he's too toxic to be considered as an NFL owner, even by an ownership group that makes 70% of their donations to the GOP.  If you would prefer to believe that it's all a fabricated leftist smear campaign, then you know what, I wouldn't be able to sleep at night if I supplied a link that upset your precious little apple cart.

    If you're interested in knowing whether it's true or false, you'll check it out yourself.  If you're not interested, then I'm even happier that I didn't waste my time serving as your research monkey.

    Parent

    First of all, the charge is racism (none / 0) (#61)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Oct 16, 2009 at 12:24:20 PM EST
    It is not that he has made outrageous statements.

    But nice try at a reframe.

    Parent

    You can't (none / 0) (#91)
    by Wile ECoyote on Sat Oct 17, 2009 at 05:50:26 AM EST
    find any can you?  Too lazy to look.  You make statements you can't back up.  

    Parent
    According to Snopes (none / 0) (#18)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Thu Oct 15, 2009 at 11:14:12 PM EST
    there is no validation that Limbaugh ever said that.

    Parent
    So--it's settled then? Where's (none / 0) (#19)
    by oculus on Thu Oct 15, 2009 at 11:21:31 PM EST
    your link though?

    Parent
    C'mon. Google: snopes limbaugh james earl ray (none / 0) (#20)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Thu Oct 15, 2009 at 11:25:36 PM EST
    ok, here.

    (Can't seem to cut 'n paste the info from the snopes site...)

    Parent

    I thought you might be being sarcastic. (none / 0) (#21)
    by oculus on Thu Oct 15, 2009 at 11:29:46 PM EST


    Parent
    Sorry. True blue. (5.00 / 1) (#24)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Oct 16, 2009 at 01:18:52 AM EST
    There's no verification that he ever said it.

    Parent
    No stranger to controversy, a fellow Divo speaks! (none / 0) (#9)
    by Ellie on Thu Oct 15, 2009 at 09:30:07 PM EST
    What say you, Marc Cuban?

    ... its [sic] impossible for the NFL to even try to predict or gauge the impact on the NFL's business if something controversial, or even worse yet, something nationally polarizing happens. There is an unquantifiable risk that comes with the size of Rush's audience.  ...

    Thats [sic] a huge risk that is not commensurate with the value a minority investment in a franchise brings.

    This isnt about Free Speech. Its about the NFL protecting their business. There is no reason to put it at risk.

    'kay.

    Segue sports: guarantee no Dodgers (none / 0) (#13)
    by oculus on Thu Oct 15, 2009 at 09:47:25 PM EST
    cares one bit tonight about Manny's drug use.

    I mean if the NFL (none / 0) (#23)
    by