Wow,Where does this “way outta left field” post begin to get analyzed and addressed.First of all,How you can drag N.A.M.B.L.A of all the organization’s one can choose from…whoa.
Anyway,Rush is the furthest thing from a nefarious club member or a clubmember who to deserves a long painful death due to their victimization of children such as NAMBLA.
As for your statement that Mr.Limbaugh thrives on controversy,I see the thought police have fed you the kool-aide.You see,Mr.Limbaugh speaks the truth and then all of the sissies get their panties in a bunch.That really the heart most of the “controversies” he’s in.Mr.Limbaugh stands for the"Old Guard" if you will.He stands for what “old” America used to stand for.He’s a major road block for the secular progressive socialists and now he’s feeling some retribution.
Sad state of affairs this country is in.If you want to get more sick to your stomach,go see how our dollar’s been doing internationally lately.
Limbaugh’s point on McNabb wasn’t that people cut him slack, it was that the Eagles defense was more important to the Eagles success than McNabb. But McNabb got inordinate credit for the teams success because everyone wanted him to be successful to end the lack of phenominal black QBs.
McNabb is a good QB, it is just that at the time people were placing importance and capability on him because of his race and what he ‘represented’.
Sound familiar?
Rush gets creamed because of things he didn’t say, and for things he did say but people missrepresent. I’m not saying that I agree with him all the time, I wish he was a little better informed sometimes, but I’m not on the radio 15 hours a week.
He kinds of reminds me of Machiavelli in that his biggest critics and haters have never taken the time to actually get the real message, but just mental shadowbox their preconcieved notions of what he is.
If you define alcoholic as a drug addict, which it should be, then many companies have lots of drug addicts in their upper echelon. Just because it’s more socially acceptable does not make it any more damaging to themselves, their families or careers. If you really delve into the subject I’ll bet you might be surprised at how many very successful alcoholic/drug addicts there really are running very successful businesses.
I’m not supporting Rush, alcoholics or drug addicts but I am under no illusions as to what happens during happy hours, golf and client dinners on a very frequent basis in the world of business decision making. Customer entertainment, it’s a bitch, but somebody’s gotta do it 
The NFL has gained in profitability and marketing from a certain quarterback formerly of the Green Bay Packers and New York Jets and currently of the Minnesota Vikings; who like Rush Limbaugh was formerly addicted to painkillers.
Your use of present tense with respect to “drug addict” is a bit laughable, as is the idea that the NFL suddenly has qualms about someone being involved in that organization who has a past history of issues with painkillers.
He is from MO
Are you trying to say the NFL does not give players drug tests?
Are you trying to make me laugh again?
Perna, would you mind addressing the following comment, as it is an excellent rebuttal to your argument.
Thanks.
You are really faulting the NFL for not wanting a drug addict to own a team?
It is a business, what other business would want a branch of their company to be run buy a drug addict?
I will…cuz I’d love to hear how you came to the ridiculous conclusion that 100% of NFL players are juicing up.
Perna, would you mind addressing the following comment, as it is an excellent rebuttal to your argument.
Sure. Comparing Farve to Limbaugh makes no sense. Farve puts asses in the seats no matter what he does, he could club baby seals on live tv and still make the NFL tons of money. Limbaugh on the other hand isnt going make them any money, or make the sport any more popular. Just because he has money does not make him an asset to the organization.
It’s highly probably that any business impact (negative OR positive) that Rush Limbaugh being a minority owner of the St. Louis Rams would have on the team or the league would be completely lost in the noise. As you said, Farve could club baby seals and no one would give a shit; it’s proven that the NFL can survive just fine with people with past history of drug abuse involved in the organization…doesn’t matter if it’s a no-name third string fullback, a first ballot hall of famer, or a partial owner of a team. The public just doesn’t care. Tickets will still be sold, jerseys will still be sold, people will still watch the games.
The league should be much more concerned that one of it’s franchises, the Rams, would likely lose soundly to about half a dozen college football teams. That is far more of a threat to the business success of the Rams franchise than Limbaugh owning a small portion of the team.
For all the BS that was spread throughout this whole Limbaugh bid, I don’t even recall hearing anything about drugs, which further proves that no one gives a damn about that, even people who are looking to crucify the guy. So if you think Limbaugh is a bad idea, fine…but the “he’s a drug addict” angle is lame, old, and overplayed.
Well, I for one am glad that the NFL doesn’t promote gambling on their games. Particularly by publishing injury reports and formated stats, because then the line in Vegas would be off by a few points. I am also sure assured that they don’t publish the drug test schedule, which would make it very easy to cycle your steroids around it.
I would be shocked that such an organization would allow someone who has a radio show to invest in their pristine, snow-white business!
M_P
I’ve been critical of Limbaugh in the past, but this is posturing.
The NFL got its publicity, the partnership will get its team and the media tied the “mack daddy” of conservatism to the whipping post. He’ll get to point out yet another liberal conspiracy to destroy him, but in this case they gave him ample credibility. Everyone gets what they want.
I’m so tired of being told when I should be offended. :rolleyes:
And the band played on…
You mean like Jim Irsay, the owner of the Colts?
Insert “Oh Snap!” picture here.
I, too, think it’s splendid that the NFL is reacting in unison to keep Limbaugh out, especially since no one of any criminal note has famously joined the NFL this year. We haven’t heard about how a felon has “paid his dues” or anything like that at all, so that leaves the NFL in the perfect moral position to tell everyone how a radio talkshow host should be barred from the sport lest it be tainted.
You know what owners do, right? They invest in the organization. They hire coaching staff. They negotiate contracts with players. People don’t show up to the stadium to watch the owners play ball…they come to watch the teams that the owners build.
Interesting that the NFL is courting a pop singer as an owner for a team but rejects Limbaugh out of hand…
I personally think rush would have done the same as jerry jones has done with my cowboys…love or hate the team, people watch to see them win or lose.
tell me that is not what his franchise (SL) needed…even if he owned just a corner, fans would join in to see him cringe or cheer. Really a stupid move by the nfl to pick sides.
A few thoughts come to mind-
Exactly. No such thing as bad publicity, especially for St. Louis.
The notion that Limbaugh somehow reflects poorly on the NFL is patently absurd.
New guy here …You know what really pisses me off ? Its those racists Al Sharpton and Jessie Jackson. They can get away with whatever they want. Race shakedown / hustlers. The media is so far to the left its a joke.