Disclaimer: I do not believe there is any real chance Rush Limbaugh will be in the booth for Monday Night Football. I fully expect ABC to hire another bland ex-jock with nothing interesting to say… like Dan “Boomer II” Fouts>
Still, the very POSSIBILITY drove many liberals to the brink of insanity. I’d like to ask… why?
Hey, look, as a right-winger, I long ago got used to the fact that show biz is CRAWLING with people I couldn’t stand politically. I think that, when Rob Reiner talks politics, he’s a pompous bore. The fact remains that “THis Is Spinal Tap” is one of the funniest movies ever made, and I LOVED “The Princess Bride.” If I had boycotted all of Reiner’s movies just because of politics, I’d have deprived myself of a lot of pleasure. When Susan Sarandon talks politics, she’s a shrewish imbecile- but I LOVED her in “Bull Durham.” As for music… am I supposed to burn every CD I own, if the artist(s) that recorded it is/are left-wing ignoramuses (REM, Springsteen, John Lennon, etc.)? I think not!
But back to Rush Limbaugh. He swears (and I believe him) that he’d never talk politics during a football game (odd that Howard Cosell never felt obliged to make such a pledge). If that’s true, why do so many liberals STILL insist they’d boycott Monday Night Football, if Rush were part of the broadcast?
A hypothetical, to add to the discussion. Phil Donahue and Larry King are as far left as Rush is far right. Like Rush, King and Donahue are passionate, knowledgeable sports fans, as well as veteran broadcasters with decades of on-air experience. If Phil DOnahue or Larry King wanted the job, and a bunch of RIGHT-wingers claimed they’d boycott the game if they were hired… what would you think of THEM?
And quite apart from MNF… how willing are you to overlook the politics of ANY performer, and simply enjoy the work they do?
Hey, I consider myself as a moderate-liberal, and I think that Rush Limbaugh is a great idea for MNF. He has that great announcer’s voice. He seems sharp and observant to what is going on. I think as a fan of the game he will be objective to what is happening on the field.
I don’t think, though, he will separate politics from the announcing of the game, and I hope that he doesn’t. People who know of him eventually will ask for opinions when some player, owner or executive does something wrong. If he doesn’t say something in response, then he would be considered as selling out to NFL/Disney.
But I think that they will pick someone from the jockacracy. A pity. Sports announcing is a wasted major.
astorian, is your entire existence dedicated to repeatedly coming to the same conclusion on a daily basis; i.e., that extremists on either side of the political fence do not like their other-side counterparts? It seems like every thread you start in GD is a variation on this same point. I think we get it.
I would imagine that these “incensed liberals” of which you speak (I haven’t seen or heard from any, but whatever) have strong feelings about someone who, much like any politically active broadcaster from either side, makes their living partly as a professional liar being rewarded with a high-profile network gig like MNF.
In answer to the question, I don’t watch MNF, so it’s pretty irrelevant to me, but if I did, I wouldn’t care if it’s Rush Limbaugh or some other airwave hack. His political opinions or no more or less relevant or poignant than anyone else’s, and he’d be there to call a football game. The guy is a major sports fan and started out doing local ad sales for the KC Royals, IIRC. Love him or hate him, the guy can at least talk at length on whatever is on his mind.
This was touched on in a different thread, but I’m too damn lazy to find it. It also was about 5 posts long, so no big deal.
pldennison, you’re correct about Rush in KC. But also, he used to announce games for the Chiefs, so he’s got football broadcast experience as well, which makes him a great choice.
My fellow liberals just need to suck it up and stop being such whiny babies.
Has anyone ever heard him doing a game on tape? If so, what was it like? Is he any good? Because that’s really the question. Just because he has “experience” as a sports broadcaster doesn’t mean he’s any good.
Without any knowledge of Limbaugh’s talents as a sports broadcaster, I would bet that the world of television and radio sports announcing is festering with unknowns who can do the job better than Rush.
I’m not a liberal, and my problem isn’t that he’s Rush, it’s that they finaly have a chance to put some real talent up there with Al, and almost any experienced football broadcaster would be a better choice. On the other hand, it could be that Rush is a fine chameleon of a broadcaster who has happened to find a lucrative niche market and play to their sensibilities, and he will adapt just as well to MNF. Of course, millions of people listen to this man every day, and I say to them, if he is any good, I will enjoy my heapin’ helpin’ of crow.
Rush does not post biographical information on his own site. But according to biography.com, he started in ticket sales for the Kansas City Royals (baseball) before becoming a commentator. He may be a fan, but there is nothing that suggests he was ever involved with the Chiefs or any other football team, or that he ever actually broadcast sports.
ABC may have found a way to assure that my demographic is glued to MNF, Rush or no Rush.
Hot off the presses from my sports-agent buddy: The new sideline announcer this year for MNF (Replacing Lesley Visser) will be Melissa Stark. Woah, mama.
Rush’s politics should not be a consideration here. Speaking as an unincensed liberal, my only problem with Rush as a MNF commentator would be that he’s boorish, long-winded and holds his own opinions as the Unassailable Truth. These are irritating qualities just in everyday conversation, but they’re maddening when you’re trying to enjoy a game.
I’m not just picking on Rush, here. As it happens, I hated to listen to Cosell, and I think Costas should have to wear a gag during actual play.
Can you imagine how many words you’d hear from Al with Rush exercising his gums the whole show? Does sports broadcasting really need another blowhard “expert” to tell us what we should think about every aspect of the game?
I think dennis miller is a great choice. I will definetly watch MNF just to see what he will say. this from someone who watch football but not that regularly. I think they will draw quite a few viewers with him. Maybe he can even throw in some good jokes.
Dennis Miller? No THAT’s interesting. I was only half right. They DID hire the unbearably boring Dan Fouts (as I expected), but I never thought somebody like Dennis Miller was under consideration.
Truth is, 99% of ALL sports color commentators are a waste of time and space. That’s true of Ahmad Rashad, Dan Fouts, Phil SImms, Boomer Esiaison, Dan Dierdorf, and most others. It’s NOT that these arent intellligent guys… and they ALL know WAY more about football than I do. And I’m sure most of them have hundreds of great anecdotes they could share with me… but they never do! Ex-jocks almost always revert to the same set of cliches. I can’t remember the last time an ex-jock commentator told me ANYTHING about sports that I didn’t already know. I suspect that’s because MOST ex-jocks are more concerned with staying popular with their other jock friends than with doing a good job.
There are only 2 things a color commentator can do: either teach me things about the game that I didn’t know (and few ex-jocks show any desire to do this) or make me laugh. Well, if nothing else, Dennis Miller will make me laugh. That’s more than ANY of the other MNF commentators can say.
P.S. Say Dennison… you are the LAST guy who should complain about unoriginal posts (the next original thought you express will be the first)!
astorian, you mentioned Sarandon and Reiner. Before your posts, I’d had no idea what Reiner’s politics were, despite having seen both the movies you mention. And despite having been a fan of Susan Sarandon for decades, I’m only vaguely aware of what her politics are. In neither case am I aware of whether they defend their positions with integrity; as I said, I hardly know what their positions are. All I know is what they do with movies.
Limbaugh is another matter. That he’s conservative doesn’t bother me. There are many conservative commentators I have a great deal of respect for: Charles Krauthammer, Joseph Sobran, Michael Kelly, William Safire, John Leo…you get the idea. I think they’re wrong more than they’re right, but that’s (at least in part) a matter of opinion, and I believe they do their best to argue their positions honestly.
The same cannot be said of Rush Limbaugh. He has demonstrated, time and endless time again, that he has no regard for the truth. He exists simply to be a cheerleader for the right, and to ridicule the left, and will slant the facts (and accept others’ slanted ‘facts’ without question, no matter how implausible they are) to do so. This is not some avocation of his; something he does in his spare time like Sarandon or Reiner; this is what he does for a living; it’s why we’ve heard of him at all. As Phil has already stated more succinctly, he’s a professional liar.
This board is dedicated, in theory anyway, to fighting ignorance. Limbaugh generates and broadcasts ignorance; that’s his vocation. It makes no sense to be here and have good things to say about him. The only reason he might have been considered for MNF is his high-visibility role as a partisan of ignorance. 'Nuff said.