October 7, 2009, - 12:09 pm

Sports Media Disses Limbaugh NFL Bid, But Didn’t w/ Annoying Libs

By Debbie Schlussel

On Monday Morning, I was one of the first to cover Rush Limbaugh’s bid to be a part owner of the NFL’s St. Louis Rams.  After I wrote about it, the followers in the rest of the conservative blogosphere and Drudge served up the stale news much later.


I figured the mainstream liberal sports media would diss Rush’s bid, and I was correct.  It’s interesting how the media covers this story compared with lefty James Carville’s Chairmanship of the New Orleans Superbowl 2013 organizing committee, or the fact that Pittsburgh Steelers owner Dan Rooney is openly pro-Obama and got an ambassadorship (to Ireland) as payment for that prostitution.

Take today’s USA Today.  Limbaugh is described by “reporter” Skip Wood as “controversial” and “polarizing,” and the story raises the issue of whether such a figure should be allowed to own an NFL team.  The word “intrigue”–as if there’s some sort of trickery to buying an NFL team–is also used, implying something sinister.

The controversial public figure released his declaration Tuesday with few details, citing a confidentiality agreement with Goldman Sachs, the investment firm the Frontiere family has hired to review the assets of her estate. . . .

Chief NFL spokesman Greg Aiello said Tuesday that, although he understood the intrigue surrounding the possible inclusion of a widely known yet polarizing figure into the league, he had to decline to comment.

[Emphasis Added.]

It’s hilarious that Rush is described this way, yet never a word about Carville’s polarizing views when he joined the Superbowl committee.  Nor a word about Dan Rooney’s disgusting slobbering over Barack Obama at NFL games, etc.  Now that’s what should be labeled “controversial.”  I doubt Rush–unlike Rooney–would ever use his position as an NFL part-owner for politics.

On the contrary, I’d say the biggest controversy about him with regard to the NFL is his consistent silence on corporate welfare and tax hikes for NFL stadiums and his mostly reticence on the criminal activity and behavior of many NFL and college players (yes, he’s, indeed, spoken out on violent NBA players, such as Latrell Sprewell).

FYI, the name Frontiere, referred to above, is the late Georgia Frontiere (pronounced “Frun-tear-ee”), who owned the Rams and died last year.  For the record, I once had a phone interview with her when I was in grad school.  It was for a possible front office job with the team.  A friend of mine was a close friend of hers, and he got me the interview.  He warned me that she was “a bitch” (his words) and hated women, was unbearable, and would never hire me.  And I can say that based on that one episode, he was right in spades.  If Rush is the new part-owner of the Rams, the level of congeniality in the owner’s box will certainly be improved.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

18 Responses

The other patronizing part of the article was claiming that his listeners, of which I have been one since DAY 1 of his NY-based radio show on WABC, call themselves “dittoheads.” This is a term used by the MEDIA to describe us. They don’t even know the genesis of the term or where it came from. Typical of the drive-by media. But WEIN, what else is new?

JeffT on October 7, 2009 at 12:17 pm

    First off, the media (sports & otherwise) is wholly owned by conservatives. Check it.

    The NFL is largely an African-American workforce that, rightly so, views Rush as a real-life nightmare throwback to all they’ve strived to overcome. The vast majority of NFL players are solid citizens who are seriously talented and seriously challenged on a daily basis. Referring to “too many of them” as “piss poor role models” is a convenient but lazy generalization which could be equally applied to virtually ANY line of work. People with exceptional talents are often controversial (i.e. Rush Limbaugh).

    Like it or not folks, Rush is an enemy of African-Americans so it shouldn’t be a stretch that he has a battle coming. He’s earned it.

    LeftCoast on October 11, 2009 at 6:39 pm

“Whether such a figure should be “allowed” to own an NFL team”?
Are you kidding? Whoever made that asinine statement should never be “allowed” to publish another ignorant screed. Last I checked, anyone in this country is “allowed” to own anything they can afford.

Spiffo on October 7, 2009 at 1:05 pm

    It is pretty amazing that someone purchasing a stake in a team needs permission to do so. Is Rush Limbaugh on probation or under a restraining order? I think Skip Wood had best stick to sports writing, if he is even good at that.

    sorrow01 on October 7, 2009 at 4:36 pm

Rush Limbaugh and Debbie Schlussel are two individuals I would actually like to meet one day.

The media hate them?

Then I like them even more!


William on October 7, 2009 at 1:36 pm

Ditto, Spiffo. Is B. Hussein Obama going to appoint an NFL Ownership Czar to make sure Rush doesn’t become part owner of the Lions? As we all know, Rush is a racist because of his Donovan McNabb remarks. (I am being sarcastic)

I would still like to know why anyone would want to become part owner of such a historically pathetic team. Did you know the Lions have only won ONE playoff game since Eisenhower was President?

Did you know that Daunte Culpepper may start for the Detroit Lions on Sunday? He’ll have to quickly learn both of their plays: getting sacked and getting intercepted.

Jarhead on October 7, 2009 at 1:38 pm

I bet the NFL Players Union would hate to have Rush as an owner when the league has new contract talks with its players.

CaliforniaScreaming on October 7, 2009 at 1:53 pm

Georgia Front-And-Rear-ie was a Bank Teller and Burleque Club Pole Dancer that stuck her claws into Carrol Rosenbloom, only to eventually murder him (allegedly) and take his team and run it into the ground, only to shake down the city of St. Louis for that mentioned “Corporate Welfare and move the team from Anaheim to the world’s largest Wal-Mart in St. Louis.

Yiddish Steel on October 7, 2009 at 2:04 pm

I don’t follow sports (I’m a band nerd) but my money says that after Rush buys into the Rams franchise, steps will be taken for the team to start doing better.

As to Rush vs the union vs players salaries. Rush, like any other owner knows the value of the talent in front of them. I am confident Rush will get his money’s worth.

Comparing players’ salaries to the average watch football on TV citizen is, IMO just another facet of class envy.

The p!ss poor role models too many players present is a social issue and has little to do with who buys what team.

Sam Adams on October 7, 2009 at 2:17 pm

The Left hates Rush for reasons that have nothing to do with his being a football fan. If they didn’t loathe his political views, his purchase of a football team wouldn’t stick in their craw.

NormanF on October 7, 2009 at 2:18 pm

JEALOUS AND FEAR are ugly together.

goldenmike4393 on October 7, 2009 at 2:39 pm

The liberal sports media is scared of Rush because he’s a self-made success and doesn’t depend on their pathetic analysis.

Keith in Houston on October 7, 2009 at 6:48 pm

More than anything else; it’s the common-place cheap shots heaped upon conservatives from all sides of the media. Prefacing every article with the menacing descriptions the subject’s ideology or associations.

P. Aaron on October 8, 2009 at 2:02 pm

It won’t work. Players are already saying that they won’t play for Rush.

dymphna on October 10, 2009 at 2:13 pm

And as expected…


Bob Porrazzo on October 11, 2009 at 2:58 pm

Leave a Reply

* denotes required field