Comments: So... When are These Guys Getting Kicked Out?

A businessman decided that having Rush Limbaugh as a partner was against his interests.

So, he decided not to do business with Limbaugh.

Last I checked, this is the kind of free-market solution conservatives believe in. The government didn't keep Limbaugh from becoming a minority owner of an NFL franchise. One of his prospective partners made that decision.

The outrage over this perfectly routine business decision reminds me of the conservative reaction to MSNBC's firing of Don Imus after he called used the term "nappy-headed hos" to refer to a group of college athletes. "Let the market decide!" Conservatives howled.

But the market did decide. MSNBC decided that its business interests were served better by firing Imus than by keeping him on the air. The government didn't take Imus off the air. His employer did. The market decided. Al Sharpton's civic activism amounted to nothing more than his own contribution to the marketplace of expressed ideas over Imus' comments. In that marketplace, Sharpton's ideas proved to have a higher value than those of Imus' defenders.

Now, I agree that the news media should have done a much better job of pointing out that there is no record of Limbaugh ever having praised James Earl Ray as a hero. But it is silly to suggest that Limbaugh has never expressed a racist thought. As just one example, it is racist to characterize a fight on a school bus between black kids and white kids as something that happens in "Obama's America." It is intellectually dishonest to deny the bigotry inherent in that statement.

Limbaugh has built his career and his fortune by generating controversy. He admits this. However, the perfectly predictable and understandable flip side of the rewards he reaps is that he finds himself unwelcome in the company of those who prefer to avoid his brand of controversy. His prospective partners in the NFL venture did not demand that Limbaugh change the nature of his program in order to participate in the deal. They simply decided that his controversial profile presented to great a risk to their bid for the team. So, he's out. It's not personal. It's just business.

Posted by UncommonSense at October 15, 2009 11:39 AM
Last I checked, this is the kind of free-market solution conservatives believe in.

Slander and libel masquerading as news are not free market solutions. On the bright side, Limbaugh can now demonstrate damages. This should be fun.

Posted by Pablo at October 15, 2009 11:52 AM
As just one example, it is racist to characterize a fight on a school bus between black kids and white kids as something that happens in "Obama's America." It is intellectually dishonest to deny the bigotry inherent in that statement.

Oh, do explain that.

Posted by Pablo at October 15, 2009 11:54 AM

right wing neocon network broke into a story about the afghanistan war to focus on....ta ta da
fatboy rushbo?

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Posted by Senorita Bonita at October 15, 2009 11:57 AM

@Pablo:

President Obama had nothing to do with the fight.

Limbaugh said that in Obama's America, white kids get beat up while black kids stand around and say, "right on, right on, right on."

Racial identity was the only connection Obama had to the black kids on the school bus. It is racist to attribute characteristics of one person to another based on nothing but race. Using race as a factor in determining someone's character is actually the definition of racism.

It is, therefore, racist to say (not to imply, but to say) that a fight on a school bus between black kids and white kids was characteristic of "Obama's America."

Posted by UncommonSense at October 15, 2009 12:04 PM

UncommonSense - Your right

Whether you support Limbaugh or not no one can deny he is highly contraversial. It is in his business interest to be contraversial. Every businessman (owner) would have to consider the negative effect on his investment of this association versus the benefits of having him aboard. So we have a basic conflict, the owners desire to minimize public contraversy versus Limbaugh's need to generate contraversy for his business model.

If it was about politics the owners would have embraced him as they are mostly Republicans.

It appears they just did not want the PR problem of having Limbaugh among them.

This sounds like business.


Posted by Wise Owl at October 15, 2009 01:08 PM

And if all else fails - draw the race card.

Posted by TWoPolitics at October 15, 2009 01:23 PM

Oye Pablo;
The best defense against libel/slander (the same thing except whether written or spoken) is the literal truth of the contested statement. therefore betcha Fatboy does nothing of the kind. But I do agree it would be great fun: the most since Fox suing Al Franken.

Posted by willdamon at October 15, 2009 01:45 PM

You guys don't get it. Rush's attempt to buy a team was just satire. You're taking it all out of context. He's just trying to entertain his listeners.

Posted by beetroot at October 15, 2009 02:03 PM

So if I understand the liberals who have made comments. It is now ok to be racist and to have behavior that uses race, ones thoughts, ones political affiliation, etc as a process to deny one the ability to do business. So lets say that someone comes in a store and I feel that he is liberal, or black or any thing else. Then I can refuse to do business with that person, in other words deny him service. It looks like we are back in the 50's according to the liberals and they are comfortable with that concept.

Posted by David at October 15, 2009 03:47 PM

@David:

Um... what?

I have seen nothing in this thread suggesting liberals believe racism is okay.

Are you suggesting that Rush Limbaugh is a victim of racism?

If so, that is silly.

Limbaugh is simply experiencing an adverse effect of the burlesque on-air persona that he presents on his radio show. It is entirely possible that Rush Limbaugh is not a racist. However, there is ample evidence based on the things he says that "Rush Limbaugh," the character he plays on the radio, is a racist.

It should not surprise anybody that a group of investors seeking to purchase an NFL franchise would not want to associate themselves with someone who earns his living with inflammatory, even racist, rhetoric.

If Limbaugh is a victim of anything, it is of his own success.

Posted by UncommonSense at October 15, 2009 04:18 PM

So how much did they have to pay to get him to bow out?

Posted by garrettc at October 15, 2009 04:45 PM

Uncommonsense,
You and Jesse Jackson are obviously prejudiced toward Rush. I have never heard him utter anything even remotely racist. There are not any quotes that he has made that are racist except those that are unvetted. That means that you don't like him as he is a white, conservative. That statement makes as much sense as accusing Rush of racism. I lived in Mississippi in the 50's and find it unsual that you desire to return to that envirorment.

Posted by David at October 15, 2009 05:37 PM

David,

Just because you have never heard him utter anything that is racist does not mean he has never uttered anything that is racist. It only means YOU did not interpret what he said as racist.

Everything you say is subjective. It is up for interpretation. Rush calls Obama a Halfrican American. You think that is fine. I think it is racist. Who is right? It doesn't matter. To the NFL's eyes, the fact that we're debating whether or not he is racist -- or to what level he is racist -- is in and of itself a discussion it would rather avoid. It is selling itself to mainstream America. And controversy is not a part of the sales pitch.

It is interesting that Rush is mentioned as an opponent of Jackson and Sharpton. I paint all three with the same brush. They are a trio of opportunistic windbags who use race and division to make themselves rich. If Sharpton and Jackson are race-baiters, so is Rush. Big Time

All three peddle controversy. They sell outrage. Rush is the SAME as Sharpton. They are two peas, the same pod.

Al Sharpton would not be welcomed to buy an NFL team either.

Posted by Tim at October 15, 2009 06:22 PM

This is an incredible indictment on any of you that believe condeming someone on something that they supposedly said. Rush makes my blood boil sometimes but he is no racist. Everything he has said for the last twenty years has been recorded and believe me if there were things that could burn him the MSM would be playing them 24/7. Also, why the name calling? Are you people that have to use name calling so immature that you don't have anything intelligent to offer? I for one have had enough of the black thugs of the NFL and no longer watch any of them. Image? Ha! There are so many social misfits in the league that Rush would be like adding a priest to a prison if were a part owner. And how about the teams that sell shares to anyone? Do they set a limit on how many a person can buy? As to the bus fight, all you had to do was watch it. The police chief that originally called it a racial fight was slapped down by the mayor and changed his story to just boys being boys. Thats why two of the boys were suspended and charged with assault.

Posted by inspectorudy at October 15, 2009 07:55 PM

What's being left out of the oh-so-clever "free market" retort is that Limbaugh didn't lose his part in the bid simply because he's controversial. He lost it specifically because he was tied to racist comments *that he never made*. It was those particular yet bogus statements attributed to him that spurred the backlash.

Furthermore, the NFL owners made no collective decision concerning with whom they would do business. This was a demonstrable case of slander that moved Checketts to take measures necessary to preserve the venture. However you look at it, that should not happen.

If the worst thing attributable to him were the McNabb comments, there's not enough to qualify labeling him as a racist. He fails the ridiculous litmus test to which would-be NFL owners have never before been subjected.

Posted by Shwiggie at October 15, 2009 11:03 PM

It's ad nauseAm. Really this poor spelling makes me sick in my stomach!!!

Posted by liamascorcaigh at October 16, 2009 06:56 AM

It's Limbaugh vs. Sharpton and you've seen the end result with your own 2 eyes. TKO in the 1st round. It is what it is.

Posted by Lipiwitz at October 16, 2009 10:49 AM

As usual, Lippy, you are watching the wrong fight, and not even understanding the punches.

The fight is Limbaugh versus Obama, with news breaking that the NFL player rep who was involved in speaking out against Limbaugh has ties to the White House as part of his campaign staff.

As it now stands, only 43% of people would vote for Obama again.

By blocking Limbaugh's ownership, Obamaphiles threw out a good jab. That's all. As polls reveal, the judges--the American public--rather obviously have the anti-Obama team ahead on points.

Posted by Confederate Yankee at October 16, 2009 11:09 AM
President Obama had nothing to do with the fight.

Limbaugh said that in Obama's America, white kids get beat up while black kids stand around and say, "right on, right on, right on."

Racial identity was the only connection Obama had to the black kids on the school bus. It is racist to attribute characteristics of one person to another based on nothing but race. Using race as a factor in determining someone's character is actually the definition of racism.

Do we not live in Barack Obama's America? Had that happened last year and someone decried "George Bush's America" would that have been off base? Racist?

It is, therefore, racist to say (not to imply, but to say) that a fight on a school bus between black kids and white kids was characteristic of "Obama's America."

You might want to look that word "racist" up. And when you get done with that, maybe you could take a look at Arne Duncan's Chicago schools. Google Derrion Albert.

Posted by Pablo at October 16, 2009 02:15 PM
Limbaugh is simply experiencing an adverse effect of the burlesque on-air persona that he presents on his radio show.

If that's the case, then why were his detractors using false quotes, UncommonSense?

Posted by Pablo at October 16, 2009 02:18 PM
As it now stands, only 43% of people would vote for Obama again.

America is clearly 57% racist, CY.

Posted by Pablo at October 16, 2009 02:19 PM

Here is a list of comments I would like explained by people who claim Limbaugh has never uttered a racist word in his life.

My favorite: "The NFL all too often looks like a game between the Bloods and the Crips without any weapons."

Rush says that a sport with a lot of black players looks like a battle between two predominantly black street gangs. Raise your hand if you think he would say the same thing about a rugby game. And this is the sport in which he wants to own a franchise?

I also really like this one:

"The days of them [racial minorities] not having any power are over, and they are angry. And they want to use their power as a means of retribution. That's what Obama's about, gang. He's angry; he's going to cut this country down to size. He's going to make it pay for all the multicultural mistakes that it has made -- its mistreatment of minorities. I know exactly what's going on here."

Has anyone ever seen Barack Obama get angry? Is there any shred of evidence that he wants "retribution" from white people? No, Limbaugh is playing to a racist stereotype about black men being angry. (Ironic, since between Obama and Limbaugh, only one of them spends three hours a day screaming until he's red in the face.)

Posted by Evan at October 16, 2009 02:28 PM

CY...with all do respect, it's a serious stretch to blame this on Obama. Some of the racial comments that were referenced from Limbaugh (the real ones and not the bogus ones) were made way before anybody ever heard of Obama. I saw absolutely nothing wrong with Limbaugh owning the team. Why not?!?! Owning a struggling football team shouldn't have to be political and if the money was good, the players (black or white) would've showed up for kick off. He's an entertainer and doesn't believe half the BS that comes out his own mouth but it makes him a lot of cash. But I don't care who is in the WH (Repub or Democrat), these blacks lead by the threat of Al Sharpton were never gonna let this happen. It's not Obama, its just simple, good old fashioned payback.

Posted by Lipiwitz at October 16, 2009 02:54 PM

So your favorite is: "The NFL all too often looks like a game between the Bloods and the Crips without any weapons."

Well, let's take that in context -- it was after a long diatribe about players' lack of discipline, lack of class, and the NFL validating misbehavior. In context, it's obviously about street-gang behavior, rather than skin color. It was titled "The Classless NFL culture"

See. for example, ". . . there is a culture problem in the NFL that has resulted in a total lack of class on the part of professional players."

I invite folks to examine the transcript at, of ALL places, Media Matters. Hardly fans of Rush:

http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/200910120009

Rush IS right about lack of class (not to mention felons) in the NFL. Which is why it's been banned in my home for years. Matters not a whit what color they are.

Oh, and the Bloods and the Crips comment ? Are you SERIOUS ? He mentions the two MOST-known (in the popular cultures) gangs in the US as his analogy, and you think it's about COLOR ?

You think that's necessarily RACIST ? It's SHORTHAND, for God's sale! I heard similar comments in the MILITARY in reference to lack of discipline DECADES AGO! Now, I could also use the Latin Kings or MS13, but THAT would be missed by more people.

The truth is, people LOOKING for racism can find it wherever they look.

Reminds me of the time when they screamed "RACIST" when the DC politician CORRECTLY used the word "niggardly." And before any illiterate fool has a conniption about THAT, look it up and improve your vocabulary.

Damned oversensitive fools.


Posted by outnow at October 16, 2009 09:12 PM

"You hate to think you have to censor your language to meet other people’s lack of understanding"

- Horace Julian Bond, then chairman of the NAACP. and President Emeritus, Southern Poverty Law Center

Posted by outnow at October 16, 2009 09:16 PM
CY...with all do respect, it's a serious stretch to blame this on Obama.

Yeah, Lippy, it's not like the White House made Limbaugh Public Enemy Number One a few months back. And it's not like DeMaurice Smith, the point man on this smear campaign, is in the Obama Administration.

Oh, wait. Both of those things are true.

Posted by Pablo at October 17, 2009 07:55 AM