Topic: Rush's comment about McNabb
started by: jimhanson
Posted by jimhanson on Oct. 03 2003,2:35 pm
Slow news day--time to throw another topic out there.Rush resigned from his position as "color commentator" (their words, not mine!)
at ESPN after his co-announcers found his comments about quarterback McNabb politically incorrect. Limbaugh had opined that McNabb, while a good quarterback, had been over-rated by network commentators in their zeal to see a black quarterback succeed.The major networks, eager to chip away at ESPN, (and get in a shot at Limbaugh), jumped on the story. ESPN, after initially backing Limbaugh, reversed itself, and Limbaugh offerred his resignation.
Now, it turns out, Limbaugh was not alone in his assessment of McNabb. A number of sports writers have written columns about the same subject in the preceeding weeks--but they weren't aired on National TV, or spoken by a talk-show host that encourages controversy. See the comments HERE: < http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=34910 >
This goes beyond McNabb, Limbaugh, and ESPN. It goes to the desire for a black quarterback to succeed. Several years ago, the question in the NFL is "why no black head coaches?" After the question had been raised, any team that hired a WHITE coach had to explain why. Are black quarterbacks immune from criticism because of this rule?
It also questions ESPN's objectivity--they hire commentators to COMMENT, as opposed to PLAY-BY-PLAY announcers. The job of a commentator is to criticize and critique--to make observations--and yes, to stir up controversy and provide a launching pad for other commentators to launch their own observations. Rush did just that--but there are certain things you dare not say on national TV--another Orwellian prediction come true.
Would this have been as controversial if John Madden had made the comment--someone that is IN the game? If not, then WHO MAKES THE STATEMENT means more than the ACCURACY of the statement.
It appears that there is a consensus among sportswriters that McNabb IS over-rated--so what Rush said was true. If this is the case, the shame should be on ESPN, for letting a non-sports "agenda" take precedence over reporting FACTS.
Posted by Liberal on Oct. 03 2003,2:49 pm
We should probably cut him some slack since he was most likely all hopped up on painkillers when he said it.
Posted by ICU812 on Oct. 03 2003,3:17 pm
ESPN. If a black announcer said the same it would have never been looked back on. As far as dare not say somthing on national TV, don't take lessons from Jimmy the Greek
Posted by jimhanson on Oct. 03 2003,3:47 pm
I forgot about him--good point! And for a TRULY racist quote, how about Howard Cosells' "look at that little monkey run!"?Commentators have been "ranking" or rating players for years--analyzing their strengths and weaknesses--but THIS time, by THIS commentator, about THIS quarterback, it's "wrong".
I don't listen to KFAN, but one of our guys said that McNabb was rated 31 out of 32 starting quarterbacks this year (I don't know the catagory). I don't know where to even start in finding NFL statistics--anybody have a way to verify?
Posted by Liberal on Oct. 03 2003,3:56 pm
Rush is wrong because he made a racist statement. If he would have left out the part about the media wanting a black quarterback to succeed there would have been nothing wrong with what he said. The other quotes from the other writers never mentioned his race that's why there isn't a public outcry about their remarks.
Posted by hoosier on Oct. 03 2003,3:56 pm
It was stupid of ESPN to hire Rush in the first place. They should have seen something like this coming. Did you see Tommy Jacksons face when Rush was saying it? My guess is Rush quit for his own safety, Jackson and Michael Irvin were gonna kill him. LOL.
Posted by jimhanson on Oct. 03 2003,4:31 pm
Liberal--I agree--kind of. I've vacillated back and forth on this issue, and I've come to the conclusion that he made a RACIAL statement--but not a RACIST statement--AN IMPORTANT DISTINCTION. Rush didn't bad-mouth all blacks, and to my knowledge didn't bad-mouth McNabb for BEING black. As I understand it, he made a statement that he was over-rated, THEN went on to state that there was a fervent desire for a black quarterback to succeed in the league, and that (perhaps) that was the reason that he was rated higher than his performance actually warranted.Once again, I don't think that if John Madden, or a black commentator, had made the comment, it would have even been noticed--and if that's the case, that's wrong.
I'm not a big sports fan, but I get the feeling that this is more about political correctness and the SUBJECT of race than about racism--the sports commentary is only the vehicle.
Posted by churla on Oct. 03 2003,5:19 pm
with as many black quarterbacks that are in the NFL today,there is really no need for the media to over- hype a black quarterback.there are plenty of good ones.
Posted by GEOKARJO on Oct. 03 2003,5:20 pm
A good friend of mine always wore a hat that was embroidered "Rush Is Right" That was Walter Trow I bet he is looking down from heaven and shaking his head at this one.
Posted by rosebudinal on Oct. 03 2003,5:23 pm
Funny how this painkiller thing popped up suddenly. I may not be a fan of Rush Limbaugh, but, I viewed it as oh yeah LETS GET HIM now for those people who have always had it in for him. Limbaugh doesn't say what the general media wants to hear. This is the very reason that I was shocked when I say him commenting on a football game last week. This is not to say that I agree with his comments. But, I agree it was because of who he is that this is newsworthy. Truly, agree if it were John Madden-------it wouldn't have hit the fan.
Posted by jimhanson on Oct. 03 2003,5:38 pm
Churla--good point--he didn't say anything about Peete or Culpepper--those are the only ones that come to mind (like I said, I'm not a big sports fan)--any others?The whole thing kind of reminds me of the Congressional Black Caucus--ex-Congresswoman Carole Mosley-Braun, for example, or Charlie Rangel (author of the statement "even to this day, 150 years later, sharks still follow the path taken by the slave ships, hoping they will throw somebody off")--despite outrageous statements, everybody has to tread very lightly about being critical of any one of them--even though they are some of the most public figures out there--taking criticism is PART of being a public figure--in sports, entertainment, or politics.
Posted by cpu_slave on Oct. 03 2003,5:48 pm
I agree that McNabb is over-rated, however rush should have simply stated that and left the race argument out of it. There are 9 (count 'em 9) starting black QB's in the NFL, and their ratings span the gambit, just as any 9 white QB's. Does race have to do with his inflated ratings? I doubt it.Now the controversy, why did so many people get upset over his remarks? Simple, when he is on his radio show, people who want to listen to him tune in. The audience is predominantly right-wing, so his non-PC crap usually flies without much controversy (since he is preaching to the choir so-to-speak). The pregame show, however, is viewed by a wider audience (not in numbers but in viewer demographics) so his comments were held to a higher standard.
I am also glad that the windbag resigned. When I watch NFL pregame shows, I do not expect nor want social commentary. Rush can go back to his radio show, where he can control what his call-in critics say (with the volume and mute buttons) and his audience already knows what his views are. I can already hear Rush somehow trying to put the blame for this all on Clinton...
Posted by GEOKARJO on Oct. 03 2003,5:51 pm
Here is a great icon
Posted by jimhanson on Oct. 03 2003,6:09 pm
CPU--you're right, but does this mean that even TALKING about race is taboo?I agree with Hoosier--this wasn't a good decision to hire Rush, he is far too controversial and polarizing for this venue--and that is sad, too. I've got to believe ESPN hired him BECAUSE they wanted something controversial--otherwise, they would have only play-by-play. Howard Cosell filled that role on Monday Night Football--people loved him or hated him (remember the "throw a brick through the old TV for $20" promotions at bars?), but Rush is even more controversial than Cosell.
How sad that "speaking our minds" is O.K., as long as we mouth the "accepted" line--that "Diversity" means "we must all speak alike"--that we must engage in Orwellian "newspeak" and "doublespeak", when things are described as opposite to what we know they really are. We avoid controversy and meaningful conversation, staring down, avoiding eye contact, keeping a low profile, not wanting to attract attention.
I know I've run across this image before--I originally thought it was in a movie, but now I remember where I saw it--it was in the book "One Day in the life of Ivan Denisovitch", who later wrote The Gulag Archipelago--a description of life in Soviet-era prison camps, by Nobel prize-winning author Aleksandr Solzhenitzen. It has taken 55 years since Orwell made his prophecy in 1984, and 41 years since Ivan Denisovitch--but life is indeed imitating the book.
Posted by KODIAK on Oct. 03 2003,6:12 pm
Kordell Stewart (Chicago Bears) is having an abysmal year, but the expectations have not ever really been high on him, he has suffered years of mediocrity at Pittsburgh prior to this. However, he was hyped as this new dimensional "slash" qb who was a threat to run, throw, receive etc. Because he has been dissapointing for awhile, he is simply called a bad player. McNabb however, has struggled in his first 3 games (nfl.com has all the stats, and for fantasy football geeks like me this is no problem on info) and he has gone to the pro bowl the last two years. Add that to the marketing of an East Coast team (see chunky soup commericials) and the criticism starts.
What Rush should have said is that he is over hyped, and left it at that. He certainly is that. His stats are above average (td's thrown, yardage etc.) but his expectations are currently higher. That is the nature of sports, and sports commentary. The forum of sports is meant for hyperbole and second guess analysis,.....the armchair qb living vicariously through others. Everyone can play in those conditions, and therefore it has immense popularity.
So what are we saying? Rush gave commentary, but gave a generality ("the media wanted a black player to succeed..")that doomed him to attack. The sporting world was not ready for that level of honesty yet. Rush can get by with overstatement and exaggeration on his radio show, and thats what people (like me) enjoy and tune into that show for. The average sport fan probably did not want to hear the same levels as they were sitting down to a beer and pizza last Sunday. Good subject.
Posted by jimhanson on Oct. 03 2003,6:19 pm
Kodiak--you have the stats--somebody told me that Rush quoted a sports writer that compared McNabb this year, and last year, with our own former Viking, Brad Johnson. Can you post the relevant figures?
Posted by The Advocate on Oct. 03 2003,6:36 pm
The problem I see is that Rush Limbaugh is a racist so when he verbalizes anything with any reference at all to race it is racist...not racial. I don't want to go down that long winding Clinton road with what does "it" mean; come on, the guy is a card carrying John Bircher and in my book that is not a good thing. I attempt to find redemption in all peoples views, and to understand that the vast majority of people are far more complex than to be pigeon-holed but I am still waiting for this guy to expand himself.
Posted by pete on Oct. 03 2003,7:40 pm
Liberal,If that statement was racist, what about the next time someone plays the race card saying they did not get the job etc because they are a person of color? Seem like there is a huge double standard at work.
Posted by jimhanson on Oct. 03 2003,7:40 pm
Advocate--| Quote |
| The problem I see is that Rush Limbaugh is a racist so when he verbalizes anything with any reference at all to race it is racist...not racial. |
| Quote |
| racist adj 1: based on racial intolerance; "racist remarks" 2: discriminatory especially on the basis of race or religion [syn: antiblack, anti-Semitic, anti-Semite(a)] n : a person with a prejudiced belief that one race is superior to others [syn: racialist] |
| Quote |
| racial \Ra"cial\, a. Of or pertaining to a race or family of men; as, the racial complexion. |
| Quote |
| come on, the guy is a card carrying John Bircher and in my book that is not a good thing. |
< http://www.thenewamerican.com/tna/1995/vo11no14/vo11no14_limbaugh.htm >
Do you have proof that he IS a John Birch Society member, or was that hyperbole?
Posted by hoosier on Oct. 04 2003,11:10 am
I agree with cpu_slave, I dont want to turn on ESPN and have tp listen to Rush, no more than I wanted to see Dennis Miller do Monday Night football. Rush says that he cannot understand what all the fuss is about, that if Shawn Hannity had said the same thing it wouldnt even be noticed. I can agree with that, but not just because he is Rush, Shawn Hannity could get away with it because he isnt on ESPN. Rush is, or was, But just look at the racial make up of the league, my guess is that it is at least 70 percent black, or more. If the black players had gotten together they could make it pretty hard on ESPN to do their job in the NFL. McNabb is a very good QB, he is not your typical pocket passer, but other than maybe Payton Manning and Kurt Warner, the day of the pocket passer are gone. Michael Vick is what a lot of people in the NFL think of when they think of the QB of the future.
I can assure you that as far as the NFL teams go, they are not going to start anyone for just racial reasons, the coach's job depends on wins, he is going to put the best out on the field. Rush was talking about media over hype, funny isnt it? The most self over hyped person in the world calling someone else over hyped.
ESPN waited way to long, they should have done the right thing and fired him before he could quit, the person responsible for hireing him should be looking for a new job also. I understand that the ratings went up after they hired Rush, but was it real football fans, or did a bunch of Rush's radio cronnies come to listen to him spout his bull$hit?
To ESPN, in the future, just hire football people to talk about football, you dont see Michael Irvin doing political commentary, we dont want to see Rush doing football either.
Posted by Hanna on Oct. 04 2003,12:11 pm
Why is it that certain sports may seem dominated by race but no one wonders why? I don't take it as racist, I just take it as "that's the way it is"Hockey - Mostly white players (still Americans, who cares)
Football - Many black players (still Americans, who cares)
Baseball - Many Mexicans and Puerto Ricans (still Americans, who cares)
Tennis - Mostly white players (still Americans, who cares)
Nascar - All white drivers (still Americans, who cares)
That's what makes us such a diversified country. But a comment that indicates what nationality an athlete is, and the political inuendos behind the comment are still only the opinion of the speaker. And I don't necessarily take ones comments to heart.
Put that theory into the job market, and you will see employers are hiring minorities because they are Equal Opportunity Employers, and want minorities on their rosters to prove it.
Anything wrong with this? You decide.
Posted by Madd Max on Oct. 04 2003,8:31 pm
I thought that Rush was the poster child for the Right wing Republicans With there God fearing Family values, Apple pie and the American way. Wasn't Rushs Motto to hell with the Democrats at all cost. Then We find out that Rush is accused of being a big time Doper. What a RUSH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Maybe he can share a cell with Martha Stewart 
Posted by The Advocate on Oct. 04 2003,9:53 pm
Pete, You stated and I quote "If that statement was racist what about the next time someone plays the race card saying they did not get the job etc, because they are a person of color"... That sir is not a racist statement but a racial one.
Posted by The Advocate on Oct. 04 2003,10:05 pm
Rush Limbaugh, unfortunately, is unable to disassociate himself from his celebrity which embodies his racist views, hence, whenever the man communicates in any way, shape, or form, the public understands that they are looking at the 1990's reincarnation of Archie Bunker... so far to the right his left hand is touching Carl Marx.
Posted by pete on Oct. 05 2003,2:30 am
So if someone says race is the reason they did not get the job it's ok? But if someone says race is the reason they did it's not?
Posted by The Advocate on Oct. 05 2003,6:03 pm
Come on Minnow, aren't you gonna tell me what's wrong with my last posting? I personally can think of two things. Let's play some verbal volleyball!
Posted by GEOKARJO on Oct. 06 2003,11:32 am
Why are there no minority race car drivers the cars are not stolen?
Posted by KODIAK on Oct. 06 2003,3:17 pm
Sorry, gone for the weekend, I see the dialogue continues. McNabb had another sub-par outing last night, no tds etc. Year to date, he is 28th in the league in yardage (664 vs. 1300 plus for the leader) has 1 td throw (vs. 8 for the leader, league average is approx 4.5 for starters) a qb rating (complex formula measuring yardage, completion %, tds, interceptions etc. a perfect game is 158) of 51.3 (high 90's, low 100's are commonplace).
I see the conversation has turned into political stances again. The general consensus at KFAN is that ESPN should have drug it out right another few days for more pub, with Barrerio pointing out that the media and the public should not be so two faced. Example, the Chicago Cubs coach making the statement that many white players should not be playing, that many black players were superior.
I stand by my earlier position (possibly similar to Hoosier's in some areas) that the commentary was misplaced, that the network tries too hard to sensationalize their telecasts, that the networks believe we don't know anything and therefore try to bury good fans with minute information (not impressed) and they bring non experts into the game to babble. Rush is ok in his own environment, but not in this one. The problem quickly became that he could not be objective, he tried to too hard to force something. Dennis Miller had the same problem, very intellectual and insightful personality, we just didn't need it every play....
Posted by KODIAK on Oct. 06 2003,3:31 pm
Oh, got carried away. Is McNabb then over rated? Yup, so far. We should take into account his supporting cast pretty much sucks, and that its a long year.
Posted by The Outsider on Oct. 07 2003,2:33 am
for a book that actually tackles the "taboo" topic of race and being politically correct, check out the book, "Taboo: Why Black Athletes Dominate Sports And Why We're Afraid To Talk About It" by Jon Entine. Some parts are dry, but it is a great book. It touches many of the issues society is afraid to talk about.
Posted by GEOKARJO on Oct. 07 2003,1:18 pm
Now if a law enforcement officer was to ask the description of a suspect is it proper give the indivduals race or just a description.
Posted by Guest on Oct. 07 2003,2:51 pm
Geokarjo, you truely are the biggest idiot to ever post here. Are you drunk when you come up with this crap? By the way folks, the big product that he says he is going to break ground for, IS CALLED THE COMPUTER. Wake up, the only gound that will be broken is the dirt clod in his head.
Posted by The Outsider on Oct. 08 2003,9:23 am
Geokarjo: Good question. I would think that it is okay to give a person's race because it helps with the description that others need to look for to track the culprit. As long as that isn't the only description passed on, it should be welcomed.On a similar note, why is it that most crime reports say "a 22 year old black man. . ." when describing a crime, but not "a 22 year old white man. . ." the white criminal gets off without his skin color being mentioned, why not the other races? For a published criminal report, things like that should be uniform in style.
Not to contradict myself - A person's race should be accounted for when trying to describe the person to the police because it does help identify who-done-it. On the other hand, published reports should not include race unless all races are covered similarly.
Posted by hoosier on Oct. 08 2003,12:09 pm
Outsider, nice post. But you and I must not watch the same news programs. Everyone I have seen describes the race of a crime suspect, especially when they are asking for the publics help in finding the person.
Posted by pete on Oct. 08 2003,11:00 pm
The Minneapolis School board was going to hire David Jennings but people protested because he was white. Too bad he took his name out, I think he would have done a good job. Where is the outcry here?
Posted by GEOKARJO on Oct. 09 2003,2:22 pm
Guest you seem to have a personal vendetta against me is it safe to assume you are a woman.
Posted by MADDOG on Oct. 09 2003,2:56 pm
LMAO@GEO 