^^Jason Whitlock is black btw

10/22/2009 2:29:40 PM

^ LOL! Good point.

10/22/2009 2:36:12 PM

^^^AHA, that's cute. But the fact that I try to occasionally be controversial myself was no big secret to me.

Also, I've never tried to buy into an NFL football team, and I'm not a highly paid radio personality with millions of listeners who may or may not make the distinction between being controversial, being racist, or being a little bit of both.

[Edited on October 22, 2009 at 2:43 PM. Reason : ]

10/22/2009 2:43:13 PM

^^You left out the best part of Whitlock's column...

Quote :

"But on most days I see Limbaugh for exactly what he is: America's most successful race hustler. He delights in labeling Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton as "race hustlers," but not surprisingly Limbaugh fails to inform his massive radio audience that he hustles the same game as Jesse and Al, just on the white side of the fence. Limbaugh's radio empire is built on the foundation of convincing white America that the country our forefathers stole from Native Americans is being stolen by blacks and Mexicans. Barack Obama's election to the presidency breathed new life into Rush's radio shtick. Again, I find much of Limbaugh's satire hilarious and appropriate. But there are major strands of it predicated on preying on the biased fears of white America. Limbaugh's "Obama's America" spiel about two black kids beating up a white kid on a school bus while other kids cheered is the exact kind of irresponsible and evil race-baiting that Limbaugh rails against when belittling Sharpton or Jackson. I've listened to the audio and read the transcript at RushLimbaugh.com of Limbaugh's "Obama's America" monologue. The point of Limbaugh's rant/satire is to divide, scare and breed contempt. It's the equivalent of Sharpton's Tawana Brawley charade. Limbaugh has convinced his sycophants that he is some sort of "victim" in his failed bid to own a piece of the St. Louis Rams. It's comical listening to a man worth a half billion dollars claim victim status, especially a commentator who rips poor minorities for claiming victimhood. Since my column last week, I've been inundated by Dittoheads who seriously believe Limbaugh is some sort of freedom fighter standing up to the establishment and injustice. Freedom fighters don't get $100-million contracts. They get coffins and jail cells. Ask the Kennedys, King and Mandela. What really irritates me about my column last week is that I certainly didn't need the quotes to make my point. Limbaugh got involved with an effort to buy the Rams and commented on his involvement as a publicity stunt. In the misleading and whiny editorial he penned for the Wall Street Journal, Limbaugh acknowledged in his opening paragraph that he anticipated public resistance and controversy. I'd write the exact same column if Sharpton and Jackson tried to buy a piece of the Chicago Bears. It doesn't matter that many of the owners enjoy Limbaugh's hustle or agree with his politics. They earned or inherited their money legitimately, and they don't spend three hours a day on the radio trying to stir up racial animosity. If that's not clear enough, think of it this way: Steve Hirsch, the founder of Vivid Entertainment, is wealthy enough to buy a piece of an NFL franchise. Porn is legal, enjoyed by many football fans and probably a few owners. No one would think twice if the NFL declined to associate its brand with Hirsch. No one would think it unusual or unfair if feminists and sportswriters objected to Hirsch purchasing an NFL franchise. Nothing remotely un-American transpired with Limbaugh's ownership bid. I truly regret undermining my message with these quotes."

[Edited on October 22, 2009 at 2:49 PM. Reason : ?]

10/22/2009 2:48:29 PM

^ No I didn't. Whitlock started with an apology and ended with an apology for misquoting Limbaugh--and other "media" outlets had to do the same. This is the point.

10/22/2009 2:52:04 PM

I think that's wrong.

It is entirely fucked up to change the "point" to the idea that he was unfairly maligned by fake quotes and people (OMG black people!) apologized for referencing the fake quotes.

Changing the point to that idea is not right because it appears to exonerate Limbaugh and paint him as some helpless victim.

You wanna mention Whitlock's apology, you should reference the whole thing where he apologizes for accidentally using fake quotes and then spends the bulk of the column reasserting the fact that Limbaugh is a "race hustler," and the NFL has every right to avoid his kind.

This is the whole point.

10/22/2009 3:04:16 PM

think about it this way - if the media had done their F-ing jobs and actually done some fact checking before they regurgitated the liberal common wisdom, Rush wouldn't be able to claim victimhood with these concrete examples of flat-out lies.

Yet again, an example of why a biased media is not good for ANYONE - conservative or liberal.

[Edited on October 22, 2009 at 3:54 PM. Reason : s]

10/22/2009 3:42:41 PM

It's also worth noting that Whitlock is harder on black athletes (and high profile black people in general) than any other black sportswriter, and almost all white sportswriters.

A lot of people (myself included) call him "Uncle Ruckus" after the Boondocks character both because of a resemblance and because they often seem to hate black people.



When he says he would write an article criticizing Jackson or Sharpton for the same things he's criticizing Rush for, believe him.

10/22/2009 3:58:25 PM

Quote :

"I think that's wrong. It is entirely fucked up to change the "point" to the idea that he was unfairly maligned by fake quotes and people (OMG black people!) apologized for referencing the fake quotes. Changing the point to that idea is not right because it appears to exonerate Limbaugh and paint him as some helpless victim. You wanna mention Whitlock's apology, you should reference the whole thing where he apologizes for accidentally using fake quotes and then spends the bulk of the column reasserting the fact that Limbaugh is a "race hustler," and the NFL has every right to avoid his kind. This is the whole point. "

Exactly.

10/22/2009 7:54:56 PM

So, is JayZ a race hustler? I'm just curious

10/22/2009 8:10:56 PM

lol rush fucking owns.

10/22/2009 8:14:43 PM

Bob Johnson is a race hustler

Hey guise, I'm gonna start BET and make money off fellow black folks by exploiting them. I'm a billionaire.

10/22/2009 8:17:01 PM

Man i wonder how different this place would be if Rush used his powers for Good instead of Evil.

10/22/2009 8:19:51 PM

^^^ not really, jay-z loves white people

http://www.quantcast.com/jay-z.com
http://www.quantcast.com/rushlimbaugh.com

and he seems to have a more balanced fan base than mr limbaugh

10/22/2009 8:19:52 PM

doesn't answer the question. Does JayZ make racially charged statements or does he not?

10/22/2009 8:20:38 PM

that’s not what “race hustler” means.

10/22/2009 8:22:28 PM

well then, elucidate

10/22/2009 8:25:29 PM

Well, Jay exploits blacks (and listeners of all other races) by glorifying illegal and dangerous activities and lifestyles, while profiting off of it all the way. I'd call that hustling society, which Rush also does.

10/22/2009 8:25:41 PM

Jay Z doesn't own an NFL team, so it's irrelevant

10/22/2009 8:32:41 PM

he does own part of an NBA team, so it's NOT irrelevant

10/22/2009 8:33:33 PM

The NBA is not the NFL

Mark Cuban owns an NBA team, and the NFL has already said they don't want a "Mark Cuban situation"

10/22/2009 9:16:49 PM

doesn't change the fact that there is no outrage that a black man who makes racially charged remarks for profit owns part of a major franchise and no one else gives a shit. the double standard is, you know, the whole fucking point

10/22/2009 11:12:56 PM

rush had the capacity to take part in buying an nfl team, from radio and publishing finances

this denial is only going to make his show more popular

10/23/2009 3:25:05 AM

Quote :

"doesn't change the fact that there is no outrage that a black man who makes racially charged remarks for profit owns part of a major franchise and no one else gives a shit. the double standard is, you know, the whole fucking point "

I dont see how there is anyway around this.

10/23/2009 9:20:23 AM

I thought the point was that somehow Rush was somehow denied his rights or wronged in some way by the NFL and/or his potential partner.

Public outrage is worthless. People get outraged at anything and everything.

10/23/2009 11:06:44 AM