mezzofondo Posted October 16, 2009 Share Posted October 16, 2009 Interesting topic, but purely based in fantasy. Despite his rantings today on his show, Limbaugh would have as much of a change of owning an NFL team as Jackson or Sharpton. Living in the Capital District all my life, I remember Sharpton's rise to fame on the back of Tawana Brawley. Him, Alton Maddox and C. Vernon Mason, left unchecked, would have set race relations back a couple of decades. As for the Limbaugh lovers claiming any kind of conspiracy against the GOP and right-wingers, a few notes: 1. If the NFL thought Limbaugh could make them more money and attract more fans to the game, he would be welcomed with open arms. The League clearly felt any gain in fans would be offset by negative publicity. Much the same as Sharpton and Jackson trying to get a team. 2. As noted elsewhere in this thread, many owners are politically in line with Limbaugh, but business is business. One NFL owner once referred to the league's owners as "30 capitalists acting like socialists." The money is first and foremost in any business, especially these days, when several of the league's teams are having trouble selling out games. 3. Roger Goodell is the son of Charles Goodell, a United States Senator from New York, who was a Republican. 4. Did I mention business is business? Michael Jordan once said Republicans buy shoes too when choosing not to campaign for Jesse Helms' opponent. For you conservatives and liberals who own businesses, unless you are extremely successful, you can't pick and choose your customers. People may complain that Limbaugh might not have said some of what was attributed to him, but there is perception, which, when used effectively to define someone, is an exceptional weapon. In this economy, even a business like the NFL needs fans it can get. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
don_of_manhattan Posted October 16, 2009 Share Posted October 16, 2009 Who insinuated that its ok for JZ to go on a racist rant? I didn't see that anywhere A winner???? I guess someone who gets on the radio and says that drug addicts should go to jail for life then sends his housekeeper to score illegal meds for him is a winner - right. Making lots of money by throwing flames does not make you a winner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bad Lieutenant Posted October 16, 2009 Share Posted October 16, 2009 Comparing O'Relly to either Beck or Olbermann just shows you don't know what you're talking about. Neither Obama nor Axelrod would EVER be caught dead being interviewed by Beck or Olbermann. There's a reason why the best Olbermann can do for a guest is either a Newsweek editor or Janeane Garafolo. What's with your creepy obsession with Olbermann, "Tingles", and "Madcow"? You're turning into the Mark David Chapman of cable news addicts. A repetitive, boring, and factually inaccurate MDC at that. Go get some thorazine. And by the way how lazy do you have to be to make an absolute statement like "Neither Obama nor Axelrod would EVER be caught dead being interviewed by Beck or Olbermann" without taking 10 seconds to check out its truthfulness? http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/200...mic_agenda.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bad Lieutenant Posted October 16, 2009 Share Posted October 16, 2009 3. Roger Goodell is the son of Charles Goodell, a United States Senator from New York, who was a Republican. He's also married to Fox News anchor Jane Skinner. http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_F-2ybd60FlE/SOAw...e+skinner+2.jpg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted October 16, 2009 Share Posted October 16, 2009 What's with your creepy obsession with Olbermann, "Tingles", and "Madcow"? You're turning into the Mark David Chapman of cable news addicts. A repetitive, boring, and factually inaccurate MDC at that. Go get some thorazine. And by the way how lazy do you have to be to make an absolute statement like "Neither Obama nor Axelrod would EVER be caught dead being interviewed by Beck or Olbermann" without taking 10 seconds to check out its truthfulness? http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/200...mic_agenda.html So he talked to Olbermann as a candidate? Wow! Imagine that. Let me know when he gives him an interview as president. Ain't happening. And if it does, I will gladly admit my error. But no POTUS takes time out for a guy with a schtick as embarrassing as Olbermann. And as to my creepy obsession with them? Given how you follow me all over this board, sig my comments and essentially bring nothing to the table but off-the-shelf non-original mocking, I think you should probably worry about your own creepy obsessions cuz I'm just not feelin' ya, brother. I know you want me to, but like President Obama on Olbermann...it ain't happenin between us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bad Lieutenant Posted October 16, 2009 Share Posted October 16, 2009 So he talked to Olbermann as a candidate? Wow! Imagine that. Let me know when he gives him an interview as president. Ain't happening. And if it does, I will gladly admit my error. But no POTUS takes time out for a guy with a schtick as embarrassing as Olbermann. You must have a different definition of "ever" then the rest of us. ever One entry found. Main Entry: ev·er Pronunciation: \ˈe-vər\ Function: adverb Etymology: Middle English, from Old English ǣfre Date: before 12th century 1 : always <ever striving to improve> <the ever-increasing population> 2 a : at any time <more than ever before> b : in any way <how can I ever thank you> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geno Smith's Arm Posted October 16, 2009 Share Posted October 16, 2009 The reason the NFL doesn't want Rush Limbaugh to be an owner isn't because of "racial" reasons (at least not primarily). It is because they don't want some guy that is known for taking any advantage that he can find, hooking up to the NFL Empire, and using it to further his own agenda. They have every right to do that. Once that blowhard gets in, they wouldn't be able to get rid of him, and he would become a serious nuisance. It's not even political (the NFL is DOMINATED by Republicans/Conservatives, particularly in the management and ownership areas). They would'nt want AL Gore , or Ralph Nader, or Jeese Jackson, or even Bill Clinton or any of these politicos because they know that these guys would use the NFL to gain access to the fanbase, television time etc. It's called a "conflict of interest". Rush Limbaugh is trying to "play" the NFL. "Homey don't play dat" Why should the NFL let that guy use them for a platform? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tcali Posted October 16, 2009 Share Posted October 16, 2009 That's right, because those bumbling farmers and country bumpkins are just a bunch of blank canvases, waiting for Rush to show them the way. Ummm...I don't think most farmers are just siitting with their families, gathered 'round the old Philco in their living rooms, waiting for Rush to guide their ignorant lives. Unlike a large portion of Obama's supporter, waiting for the next handout, those farmers are actuallu busy working. You strike me as the kind of elitist who assumes the salt of the earth middle American, church-going citizens are a bunch of Mayberry castoffs who couldn't find their pitchfork with a Garmin GPS navigation system. If that's your assumption, that's as ignoratnt as any ethnic or racial stereotype. You want to see duped? Look no further than the ignoartant masses duped by our new messiah or the maliable Acorn recruits voting for their amzing leader, but who couldnt' even tell you who the VP candidate was. You wanna see some real dumbasses?......click here: right on ..im getting tired of the limbaugh bashing from left wing snob ignoramuses Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted October 16, 2009 Share Posted October 16, 2009 There is a big difference between a race hustler and a racist. And which one is worse? One is simply a matter of opinion. The other is used to extort others for financial gain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John in Jax Posted October 16, 2009 Share Posted October 16, 2009 The reason the NFL doesn't want Rush Limbaugh to be an owner isn't because of "racial" reasons (at least not primarily). It is because they don't want some guy that is known for taking any advantage that he can find, hooking up to the NFL Empire, and using it to further his own agenda. They have every right to do that. Once that blowhard gets in, they wouldn't be able to get rid of him, and he would become a serious nuisance. It's not even political (the NFL is DOMINATED by Republicans/Conservatives, particularly in the management and ownership areas). They would'nt want AL Gore , or Ralph Nader, or Jeese Jackson, or even Bill Clinton or any of these politicos because they know that these guys would use the NFL to gain access to the fanbase, television time etc. It's called a "conflict of interest". Rush Limbaugh is trying to "play" the NFL. "Homey don't play dat" Why should the NFL let that guy use them for a platform? Totally disagree with this absurd take. Limbaugh's NOT some small-time hack trying to make a name for himself. He IS one of the most well-known, highest-paid media personalities in the world....including ALL media....and at this point, he needs no one for anything. He WAS involved, as he as stated, because he loves the NFL and has always been a fan, and has dreamed about being an owner. He sounds like many of "us", who if we had the resources, would probably want to do the same thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffal0 Bill5 Posted October 16, 2009 Share Posted October 16, 2009 Totally disagree with this absurd take. Limbaugh's NOT some small-time hack trying to make a name for himself. He IS one of the most well-known, highest-paid media personalities in the world....including ALL media....and at this point, he needs no one for anything. He WAS involved, as he as stated, because he loves the NFL and has always been a fan, and has dreamed about being an owner. He sounds like many of "us", who if we had the resources, would probably want to do the same thing. Well said. It is amazing the number of people that have an opinion on Rush, but are so ill informed of his history. Do a little research into his beginnings in broadcasting, and then support the take that he has no interest in football for the sake of football. Love him, or hate him, the man loves the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dante Posted October 16, 2009 Share Posted October 16, 2009 Totally disagree with this absurd take. Limbaugh's NOT some small-time hack trying to make a name for himself. He IS one of the most well-known, highest-paid media personalities in the world....including ALL media....and at this point, he needs no one for anything. He WAS involved, as he as stated, because he loves the NFL and has always been a fan, and has dreamed about being an owner. He sounds like many of "us", who if we had the resources, would probably want to do the same thing. I agree. I think that owning a NFL team is a status/ego thing. I'm not a Rush basher like a lot here. I don't think he wants it as some sort of diabolical plan to obtain media time. Ridiculous. I think it probably just a dream/fantasy thing, like many, to own a NFL team. I mean, look at all the armchair gms we have on this board. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thurman#1 Posted October 16, 2009 Share Posted October 16, 2009 Totally disagree with this absurd take. Limbaugh's NOT some small-time hack trying to make a name for himself. He IS one of the most well-known, highest-paid media personalities in the world....including ALL media....and at this point, he needs no one for anything. He WAS involved, as he as stated, because he loves the NFL and has always been a fan, and has dreamed about being an owner. He sounds like many of "us", who if we had the resources, would probably want to do the same thing. Yeah, he legitimately wants a team because he's a fan. But you're kidding yourself if you don't think he realizes that being an owner would be worth hundreds of millions of dollars in free publicity for him. He has a group of people who listen to him. But 90% of the country tunes him out. If he were an owner, he'd be on the news all the time, and every time he said something controversial it would be infinitely larger news than it is now. He doesn't deserve even a part of a franchise. Of course, I don't think Dan Snyder does either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geno Smith's Arm Posted October 16, 2009 Share Posted October 16, 2009 Well said. It is amazing the number of people that have an opinion on Rush, but are so ill informed of his history. Do a little research into his beginnings in broadcasting, and then support the take that he has no interest in football for the sake of football. Love him, or hate him, the man loves the game. I don't think he is a small time hack. I think he has a huge audience. That's the problem. It would give him opportunities to leverage the NFL, and they don't want to let him in just so he can use them for a platform. No not a platform for his political views, but as a way to promote himself (make money). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffal0 Bill5 Posted October 16, 2009 Share Posted October 16, 2009 I don't think he is a small time hack. I think he has a huge audience. That's the problem. It would give him opportunities to leverage the NFL, and they don't want to let him in just so he can use them for a platform. No not a platform for his political views, but as a way to promote himself (make money). No doubt Rush likes to make money. As for 90% of America tuning Rush out (Thurman#1), that is just preposterous. I rarely listen to Rush, I consider myself a conservative, but his ego bugs me. I spent a good deal of time in radio with an affiliate that carries the full 3 hours of Rush daily, and there are these things called ratings. Rush still pulls in a huge audience, or we just wouldn't be having this conversation. As to the original question, I don't see why I would be opposed to his ownership of the franchise. He made a really stupid comment about McNabb, and should have kept it to himself. I get his point about the NFL. I remember when I was foolish enough to take ESPN the magazine, and they did a round table discussion with the best quarterbacks in the NFL. It included Elway, Young, Marino, and.............Kordell Stewart. Stewart didn't belong in that discussion, at the table or on the list. What was his purpose for being on it? I think Rush told us the reason. It was foolish to do so for two reasons. One, any white guy who says that is automatically a racist, and two, Donovan McNabb is a pretty good QB. Before we get our shorts all in a tangle over the "bloods/crips" one liner, how about considering the context it may have been in. Remember the throat cutting gesture a few years ago? Was that appropriate? If the statement was in the context of that type of behaviour, how far off would it have been? I am not here to defend Rush, but I am frightended to be in a country where a guy who has the money can't buy a product because people don't like his political ideology. If you could stomach his show, you would know that the guy does know and enjoy football. That is why ESPN put him on in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CodeMonkey Posted October 16, 2009 Share Posted October 16, 2009 My goodness, what difference does it make. Some people are just soooo politically correct anymore is sickens me. Micheal Vick tortures dogs for fun. Why should that make a goddamn bit of difference if he would make a good QB for a team or not. Ban him for life? Retarded. Rush Limbaugh. I honestly don't know if he is a racist, a borderline insane narcissist, both of the above, or just a smart guy who has tuned into a certain segment of the public who wants to hear the kind of stuff he says. And what the hell difference does it make when the subject at hand is owning a goddamn football team? Does he have the resources to be a member of a ownership team and do the other members of the team want him there. Those are the relevant questions. We aren't talking about being the pope here. We are talking about freaking football people! If Rush wanted to be on the ownership team for the Bills I'd be asking will he want to keep the Bills in Buffalo, and would he do what is required to make the team not a laughing stock. Not do I think his political views are bull **** or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Posted October 16, 2009 Share Posted October 16, 2009 A winner???? I guess someone who gets on the radio and says that drug addicts should go to jail for life then sends his housekeeper to score illegal meds for him is a winner - right. Making lots of money by throwing flames does not make you a winner. Where did I call him a winner? I don't think he is a small time hack. I think he has a huge audience. That's the problem. It would give him opportunities to leverage the NFL, and they don't want to let him in just so he can use them for a platform. No not a platform for his political views, but as a way to promote himself (make money). He is a brilliant man who knows how to stoke the fire and knows who is audience is and how to rile them up- he realizes the majority of his audience is liberals and he antagonizes then well. He is very intelligent in the art of psychology. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted October 16, 2009 Share Posted October 16, 2009 Here's the first apology, Dick Sanchez from CNN http://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb-staff/2009...-limbaugh-quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dante Posted October 16, 2009 Share Posted October 16, 2009 My goodness, what difference does it make. Some people are just soooo politically correct anymore is sickens me. Micheal Vick tortures dogs for fun. Why should that make a goddamn bit of difference if he would make a good QB for a team or not. Ban him for life? Retarded. Rush Limbaugh. I honestly don't know if he is a racist, a borderline insane narcissist, both of the above, or just a smart guy who has tuned into a certain segment of the public who wants to hear the kind of stuff he says. And what the hell difference does it make when the subject at hand is owning a goddamn football team? Does he have the resources to be a member of a ownership team and do the other members of the team want him there. Those are the relevant questions. We aren't talking about being the pope here. We are talking about freaking football people! If Rush wanted to be on the ownership team for the Bills I'd be asking will he want to keep the Bills in Buffalo, and would he do what is required to make the team not a laughing stock. Not do I think his political views are bull **** or not. Post is an oasis of reason in a PC insane society. What is much more scary than Rush owning a team is the PC facists speaking out against Rush's basic rights. Free speech and the pursuit of happiness. Rush hasn't done anything to anyone on this board or anywhere else for that matter. He's a radio commentator. STOP. Thats all. He has been lucky/skilled/talented enough to make a good living at it. Good for him. At least he makes his own way in the world. And if things are so ****ty out there, how come they have so much time and energy to devote to such a non issue as this? Obviously people don't have it tough enough if Rush's possible purchase of the Rams is a major problem to them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EasternOHBillsFan Posted October 16, 2009 Share Posted October 16, 2009 Here's the first apology, Dick Sanchez from CNN http://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb-staff/2009...-limbaugh-quote Where's the apology for the other quotes that are PROVEN by Rush from the bloated man himself??? Ohh that's right.. the other PROVEN racist quotes are stood by... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts