Tuesday, October 13, 2009
The Rams new principal owners? In the name of Georgia Frontiere, what?!?
The Clarion Content is not unilaterally declaring that Rush Limbaugh should not be allowed to own the the NFL's St. Louis Rams. We would only suggest that the NFL think long and hard about the wisdom of including a person like Limbaugh in their exclusive group. How long ago did baseball exclude Marge Schott for her bigotry?
Limbaugh does not deny saying, "I mean, let's face it, we didn't have slavery in this country for over 100 years because it was a bad thing. Quite the opposite: Slavery built the South. I'm not saying we should bring it back. I'm just saying it had its merits. For one thing, the streets were safer after dark."
Nor does he deny saying, "Look, let me put it to you this way: the NFL all too often looks like a game between the Bloods and the Crips without any weapons. There, I said it."
It is a free country and we are big believers in free speech. But the NFL, as a private entity, has the right to impose its own standards and limits on appropriate conduct. They certainly impose their standards on their largely black player base. Limbaugh seems like the kind of character we might not include (were it up to us).
Then again, the NBA is about to let a Russian billionaire, who built his nickel under the Kremlin's shady watch after dubiously acquiring a monopoly, buy into the Nets. Standards everywhere are green first, everything else second.
If we were Rams fans, we might be worried about the deleterious effects of allowing Dave Checketts near our franchise, too.