The circus continues: Limbaugh, Checketts and the St. Louis Rams
by Ryan Van Bibber on Oct 15, 2009 3:05 PM CDT
Email
PrintIn or out, and now he's out, you knew that the Rush Limbaugh, St. Louis Rams firestorm wasn't going to go away this easily.
El Rushbo used his removal from Dave Checketts' group of prospective buyers to drum up ratings for his show today, lashing out at those he felt were responsible. It's sadly predictable...and avoidable.
Regardless of where you fall on the left or right spectrum and your opinion on Limbaugh, think how different this situation might have been had Rush come out as soon as the news broke that he was involved in a potential ownership bid for the Rams and assured people that his past statements, i.e. McNabb, were in the past and that he would keep his politics/day job out of his role as a partial owner of the Rams. It might have been a different situation entirely. The thing is he can't back himself away from those statements, not without compromising his reputation as a pundit, the job that puts the kind of money in his pocket in the first place.
You can blame Jesse Jackson, Obama, Roger Goodell or whatever other straw man you want, but the same thing would hold true for Michael Moore. Of course, Moore never made an unprovoked statement about a popular NFL player, and the NFL is a tight-knit, closed society that doesn't take kindly to one of their own being talked about like that.
Frankly, I wouldn't want anyone, right or left, involved in the Rams if they couldn't distance their football and politics. I'm an incredibly cynical guy, and my political beliefs can best be categorized as agnostic. I generally disdain ideologies of all kinds. And I think guys like Rush or Michael Moore do too; they've just realized that they can make piles of money by pretending to be angry about something.
More thoughts on Checketts
Checketts has done a great job with the St. Louis Blues, and it seems like that's mostly been the result of handing the operation over to dedicated hockey guys, something he'd be doing with the Rams with Devaney et al in place. Seems like a shwred enough guy, but the claim made by Limbaugh that Checketts had cleared his involvement with people at the "highest level" of the NFL makes me wonder about his competency for NFL ownership.
Did he really check? I just can't help think that he just needed another money man and knew Limbaugh had the money, an expressed interest in NFL ownership and a connection to Missouri. Right or wrong, I could have told you that bringing Limbaugh into the fold would invite controversy. Why didn't Checketts undertake a preemptive PR blitz to smoothe it over as much as possible? There's something missing here.
The smart money is still on Stan Kroenke.
21 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Pathetic!
Straw men like Jesse Jackson? Do you watch any news… Jackson used a balls out lie to slander Limbaugh. And by you refusing to fact check yourself, you are in perpetuating the same slander as those the made of those phony quotes. Your post here shows nothing but dishonest journalism on your part, and brings controversy to the credibility of this blog. Van Ram, what you just pulled here is a complete disgrace.
Can we all start a campaign too have the Rooney’s ousted from the NFL!
I'm not a journalist
and I don’t claim to be. I don’t agree with Jesse Jackson anymore than I do Rush. All I’m saying is that the guy knew that people would take issue with what he did for a living, which is advocate a particular political agenda (and I’m not saying his agenda is right or wrong), but he did nothing to put some distance between that and his bid to own part of an NFL team. All he had to say was I won’t let my politics influence my role as part owner of a team. He couldn’t do that, and he did nothing at all to reach out to his critics.
Turf Show Times
by Ryan Van Bibber on Oct 15, 2009 4:46 PM CDT up reply actions
So in other words, he needed to apologize for everything that he believes in to be an NFL owner. Would you hold that same standard for every other owner in the league? My point is that whether your a Conservative, Liberal or Moderate it shouldn’t matter one bit what your political beliefs are. This is America, and we should all have the right to stand for what we believe and still be a part of society. The St. Louis Rams over the years have overwhelmingly donated money to liberal politicians, yet as someone like myself who is more right of center I have never let that stop me from supporting this team. I just want the same tolerance all the way around for all people.
I agree with you
that a person’s political beliefs don’t matter. The NFL, however, has a different perspective. I don’t think Rush should have had to apologize for what he does for a living, but he would have done himself a big favor by telling people that his politics wouldn’t factor into his role as a partial owner. This was a much bigger issue because he shot himself in the foot a long time ago with the McNabb statement. He should have done something to put the other NFL owners and players, etc. at ease over that.
Turf Show Times
by Ryan Van Bibber on Oct 15, 2009 5:00 PM CDT up reply actions
He’s talked about the McNabb comment many times, even if he were to apologize (which i think he shouldn’t) it wouldn’t matter because its a political which hunt by liberal sports writers and others. The McNabb thing however wasn’t even the biggest issue this time around, it was the phony slavery quote that no one can find a reference too (Jesse Jackson) and the James Earl Jones phony quote that no one can find a source to. It’s all lies!
Rooney Campaign??
Let’s start with the self-rightous Jim Irsay. He’s the one who threw his Mother and family under the bus to grab the Colts! He’s got some nerve pointing a finger at Rush. Two peas in a pod!
Last Super Bowl many of us had to endear the owner of the Steelers bow at the alter of Obama. Quite honestly, it made me sick as there is no bigger divisive figure in our society right now than the current President. But you what, that’s his opinion and he has a right to express it as much as it leaves a bad taste in my mouth. My point is that if political opinions can disqualify you from being an NFL owner than that standard should be held for everyone equally.
Ban Rams8888
He obviously just made an account to spam his personal website. Lifelong Rams fan my ass. And the fact that Obama ‘divided’ freaks like him from the socially functional members of society is a good thing.
Let's just all agree
that with the departure of Rush, there are other opportunities now for someone to fill his spot…such as Marshall Faulk?
Your uncle molests collies.
Ban Me?
You dont even know me!
What, i cant have a political site and be a Rams fan at the same time?
You calling for a ban of me shows your intolerance.
Tell you, lets play Rams trivia, me and you one on one!
The difference between Rooney and Rush
is that Rush let his politics interfere with his former role in the NFL as a broadcaster when he criticized a respected NFL player (McNabb) who did nothing to provoke such claims. Rooney making his support for Obama or any owner making their support for an elected political leader public is quite a bit different.
Turf Show Times
by Ryan Van Bibber on Oct 15, 2009 4:53 PM CDT reply actions
The problem with that argument is that Rush was referencing the media when he made the McNabb comment. Just like the mainstream media had an overwhelming interest in getting Barack Obama elected under the premise of ’making history"
But what about in week one that same year when Rush defended black coaches form that stupid Rooney rule that patronized black coaches… that was Rush defending potential black coaches. Does he get any credit for that? No just what the liberals can distort to get their revenge only 3 weeks before the McNabb comment.
agree with it or not
the NFL is a closed bunch and they don’t like attacks on their members from the outside.
The man makes a living from controversial statements, and that bothers a lot of people, his NFL as Bloods and Crips statement for instance.
Turf Show Times
by Ryan Van Bibber on Oct 15, 2009 5:08 PM CDT up reply actions
Yes, but that’s Rush. He calls it for like he sees it. When there’s acts of incivility on the field he justifiably calls it so, but he also praises the athletes by addressing there special talents. Call it a perspective, but if higher standards were demanded more often our society and even the NFL could be a better place.
So the only acts of incivility
Happen between Crips and Bloods? It was a clearly racist parallel. He’s such a fat, predictable pig.
Predictable, the guy that called for a ban on me is now pulling out the race card. I knew it was coming, just didnt think you would pull it out this soon.
If you believe that there are not major character issues in all sports right now than you in are in LA LA Land. (Pac Man Jones, Michael Vick just to name two off the top of my head). But I guess pointing out the facts makes people racists… what logic!
That gold microphone
represents the corporate wang Rush deepthroats. The Rams would have just lost him money.. surprised he’s not sugarcoating it that way.
Rush is a fat, disgusting, hypocritical pig
He once said that all drug abusers be jailed while popping Oxy like it was candy. What a moron.
alright name calling is not permissible at TST
comments closed.
Turf Show Times
by Ryan Van Bibber on Oct 15, 2009 6:28 PM CDT reply actions
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.
