Wednesday, October 14, 2009

Limbaugh out of the bidding for the Rams:

Apparently. In any event, this observation by Morris O'Kelly is good:
... the league would not have any editorial control over Limbaugh's daily radio program. Each and every single day, Rush Limbaugh manages to deeply offend someone and that anger would then be tied to the St. Louis Rams and to the NFL. The routine and inevitable hatemail and calls for boycott of advertisers supporting Rush Limbaugh would also then become the NFL's problem.

Every subsequent story regarding the "questionable" remarks of one Rush Limbaugh would inevitably include the words "owner of the NFL's St. Louis Rams" in the opening paragraph. The NFL doesn't want that and given its stature surely doesn't need that.
Note that the above remarks are not discussing race. While Limbaugh's statements regarding race have garnered most of the attention, it should be noted that Limbaugh has targeted lots of other groups (feminists, Democrats, scientists, celebrities, reporters), which is his right. But does the NFL need somebody like that? No.


I am very disappointed. Players refusing to join the team, opponents skipping games against St would have been a great show of normal people v. knuckle-dragging AM radio listeners.

By Blogger JeffKw, at 10/14/2009 4:46 PM  

He would have run the team into the ground in no time. It would have helped make him a more irrelevant figure.

By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10/14/2009 5:36 PM  

My neighbor friend but PITA Repub claimed that the reason Rush was ousted was due only to Sharpton & Jackson; simultaneously being a racist and denying a Rush is a racist at the same time. These folks spin on a very thin edge.

By Anonymous Mart, at 10/14/2009 9:13 PM  

Doesn't the NFL drug policy apply to team owners?

By Blogger Shag from Brookline, at 10/15/2009 2:50 AM  

Post a Comment