Good news for the NFL. (and they could use it) :)
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/200...x.html?cnn=yes
Printable View
Good news for the NFL. (and they could use it) :)
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/200...x.html?cnn=yes
Great. Bar someone from being a team owner because of what they've SAID?
It's a red letter day for free speech.
Most of what Sharpton and Jackson were accusing Limbaugh of saying was falsely attributed to him, and the one comment he made that keeps getting dragged up (his comment about McNabb) took three days before anyone said anything about it. Three days after the fact, it was whipped into a frenzy. When he actually made the comment, his two coworkers said nothing about it, and continued their conversation as if nothing untoward had been said.
The NFL is a private group, and as such can set their rules for ownership as they see fit, but what would happen if they barred Cynthia McKinney from ownership or her past statements? There would be a firestorm almost instantly.
Has anyone else ever been refused in buying a NFL team?
Convicted drug abuser?
And is this REALLY free speech having a red letter day. He spoke. No one stop him. He has not been arrested.
If someone comes in to the boss' office and says "boss - you are a $@%#%$%." And the boss fires him as a result, would that be a red letter day for free speech?
Of course not. You can say what you want. Call the boss anything you want. But don't whine then about "free speech" because you don't like the reaction you get!
Same thing. He said what he wanted to say. Now go be a big boy (pun intended) and accept the outcome!
(and all the free publicity!!)
Take one league, complete with convicted felons, both players and coaches.
Now take Mr. Goodell's statement about not wanting to bring controversy to the league.....
:confused:
You don't want controversy? Then get Ray Lewis (oops, Ray wasn't convicted, one of his posse took the fall for him), Michael Vick, and the other 30 some odd active players who are convicted felons off the damned field, boot the convicted felons from the Hall of Fame in Canton, then I'll believe you.
I think LH covered it nicely.
However in a private transfer the seller can object to one of the buyers and not sell.
Double standards are afoot!
I could not care less about controversy. Or football. Don't even know or want to know who these guys are. I have enough trouble keeping the illegal drug user radio heads straight from the sexual harasser radio heads.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lady's Human
I am interested in the Red Letter Day for free speech you spoke of.
Druggie Limbaugh likes it when people admire him for his "freedom of speech" but cries when people don't like him for his "freedom of speech."
What a baby.
Freedom of speech does not mean people have to like you, does it? So some people don't like him because of what he says. That doesn't strike me as an abridgement of his free speech rights.
I have no idea whether Rush Limbaugh has said anything one way or the other about the ownership group cutting him.
The whole reason Mr. Goodell gave for not wanting Mr. Limbaugh as an owner was the controversy he would bring to the league.
That statement is absolutely priceless coming from someone who has allowed convicted felons on the field.
I find it particularly amusing that Al Sharpton (Tawana Brawley, anyone?), who has made just as many controversial statements as Rush Limbaugh, is opposed to Limbaugh as an NFL owner because of the statements he has made....which, when they were made, caused nary a ripple, and only became an issue days later. Despite the spin in the media, it wasn't a racist statement.
Still not answering the question!
Why was this a Red Letter Day for Free Speech?
Does Al Sharpton own a team?
Al doesn't own a team, he doesn't have the money for it.
He, however, lead the charge against Limbaugh buying the team.
The free speech comment is a throw away, really, just a figure of speech tossed in.
Ole Rush is just a big crybaby.:D Seems he already has history with
Pro sports.
Quote:
Limbaugh's history hurt his participation in the bid. In 2003, he was forced to resign from ESPN's "Sunday NFL Countdown" after saying of the Eagles' Donovan McNabb: "I think what we've had here is a little social concern in the NFL. The media has been very desirous that a black quarterback do well."
According to transcripts posted on his Web site, in 2007 Limbaugh said: "The NFL all too often looks like a game between the Bloods and the Crips without any weapons. There, I said it."
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=4562338
The comments about McNabb were why the NFL was in such a huff about him possibly buying part of a team.......but no one said a damned thing about the comments for 3-4 days.
Tom Jackson and Michael Irvin were on set with Limbaugh at the time, and neither one of them skipped a beat, they kept on discussing what they were talking about.
Given Mr. Irvin's mouth, if there was a real problem with what was said, I believe he would have said something. He's not exactly known for reserving comments on statements.
Was there this much fuss when Bud Selig, et al, wouldn't hear of allowing Mark Cuban to buy the Chicago Cubs? For much the same reason - too much controversy :confused:
Perhaps they should have let him - he had the $$$ - and now the Cubs are filing for bankruptcy.
The bankruptcy is just a way to get a sale done quickly.Quote:
Originally Posted by Grace
Please,
What's to keep him from still investing after the sale?
Tom Jackson is a more 'PC' announcer/broadcaster......so, the fact that Irvin was in the room when this all went down shows that it's a non-story and fake interest by everyone against RL.
I do not listen to Limbaugh and really don't care what he does.
I worked a few years for an *%#(*^$ that didn't like me, but I had no problem with taking the money they paid me.
What they said didn't matter to me, as long as the check cleared.:D
LMAO!!!!!!!
Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee used her speech on the house floor this morning to ask the NFL owners set standards for team ownership.........
Redlining, anyone?
And nothing said about kids playing baseball with boards on kid's heads in Chicago?Quote:
Originally Posted by Lady's Human
You should be ashamed that you were watching her talk!:eek:;)
What's sad about Rep. Lee's speech is that the first part of it was actually a decent explanation of her view of the stimulus package. She impressed me with the first 2 minutes, actually. It was a very concise, well formed commentary on her view of the governments role in bringing the country out of the recession. (I disagree with it, but it was a good explanation of her position)
It went south rapidly from there.
The first 2 minutes will be lost, and the rest of it will just add fuel to the fire.
What I get from this thread.
1.) I like using my new MacBook. The keyboard rocks.
2.) Its interesting how, to some people, that a person who atones for their sins and cures themselves of their addictions... Can never really be redeemed. Is there no hope for mankind?
3.) I continue to laugh at the disdain certain people have for other people who they know nothing about, other than what is said about them in the press. Lemmings perhaps?
4.) Rush got what he earned. He executes his free speech. The NFL owners exercised theirs. But...
5.) The whole premise of the NFL owners/players arguement is based on a outright lie. There is ZERO proof of the quotes used were ever said by Limbaugh. Since when did a citizen have to prove he did NOT say something, rather than the press needing to prove something was said?
I know... Facts.... Proof.... Matters not anymore. Style matters. Substance comes second. Liz proved it by just now noticing what Rush said 6 years ago. She showed how people like her work.
Call me on it. Please?
A phrase as narrow-minded, bigoted, condescending, and uneducated as...Quote:
Originally Posted by Puckstop31
"Not me...I have friends who are.....people like her!
Four yards and you get a strikeout?
You want to translate that RICHARD? Into English for people like me?Quote:
Originally Posted by RICHARD
Does a sticky wicket count for three points?
Is that a personal question http://bestsmileys.com/blushing/6.gifQuote:
Originally Posted by RICHARD
Get it right, Richard.
TEN yards and you get a strikeout, 4 balls is a touchdown, and a sticky wicket is only worth 2 points.
:p
(People like you, Sara, will just never get it......there's no 'splainin the technimacalities of sports to you wimmin-folk)
:p :p
oh,Quote:
Originally Posted by Grace
I don't know anymore.
I am just thankful that I have half a brain to think at the moment.
I am absolutely gob smacked that people can be so brilliantly comatose and incapable of any rationality.
I am seriously gob smacked. Speechless.
\-----------------------------
LH,
So Zamboni isn't an Italian Ice ?;)
As usual... Nothing to say about content, only "style". And as usual, you cherry pick a phrase and take it out of context.Quote:
Originally Posted by Edwina's Secretary
Name calling ES? Thats all you got? I expected more from you than that.
ETA: Upon further reflection, you have one thing right about me, in a way. I am a bigot. I am bigoted against ignorant people who make statements without knowing the facts OR being willing to discuss the merits of something. The OP states that Rush not being part of a NFL ownership group is good for the NFL. Why? Of course the OP cannot and will not answer that, because she does not know why, just that a person she does not like "failed".
But I am the one who is all the names you called me?
Richard, I didn't know you were a Brit.Quote:
gob smacked
I'm not. I should have been born one tho.:eek:Quote:
Originally Posted by kokopup
I love the understated flow of their country.
I was watching Top Gear and they commented on "Gentleman's Special Interest Clubs". Strip Club to you and me, here in the states!:o
-------------------------
If the footballers, god bless their little hearts, are so upset about working for RL, why don't they revolt and not work for the "white man' and walk away from the whole league?
I am sorry, but some of these idiots have no problems working SHOULDER TO SHOULDER with thugs, abusers, killers and ????????
Why? THEY DON'T SIGN THE PAY CHECKS!!
-----------
We won't work for Rush, But we will let 'the cause' be hacked and made a joke by letting My pal Al Sharptongue and Jesse Jerkson speak for us?
Pshaw!
Why The NFL Said No
Dave Zirin
Sports Writer for The Nation
Over the last eight years, even though it often made me break out into hives, I've listened to a lot of Rush Limbaugh. I've heard him express the full gamut of his emotional range: from hateful to very hateful. But over all this time, I've never known him to be pathetic until yesterday.
As the media has now endlessly dissected, Rush was thwarted this week in his efforts to buy the National Football League's St. Louis Rams. His ownership group, led by St. Louis Blues boss Dave Checketts, dumped Rush without ceremony or pity. Checketts issued a statement saying, "It has become clear that his involvement in our group has become a complication and a distraction to our intentions; endangering our bid to keep the team in St. Louis. As such, we have decided to move forward without him and hope it will eventually lead us to a successful conclusion."
His comments came the day after Rush insisted on his show that they would fight this to the bitter end. But Checketts, like most owners a long time donor to right wing causes, had no desire to link arms with Limbaugh for a public crusade.
You might think Rush would have gone on the air to slam Checketts's absence of a spine. You might think he would have called out the hypocrisy of NFL owners who give prodigiously to right wing candidates and causes, but insist on doing it in the shadows. You might think he would rail against those who see their conservative support as something sordid and best done behind closed doors. You might think Rush would howl at the moon at those who think that being an open, unreconstructed right winger, actually hurts the almighty bottom line.
You might think he would say that the right wing has failed a major test by refusing to back him. Or maybe you might think he would take a different tack and accept personal responsibility for why a group of billionaires wouldn't want his presence affecting their bottom line.
But no. Rush instead had this to say about why his defeat occurred:
This is about the future of the United States of America and what kind of country we're going to have.....This is the latest assault on people who believe in rugged individualism and liberty and freedom who threaten the whole notion of state control tyranny and central authority which is typified by the Obama administration and the Democrat Party.
It boggles the mind. For someone who claims a belief in rugged individualism and rails against "victim politics" while he preaches personal responsibility, it was almost jarring to hear Rush whine about "tyranny" on the left when it was his compadres on the right who just said no.
It was even worse to hear MSNBC's Pat Buchanan defend Rush, comparing this episode to the McCarthyite witch-hunts of the 1950s, saying "this is blacklisting," which "liberals used to condemn." To compare a crew of billionaires throwing Rush under to bus to McCarthy's persecutions, is about as offensive as Glenn Beck's efforts earlier this week to compare Fox News to the Jews in the Holocaust. Yes, it hasn't been a banner week for conservative metaphor.
Let's be absolutely clear: there is nothing in the First Amendment that covers the right to own an NFL team. Owners have the right to protect their brand and Rush needs to deal with the fact that in 21st century America, he is a liability and not an asset.
As for the position "liberals" should take in such a manner, it seems more than obvious about what side we should be on. I would rather stand with the growing handful of players who were going public with the sentiment that they would never play for someone so noxious. Remember, NFL players have next-to no control over what team they play for. They don't have guaranteed contracts. A recent study showed that many suffer dementia or Alzheimer's when they hit their mid 40s. According to their collective bargaining agreement, they only have the right to view their own medical records twice a year. It's a situation that former player LaVarr Arrington called "slavery" on his radio show on Thursday. Any time they make an effort to exercise any kind of control over their professional lives, we should support that. They didn't want to play for someone who said that they "looked like the bloods and the crips without the weapons." Good for them.
As for Rush, maybe he just went about this all wrong. After all, this is a man who once said,
"Holocaust? Ninety million Indians, only 4 million left? They all have casinos...what's to complain about?"
Maybe he should have tried to just buy the Redskins instead.
My favorite Rush Limbaugh is a big fat idiot story?
He said this...And when he got caught...was he "sent up?" Of course not! The rules are not for him.Quote:
"Drug use, some might say, is destroying this country. And we have laws against selling drugs, pushing drugs, using drugs, importing drugs. ... And so if people are violating the law by doing drugs, they ought to be accused and they ought to be convicted and they ought to be sent up," Limbaugh said on his short-lived television show on Oct. 5, 1995.
What a cry baby. Just once he needs to "man up" and take some responsibility.
He says things that offend some people - that is his right. But then don't be a whiner about the reactions of those he offends.
Personal responsibility - a great concept - for the other guy! :D That's the Limbaugh way!:D
I also don't understand how someone with what is probably a good junior college level understanding of US history would not recognize "people like ___". Comes from the same school as "separate but equal." :rolleyes::rolleyes:
Has anybody denied this? I agree with you on this. He should have paid more of a price for his CRIME. Why are you using this as a defence when nobody brought it up? He did not pay for his crime, but he did recover form his addiction.Quote:
Originally Posted by Edwina's Secretary
You say he is "whining". If the information being used as the primary reason for removing him from the group had even a lick of truth... I would be in 100% agreement with you on this subject. But fact that the racist comments being attributed to him are totally fabricated... Oh well I guess?
LOL Good one. ES... Tell me, what DID I mean by "people like ____"?Quote:
I also don't understand how someone with what is probably a good junior college level understanding of US history would not recognize "people like ___". Comes from the same school as "separate but equal." :rolleyes::rolleyes:
Its also cute to see you think so highly of yourself (or so lowly of me) that you can affix a level of "understanding" to my knowledge of US History. (Have we had discussions on such topics before?)
Rush responds...
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...GHTTopCarousel
"Numerous sportswriters, CNN, MSNBC, among others, falsely attributed to me statements I had never made. Their sources, as best I can tell, were Wikipedia and each other. But the Wikipedia post was based on a fabrication printed in a book that also lacked any citation to an actual source. "
Look, I get it why the OP and others don't like Rush. I am not his biggest fan either. His style is over the top and he is quite arrogant at times. But if the only reason you have to be "happy" that he was dropped from this group, based soley upon fabricated statements... Well, that is your right. But it is also very telling.
It certainly appears that some of the statements attributed to Mr. Limbaugh were not said by him. However, he has made comments in the past that put him in the position, now, where those other quotes were completely believable.
Perhaps that is what Mr. Limbaugh should be concerned about?
Mr Sharptongue (aka My Pal AL) has threatened to sue RL for speaking his mind.
Please, the largest race baitin' liar and moron wants justice.:D