Limbaugh makes ownership a "me vs. them" issue
by Ryan Van Bibber on Oct 13, 2009 1:14 PM CDT
in News
Email
PrintI'm almost loathe to wade into discussion of Rush Limbaugh and his role in bidding on the St. Louis Rams, but it's hard to avoid. Run a Google search for the Rams and you'd be hard pressed to find anything but Rush-related news. Of course, the Rams aren't giving people much to talk about with their performance, so how's that go...all press is good press? Whatever.
Here's Rush on NBC's Today show, today (via the PD).
They’re gonna go nuts. This is the kind of stuff they’ve been trying to make sure doesn’t happen with me. All this stuff is the mainstreaming of Rush Limbaugh from off this far-right fringe they’ve tried to put me [in]. I just keep tiptoeing into the mainstream. And it just irritates them.
What bothers me most about his statement is the "me vs. the world" aspect. First of all, you have to suspend belief a little when people with enough money to purchase part of a NFL team claim the world is against them. And therein lies the problem: be gracious about it, leave the oppressed meme for your radio show, where it's making money. The reason people are opposed to Rush being an NFL owner is because of his divisive remarks. The best way to take the oxygen out of that debate would be to leave the schtick for the radio, and assure people that your politics will not factor in to your role as (partial) owner.
His inability to seperate his regular gig from the world of NFL ownership is what bothers me the most and makes me think that his entrance into the league's ownership circles might not be a good thing after all.
63 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Lifelong Ram Fan
If that hate mongering drug addict buys into the Rams I will be getting a new favorite team. I have been a lifelong Ram fan but there is no way I could support anything that lunatic is involved in.
But...
what about those of us who love what he has to say? I might be more tempted to actually buy a ticket and thus make up for you!
by football 101 on Oct 13, 2009 2:06 PM CDT up reply actions
Rams fan
So VanRam, what your saying is that we don’t need an owner who makes divisive statements because of the players with high morals (and arrest records) might be offended?
it's not the players I'm worried about
I’m just not comfortable with a guy, left or right, who makes divisive statements by day to bring that to his perspective as an owner. What bothers me about his statement above is that he already is making this an issue of “them against me” something appropriate for his radio show, but not for a potential NFL owner.
Turf Show Times
by Ryan Van Bibber on Oct 13, 2009 2:19 PM CDT up reply actions
VanRam
VanRam-My prior post was for SportOMania. However, I can relate my thoughts to everyone who fears an owner-He (Rush) won’t be in a position like Al Davis, but will in fact back way off if he is able to buy into the Rams. His presents is almost a non-issue and not related to the NFL. Remember that Bernie Madoff financed (or made possible) other Lending operations in the NFL. Limbaugh is a small fry.
I’ve been a Ram fan since they became a team. At 70+ I can still throw a lamp thru my TV and invent words. And my wife is even more radical than I am. BUT-over all these years, we have seen many investors buy into many teams, and some make Limbaugh look like a choir-boy. Only in very rare cases do Pro Football players play for the personality of the Owners/shareholders especially when those players rotate from team to team. Ever hear of a Pro player turn down a big contract because of a political issue? Support your team with the fevor you show in your post and we’ll fill the stadium. GO RAMS!!!!!
Dave Checketts
is in the bid with him too.
I’m interested to see who would be in charge of what…Rush really isn’t a football guy (doesn’t seem to be), but he seems like an egomaniac, so I’m not sure what he would let someone else control should he be the main money man.
I believe in 2010
he's very much a football guy
he talks about football all the time on his show
by cardsfansouth on Oct 13, 2009 3:59 PM CDT up reply actions
You Are Missing the Point...
It is a me vs the world for Rush. Everyone out there is putting in their two cents about why he should not be an owner. Get over it, he has the money, and he shoudl be an owner. Maybe he would shake things up. This is the same league that did not want Mark Cuban, because he woudl make them rethink all of this bs about no celibrations, and putting the qb’s and wr ’s in petticoats. Real players like Mr.Tatum could never play under todays rules.
Agree and Disagree
I am a forever listener of ElRushbo. I listen to his actual words. He is not racist. He can be controversial only if you dont agree with him. However I agree that with his high profile politics I do not want him buying a team unless he gives up the radio show. Mixing politics and sports drives me nuts.
Idon't understand you hate....
I believe that he would have to go through the same vetting process that all other owners have to go through. After that I think he would be accepted as a minority owner.
SportOMania – I can’t believe that you would say those things about Rush and not take into consideration a few other facts. Those facts would be Ray Lewis, Michael Vick, Plaxico Burress, Packman Jones…blah, blah, blah. See my point. The league is filled with alot of people that do drugs, have gun problems and assault there spouse or girlfriend. Using those qualification half the people in the NFL should be playing.
Just because you disagree with his politics doesn’t mean you can hold his feet to the fire about things and NOT do the same thing with everybody else in the league. I believe we haven’t settled the case of a head coach punching and assisant coach.
Rush was referring to the amount of issues involving players, coaches and owners that have been involved with the police. You would have to admit that the players have had issues.
My point is everybody should be judged equally.
Sure the players have had issues and I am not a fan of any of those you mentioned. In fact I’d like to have seen Ray Lewis stand trial for murder rather than pleading out to obstruction if justice. I never said Limbaugh didn’t have the right to buy the Rams, I just stated I will get a new favorite team.
Rush is what he is
This is nothing new with this guy. He likes to play this us against them thing and frankly it’s a big reason that there is a division happening in this country. He is able to buy a football team because of his stance and it’s unfortunate. I have been a Rams fan for 35 years but I will not support them anymore if this guy is the owner(s).
Rush makes this a "me vs. them" issue....and the sky is blue.
If you want your owner to overshadow your team, get Rush in there. Statements like this strike me as evidence that his ego won’t let the team be about football; instead of being the Rams they’ll be Rush’s Rams.
Rename the team the Rushtards
Recruit the lily whites from the trailer parks. Put hoods over their helmets. Think of all the fun!!! While the gas bag continues to pontificate his brand of drug addled hatred.
I congratulate the bold move of this modern day Goebbels of the Republican Party.
be advised
that comment is not appropriate for the discussion. Saying that you disagree with his politics is enough. I want to make sure that TST remains a civil forum for ALL fans to discuss the Rams.
Turf Show Times
by Ryan Van Bibber on Oct 13, 2009 4:12 PM CDT up reply actions
Its not a matter of like/dislike
Rush Limbaugh does not meet the ethics clause of the NFL
The guy was banned from ESPN, and as to whether the guy is a racist, well if your going to use the reverse-racism arguement that has been endorsed by the KKK as a consistent talking point, well that kinda means you are endorsing the KKK.
There is good reason that the top race-baiter in the nation is being rejected by the NFL. If for no other reason than this. There’s no crying in Football. So there just isn’t any room for Conservative Crybaby Commentators.
VanRam? Toeing the line?
As for an actual flaw in your argument:
Just because two people or entities share an opinion on a point does not mean they would endorse the whole platform of the other. For example, believing that the Treaty of Versailles was unfair to the Germans does not mean I endorse the Nazi Party.
Does this qualify as Godwin’s Law? Maybe not, but I tried…
by BruinHalo on Oct 13, 2009 9:26 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions
This is ridiculous
Rush is not a racist. Those peope who think he is do not listen to his show. Listen to his show for a week and stop getting your talking points from the internet and then make those claims. Since when did having certain political views become a requirement for owning an NFL team? All of you can say he makes divisive statements all you want, but the simple truth is that Rush is being attacked and discriminated against simply because some of you do not like him. That is NOT a valid reason to block someone from becoming an owner of an NFL team. And what do Rush’s views have to do with his ability to become a part owner, anyway? Lastly, that ownership group wants to keep the Rams in St. Louis, which is something that I am extremely happy about. Wise up, people.
Rush is die-hard-rescist
He makes money by talking about people and dito heads likes it. He is not educated, but just big mouth sob
You just proved my point
There is no way you actually listen to his show if you think that
by cardsfansouth on Oct 14, 2009 4:33 PM CDT up reply actions
Fine Line
Please try and keep the tone of this civil.
Rather than insinuate the guy’s a racist or not, it’s more appropriate to state that his comments do bother people. I know this is tough to discuss without getting into the politics, but let’s make every effort to do so.
thanks,
Van
Turf Show Times
by Ryan Van Bibber on Oct 13, 2009 4:15 PM CDT reply actions
Let's try to look at this rationally
I’ll remove my political bias and try to look at this from above the fray. I would guess that there would be as many people who would “boycott” the team, or just abandon the Rams because of their disdain for Rush as their are Rush fans who would then jump on the Rams bandwagon simply because he’s attached. From business perspective, this doesn’t seem to really lose much either way, except what group has more disposable income. And the idea that a “star” owner brings in more money is bogus. Just because the Mavs are owned by Cuban doesn’t affect their bottom line any more than if they were owned by Boring McBoringFace. Al Davis, while he draws headlines and offers fodder for fans, doesn’t really bring in or drive away fans, IMO. So I don’t think the notoriety of an owner makes any difference.
Again, bear in mind that as ram rod noted above, Rush would be a member of a group, led by Dave Checketts, who would purchasing a portion of the team. Don’t forget Stan Kroenke is a part owner as well.
Your uncle molests collies.
I think you're right about this
I think all the talk about jumping ship is exaggerated, and that it would probably be a wash either way. In all honesty, I don’t care who owns the Rams as long as they can get us a winning team and keep the Rams in St. Louis. If Rush has the money to be part owner and he’s committed to helping put a winning team on the field, more power to him.
by cardsfansouth on Oct 13, 2009 4:37 PM CDT up reply actions
i think this is less the issue
the approval has to come from the other owners, so they will be doing their own projections on how Rush owning the Rams will help their OWN teams. and the number of people jumping on the bandwagon and going to more games b/c Rush owns the Rams is low. the number of people who would give up on the NFL b/c they let a figure like Rush own a team is higher. thus, it seems an unnecessary risk for other owners, particularly if their is another ownership group out their willing to buy the Rams.
by gotyourselfastew on Oct 13, 2009 5:23 PM CDT up reply actions
Is there any evidence that it would cause a larger exodus than growth?
I think a bigger issue for the Rams fanbase and in terms of selling merch and tickets., get the owner that will make the team more competitive. I think perennial suckitude is worse than a divisive owner.
by BruinHalo on Oct 13, 2009 9:31 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions
What a disingenuous, misleading quote. It’s obvious that VanRams is content simply hijacking snippets from other sites to push an agenda.
Rush’s quote above was not said by Rush out of nowhere — it was a response to a direct question on the Today Show.
Be a real writer and watch the interview instead of relying on a snippet of someone else’s snippet of a cropped, out-of-context quote.
i did see it
and I felt like he used that as entre for a me against the world statement. I don’t like mixing sports and politics and if i were to support this decision (not that it matters) i would like to see him rise above that. There again, this is a matter of perspective and a reason why it’s important to take our politics out of the debate.
Turf Show Times
by Ryan Van Bibber on Oct 13, 2009 8:17 PM CDT up reply actions
As for the divisiveness...
How is Rush to blame for the ideological divide in the nation? Is he, or anyone for that matter, not allowed to speak his mind and explain his desire for our nation to approach economic issues with conservative solutions?
I’d say our President is more divisive than Limbaugh. Limbaugh didn’t have 1.5 million people march in protest on his policies.
we're not having this discuss here
there are much more appropriate places on the web for it
Turf Show Times
by Ryan Van Bibber on Oct 13, 2009 8:18 PM CDT up reply actions
LIAR
Why are you spreading lies? ABC said this about the protest:
“]As Josh Marshall reported at TalkingPointsMemo, the fire department estimated the crowd at 60,000 to 70,000 people — a “respectable” size, but nowhere near the order of magnitude that ABC says Kibbe claimed."
http://rawstory.com/blog/2009/09/abc-fights-back-protest-size/
Secondly, President Obama is not trying to buy a football team.
I don't see how any of this adds to this conversation.
Especially the childish name calling.
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
Again...
is it possible to attempt to have some sort of constructive discussion regarding this? If not, and you have a thought, please keep it to yourself.
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
ugh
this is getting out of hand. can we please talk about the football aspect of this?
by stlcardinalsfang on Oct 13, 2009 7:02 PM CDT reply actions
This is the part I don't get.
Why is Dave Checkett’s partnering with Rush?
On one hand, I really like Dave Checketts. I’d LOVE for him to be an owner of the Rams. But on the other hand, I get skeptical about why he wants Rush in the fold…..and it’s got to be all about the money.
I really think Checketts had his heart set on Jack Taylor but he’s taken a big hit in the wallet this past year, so I guess DC went to the only other guy who is making money right now and that’s Rush.
I’d just be so much more excited it the group was headed by Checketts and Taylor. Then we could call the Dome the Starship Enterprise or something….
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
then you should be
smarter about what you post van ram
you cant post this and expect people to keep it to just football
One can hope...
Be more aggressive VanRam in moderating content. Even if 95% of the comments are political, the 5% left will make us look classy, rational and disinterested in politics.
by BruinHalo on Oct 13, 2009 9:35 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions
wrong
you can talk about the role of politics in the discussion around Rush, but we do not need to get into the actual left vs right debate here.
Turf Show Times
by Ryan Van Bibber on Oct 14, 2009 6:35 AM CDT up reply actions
My Two Cents......
i am not a big Rush fan, i can say i live with or without him. My opinion is, that its not up to us to decide. let the NFL decide if he can be an owner. My concern is, say there is a peyton manning type QB who is a free agent and he’s black and we want him……..now both the rams and another team offer him around the same money…….which team does he go to? will we lose a top notch QB because our owner is controversial? If so, then i do not want Rush as the owner of the Rams
Rams Must Win In 2010.........2009 Is For Rebuilding, So Dont Expect Much
Chris Long Needs At Least 3 Years To Be A Great DE....Give Him A Chance
As Long As We Keep Losing, Dont Expect Any Respect From Anyone
Talk About Conflict Of Interest
Deon Sanders says that he has “100 kids” in the NFL that he advises………and he is a co host on the NFL Network, with the ability to talk a player up or down. If one of his players is up for a contract, all he has to do is talk that player up for a couple of months. I know that teams do their own homework on players and dont rely on deion’s opinion, but he can sway viewers’ opinions on someone……maybe im not explaining it right, but can you guys see the conflict of interest?
Rams Must Win In 2010.........2009 Is For Rebuilding, So Dont Expect Much
Chris Long Needs At Least 3 Years To Be A Great DE....Give Him A Chance
As Long As We Keep Losing, Dont Expect Any Respect From Anyone
No to Drugist
This guy spew more hatred than good and he is not good for organization. He is lethal to public and he is going to divide NFL and reduce it to a radio talk show.
Tjopijaa...
what you’ve just said [throughout this entire fanpost] is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response [throughout this entire fanpost] were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
The 20 year itch
Here’s to all our Bloggers who would like to come back and figure out (for the Coaches) what they should do and how they should conduct the game! We’ll show em!!
Old Ram Coaches show that Pace and Companies departure was nothing new. I’m still PO’ed after 20 years!
Seattle Seahawks Catch Rams’ Johnnie Johnson in Free Agency
March 23, 1989
The winds of change, blowing briskly through Anaheim these days, swept out another Ram Wednesday when veteran free safety Johnnie Johnson announced that he was taking the money and running his 32-year-old body to the Seattle Seahawks.
Johnson, a nine-year veteran and a mainstay of the Ram secondary for nearly a decade, has agreed to terms with the Seahawks on a two-year contract. Johnson was one of 19 Ram players left unprotected last month when the National Football League loosened its chokehold on the terms of “free agency.” Johnson, thus, was free to negotiate with any team and was not subject to compensation. Terms of his deal were not immediately known, though he will reportedly earn at least double his annual Ram salary of $200,000, which Johnson was to receive this year and next. His total package, including reachable incentives, could be worth in excess of $500,000 a season. It was an offer Johnson couldn’t refuse.
Not to A Racist...
Thanks to The NFL and their good judgement about Mr. Rush!!!!
Don’t let this maniac with A big mouth buy his way into football.
There’s that saying be careful what u wish for Mr. Rush, don’t you wish you never said all that crap you said in the past.
You’re not good for Humanity, you’re an evil man. Give a chance to human that deserves better than you. You don’t get My Vote…
Not one likes you big mouth…
Rush Limbaugh
If Mr Rush Limbaugh gets part-ownership of the Rams, I strongly urge two things: (1) return the Rams logo to the city of Los Angeles, and (2) change the name of the team to the St Louis Bigots! I cannot believe that there is actually something worse than a winless season for the team that so far has the most pathetic performance in the NFL!!!
Isn't it amazing what a little Rush talk can do for
blog memberships? There must be a dozen brand spanking new accounts right here in this thread. All signed up on October 13th. All making their first appearance on TST right here.
I think we can all be thankful…………..
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
yeah....I wasn't being sincere....
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
i know
your sarcastic comment was met with another sarcastic comment. gotta love the mob
by stlcardinalsfang on Oct 14, 2009 12:49 PM CDT up reply actions
Rush not liked because he has courage to say things
he is not a media coward to the political correctness crowds. Al Sharpton and jesse jackson just don’t like him because Rush exposes them for the frauds that they are. It seems people with his views are crucified for their beliefs by the ruling liberal elites and many owners of the NFL cater to these people
Soccer is for people to small and wussy for real football
Yankees and Red Sox ...buying your way into playoffs every year
Dear andy
You make me laugh. And your signature is weak. Are you james535?
Your uncle molests collies.
Andy's just angry because
the owner of his favorite team publically said he’d vote against Rush….
He’s also angry because he’s a fan of the Chicago Fire, yet doesn’t seem to like Soccer………maybe it should be confusedandy….
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
If this is what the specter of Rush ownership has done to this board...
…just imagine what it would be like if he actually owned the team. Everything even remotely related to the Rams would become a quasi-political issue.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
