![The Mohican Board! [Bumppo's Redux!]](images/wwwboard.gif "The Mohican Board! [Bumppo's Redux!]") |
|
 |
|
|
 | The Sad Rush Limbaugh/NFL Saga!
This message was posted by
richfed
on October 17 2009 at 5:00:
.:. 610 times viewed
.. There are 6 replies to this post
|
 |
This is sorry ...
So, conservative radio talk-show host Rush Limbaugh was set to be a part owner of the St. Louis Rams NFL franchise ... or, at least, was applying to be as part of a group. Rush is a huge football fan and has a lot of money, so he would seem to be an ideal owner in the NFL, right? Apparently not. No, not in these sad times ...
You see, Rush was accused of being a ... well ... what ... guess ... right ... a racist. Well, of course! Though I certainly wouldn't include all Democrats in this category, it would seem that the most left-leaning followers of that party have this severe aversion to honest discourse. They can't debate, they can only make accusations, and their favorite one is to call an opponent a racist. Someday, this tactic will grow old and ineffective, but as of now, it always seems to bring about miraculous results for the accuser. It did this time. And Rush was unceremoniously dumped.
[more to come - I am testing the weblog function I added to this forum]
If you listen to Rush - and, I mean REALLY listen, with open mind and heart - not just hear the regurgitations of the media with their misrepresentative sound bites and outright lies [as in this case] - you know that Rush is not a racist. In fact, sitting in there in the booth as his left-hand man is none other than a guy known as Snerdley, a black man. I love it!
It all started with a Wikipedia article. You all know Wikipedia - the online encyclopedia that anyone can add to and edit, clearly making it unassailable as a biased source ...  The article quoted Rush - falsely - with some racist statements. The mainstream media - from ESPN to MSNBC to CNN - in their constant mission of reporting the news in an unbiased fashion - picked up the story and ran with it, no questions asked. Juan Williams, a black man, on a FOX news show was told to "go back to the porch" by another guest, also a black man, because he defended Rush. Marcellus Wiley, former NFL player [I hate to admit it, but he played on my beloved Cowboys for a year, or two], was on ESPN saying that Rush's racism [and his audience's] was too divisive to allow him into the NFL. He said 70% of the NFL was black, the implication, of course, being that they were all against Rush coming aboard. It goes on and on ... disgraceful stuff all over the airwaves. Honest discourse ...
And, Rush was dumped ... YAY!!!! What a wonderful ending! "Diversity" lives in the NFL! Once again tolerance and understanding prevail!!! Oh yeah! Go LEFT!
But then ...
Mission accomplished, the retractions began the very next day. The statements attributed to Rush were lies, couldn't be verified, etc., etc. NOBODY could produce the words they said Rush had uttered. NOBODY. And the whole media world was reporting it as truth just a day before. Honest discourse ...
But, folks, it gets worse ... more to come.
I quote here, in it's entirety:
quote:
I have been a faithful Rush Limbaugh radio show listener for almost 20 years. I have never heard Rush make one racist comment. As a matter of fact, I am a black man who has been inspired and encouraged by Rush on numerous occasions. Rush is part of a partnership bidding to purchase an NFL football team. I am highly offended watching the liberal medias all out assault on this great American. In their efforts to block Rush from ownership of a team, the liberal media and the Left are attempting to brand Rush as a racist.
The medias charges of racism against Rush are totally based on supposed racist quotes which cannot be documented and comments knowingly taken out of context from his radio show. As a member of Rushs weekly 20 million listening audience, I take the assault on him personally. If Rush is a racist, then isnt it logical to assume that we, his listeners, are equally guilty for tolerating his racism? Obviously, Rushs accusers have never listened to his radio show or else have an agenda. It is truly disheartening and infuriating to witness the medias frenzied character assassination of Rush built on falsehoods and hearsay without one shred of evidence. Knowing the truth about Rush, how can I possibly trust any reporting by the mainstream media?
Adding insult to injury, Rev. Al Sharpton, considered to be a respected spokesperson for the black community by the liberal media has weighed in with his opposition to Rush being allowed to own a team. Given Sharptons role in the Tawana Brawley scam, it is truly amazing that he is considered a credible representative of the black community talk about Bizarro World. How dare this characterless con man pass judgment on Rush!
Beyond Rush, the larger issue is the tyrannous yoke political correctness has on our society and the swift punishment delivered with an iron fist by its enforcers, the liberal biased media. Rushs true crime is boldly speaking the truth about several of the liberal medias sacred cows, challenging their premises and opposing their far left agenda.
For example, the NAACP, a sacred cow of the Left, is without question a liberal partisan organization. Rush, a white guy, stated this truth out loud, thus violating rule number one on the medias politically correct list of dos and donts. Whites under no circumstances are permitted to publicly criticize blacks. Offenders are verbally flogged within an inch of their lives and branded with a virtual R on their forehead for racist.
The liberal media has no problem with throwing Rushs 20 million listeners along with Rush under their youre a racist bus. They are relentless in protecting their sacred cows and are willing to sacrifice and impugn all. Take their sacred cow ObamaCare, outrageously, the liberal media calls the over 50% of Americans who oppose it racists. When their married president Bill Clinton had sex with an intern, the liberal media told us that every man in America, fathers, clergy, coaches and whomever would behave as Clinton did if given the opportunity. To defend Clinton, the liberal media sacrificed the morals and character of all men. In essence proclaiming, All men are dogs.
Remember what the liberal media did to a young beauty pageant contestant who shyly gave a politically incorrect response when asked about gay marriage, another of their sacred cows? Miss California, Carrie Perjean was vilified.
While I stand beside my hero, Rush Limbaugh, as I stated earlier there is a much larger issue at stake extremely threatening to our freedom, liberty and culture. We cannot trust the mainstream media. We are at war; liberal medias and the Lefts Political Correctness versus the Freedom and Free Speech of the America people. Our enemys mission is to silence all dissent. We serfs must worship their sacred cows or suffer the consequences.
The liberal media and the Left have been attempting to silence Rush and other conservatives for years. Make no mistake about it, their latest bogus Rush is a racist campaign is another stealth attack on our freedom of speech. It is extremely important that lovers of freedom rally around Rush Limbaugh. Silencing Rush would be a major victory in their quest to silence and control us all.
Lloyd Marcus, Black Unhyphenated American!
Still more to come ...
Post a reply
|
|
|
|
|
Monadnock Guide
Council of Elders
 |
|
|
Monadnock Guide
Council of Elders
|
 Posted Octob/09 @ 36:38
|
| The "race card" is about the only play left in the Libs playbook. At this point, it's their "bread & butter" - "go to" move on almost any subject or problem. There's a VERY left wing radio talk show character on a Boston station, - who freely admits he sees race as an issue in almost everything. While I can't stand the sob, I'll give him credit for admitting it, - and I'd say he has A LOT of company - unfortunately. |
 |
|
|
richfed
Sachem
|
Posted Octob/09 @ 58:06
|
Here's where it gets really ugly, with a guy named DeMaurice Smith, part of Obama's transition team. We are in nasty, ugly, dirty times when this type of stuff is going on. Like him or not, Rush is a private citizen just like the rest of us. If you are paying attention to the news, and digging deeper than the fluff we see on most channels, it is hard not to be appalled. There is so much crap being rammed down our throats to save us from every evil, every invented villain they can muster ... I am flabbergasted.
But, this is about Rush ... let this article finish the tale, for now.
This is quoted from the American Thinker, a conservative publication:
Don't be tempted to believe in an organized conspiracy to race-bait Rush Limbaugh. That's not how things work in politics.
To understand how DeMaurice Smith, head of the NFL players' union and politically connected Obamite, could be the center of an attempt to destroy the reputation of Rush Limbaugh you only need to recall the complaint of English King Henry II about Thomas Becket. "Who will rid me of this turbulent priest?" the King is supposed to have said. Immediately four knights set off to Canterbury to deal with Archbishop Becket (See Eliot, Murder in the Cathedral; Anouilh, Becket).
Here's another example. A lowly courtier thinks he heard British Henry IV say of the deposed King Richard II: "Have I no friend will rid me of this living fear?" And so he rids Henry of his fear. Of course, Henry is livid when the courtier brings in the coffin of Richard. "I thank thee not," he says. (See Shakespeare, Richard II).
It doesn't take a conspiracy. It just takes a word, an attitude from the king, and the courtiers get the message.
In the case of Limbaugh it doesn't even take a careless word from the president. Every liberal knows how turbulent and troublesome, uncivil and racist the president's critics are. If it weren't for them we would have universal health coverage by now. If it weren't for them we'd be well on our way to saving the planet by now. If it weren't for them, we'd be well on our way to resolving the world's conflicts with diplomacy and "soft power" by now.
What's the harm in adding a little "artistic verisimilitude to an otherwise bald and unconvincing narrative?" (See Gilbert, The Mikado).
(We are adding all these literary quotes for the benefit of any sophisticated liberals reading this article.)
Rush Limbaugh is just doing is what the turbulent critics of the powerful always do, whether it's Thomas Becket criticizing Henry II, Sir Thomas More criticizing Henry VIII, or Tea Partiers criticizing Henry Paulson.
Politicians have the power of force; critics have the power of ridicule. Limbaugh's power is his talent to deliver "fun, frolic, and a serious discussion of the issues" to his 20 million listeners. You might even say that Rush is "edgy," because he commissions Paul Shanklin to do parodies like "Barack the Magic Negro" and "Banking Queen" to make his point. That's what art is for, according to our liberal friends. It is supposed to challenge the comfortable shibboleths of the establishment and say things that you are not allowed to say.
Here is the irony of the full-court press on Rush Limbaugh. Our liberal friends have made a big deal in recent years about the unilateral foreign policy of the Bush administration. They have lectured the "neo-cons" about the importance of "soft power" in resetting relations with powers that President Bush treated as adversaries, but that could be our global partners in diplomacy. They know the importance of developing trust and reciprocity.
But what do liberals do on the domestic front? They blow 1,000 page bills through Congress that nobody has read. They rush through a so-called stimulus bill in early 2009 that spends most of its money in the 2010 election year. They twist the Baucus health bill into a pretzel so it will score well with the Congressional Budget Office. They plan elaborate legislative tricks and subterfuges to snake their unpopular legislation around the long-established rules and customs of Congress They set up phony quotes on Wikiquote (that curiously seem to be edited from an IP address at a New York law firm) to discredit their political opponents. To heck with trust and reciprocity. We won, as the president said.
Let us not call this hypocrisy. It goes well beyond hypocrisy. It points to a delusional worldview. How can liberals think and write and act as though American conservatives are beyond the pale of polite society while they talk nicey-nicey with thug dictators and millenarian revolutionaries all over the world? If "soft power" and diplomacy works so well in international relations, what disqualifies them for the day-to-day diplomacy between the governing liberal elite and its loyal opposition, even including a popular entertainer and commentator?
However you look at it, the way the powerful treat their opponents tells us a lot about their fitness for power.
In a partisan sense, the clumsy political thuggery of the Obamites is a once-in-a-generation gift for conservatives. But as Americans who want the best for our country and its people, we deeply regret the truth that it communicates. Day by day, issue after issue, our liberal friends are telling all Americans that they do not deserve the political power that the voters have entrusted to them.
Limbaugh asked last weekend just what was the problem with his troublesome racial views:
quote:
You mean, my belief in a colorblind society where every individual is treated as a precious human being without regard to his race... Those controversial racial views?
Remember when young Prince Hal became king? The corrupt Sir John Falstaff thought he'd get his own shovel-ready stimulus project. Prince Hal had other ideas. The new King Henry V told Falstaff: "I know thee not, old man." (See Shakespeare, Henry IV, Part Two).
Would that President Obama were as wise.
Christopher Chantrill is a frequent contributor to American Thinker. |
|
|
|
Monadnock Guide
Council of Elders
|
Posted Octob/09 @ 27:54
|
| Excellent read indeed, - the very last thing the "can't we all get along" crowd wants is a "color blind" society. Their very existence requires racial conflict that needs more government rules, regulations and money (taxes) to solve. An ever expanding government, with more control over individuals than at anytime in our history, - and it's not even close to enough for them. Oppose BO, - whether it's Rush, Fox News, health care blogs, or "whatever" - and the heavy boot of government is heard VERY loudly. This is what the Revolution was fought for??? - This administration is without ANY question the most dangerous in my lifetime. |
|
|
|
di-mc
Pioneer
 |
Posted Octob/09 @ 53:54
|
| I've listened to Rush for a long time, and never heard him utter a word that any rational person could consider to be racist. He said he hoped Obama would fail, well, so do I. Yes, we Rush listeners are all painted with the broad brush - we're called racists, homophobes, mind numbed robots, etc., nothing new. Another group being thrown into the "racist" column currently are those of us who attend tea parties. Not only are we said to be racist, but we're also "old", so we can't possibly be worth listening to. Every liberal who I've heard talk about us has used the "old" description, well, so what? What if it were true, which it isn't? Imagine a similar group of folks, opposed to a conservative, and they happened to be mostly black. We wouldn't hear anything negative being said, instead they would have been held up as shining examples of American citizens, doing what the Constitution gives us the right to do. So, what do we do? I've attended 3 local tea parties and the one on 9/12 in Wash DC and I will attend more. I'm very concerned about the course this administration is setting. Even if we elect conservatives to Congress in 2010, will it be too late? |
|
|
|
di-mc
Pioneer
|
Posted Octob/09 @ 00:57
|
| BTW, I hope, oh do I hope that Rush sues the people who made up stuff and attributed it to Rush. He can sue for defamation of character, slander and probably more. Rush does come from a family of lawyers; I hope he's being given superb advice and I hope he sues the miserable individuals who did this. If someone in the public eye, like Rush, is treated this way, what do the rest us think will happen to us if we're labled unjustly? We don't stand a chance. |
|
|
|
|
 New Topic
Reply to Topic
|
|
|
|
|
