Or pop a painkiller.
I wouldn't. I've said it already. Neither are good for the game, regardless of if I agree with their politics or not. That's where you and I disagree, Steve.
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
Rush Limbaugh and the Rams
- Thread starter Dr. Cheese
- Start date
- Status
I think my intent was trollish, and it came out lame. Anyway, a lame troll deserves to be deleted even moreso than just a straightforward troll.
Speaking as a former resident of Saint Louis, I personally had no problem with him being an owner. A crappy team owned by a crappy person. Seems almost appropriate to me. I do, however, understand the logic behind barring him from owning the team. Being in such a high profile position and being as extreme as he is, he could jeopardize the team by having them fined for him making some ridiculous comment about the NFL.
The NFL Brand is one that seeks to appeal to EVERYONE. That's how you maximize income.
The Rush Limbaugh Brand has no interest in appealing to everyone. If the League and owners perceive a threat to the brand, they will take pre-emptive action.
The Rush Limbaugh Brand has no interest in appealing to everyone. If the League and owners perceive a threat to the brand, they will take pre-emptive action.
I'm willing to bet Michael Moore would have the exact same problem getting in.
It's a private club - they don't have to let anyone in.
The first amendment only applies to the government. The NFL isn't the government - and is perfectly within their legal rights choosing not to enter into a business partnership with someone because of their past actions and/or speech.
Ummm... no.
Most of the other owners have similar political views.
They barred him from ownership because they believed having him as an owner would cost them money. They believed he was divisive enough to cost them money. Nothing more, nothing less.
Pure capitalism.
In your option how would having Rush as a minority owner in a team have a negative impact on NFL revenue? Frankly I would think having a player in the NFL that tortures and kills dogs would have a negative effect on revenue, however that seems to be OK.
Rush will always be an extremist and bigot. He does not "do the right things" and cannot if he wants to keep his extremist audience which is needed for him to make piles of money.
Vick has paid the legal price, "made nice' publicly, is doing the right things, and is therefore forgiven in our society.
You may not like it, but that's how it works. Get over the Mike Vick stuff...it's so "last summer".....the collective consciousness of the public has moved on.
IMHO Rush tells the truth every day about our world. You may not agree with him but apparently a huge demographic in America does. He is the most successful talk radio host in America for a reason.
Many would not agree and my point was about potential revenue, why take the chance and allow him to play if NFL revenue was so important?
I really could care less about Vick. I was using him as an example of the NFL's hypocrisy.
I can't believe you guys are still arguing over Thrush.
I thought it would have mutated into something else by now.
I thought it would have mutated into something else by now.
Ok, would you please reference a direct quote where Rush was dishonest? And please, something verifiable, unlike the slander occurring in the press. Maybe you can change my mind. I may like Rush but I am open minded and fair.
Did you listen to this?
I didn't see a smiley face. Is that an insult aimed at RWP, or all Rush Limbaugh fans on this site?
I listened to the clip. Means nothing (to me). The guy makes countless great points. I agree with almost everything he says. Doesn't change anything about Limbaugh, however.
Regarding honesty/dishonesty, we're all going to believe what we want. There is very little "honesty" in anything political. The likes of burk won't acknowledge any truth from someone like Olbermann. I have a very difficult time seeing much honesty in what Limbaugh says. We cannot both be right.
But he's Black so that should be close enough for the logic at play here.
Rush has not made any of the statements attributed to him. Never. In other news, the Tooth Fairy just won the Talledega 500 in a bone stock Smart fortwo.
There seems to be some confusion on the difference between satire and sarcasm. Limbaugh is sarcastic and as far as his listeners seem to go, they certainly seem to take him seriously. I hear people quote him as an authority on a fairly regular basis. Maybe he should tell them it's satire.
When I hear this genius go on and on about how Black people are being raised to hate America, conveniently ignoring people like me, my extended family and friends and acquaintances and even more folks that I don't know, it's clear it's neither satire nor sarcasm. It's preaching to a choir that needs to feed on that delusion.
Thank goodness Rush is such a uniter.
He picks the scab daily. That's what his popularity is based on. To listen to his show and not get that would be amazing. Simply amazing.
Do people really miss the "Us against them" vibe?
- Status
