A liberal friend writes to ask, so what’s the big deal about the NFL’s rejection of Rush Limbaugh?
So one quote wasn’t true–somebody did some lousy research, or, yes, worse, made it up. But what about the rest?
This line of defense has become familiar from those who would defend the NFL exclusion. So let me try to explain why the defense will only enflame and intensify the outrage on the conservative side.
As conservatives see it, the manufacture of racial hoaxes has grown into a lively little cottage industry over the past couple of decades.
This John Leo column summarizes a barrage of incidents in 1999-2000,
Here’s a list of incidents in 2006-2007.
The fall of 2007 was a particularly rich season, with three dramatic incidents in October and November:
- A black professor at Columbia Teachers’ College who had been accused of plagiarism hung a noose on the door of her own office. She used the incident to accuse the university of institutional racism.
- A Jewish student at George Washington University drew swastikas and racial slurs on the door of her own dorm room.
- November 2007: a Baltimore black firefighter under investigation for cheating on his qualifying exam likewise hung a noose in his firehall, prompting a federal civil rights investigation.
The back-to-school season in 2008 likewise inspired a black undergraduate at Trinity College, Connecticut, posing as a white, to post racially inflammatory comments in a student web forum. The comments prompted 200 students and faculty to join a campus rally against racism the following day.
That same month, a Muslim girl at Elmhurst College falsely claimed to have been assaulted and pistol whipped.
Altogether, we are looking at a roster of perhaps a hundred incidents over the past decade. Sometimes these incidents result in disciplinary action (the girl in the pistol whipping was expelled from school and faces charges of filing a false police report). As often, the disciplinary actions dribble away without consequences.
The pattern was set by the most spectacular of all fake hate crimes: the Tawana Brawley case of 1987. (For those who have forgotten the details, Wikipedia (for once!) has a reasonably reliable and fair account of the incident here.
And who was the co-author of the Tawana Brawley hoax? The then-obscure Al Sharpton, along with Alton Maddox and Vernon Mason, New York City lawyers. And who has now joined the fake-evidence charge against Limbaugh? Al Sharpton once more – now a respectable member of society, a participant in Democratic presidential debates, and a solemnly consulted television guest.
At a time when liberals and Democrats from President Carter on down are suggesting that opposition to President Obama is racially motivated, this Limbaugh incident vividly highlights to conservatives how often accusations of racism are concocted for political purposes.
More than a few conservatives will suspect that the White House political operation was somehow involved in the Limbaugh-NFL story. Conservatives are busily convincing themselves that the Obama White House uses the most outrageous thug tactics against its political opponents. Sean Hannity has repeatedly suggested on air that Obama critics will face audits by the Internal Revenue Service.
(By the way: In the Hannity mental universe, I probably count as a RINO, if not an outright Obama apologist: “Vichy Republican” is the disgusting phrase used by some in the right blogosphere. Yet as it happens, I am being audited by the IRS this year myself. Where do I file my application for status as a conservative martyr?)
26 responses so far
1 balconesfault // Oct 16, 2009 at 11:09 am
And who has now joined the fake-evidence charge against Limbaugh? Al Sharpton once more – now a respectable member of society, a participant in Democratic presidential debates, and a solemnly consulted television guest.
Ahh – yes – and who funded Al Sharpton’s run for the Democratic Nomination?
http://dir.salon.com/story/opinion/conason/2004/02/03/sharpton/index.html
When he deposits that government check, Sharpton should thank (Republican Operative Roger) Stone. In his latest financial filings, the Village Voice discovered literally dozens of recent $250 contributions from the Republican consultant’s relatives, friends and political associates, scattered across state borders from Virginia to California.
Al Sharpton is clearly a demagogue who profits from race baiting. That is why the Democratic Party doesn’t pay attention to him. Outside of the DC primary in 2004, you might note that Sharpton did far far worse everywhere else than Alan Keyes did in the 2000 Republican Primary, and Pat Buchanan actually took 23% of the 1992 Primary Vote in his campaign to unseat GHW Bush.
Do you want the Republican Party to be tarred with Pat Buchanan’s xenophobia?
I actually feel bad for Limbaugh, in that it does seem that some (not all, but some) of the most racially inflammatory quotes that have been attributed to him may be made up. That should not happen to anyone.
In fact, I would love it if from here out Limbaugh made it a campaign to fight against slurs and slanders against all political figures in America, subjecting unproven claims against both Dems and Republicans to serious fact-checking and moreover, rooting out the source of the slanders. In this he could do far more good for our nation in one year than his entire body of work has done to date.
2 DFL // Oct 16, 2009 at 11:24 am
I’m not particularly concerned about Rush Limbaugh and his desire to buy part of the St. Louis Rams from the point-of-view of Limbaugh being a target of the Democratic Party. What concerns me is that the NFL acts like a combined super-guild/Mafia/Purple Gang that regulates who can buy a franchise and regularly shakes down localities when they want new stadiums. What gives them such a right? And since the NFL is pretty close to being as much a monopoly as Amtrak and Google, where is the anti-trust laws governing it? Should not the government intervene, not for the sake of Rush Limbaugh, but for the common good? It appears to me that the NFL has a bit too much swagger.
3 LFC // Oct 16, 2009 at 11:30 am
In fact, I would love it if from here out Limbaugh made it a campaign to fight against slurs and slanders against all political figures in America, subjecting unproven claims against both Dems and Republicans to serious fact-checking and moreover, rooting out the source of the slanders.
Would he have a show left?
As to the other side, I have to go back to a classic joke. “What’s 3 inches wide, 16 inches long, and dangles from an a**hole? Al Sharpton’s tie.”
4 Kanzeon // Oct 16, 2009 at 11:31 am
Rush can dish it out, but can’t take it.
The man makes millions being deliberatively provocative, then whines when he actually provoked someone. His investment partners are private individuals, and make a business decision to dump him. The NFL isn’t an arm of the federal government.
In a country that allows free speech, people have the right to be provocative, and private citizens have the right to boycott or protest them, even if that boycott causes financial damage.
The Dixie Chicks were a target of private conservative ire for criticism of Bush. Liberals got angry. But that’s the cost of being a public figure, and making political statements. The Dixie Chicks survived, and so will Rush.
But I don’t take your point. Because a number of obscure campus incidents were “racial hoaxes,” Rush’s racially provocative statments disappear? Is that what you’re arguing?
5 balconesfault // Oct 16, 2009 at 11:38 am
But I don’t take your point. Because a number of obscure campus incidents were “racial hoaxes,” Rush’s racially provocative statments disappear? Is that what you’re arguing?
I was wondering how anyone could go through a litany of racist hoaxes without mentioning this one …
http://www.politicususa.com/en/Ashley-Todd-Hoax
6 Reason60 // Oct 16, 2009 at 12:03 pm
I haven’t listened to Rush since the mid-90’s, so I don’t make any claim of his being racist or not. In fact, I think that word is so poisonous, so loaded with extraneous meaning, as to be nearly meaningless.
The thing is, I am very familiar with conservatives of Rush’s persuasion, and they truly are offended when they are accused of racism. they don’t use the “N” word, they don’t have any overt hatred towards blacks, they speak and even think all the “correct” sentiments about race. They listen to the blues, or rap, they love black sports figures, they even serve in the armed forces with black people.
And yet…
However, when you read through right wing blogs, chat over coffee with them, you do in fact hear constant refrain of negative comments that somehow are always directed at minorities. The common sterotype of Black being synonymous with ,”Urban” and “Urban” being synonymous with decay, crime, and Every-Awful-Nightmare of modern life, the resentment over pressing 1 to hear English, about bilingual ballots, the hysteria over “Illegal” immigrants, which subtly morphs into immigrants genrally, the general sense that America is declining, that “We” are losing “Our” country….these are not the voices of people who are friendly and hopeful about the changing demographics of America.
These are not “White Hood” racists. These are the voices of ethnic fear, that deep primal tribal terror of being overrun by The Other.Rush and many other leading voices on the Right DO tap into this, reinforce it, and profit handsomely from it.
For him to feign surprise at how black people resent him, is disengenuous. Or maybe he is truly not understanding how the constant drumbeat of racial animosity has reached the ears of minorities, about how well they understand it.
7 sinz54 // Oct 16, 2009 at 12:16 pm
reason69:
Go argue with “ottovbs,” one of the Obama-supporting trolls on this NG. He just said on another discussion thread that America really is declining.
The difference between liberals and conservatives is this:
Liberals think that America’s decline is inevitable, and possibly even desirable (why should a lone superpower be able to push around other nations?). They were pushing that same line during the 1970s, remember? They’re very quick to conclude that America is in decline–because it fits their world-view.
Conservatives like me believe that America’s decline is NOT inevitable; that we’ve been in tight jams before and emerged stronger than ever; that America can still be an ascending, dynamic world power–but that it takes real leadership to accomplish this.
And we’re angry at the liberals for presiding over an unnecessary American decline.
8 sinz54 // Oct 16, 2009 at 12:21 pm
reason60:
Oh, brother.
You don’t have to play Freud and go hunting in the subconscious of voters.
It’s not “primal fear,” but a simple psephological calculation.
Minorities tend to vote strongly Dem. In 2008, Obama got 95% of the black vote and 70% of the Hispanic vote. The heavy Hispanic turnout helped deliver states like New Mexico (once reliably Republican) to Obama.
So if minorities increase their numbers, and there is no shift in their voting patterns, then that will make it increasingly difficult for the GOP to win elections.
The Dems know this, which is why their voter outreach drives traditionally centered on getting minorities to the polls. Why do you need to invoke “primal fear” to explain why the Republicans know it too?
The only way out is for the GOP to find ways to appeal to minorities. So far, they have failed dismally at this.
9 balconesfault // Oct 16, 2009 at 12:38 pm
And we’re angry at the liberals for presiding over an unnecessary American decline
When was US standing in the world stronger … in 2000, or in 2008?
10 EscapeVelocity // Oct 16, 2009 at 12:46 pm
Sinz, you are of course correct.
I cant wait for Western Civilization to reassert itself.
11 nwahs // Oct 16, 2009 at 1:20 pm
I think the media ran with the fabricated quote, because it was short and to the point. That was wrong, but it doesn’t absolve conservatives of looking at Limbaugh’s record of racially insensitive remarks over 20 years. Like the host of the documented accounts or not, Media Matters has a long list of racially offensive utterances by Limbaugh, and it would take a Dixiecrat to ignore them all. If you put this list in front of the average dittohead, they’ll start screaming “Context! Context!”
No one has a list of so many racially offensive comments that have to be contextualized unless they are purposely stroking bigotry in a sly manner. There is a lesson here, and it is the Limbaugh is a divider. Since being dropped by the group, Limbaugh has made it his job to go after the NFL as a racist, Obama tool. This treatment for the organization he supposedly loved two days ago. He will do the same thing to the GOP. Its about Limbaugh, not conservatism, and if you cross him, he will use his mouth to divide you. The GOP has to take note of this rebuke, and not buy in to the Limbaugh martyrdom. You will not win with a divider.
12 balconesfault // Oct 16, 2009 at 1:46 pm
nwahs – exactly right. Well put.
Limbaugh remains a powerful multimillionaire if there are 10 million listeners out there who believe that he is more important than the Republican Party as a whole. However, deferring to that reality, as the GOP has been doing, is not a long term winning strategy. On the other hand, not deferring to that reality could be very very painful over the short run.
13 Reason60 // Oct 16, 2009 at 2:19 pm
“The only way out is for the GOP to find ways to appeal to minorities. So far, they have failed dismally at this.”
Gee, I can’t imagine why.
No seriously.
As I have said before, I have known gay florists, immigrant Mexicans who operated small businesses, and black business managers, who were all poster children for Republican virtues; And yet they all felt rejected by the dominant conservative voices.
The conventional wisdom on the Right is to assert they they- the entire population of gays, blacks, immigrants- are all fools, stupidly seduced by left wing ethinc mau-mauing.
It doesn’t seem to occur to the Limbaugh crowd that maybe the entire population of ethnic minorities and gays might have a point- maybe they really AREN’T welcomed into the conservative movement, but merely tolerated grudgingly.
14 Brittanicus // Oct 16, 2009 at 3:30 pm
No doubt in my mind that Europe is stepping into dangerous quicksand. My sister in England remembers what a great country it used to be. It seems like the native English-British people are going over the proverbial cliff, like a bunch of Lemmings, because they believed in the Globalist-International propaganda from Brussels on free trade. Now their mired in Legal and in illegal immigration that is sponging of indigenous people like in America? RULE BRITTANIA
15 Levedi // Oct 16, 2009 at 4:09 pm
Reason60 nailed it. Far too many conservatives don’t understand how they subtly characterize non-whites and those of non-European descent as evil / dangerous / anti-American. Case in point – my brother married a Fillipina woman. They have a lovely baby. They both agree that racism is evil. But ever since I moved to a city with a large Hispanic population I constantly hear from him how the “Mexicans” are a threat to “our” way of life. There’s no recognition that not all hispanics are Mexican, not all immigrants are here illegally, not all hispanics are immigrants, immigration isn’t inherently evil, and, since our family came here from Ireland, we’re the descendants of people who were at one time seen as a threatening, non-American population.
I don’t know what to call that, but it isn’t wise, loving or Christian. And it’s certainly not very savvy or aimed at reconciliation.
16 midcon // Oct 16, 2009 at 4:56 pm
The NFL does not need Limbaugh. He doesn’t bring anything to the table except the potential for embarassment to league. Regardless of whether they were right or wrong, they made it clear that he would not be acceptable. It was a business decision made by an organization that delivers a wildly popular product that shows no sign of losing its popularity anytime soon. The NFL was driven by the bottom line and they did because they could.
I suppose one could decry the monopolistic aspect of this and what gives them the right blah blah, but really who cares? No Rush, one less risk that threatens their lock on the general public from September to January!
Go Giants!!!
17 anniemargret // Oct 16, 2009 at 6:23 pm
Who cares about Limbaugh? He’s made millions denigrating minorities and women. His disgusting and shameful laughing, and joking (along with the odious McCain) about how ‘ugly’ a young Chelsea Clinton was, proved to me what kind of a man he is. There is *nothing* to admire there.
He slyly stays just on this side of the border of fear and hate, and then pretends he is being unfairly targeted. I’ve listened to him enough over the years to have a complete lack of respect for this man. Yes, he is highly intelligent. But he lacks compassion. He’s a bottom feeder. Let him and others like him, Beck, Palin, Coulter, etc… .rake their millions in while spewing hate and instigation and devisiveness. The ‘dittoheads’ are doing nothing to help this country, except keep his coffers full.
18 rbottoms // Oct 16, 2009 at 7:19 pm
And we should give a damn about this why?
It doesn’t matter what Obama does conservatives will find a way to convince themselves that Obama uses the most outrageous thug tactics against its political opponents. Why? Because most of them are paranoid, racist, and willingly ill-informed to same varying degree.
A huge percentage of them don’t even believe the president is an American citizen for God’s sakes.
The hell with them and what they think. The only that does matter, and the only thing that ever matters is the 2% swing voters. We will never, ever win over Republicans. The only reason Obama got a 2% extra bump last year was George Bush was so staggeringly, monumentally, incredibly incompetent and disastrous as president. So much so that the sane part of the GOP, what little there is of it couldn’t stomach it for one more year.
That small group will run after the next Brylcreemed empty suit who sounds halfway stable and the rest will be supporting the clueless Sarah Palin and former exorcist Bobby Jindal for 2012.
You’re doomed. We don’t need to care what conservatives think because the GOP isn’t a conservative party. It is the physical manifestation of a theocratic cult of your own making and it will be eviscerated at the polls in 2012.
It’s your bed sir. Lie down in it.
19 SFTor1 // Oct 17, 2009 at 12:59 am
The NFL (a business) concluded, and I believe rightly so, that associating with Rush Limbaugh was potentially divisive and would hurt their profits. So they declined to make Rush part of their business.
Why is this a problem? I would be a little surprised if Republicans were to quarrel with the right of a business to make decisions regarding whom they want to associate with.
20 rbottoms // Oct 17, 2009 at 4:58 am
Subtle? I don’t think they know the meaning of the word. From our perspective it’s damn overt but not being black or actually knowing any blacks or non-whites they insult and demean us all the time.
Obama’s been president less than a year, in which time we’ve seen a dozen incidents of watermelon jokes, witch doctor references, gorilla and monkey comparisons and always the shocked reaction that anyone could fail to see the wit and humor intended.
It’s mental density from not having a clue. Until recently, that is since the election of an African-American president they have been required to actually watch what they say, who they say it about and as Joe Wilson found out they have to show some real respect.
That hasn’t been required of them. Ever. They’ve been able to wave the rebel flag and surround themselves with good old boys who would cover for them. But no more.
The game has changed and the power has shifted. It’s a new day.
21 andydp // Oct 17, 2009 at 11:07 am
Rush Limbaugh painted himself into a corner. His vituperative talk and his anti anything not smacking of liberalism has made him toxic to any non conservative, non political organization he might associate itself with.
The NFL and the partnership involved are a private enterprise and allowed to do what they want; something Rush has always defended. In this case, they did not want him as a partner as is their right. I’m sure the other owners thought of the specter of Rev Sharpton and Rev Jackson leading mass demonstration against Rush outside NFL stadiums.
Was it fair ? No. Was it within the rights of the NFL or the other partners to drop Rush like a radioactive hot potato ? Yes it was. Does Rush have to sleep in the bed he made ? Yes.
Perhaps next time Rush should remember the words of Jackie Gleason’s Ralph Cramden: I got a BIIIIIG Mouth !!!!
22 andydp // Oct 17, 2009 at 11:12 am
Sorry folks. The quote above should have read: “…anti anything not smacking of conservatism”
23 Dblade // Oct 18, 2009 at 9:04 pm
Uh, you all seem to miss the point. As I understand it, that’s almost a libelous thing, manufacturing a racist quote that did not exist in order to torpedo Rush’s reputation and force him out of a deal. If the quote was not said at all, regardless if he even has been flippant or satirical to the point of insensitivity, something is seriously wrong.
The handling of the quote gives real credence to accusations of media bias and unfairness, and the whole geroge w bush term before has shown that the left-wing media really has no scruples over this kind of tactic. The difference was dan rather got fired for being proven wrong. The case for the limbaugh quote is even flimsier-rather could be accused of not checking a source enough, but he at least didn’t fabricate a quote out of whole cloth.
24 rbottoms // Oct 19, 2009 at 11:28 am
One quote, manufactured or not would not have forced him out of the deal. It’s 25 years of similar quotes that did it. A group that relies so heavily on black players was not going to tolerate Rush Limbaugh’s presence among the ranks of the owners.
You may enjoy Rush’s bomb throwing racial provocation but a lot of people don’t. Limbaugh was hoist by his own petard.
25 ww_todo // Oct 27, 2009 at 5:18 pm
I’m just amazed at how venomous anti-Limbaugh (and somehow, Palin, McCain, etc.) comments are from people who assert that Limbaugh is insensitive. I’ve also not seen anti-Limbaugh comment on how a business, the NFL, has excluded someone from being involved in a business purely because he exercises his freedom of speech. I assume that if that was Sharpton, Jackson, a Kennedy, or any other left-of-center person then the ACLU and many of ‘you’ would be saying “you can’t penalize him for stating his opinion.”, even if he’s caught lying and making very insensitive statements about a race other than his own (like Sharpton and Jackson have). It was a GREAT idea by the NFL not to have Limbaugh in the league, he’s devisive to many who fail to be self-aware. He says things that are blunt, direct, and usually sourced…but they’re certainly not sensitive to anyone – whites included. Then again, so have MANY of my liberal, female, and minority friends in the meanest of terms when they don’t think anyone is listening. To confine it to conservatives, males, and whites is folly, ridiculous, and plain ol’ incorrect.
Sadly, to say that in just one year there have been insensitive things said about Obama…and be surprised, is just disingenuous, or again, not self-aware. We all should remember anti-Bush posters (with Hitler mustaches, etc.), stickers, and reports that were extremely unflattering – and often inflammatory. Were you upset by those insensitive characterizations as well? Are you willing to admit that Obama’s policies have driven up unemployment, divided the country, put more American soldiers at risk in Afghanistan (a war he DID run on for President), and looks to create massive government social programs that will change a democratic and capitalist America (maybe for the good for some of you)? Bush didn’t do that, and really, don’t try to blame the man (Bush) for anything that Congress wasn’t complicite in (including Pelosi and the ‘progressives’). What don’t you like, that he had the same information as the rest of the free world (34 countries) that voted to go to war, including your Congress? That he didn’t bail out failing banks and car companies? That ‘he’ inherited a recession? That he speaks realllllly poorly? That he gave more money to sub-Saharan Africa than any President in history? That he tried to offer ‘illegal’ working immigrants amnesty?
Please be intellectually honest, meet in the middle, and make positive change!…especially you RoundBOTTOMS.
26 ww_todo // Oct 27, 2009 at 5:22 pm
….now that your angry at the truth and calling me a rascist, ignorant, pig. I’m not white, I’m a legal-immigrant, and I grew up very poor with lifelong left-wing parents. Yeah, I was bitten by a smidgeon of intelligence and the desire to use MULTIPLE sources to gain information. Go back to being angry now – or – listen and research information that you’re not comfortable with and learn (confirm or dispute your beliefs, but be fully conversant).
You must log in to post a comment.