# Is Rush a racist?



## Bogy (Mar 23, 2002)

Every few years a sports commentator makes a statement that gets him in a lot of trouble. It didn't take Rush long.
http://www.philly.com/mld/philly/sports/6901462.htm


> Doug Williams, quarterback of the Super Bowl XXII champion Washington Redskins, and, like Donovan McNabb, a black man, has a few questions for Rush Limbaugh:
> 
> Could Rush make it up the stairs to do his radio show with a broken ankle?
> 
> ...


Here's a good column by Phil Sheridan.
http://www.philly.com/mld/philly/news/special_packages/inqcol/6893265.htm


> The sick thing is, this is exactly what ESPN had in mind when the all-sports network hired veteran provocateur Rush Limbaugh for its Sunday NFL pregame show. You can imagine the meeting. The ESPN bigwigs must have needed drool cups to handle the runoff when they discussed the controversy Limbaugh would generate.
> 
> Well, here it is. Just be advised, ESPN, that you're not fooling anyone. You brought this tired act out of his radio closet, where he rants to people who already agree with him, to stir things up. Prepare to get spattered.
> 
> ...


For those of you who didn't bother to read the whole article, here's a couple of quotes from near the end.


> This is the same man who once told an African American caller to "take that bone out of your nose and call me back." The same man who once said, "Have you ever noticed how all composite pictures of wanted criminals resemble Jesse Jackson?"


So dittoheads, what do you have to say in defense of your hero?


----------



## clapple (Feb 11, 2003)

I stopped watching the ESPN pre-game show, when they announced this idiot was hired. Hopefully, they will soon announce he is fired.


----------



## jened (Nov 13, 2002)

it seems most of the time someone screams of racism, they themselves are racist. funny how the guy writing the article doesn't really know what he is talking about either.


----------



## mainedish (Mar 25, 2003)

The facts he has about Rush are not true. He never said any of these things to a caller. Pure BS. Remember when Howard Cosell called a football player a little monkey as he ran down the field? We knew what he was talking about but the left went after him anyway. Like I have said before the last time I heard the N WORD was from a black man to another black man in Boston.


----------



## James Hill (Jul 24, 2003)

Rush didn't say anything that's wrong. However, is it racist? It's based around race, so by definition it is.

McNabb's overrated and the NFL has pumped him because he's black. Sports leagues tend to promote certain individuals over others (ex: Kobe Bryant over Iverson), and they put their chips on McNabb over guys like Warner, Favre, and Bradey (guys that have actually won the Super Bowl).

Should Rush have said it? It's a true statement. It's not politically correct, and that seems to bother the lefties out there.

The same lefties that don't watch ESPN. It took them two days to find out about this. If they actually watched, or really cared about black people, this would have been in the news on Sunday night.

Nice to see the haters out there still can't get things straight.

James Hill


----------



## Bogy (Mar 23, 2002)

About what I expected so far.


----------



## James Hill (Jul 24, 2003)

Bogy said:


> About what I expected so far.


Agreed. No one can make a case that he's actually a racist.

He only made a statement dealing with race.

James Hill


----------



## Ric (Apr 26, 2002)

I remember that there have always been discussions about why there are not enough black quarterbacks and black coaches in the NFL. As some have come along, the media has pushed them regardless of credentials or success, but rather as breaking barriers. Right or wrong - would this be a racist act by the media or just reporting? Far too many opinions to get into that quagmire on this topic. Rush's statement is simply that this quarterback is not as good as the media has pushed him to be. The media has pushed him because he is black not because he has credentials.

To me the debate should be: does he have the credentials to get the attention and therefore Rush is wrong or Rush is right and this guy isn't as great as the hype. Personally, I don't know as I don't follow the Eagles regularly.

But is this racist? Just can't see it. A racist comment would be to state the quarterback is no good based solely on his color, be it black or white. I just don't see how Rush's comments insinuated that in any way.


----------



## Ric (Apr 26, 2002)

Just went to SI and looked up McNabb's ratings and stats. He is currently ranked 28th out of 35 NFL quarterbacks in passing yards. His QB rating is at 51.1 for this year which puts him in the 34th of 35 positions. He has an average of one interception per game and no TD's. 

Honestly had no idea until I read this topic about the issue. Decided to go look McNabb's stats up and see how they play out. According to SI, he really is in the lower 25% of quarterbacks and I can see Rush stating he is getting more credit than deserved. Rush states the media is giving the credit because he is black. Can't say for sure but the stats aren't proving credentials.


----------



## John Corn (Mar 21, 2002)

Where do I sign to get one of those overrated guys on my pitiful Browns?

Speaking of useless stats and overrated, anyone see Vinny just became like the 6th highest passer of all-time?


----------



## dtcarson (Jan 10, 2003)

I like Rush, and don't like football, so I don't know where that puts me, but if this is the quote that caused the hubbub:
"the media has been very desirous that a black quarterback do well. There's interest in black quarterbacks and coaches doing well." McNabb, Limbaugh said, isn't "as good as everyone says he has been."

My response to that, regardless of who said it, is....BFD. He is stating an opinion as to how he percieves the media and sports stars [which may or may not be true, again, I don't follow sports], but from my experience with the media, I can see that happening [many times the headline or article is 'Black college' or 'AfricanAmerican *something* star' or 'Black fraternity' [insert Oriental, Jewish, whatever, instead of Black, sometimes--anything but Caucasian]. And the second comment is that he thinks this McNabb guy is overrated--which has nothing to do with race. I think most 
people in the press are overrated; the media picks their darling, and hypes them to death [ie, I could care less if Ben and Jen get married, divorced, or sex changes].
If anything, it's a comment on race, and how the media focuses on it [even though race isn't supposed to matter anymore]; it's not a racist comment [like that coach up north said, 'blacks are better at standing in the heat'. That is a racist comment.]


----------



## Bogy (Mar 23, 2002)

James Hill said:


> Agreed. No one can make a case that he's actually a racist.
> 
> He only made a statement dealing with race.
> 
> James Hill


That is not exactly what I meant by the responses so far being what I expected. I expected a great deal of rationalization for Rush's position. :sure:


----------



## Bogy (Mar 23, 2002)

Ric said:


> To me the debate should be: does he have the credentials to get the attention and therefore Rush is wrong or Rush is right and this guy isn't as great as the hype. Personally, I don't know as I don't follow the Eagles regularly.


I don't follow the Eagles either, which is why I quoted articles in a Philadelphia paper. I figured that sports writers in Philadelphia would have a better read on whether McNabb is overrated or not. 
This is what Phil Sheridan has to say about whether he is overrated:


> Finally, there is the substance of Limbaugh's statement, that McNabb isn't as good as the media say and that he's gotten credit that should go to the Eagles' defense. Anyone who has watched this team for the last three years would know that is laughable. The defense has been very good and has gotten due credit. But McNabb has been good much of the time, very good some of the time and great on occasion. Talk to his teammates and to his opponents and you hear the kind of respect that someone like Limbaugh would know nothing about.
> 
> It is telling that Limbaugh pounced on a two-game slump by McNabb to advance his own pathetic agenda. It's a shame that Steve Young - who didn't become an effective NFL starter until he was plugged into the great San Francisco 49ers' offense in his eighth pro season - lent credence to Limbaugh's doggerel by suggesting that Koy Detmer would run the Eagles' offense better.
> 
> Fortunately for McNabb, his record speaks for itself.


Statistics, this early in the season can be very misleading. A two game slump in a season this young would give a quarterback lousy numbers. I would trust someone who has been observing a QB over a 3 year period more than numbers at this point in the season.


----------



## dtcarson (Jan 10, 2003)

Apparently, judging from both your original post and the 'column' from Sheridan, what you wanted was mass agreement that Rush is only one step less racist than Hitler, based on this comment, which I view as pretty innocuous.
It doesn't sound like either you or Sheridan is giving Rush the benefit of the doubt, or even listening to the words he is saying--if he's a conservative, and mentions race, he's obviously a racist. :sure:

"tired act"
"absurd attack on Eagles quarterback"
unless he said something other than what was quoted above, how is 'he's overrated' an 'absurd attack'? I know political correctness is unfortunately still around, but this is hypersensitivity.
"radio comfort zone" where he can 'cut off' people he disagree with him. Obviously Sheridan has not listened to the show--Rush will discuss/debate with people who disagree with him. IF they can discuss/debate, rather than just 'Well, you're a stupid Republican'. Not to mention, it's his show, it's not a news show, he doesn't *have* to let *anybody* on the air.
It's funny, I've never heard of Sheridan, but Rush has been on the radio for what, 15 years? That's an awfully good 'bluff.'

I would like to counterask:
If ANYONE else said this, would it be this much of a big deal? Say, Hillary, or Robert Byrd, or Al Franken. Or even people outside of politics--Letterman, Leno, etc. I think not. Unless there's a lot said that I missed, I think this is a non-issue, except for people who already hate Rush [which is most of the mainstream media, especially newsprint.]


----------



## Bogy (Mar 23, 2002)

dtcarson said:


> I like Rush, and don't like football, so I don't know where that puts me, but if this is the quote that caused the hubbub:
> "the media has been very desirous that a black quarterback do well. There's interest in black quarterbacks and coaches doing well." McNabb, Limbaugh said, isn't "as good as everyone says he has been."
> 
> My response to that, regardless of who said it, is....BFD. He is stating an opinion as to how he percieves the media and sports stars [which may or may not be true, again, I don't follow sports], but from my experience with the media, I can see that happening [many times the headline or article is 'Black college' or 'AfricanAmerican *something* star' or 'Black fraternity' [insert Oriental, Jewish, whatever, instead of Black, sometimes--anything but Caucasian]. And the second comment is that he thinks this McNabb guy is overrated--which has nothing to do with race. I think most
> ...


But it is Rush that brought race into it. He didn't just say that McNabb is overrated as a QB. As you point out, many people in many fields are overrated. He made it an issue of race when he said that the reason McNabb was overrated was because he was black.


----------



## Bogy (Mar 23, 2002)

dtcarson said:


> Apparently, judging from both your original post and the 'column' from Sheridan, what you wanted was mass agreement that Rush is only one step less racist than Hitler, based on this comment, which I view as pretty innocuous.
> It doesn't sound like either you or Sheridan is giving Rush the benefit of the doubt, or even listening to the words he is saying--if he's a conservative, and mentions race, he's obviously a racist. :sure:


I thought this issue is deserving of comment. I did not state my own opinion in the original post, simply asked a question. And as I stated, the mass rush to defend Rush does not surprise me.



> "tired act"
> "absurd attack on Eagles quarterback"
> unless he said something other than what was quoted above, how is 'he's overrated' an 'absurd attack'? I know political correctness is unfortunately still around, but this is hypersensitivity.
> "radio comfort zone" where he can 'cut off' people he disagree with him. Obviously Sheridan has not listened to the show--Rush will discuss/debate with people who disagree with him. IF they can discuss/debate, rather than just 'Well, you're a stupid Republican'. Not to mention, it's his show, it's not a news show, he doesn't *have* to let *anybody* on the air.
> It's funny, I've never heard of Sheridan, but Rush has been on the radio for what, 15 years? That's an awfully good 'bluff.'


I'm afraid you are mistaken about his not cutting people off. In the first place he only lets people on who disagree with him when he has boasted he will talk with anyone. Most times people who don't agree never make it through the screeners. If they do make it through there are usually "technical difficulties" very soon. Secondly, I don't believe Sheridan made any statement that Rush had to let everyone on his radio show, simply that he was now out of his protected comfort zone. Thirdly, I have heard of Phil Sheridan before. Perhaps you need to spend less time listening to Rush.



> I would like to counterask:
> If ANYONE else said this, would it be this much of a big deal? Say, Hillary, or Robert Byrd, or Al Franken. Or even people outside of politics--Letterman, Leno, etc. I think not. Unless there's a lot said that I missed, I think this is a non-issue, except for people who already hate Rush [which is most of the mainstream media, especially newsprint.]


The answer is, I don't believe Hillary or Robert Byrd or Al Franken would have said such a thing. And yes there is a lot of dislike for Rush out there which is why many of us were dismayed when Rush was hired for this gig.


----------



## mainedish (Mar 25, 2003)

Al Franken is too busy stealing letterhead from Harvard.


----------



## waydwolf (Feb 2, 2003)

Bogy said:


> That is not exactly what I meant by the responses so far being what I expected. I expected a great deal of rationalization for Rush's position. :sure:


Bogy, you will regard anything said that doesn't condemn Rush as a rationalization.

In fact, you on the left are the true racists. You treat minorities as if they are predetermined to be violent ignorant savages and only liberal whites and annointed minority representatives can raise them from their destined place under the feet of rich white people who will always win without your heavenly help. This was the exact rationalization the left used to explain the Los Angeles riots after the Rodney King fiasco. Since there weren't enough lefties representing the poor downtrodden minorities, their only recourse was violence bordering on open revolution.

Meanwhile millions of nonwhites across the USA and billions more across the planet raise nice families with well behaved children without massive social disruptions and multigenerational poverty and despair. Yet those within the USA who fall on hard times and come under the left's cradle to grave welfare machine are exhorted to throw off familial values and structures, long standing tradional morality and ethics, and to enter your brave new world of socialist malaise.

And since religious faith is anathema to the left(which makes you a hypocrite from the word go), the left downplays strong church life among minority families and encourages children to make up their morality for themselves however they please, ignore their parents, don't study, don't achieve, don't strive... If a minister counsels abstinence and strong morals to a congregation on Sunday, the welfare system and social lefties are counseling the opposite the whole rest of the week. Their line sounds like, "Don't bother with listening to that crud kids, go ahead and here's a condom. That anti-drug stuff is just the man keeping you down. Go ahead and smoke some weed."

The result is minorites across the USA hoodwinked into acting as if there is no other way than to behave badly, hurt themselves and others, and in the end get nowhere with their lives while the white leftists and their nonwhite lapdogs like Sharpton and company end up with all the booty of the social plunder.

When people think I'm totally white, I get held to standards. I have goals set before me by society, by work, by the government. When people find I'm part Indian, they suddenly act as if I'm f*cking disabled or retarded and it's okay if I don't aspire to anything at all. As if I'm expected to be a failure because I'm part Indian. I have in my life known dozens of black, Indian, Latino, and other nonwhite men and women who realized the same thing and were just as angry and hurt beyond belief. We have a right to be. My black ex was absolutely rabidly hatefilled towards the left thanks to the way they treated her like she couldn't do a thing without them.

Keep your guff about racism. You on the left, who treat minorities like retarded children in need of your shelter and intellect, are the real racists. Your welfare, your condescension, your smarmy talk about tolerance and diversity are not needed. Just get out of the way and let people be themselves and rise according to their own spirits. The victims of your pity are stronger than you give them credit for and sooner or later they will realize who's been keeping them on a leash with illusions and false promises.


----------



## Bogy (Mar 23, 2002)

waydwolf said:


> Bogy, you will regard anything said that doesn't condemn Rush as a rationalization.


As you regard anything good said about liberals as a lie. In fact the rest of your post shows how little you really understand liberals, and your very consistent stereotyping. We already know from many of your past posts that you grew up in a world far different than most of us, and that must have included the liberal as well. I, as many liberals do, feel that as in this example a black man is capable of being a QB, as 10 are this year, without it having to be because of some NFL affirmative action program. Your assumption that all liberals feel that minorities can only succeed with paternalism is not really any different than an assumption that all conservatives feel that minorities cannot succeed in any case. Neither assumption is true.


----------



## Rick_EE (Apr 5, 2002)

Bogy said:


> . Most times people who don't agree never make it through the screeners.


How do you know? You don't. That is probably true of those that agree, too.

A Philadelphia sports writer would be one of the least credible sources. That guy has to work with the Eagles, if he said anything else, he wouldn't get back into the locker room.

When an espn.com writer said that "running quarterback" meant "black", no one screamed.

Robert Byrd has said worse, the former wizard of the KKK used the N word on national TV less than 10 years ago.

Is what he said rascist? Borderline. Was it completely out of place for a pre-game show. Absolutely. Is it true? It seems likely. Look at Daunte Culpepper and Kordell Stewart. The same thing happened to them.


----------



## Rick_EE (Apr 5, 2002)

Bogy said:


> In fact the rest of your post shows how little you really understand liberals, and your very consistent stereotyping.


I would say the same thing about what you say about conservatives. Matter of fact, I did a few hours ago. I wonder where you got the idea?

You seem to misunderstand Rush's comment. He is not saying that black men can't play quarterback. He is saying that this one is hyped because they want a black superstar.


----------



## Chris Blount (Jun 22, 2001)

I find it truly sad that people can't say anything these days without getting jumped on for racism, sexual harassment, or anything else that might offend someone. How far is this going to go? Someday we may get to a point that everyone will just stop talking. 

Lighten up people. We have much bigger things to worry about.


----------



## Bogy (Mar 23, 2002)

Rick Densing said:


> You seem to misunderstand Rush's comment. He is not saying that black men can't play quarterback. He is saying that this one is hyped because they want a black superstar.


You just said it. The charge Rush makes is not that people are hyping a superstar/potential superstar, but it is because he is black that he can't really just be a really good QB having a slow start this season, but he must be "hyped". After all, how good can he be? All he did was win two conference championships in a row and come in second for MVP. Lots and lots of NFL QB's must have done that in the last two years. :sure:


----------



## Bogy (Mar 23, 2002)

Chris Blount said:


> I find it truly sad that people can't say anything these days without getting jumped on for racism, sexual harassment, or anything else that might offend someone. How far is this going to go? Someday we may get to a point that everyone will just stop talking.
> 
> Lighten up people. We have much bigger things to worry about.


It is sad that a guy can't even play QB and have a few off games without people making the charge that the only reason he has the job in the first place is his color. It just shows how far this nation has to go before we truly become colorblind. *Then* we can stop talking about it.


----------



## djlong (Jul 8, 2002)

Bogy,

MVP voting means almost nothing - popularity contest more than anything else in just about every sport. The conference title games mean more - but that's a team.

I don't have the stats handy, but what were McNabb's ratings those years? Judge him *individually* by those.

When I read about Rush's statement, I was reminded of a discussion that took place where I worked some 12 years ago or so.

Hispanic woman was leaving the company - she was a computer operator and just about the worst one I'd ever seen. I can't begin to tell you how many screwups she made and how many hours I had to work extra because of her - including cancelling a vacation once (ok, family went, I stayed at the office).

She leaves saying she got a job at the Boston Police Department. Ok, no problem so far. Then she says she's going to be a cop on the beat. Not a desk job or dispatcher or something else. But a real street cop. She was a short, tiny little woman who couldn't follow directions if they were printed and handed to her.

But a relative of mine who's a cop explained to me that she is a "two fer" - female and Hispanic. 

Is it racist to say she got her job because of her race?

For the record, I'm Hispanic - though I only found out when I was 29 (found my birth mother, maternal grandmother born in Puerto Rico).

I often disagree with Rush - though I haven't listened to him much since I got satellite radio. But I have noticed how people froth at the mouth to pounce on him when and if he slips up.


----------



## FTA Michael (Jul 21, 2002)

Bogy,

Your actions are those of a troll. You started a volatile topic with the expectation of evoking strong disagreement. You withheld your opinion until it could be used for counter-punching.

Long, long ago, I learned an important rule about such threads: Don't Feed The Trolls.


----------



## Mike123abc (Jul 19, 2002)

Well Fox news is reporting he has resigned from the pre game show... guess that did not last long.


----------



## Bogy (Mar 23, 2002)

Mike123abc said:


> Well Fox news is reporting he has resigned from the pre game show... guess that did not last long.


ESPN agrees with that report.
http://msn.espn.go.com/gen/news/2003/1001/1628537.html?partnersite=espn


----------



## Bogy (Mar 23, 2002)

carload said:


> Bogy,
> 
> Your actions are those of a troll. You started a volatile topic with the expectation of evoking strong disagreement. You withheld your opinion until it could be used for counter-punching.
> 
> Long, long ago, I learned an important rule about such threads: Don't Feed The Trolls.


I submitted a topic for discussion. If you read the articles I posted and knew me, as many here do, you would know what my opinion of Rush was already. Otherwise, if you don't want to participate in the discussion, don't.


----------



## Charles Oliva (Apr 22, 2002)

Funny how it is that last year Warren Sapp on Fox Sports Net's BDSSP was asked about who the the most overrated player in the NFL was and named Jason Sehorn, paraphrasing Sapp "hyped cause he's a white guy playing a black guys position", it was yucked at, and CNN/MSNBC/etc. (and an internet discussion forum) not examining Sapp's comments as possibly "racist". It's a pretty sad statement on society when it's really not the comments but the person who says the comment that raises "controversy", trust me if it was Michael Irvin that said that McNabb was overrated and is hyped by the media cause he's a black QB, this wouldn't be an issue.
In fact, ESPN didn't think anything of Rush's comments appearently, at first. I don't watch any of the pre-game shows. But ESPN's Sunday Countdown show is scripted, meaning everyone connected to that show *knew* what Rush was going to say. ESPN also during it's Sunday Night NFL game, even used some excerpts from Rush's comments to quip "If you missed NFL Sunday Countdown, this is what you missed". Now of course, ESPN cowers under the PC police and "accepts Mr. Limbaugh's resignation". Another reason to hate "The Mouse".


----------



## SamC (Jan 20, 2003)

What Rush said was not only not racist, it is fundamentally correct.

Do you think that the NBA wouldn't kill for a white guy? Aren't all white players in the NBA over-hyped? Wouldn't the NBA love to increase its quotent of guys, of any race, who have a vocabulary of more than 500 words and can avoid being arested on a monthly basis?

Does the NHL not want blacks to take up its sport? And people from non-hockey areas (the south)? And does it not hype the h**l out of American born players over everybody else, English Canadians over French Canadians (except on Montreal, where its the reverse), and Canadians over Euros? Would the NHL not trun backflips if a black guy showed up with great skills. Wouldn't NASCAR?

And, the fact is, that the NFL itself and most big city sports writers hype black quarterbacks and white receivers. Fact of life that Limbaugh pointed out.

A lot of big city eastern liberals take their sanctamonious shots. But the fact remains that the only real racists in our society are in the party they have always been in, the democrat party. The party of race.


----------



## Chris Blount (Jun 22, 2001)

Bogy said:


> It is sad that a guy can't even play QB and have a few off games without people making the charge that the only reason he has the job in the first place is his color. It just shows how far this nation has to go before we truly become colorblind. *Then* we can stop talking about it.


What difference does that make? If the guy is playing well, it doesn't matter what color he is or what people are saying about him.

Have you ever been the victim of racism Bogy? I face it down here every day. San Antonio, TX is 80% Hispanic. Being a white male, I face reverse racism every day. I have been passed over for several government jobs because they needed female Hispanics to fill a "quota". Do I let this bother me? No! You know why? Because I move on with my life and work hard using the tools that God gave me to overcome obstacles. If people tell me I'm a white racist, I could care less. People who make it in this life get off their butt and do what needs to be done and don't sit around and complain. Talk is cheap. Actions are gold!


----------



## Cyclone (Jul 1, 2002)

I thought that Rush said that McNabb was being carried by the Defense. Isn't the Defense mostly Black? If so, was Rush complementing them?


----------



## James Hill (Jul 24, 2003)

While I enjoy watching everyone pile on Bogy, let's call this thing down the middle.

Rush quit for one of two reasons: ESPN was going to fire him anyway or he wants to get more of a reaction out of his 20 million faithful.

As much as I enjoy listening to the guy, ESPN hired him to spark debate and get the show noticed. In turn, I strongly believe he did this to get a rise out of his base.

Besides, when Al Sharpton says you're wrong, you know you're right.

James Hill


----------



## paulh (Mar 17, 2003)

Makes me wonder if he has a non-compete clause with ESPN stating he can't be part of another football show, as ESPN's ratings were up with Rush on.


----------



## lee635 (Apr 17, 2002)

I'm not sure I can condemn Mr. Limbaugh for this statement. And I'd agree that there exists the appearance of his being treated more harshly. On the other hand, Rush is a big boy and knows that he is a lightning rod. I'm sure this will boost his radio show ratings, so I don't worry about his finances. Who's to say Rush didn't think this would evoke a big response and he said what he said just for that reason. Who knows.


----------



## RichW (Mar 29, 2002)

Controversy sells, but this time it backfired on ESPN.


----------



## Bogy (Mar 23, 2002)

Chris Blount said:


> Talk is cheap. Actions are gold!


Which is exactly the point of the first article quoted. From a former black QB facing the same kind of BS.


----------



## markh (Mar 24, 2002)

I'm not too worried about Rush getting by without this job. I think it would have been more interesting to keep him on the show and try to justify what he said. I don't think he is a racist, but with what he said, it doesn't sound like he thought through the reaction he would get.

McNabb has had a slow start this year. If you look at what he's done the last few years, it'll show that Rush is not the football expert he fancies himself to be.


----------



## dtcarson (Jan 10, 2003)

Bogy said:


> I thought this issue is deserving of comment. I did not state my own opinion in the original post, simply asked a question. And as I stated, the mass rush to defend Rush does not surprise me.


The way you phrased your question, stated your opinion. I'm not necessarily defending Rush, I'm defending anyone who might have said what I think is a non-racist opinion. If Hillary said it, I'd say the same thing.



Bogy said:


> I'm afraid you are mistaken about his not cutting people off. In the first place he only lets people on who disagree with him when he has boasted he will talk with anyone. Most times people who don't agree never make it through the screeners. If they do make it through there are usually "technical difficulties" very soon. Secondly, I don't believe Sheridan made any statement that Rush had to let everyone on his radio show, simply that he was now out of his protected comfort zone. Thirdly, I have heard of Phil Sheridan before. Perhaps you need to spend less time listening to Rush.


I assume you meant to type 'he only lets people on who AGREE with him', not 'DISagree with him.' I didn't say he didn't cut people off--it's his show, he can do what he wants. I said that he does put people on who disagree with him, as long as they don't just spout buzzwords and insults. Eventually he will cut people off, yes--I've heard non-political talk show hosts do that too [Clark Howard]. He's on a live radio show, with time constraints, sure he cuts people off sometimes. I can't recall ever hearing 'technical difficulties', although I have heard people call in on crappy cell connections. 
I looked up Phil Sheridan. He's a sportswriter focusing on the Eagles. I don't care about sports, I don't live in Philadelphia, and I don't care about the Eagles. Why would I have heard of him? Have many people outside PA, the sports industries, or Eagles fans heard of him? I highly doubt any paper or radio station down here in NC would carry him, and again, since I have no interest in his topic, I've heard of Cosell and that's about it.



Bogy said:


> The answer is, I don't believe Hillary or Robert Byrd or Al Franken would have said such a thing. And yes there is a lot of dislike for Rush out there which is why many of us were dismayed when Rush was hired for this gig.


Hmm...I don't know about Hillary or Al Franken [he usually just calls people 'fat' or 'idiot,' which is surely the height of creative satire], but Bob Byrd doesn't just stop at a phrase that could be construed by the hypersensitive as racist:
http://chblue.com/PrintArticle.asp?ID=858

If something as relatively as innocuous as this statement of OPINION [which apparently everyone but conservatives are allowed to have] caused this much hubbub, with this little support from his employers [ESPN], I'd quit too.

To me, what I've read about this seems like Rush's opinions on affirmative action: the perception that traditional 'minorities' get a leg up, or get hyped, in part simply because they are a minority ['bonus points'], rather than on their achievements or talents. That's not right.

I've reread the quote, as phrased in the original article posted, and again, honestly, I don't see how that could be construed as racist, ie, bigoted. That's like me saying 'The press is hyping McD's new salads because they're nutritious, but I think the salads are overrated.' Am I being anti-salad or anti-nutrition now?

I mean even in the first line of the first article, it points out that Doug Williams is 'like McNabb, a black man.' If the media didn't keep making an issue of it, it wouldn;t be as much an issue. To state that Williams is a black man, and ask his opinion, is racist in itself, implying that a white man's opinion isn't valid, merely because of race, which is the very definition of racism.


----------



## pjmrt (Jul 17, 2003)

all the more reason to pass on ESPNs broadcasts. The media just proved Rush's statement to be true.

If you favor a black player over a white player, its good journalism - if you don't, its racism. Go figure.


----------



## lee635 (Apr 17, 2002)

"Poor Rush. Not. 
Do I think Rush Limbaugh's cracks about Donovan McNabb are seriously racist? Not really. Do I think they were offensive? Mildly, not profoundly. Do I like it when the thought police, the language cops and the political correctness enforcers pounce on an utterance and declare it illegal? No, I hate it. Am I delighted to see Rush Limbaugh attacked, ridiculed and forced out of his ESPN gig? Absolutely. Justice is being served.

Limbaugh routinely insults those he disagrees with. He gives them nasty nicknames; he mocks them, besmirches them and makes fun of them far more adeptly than his current attackers. This is how he makes his millions. It is ludicrous for him, and for his defenders, to claim he is being treated unfairly. Others are simply doing unto him what he does unto others. That's justice in my book.

It doesn't matter if I think Limbaugh's remark was racist or offensive. Many other people did. And just as Limbaugh has a right to speak his piece, so do they. And they did. And Limbaugh left the ESPN gig. What is unfair about that?

Poor Rush, say his defenders, is being held to a politically correct double standard. It may be that he is being held to a political standard, but it isn't double."

"news


----------



## Halfsek (Oct 29, 2002)

lee635 said:


> "Poor Rush. Not.
> Do I think Rush Limbaugh's cracks about Donovan McNabb are seriously racist? Not really. Do I think they were offensive? Mildly, not profoundly. Do I like it when the thought police, the language cops and the political correctness enforcers pounce on an utterance and declare it illegal? No, I hate it. Am I delighted to see Rush Limbaugh attacked, ridiculed and forced out of his ESPN gig? Absolutely. Justice is being served.


Wow. What a hypocrite.

"Rush didn't do anything wrong, yet I'm happy he's getting all this flak... for doing nothing wrong."

If giving nicknames and the other things you accuse him of are so bad, then give him crap on that.
Kennedy got a free pass on what he said about Bush.

You're just so eager for him to get in trouble that you don't care if there is any consistancy or not.


----------



## RichW (Mar 29, 2002)

The issue, Halfsek, that bothers me the most is Limbaugh's in-your-face style. He is essentially a big bully. He is at his worst when he riducules the opposition. He is at his best when he gives rational explanations without directly attacking individuals, which unfortunately is not often enough. I am not familiar with your "Kennedy" reference but if you watch any amoount of C-Span you will see that there is a certain amount of personal respect each Congressman gives each other, even those with whom they hartily disagree with. 

This in-your-face attitude is prevalent in our society to EVERYONE'S detriment. Heck, one GOP candidate for state senator in Tennessee even murdered his opponent. It just isn't cricket, old man!


----------



## MrBadGuy (Oct 3, 2003)

Wow. All these "tolerant" people seem to be out for blood. Accept your fellow man, flaws and all. Remember, WE ALL HAVE THE FREEDOM OF SPEECH. 
My list of overated QB's:
Garcia in SF, Stewart in Chicago, Collins in NY, Manning in Indy, Culpepper in Minnesota and Yes, Vick in Atlanta.
They are entertaining but they choke in playoffs.
McNabb is good, Not great. 
Look Ma, I see white people on that list. WOW!!!

That is MY opinion and Everyone has theirs.

P.S. The Eagles DEFENSE did carry the team last year.
They used 3 different QB's to make the playoffs and McNabb was the QB when they lost to Tampa Bay in the playoffs. FACT.


----------



## Richard King (Mar 25, 2002)

http://www.msnbc.com/news/975128.asp?0dm=N11QO


----------



## Bogy (Mar 23, 2002)

dtcarson said:


> I assume you meant to type 'he only lets people on who AGREE with him', not 'DISagree with him.'


No, I meant exactly what I typed. The full sentence was _In the first place he only lets people on who disagree with him when he has boasted he will talk with anyone._ About once a month or so he will make the boast that he lets people on who disagree with him. People who disagree with him then have about a 24 hour window to get on the air, because he then actually has to put someone on who disagrees with him to prove that he isn't a complete liar.


----------



## Danny R (Jul 5, 2002)

_Most times people who don't agree never make it through the screeners. _

Rush has said many times that the purpose of any caller is to make the host look good. Not allowing folks who disagree with him makes him look weak. Therefore his screeners will let people who disagree with him call in, as long as Rush has a ready answer for them that makes him look better.

_If something as relatively as innocuous as this statement of OPINION [which apparently everyone but conservatives are allowed to have] caused this much hubbub, with this little support from his employers [ESPN], I'd quit too._

Oh, conservatives aren't the only one's lambasted for their opinions. Bill Maher certainly found that out. And to his credit, Rush defended Maher, saying "This was, in my mind, one of the few things Bill Maher has ever said that's correct. In a way, he was right."

But Rush should have remembered his lesson learned long ago... stick with radio. He's stated many times that with TV you don't have control. If he didn't quit, he probably would have been canned.


----------



## James Hill (Jul 24, 2003)

It's funny how half of you can't get over the fact that what he said wasn't racist. It just had a racial component.

Of course, on the flip side, no one's talking about that pesky White House leak anymore. Score one for the Right Wing Conspiracy!

James Hill


----------



## Halfsek (Oct 29, 2002)

Bogy said:


> No, I meant exactly what I typed. The full sentence was _In the first place he only lets people on who disagree with him when he has boasted he will talk with anyone._ About once a month or so he will make the boast that he lets people on who disagree with him. People who disagree with him then have about a 24 hour window to get on the air, because he then actually has to put someone on who disagrees with him to prove that he isn't a complete liar.


Bogy, where do you get your information?
A 24 hour window to get on the air?
Did you figure this out yourself or are you just reading it on some site?

It is amazing, you'll latch onto anything that you believe will make Rush look bad.

It's useless using any number of examples to prove you wrong if you already believe stuff like this.



RichW said:


> The issue, Halfsek, that bothers me the most is Limbaugh's in-your-face style. He is essentially a big bully. He is at his worst when he riducules the opposition. He is at his best when he gives rational explanations without directly attacking individuals, which unfortunately is not often enough. I am not familiar with your "Kennedy" reference but if you watch any amoount of C-Span you will see that there is a certain amount of personal respect each Congressman gives each other, even those with whom they hartily disagree with.


Rush has been accused of being a racist, homophobe, anti Jew (that's a laugh), anti women, etc. So people being irritated at his "in your face" style is the least of it.
My point is that rational people (even those who dislike Rush) know that what he said was not racist. Yet they have no problem with Rush being accused of saying a racist thing.

That's the issue. It's hypocrisy.

Not familiar with the Kennedy remark? The one where he bashed Bush for being a gang leader and all that stuff? Sheesh, he said it just 2 weeks ago.

There are many people I dislike. But I'm not going to lower myself by attacking them for something they didn't do. It cheapens my opinion and views towards that person if I have to grab at flimsy examples to prove my point.
A perfect example is Bogy's post above. He comes out with stuff that, if looked at rationally, is silly. There is no way to prove it and if you listen to Rush's show enough you can hear that it's false.

At least you, Rich, have come up with a legitimatge problem which you have. You didn't accuse him of racism, you have a problem with his style. Many people dislike his "air of superiority". You can argue those points with a good foundation, and as a Rush fan, I can accept that while disagreeing. But I can't even begin to respect comments like Bogy's. To me it just demonstrates a blind disklike, hatred (whatever) of Rush regardless of actual fact.


----------



## Bogy (Mar 23, 2002)

Last night on _Nightline_ G Gordon Liddy (conservative enough for you?) said that Rush's biggest mistake was that he was just plain wrong. He was behind the times, living in the past. There are far to many black QB's, coaches, etc. to think that the media is going to get all excited waiting for a really good black QB. Not only that, but to think that team owners are going to hire and keep a mediocre QB just to be PQ is ridiculous.

So take your choice. Rush is:
A. Stupid
B. Racist
C. So hung up on the liberal media he is willing to shoot himself in the foot over it. (see A. above)
D. So hung up on PQ and/or affirmative action that he is willing to shoot himself in the foot over it. (again, see A. above)


----------



## James Hill (Jul 24, 2003)

If his point was about could a black be a QB then you'd be right.

But that's not what he said.

The media is getting hyper over McNabb because the NFL itself is pumping him. Why would he be promoted over any of the Super Bowl winning QBs? Why would he be promoted over better athletes (Culpepper, Vick)?

Because he's had some success, he's black, and he can be understood by a white audience.

Is it fair? Is it right? No. Does it fall in line with what Rush said? Yes.

Just turned Rush's show on. He's dodging the drug issue and doing what he does best: talk about himself. $20 says he's loving this.

James Hill


----------



## markh (Mar 24, 2002)

Would I be out of line to say that Chad Pennington is the great white hope after just one good year. I think he got plenty of hype. Is it because the media wants white quarterbacks to look good? Is that statement any less ridiculous than Rush's?


----------



## James Hill (Jul 24, 2003)

markh said:


> Would I be out of line to say that Chad Pennington is the great white hope after just one good year. I think he got plenty of hype. Is it because the media wants white quarterbacks to look good? Is that statement any less ridiculous than Rush's?


Since Rush didn't tie McNabb's performance to his race, and you did, you'd be a racist.

James Hill


----------



## Halfsek (Oct 29, 2002)

Bogy said:


> So take your choice. Rush is:
> A. Stupid
> B. Racist
> C. So hung up on the liberal media he is willing to shoot himself in the foot over it. (see A. above)
> D. So hung up on PQ and/or affirmative action that he is willing to shoot himself in the foot over it. (again, see A. above)


Man, Bogy, do you treat your parishioners this way?

How about:

E. Wrong

Which is *exactly* what you started that post with.

And guess what? That was Liddy's opnion. Just like it was Rush's opinion that the media takes it easier on black QB's.

As far as your post shows, Liddy said Rush was wrong. You then somehow take that and suggest that he's racist. Nice connection there, Bogy. Very understanding of you.


----------



## Bogy (Mar 23, 2002)

How about if I say that the media overhyped Kurt Warner because they he was a white, good looking, God fearing, challenged children of wife's first marriage loving guy who fought his way up from the bottom to win a Superbowl? He was named by the media to be the greatest QB ever. I am a Ram's fan, I have used Kurt as in illustration in sermons, he has been dogged by injuries and played injured way to much, but he just isn't living up to the hype. Media and sports are all about hype. Rush certainly understands hype, he is a master of it. Of course the NFL promotes its QB's and hypes and overhypes them. It has nothing to do with race, but everything to do with TV ratings. Do you think they would sell as many Sunday Ticket packages without the hype. If anything, the reason Rush got canned/resigned was because he forgot that hype pays the bills on sports shows.

Yes, Rush did use race as the reason that McNabb has received the hype he does. He did not recognize/acknowledge that whites and blacks alike are the recipients of hype, and pinned McNabb's hype on his race.


----------



## pjmrt (Jul 17, 2003)

markh said:


> Would I be out of line to say that Chad Pennington is the great white hope after just one good year. I think he got plenty of hype. Is it because the media wants white quarterbacks to look good? Is that statement any less ridiculous than Rush's?


ahhh.... but for the press have made just that kind of remark in the past - praising a white player succeeding in "a black man's game", it got a few chuckles and little else.

The point is color blindness should go BOTH ways. The news & sports media knee-jerk reaction pretty much proves Rush was correct. He wasn't saying bad stuff about McNabb because he was black. He was critizing the media and NFL for giving preference based on race. He touched a nerve because they know that is exactly what they've been doing. You can instantly jump on a white player and criticize him - but watch out, the PC will get you if you apply the same rules to a black player.


----------



## Bogy (Mar 23, 2002)

Halfsek said:


> Man, Bogy, do you treat your parishioners this way?
> 
> How about:
> 
> ...


Hey, it is important not only to point out that people are wrong, but dig down to the deeper issues of why a person did the wrong to help them do the right the next time. You can be wrong through a misunderstanding, you can be wrong by deliberate obstinance, you can be wrong because of selfishness, or you can be wrong because of stupidity. Knowing why you were wrong helps you to do better the next time. I am just trying to help Rush be a better person. Being racist is just one of the options.


----------



## Halfsek (Oct 29, 2002)

Bogy said:


> Hey, it is important not only to point out that people are wrong, but dig down to the deeper issues of why a person did the wrong to help them do the right the next time. You can be wrong through a misunderstanding, you can be wrong by deliberate obstinance, you can be wrong because of selfishness, or you can be wrong because of stupidity. Knowing why you were wrong helps you to do better the next time. I am just trying to help Rush be a better person. Being racist is just one of the options.


Interesting, but you don't seem to leave the option open that his thoughts were just plain off base.

You automatically assume that his incorrect belief is due to some deep down dislike of black folk.

Again, not a very good trait for someone who is suppose to be helping others.

So why didn't you put down:

E. Misunderstanding

?


----------



## Steve Mehs (Mar 21, 2002)

> How about if I say that the media overhyped Kurt Warner because they he was a white, good looking, God fearing, challenged children of wife's first marriage loving guy who fought his way up from the bottom to win a Superbowl? He was named by the media to be the greatest QB ever.


If that superbowl would have played out a little differently at the very end, Warner would have been just another QB. 

If I agree with Rush said, does that make me racist? If Someone thinks yes, read my first sentence again. My favorite team is the Titans and they were inches (feet maybe) from beating the Rams in the SB, and what race is Steve McNair? I think McNair is a damn good quarterback, as long as he stays healthy. There were games at the beginning of last season and the season before I was screaming at the TV for Fisher to bench him and put in the back up.

I never listened to Rush's radio show, I would like to very much, but I have no clue what station its on here and I don't like AM radio, but if it ever gets on XM I'll listen. Someone mentioned about mean spirited nicknames, in context is was about his radio show, but in terms of sports, that's part of it. I hate the Buffalo Bills with a passion. Before the cheerleading squad took the nickname of The Jills I called the team the Jills. I refer to Drew Bledsoe and 'Boohoo Drew'. I dislike like every member of the Buffalo Bills as a football player, whether black or white or purple, the sports media hyped the Bills after two wins, hopefully Cincy can damage their spirit even more.

Go Bengals!


----------



## Bogy (Mar 23, 2002)

Steve Mehs said:


> If that superbowl would have played out a little differently at the very end, Warner would have been just another QB.
> 
> If I agree with Rush said, does that make me racist? If Someone thinks yes, read my first sentence again. My favorite team is the Titans and they were inches (feet maybe) from beating the Rams in the SB, and what race is Steve McNair? I think McNair is a damn good quarterback, as long as he stays healthy. There were games at the beginning of last season and the season before I was screaming at the TV for Fisher to bench him and put in the back up.


That was the most exciting SB I have watched in my entire life. Of course I was sightly happier about the end than you were, but it was great. Even/especially the part right at the end where my heart stopped for about 12 seconds. Where a black defensive player saved the game by about 10 inches. Have to watch the tape again to get the official measurement.

Warner has been overhyped, Bulgar is now being overhyped, and McNair is overhyped. Nothing to do with race, everything to do with marketing.


----------



## Bogy (Mar 23, 2002)

Halfsek said:


> Interesting, but you don't seem to leave the option open that his thoughts were just plain off base.
> 
> You automatically assume that his incorrect belief is due to some deep down dislike of black folk.
> 
> ...


I thought I covered that with the "stupid" category.  :sure:

After all, I will be the first to admit that we all do things that are stupid at times. Some just make it a constant lifestyle choice.


----------



## James Hill (Jul 24, 2003)

Good lord. I didn't know there was a religion of stupidity, but Bogy must fit right in there.

Again, Rush did not state McNabb is overrated because he is black. Rush said he is overrated because the media wants to see a black QB succeed.

If you can't see the difference between the two (that Rush was calling the media racist it a round-about way, and that has lead to disapointment in McNabb) then you're not intelligent enough to participate in this debate.

James Hill


----------



## Timco (Jun 7, 2002)

It's "Beat Up Bogy Week" in the Sports forum! :lol: No wonder he dosen't post here very often. 
The problem I have with this whole mess is that Rush didn't have any stats to back up his claim. It's one thing to bring up the subject with research, it's another to just spout off without backing it up. He comes off racist because he didn't research the subject. He was going for controversy and he got it. He just didn't think it would bite him in the a$$.


----------



## Halfsek (Oct 29, 2002)

But people have come up with stats to back up his claim.

His position there was one of a "sports fan," not necessarily an analyst like the other guys on ESPN.

When I'm talking with my buddies about hockey, I say, "Patrick Roy is overrated"
"Sure he's a very good goalie, but his numbers are very much helped by his great defense"

Just like McNabb. Limbaugh never said he was a bad player, just that the media was giving him too much credit for the success of the team.

In fact, Limbaugh we giving a lot of kudos to the defense of the team. I don't know the number, but I'd guess that a fairly high percentage of those players are black.


----------



## Timco (Jun 7, 2002)

But the QB is always given too much credit for wins and losses. McNabb was celebrated because he was a dynamic athlete, not because he was black. Rush needed to state some evidence that the media was playing favorites.
Saying he was just a "sports fan" is a cop out.


----------



## Bogy (Mar 23, 2002)

James Hill said:


> Good lord. I didn't know there was a religion of stupidity, but Bogy must fit right in there.


You didn't realize that? Stupidism is one of the largest religions in the world, with billions of adherants. I am indeed one of the priests of this religion, and you are obviously one of my faithful followers.



> Again, Rush did not state McNabb is overrated because he is black. Rush said he is overrated because the media wants to see a black QB succeed.


Semantics.


----------



## dtcarson (Jan 10, 2003)

Bogy said:


> You didn't realize that? Stupidism is one of the largest religions in the world, with billions of adherants. I am indeed one of the priests of this religion, and you are obviously one of my faithful followers.
> 
> Semantics.


That's not semantics, that's the whole point.
If Rush, or anyone, said 'Person X is good/bad at something because s/he's black/white/Asian/male/female', that by definition is racism/bigotry/stereotyping.

But if Rush, or someone, says 'This other third party wants for a *blank* to do well, Person X is a *blank*, so they're hyping/overrating him' is vastly different from the above, and if anything, is pointing out racism in the third party; that they are wanting Person X to do well because he's a blank, not because he's good or a nice guy or something. That is not the same thing at all. I think that's where the confusion came in--Rush, a wellknown conservative, mentioned race, so obviously [according to people who already don't like him], he's racist [since that in itself is yet another example of stereotying/bigotry--"conservatives are racist"].


----------



## Bogy (Mar 23, 2002)

dtcarson said:


> That's not semantics, that's the whole point.
> If Rush, or anyone, said 'Person X is good/bad at something because s/he's black/white/Asian/male/female', that by definition is racism/bigotry/stereotyping.
> 
> But if Rush, or someone, says 'This other third party wants for a *blank* to do well, Person X is a *blank*, so they're hyping/overrating him' is vastly different from the above, and if anything, is pointing out racism in the third party; that they are wanting Person X to do well because he's a blank, not because he's good or a nice guy or something. That is not the same thing at all. I think that's where the confusion came in--Rush, a wellknown conservative, mentioned race, so obviously [according to people who already don't like him], he's racist [since that in itself is yet another example of stereotying/bigotry--"conservatives are racist"].


But Rush wouldn't say anything as blatant as "Person X is whatever because of Blank. He is much to clever for that (in a stupid way of course  ). That is why liberals have learned to interpret "conservative speak" and can easily pick up subtle racism whenever it raises its ugly head. :grin:


----------



## Halfsek (Oct 29, 2002)

Bogy said:


> But Rush wouldn't say anything as blatant as "Person X is whatever because of Blank. He is much to clever for that (in a stupid way of course  ). That is why liberals have learned to interpret "conservative speak" and can easily pick up subtle racism whenever it raises its ugly head. :grin:


You put the perfect little smily at the end of that.
Sort of the 'cuckoo' one. Which is exactly what your explanation was... cuckoo. 
You have to interpret conservative speak. That's very convenient. Since you're doing the interpreting, you get to decide whether or not it's okay.

Nice little gimmick you've got going on there. :grin:


----------



## Bogy (Mar 23, 2002)

Halfsek said:



> You put the perfect little smily at the end of that.
> Sort of the 'cuckoo' one. Which is exactly what your explanation was... cuckoo.
> You have to interpret conservative speak. That's very convenient. Since you're doing the interpreting, you get to decide whether or not it's okay.
> 
> Nice little gimmick you've got going on there. :grin:


We liberals have learned and adapted this trick from experts like Rush.


----------



## markh (Mar 24, 2002)

James Hill said:


> Since Rush didn't tie McNabb's performance to his race, and you did, you'd be a racist.
> 
> James Hill


Look, he dragged race into it. If he had said McNabb was over rated and the defense was responsible for the Eagles success, nobody would have cared. I don't think he is a racist, but he did go on to say because McNabb is black, the media goes easy on him so he would appear to be more successful than he really is.

My post said the same thing about Pennington. Is it any different to say Pennington got hyped after one year because the press wants to see a young white guy to succeed than what Rush said about McNabb? McNabb did get flak for the way he played in the first two games this year. Where did he get criticized? Hmmm, the media maybe? Anyway, thanks for calling me a racist.


----------



## billpa (Jul 11, 2003)

Many people have been attacked because they called Rush a racist. But Rush has done the same thing...he's called the Media racist.

He said they (the media) only hyped McNabb because he's black. Rush is saying media members are acting in a certain way regarding McNabb because of the color of his skin--that's racism isn't it?

Also Rush is full of it when he talks about the First Amendment being thrown out the window. People were certainly very loud when attacking him, but the "1st" is a two-way street. Just because he's being attacked for exercising his rights doesn't mean those rights were being denied him.


----------



## James Hill (Jul 24, 2003)

Bogy, if anything is clear, its that you've lost another debate.

By follower, you must mean the guy behind you with his boot stuck in your ass.

Markh, you're failing to see the difference in the statements. Words mean things, as Rush is fond of saying, and he lived up to this by making a coment about race without stating anything beyond him thinking McNabb is overrated.

Semantics, indeed.

James Hill


----------



## Halfsek (Oct 29, 2002)

billpa said:


> Also Rush is full of it when he talks about the First Amendment being thrown out the window. People were certainly very loud when attacking him, but the "1st" is a two-way street. Just because he's being attacked for exercising his rights doesn't mean those rights were being denied him.


Did Rush say that? 
Even so, he's not full of it. This episode proves that we're not free to say something which is arguably provacative. This could have been a great opportunity for a debate/ discussion or whatever.

But those on the left instantly called for Rush's firing; simply becuase they didn't like what he said.


----------



## markh (Mar 24, 2002)

Wait a minute, the First Amendment covers the government limiting speech. If the company you work for doesn't like what you say, they have a right to fire you or ask for your resignation. Rush has argued many times on his show that corporations should be allowed to hire and fire at their whim.

He certainly isn't being silenced, he has a radio show heard by a lot of people. He was free to say what was provocative but then had to live with the consequences of his words. Much like Bill Mahr who lost his show over a provocative statement.


----------



## Richard King (Mar 25, 2002)

> Wait a minute, the First Amendment covers the government limiting speech. If the company you work for doesn't like what you say, they have a right to fire you or ask for your resignation. Rush has argued many times on his show that corporations should be allowed to hire and fire at their whim.


Bingo!! We have a winner. While I agree with everything Rush said, ABC is, and should be, free to fire him for whatever reason they desire. The 1st has nothing to do with it. I do have a bit of a problem with the policos, especially those in public office, of the left (or right) calling for his or anyone's firing though.


----------

