No, I don’t agree. This is a free country with a free market. We don’t get to dictate who established businesses have to accept as partners. If Limbaugh would be bad for the NFL’s bottom line, why should they be forced to accept him as a partner?
Who is claiming anyone should be forced into anything? My only point is that the NFL allows far worse a-holes than this guy.
They allow what’s good for business. It’s not a nursery school. They don’t have to be fair.
It’s a free country and presumably players can choose who to play for and who not to play for. I’d like to know which players would like to work for Rush, and which wouldn’t.
Maybe I’m missing something, but where exactly are all these left-wing pundits that are doing all this hand wringing over Rush Limbaugh?
What crimes did Rush commit? Addiction to prescription drugs?
From The Washington Post:
The charge will be dropped in 18 months, said his attorney, Roy Black, provided that Limbaugh continues treatment for drug addiction, as he has for 2 1/2 years. According to an agreement with the Palm Beach County state’s attorney’s office, Limbaugh also must pay $30,000 to defray the costs of the investigation, as well as $30 a month for his supervision.
**
The agreement is not an admission of guilt to the charge, which was fraud by concealing information to obtain a prescription**.
A spokesman for the state’s attorney’s office, Mike Edmondson, said the agreement dropping the charge is “standard for first-time offenders who admit their addiction.”
I do not see a connection
Stallworth is suspended for the season.
For the record, Rush was never fired from MNF. For that matter, he was never employed by MNF either.
Rush had a job on ESPN’s pre-game show as the “Voice of the Fans” and was present on the show to challenge the convictions of the four hosts. His racist moment came when he claimed that Donovan McNabb was only considered a great quarterback because he was black and the NFL wanted a black quarterback to succeed.
He subsequently resigned, because ESPN was no doubt going to shortly fire him.
Yeah, I tend to root for the (baseball) Cardinals. I was happy to welcome the Rams when they moved from L.A., but if Rusty’s involved, I’ll go back to rooting for the Chiefs.
(What? There’s a football Cardinals? In the NFL? G’wan, pull the other one!)
You’re wrong about that, obviously. Cite, cite, etc. Not that reality is going to make any difference, of course - lefties aren’t ever going to let anything interfere with the hatefest.
Regards,
Shodan
Repenting isn’t apologizing over the latest racist thing you’ve said. Its apologizing and making appropriate changes to your life so the transgression doesn’t reoccur. Rush has continued to say racist things and he just apologizes to get the heat off of him for a little bit until he makes his next racist statement.
What **treis **said. Jeez, you’re really off your game lately, Shodan.
FWIW, I’m in the midst of reading a book, Next Man Up, by John Feinstein, which chronicles the Baltimore Ravens season of '04 “from the inside”. One interesting notation by Feinstein is that the overwhelming majority of NFL players are conservative/republican (the book takes places, naturally, during GWB’s re-election campaign, and nearly every player supported Bush).
Upon reflection, it’s not surprising. Players are very wealthy, and come from a background which emphasizes toughness, aggression, and simplistic platitudes that eschew nuance (anybody who’s heard a dosage of sports cliches or coach-speak knows from where I speak). Although a very superficial generalization, these are not generally liberal qualities. Thus, I actually don’t think that there would be that many players who truly oppose Rush on a political level.
Admittedly, though, much of Rush’s “schtick” plays with the bounds of racist ideology (as an example is the OP’s quote about white kids getting beat up by black kids). As many of the players are Black, I can see some hand-wringing about that aspect. Ultimately, though, given how damn hard it is to make it in the league, and due to the potential to make a lot of money if you do stick around, I just can’t see how players would be able to justify walking away from their dream job because they don’t like one of the people who signs their check.
From a player’s perspective, then, I consider the possibility of Rush owning the Rams a complete non-issue.
That statement (and similar one’s from other posts) are flat out wrong and naive. These teams are not publicly traded companies. The ownership can be restricted under the rules of the League. They can restrict a sale to any individual or entity for any reason as long as they don’t violate discrimination laws.
Take your statement to a housing Co-op and see how far you get. Some Boards will not allow sales to lawyers, celebrities, three-legged midgets or anyone they don’t like. They never state a reason, they just deny the sale and it is perfectly legal. By not stating a reason there can be no discrimination claim.
If I own a family business I want to sell, and Joey the Mobster want’s to buy it, I don’t have to sell to him just because he shows me the money.
If the NFL were to determine that a significant number of players would refuse to play for the Rams if Limbaugh was a part owner that could upset the competitive balance of the league, it would be good business to deny the sale. No reason would ever be given.
FTR, his criticism was of the sports media, not the NFL.
The NFL can do what it wants but I hardly think it would be a good PR and financial decision to sell it to that guy
Several of the people on this list were charged with (not necessarily convicted of) a single misdemeanor. It takes some impressive moral and mental contortions to equate that with a lifetime of spreading lies and hate for fame and profit.
Similarly, working in the same corporation as an asshole is not the same as working for an asshole.
Well, Jim Irsa, Colts owner has said he would not approve Limbaugh as an owner of the St. Louis Rams. I have heard various commments (on radio and on the internet elseewhere) that Rush has the right to own an NFL team. But of course he doesn’t, no one has a right to own an NFL team. Pretty much everyone has a right to bid on an NFL team for sale, but there is no right to be accepted.
That’s the key reason. Democrats like football and buy tickets, watch games on TV, patronize the sponsors, buy NFL licensed merchandise, etc, too. It isn’t good policy to alienate half your market when you don’t have to do so.
This doesn’t prevent Republicans from tuning into TNT (owned by flamboyantly Liberal Ted Turner)
Ted Turner also owned the Braves for many years, and I don’t recall either Republicans or Democrats being upset about that.
This doesn’t prevent Republicans from watching CBS News (owned by flamboyantly Liberal b.o.d.'s)
This doesn’t prevent Republicans from enjoying the movie “Bull Durham” (starring the flamboyantly Liberal actors and director)
This hasn’t prevented Democrats from enjoying Schwarzenegger films.
So … why the double standards, liberals?