Posted on 10/01/2003 10:49:55 AM PDT by Moosejaw
There is much wailing and gnashing of teeth over the comments of a sports broadcaster about a pro athlete.
Normally, sports broadcasters have pretty wide latitude in their commentary and the athletes often demonstrate a fairly think skin. After all, most professional athletes get far worse treatment from fans, so the occasional unflattering remark by sports writers and commentators is pretty small potatoes.
But when the broadcaster is a conservative icon and the athlete is a person of color, the landscape alters, providing another opportunity for liberals in and out of the media to bash away on conservatism and insinuate racism.
We're talking about Rush Limbaugh who, during the September 28 broadcast of ESPN's 'Sunday NFL Countdown' show, on which he is a commentator, spoke less than flatteringly about Philadelphia Eagles quarterback Donovan McNabb.
"I don't think he's been that good from the get go," said Limbaugh of McNabb. "I think what we have here is a little social concern in the NFL. I think the media has been very desirous that a black quarterback do well, black coaches and quarterbacks doing well."
In response to Limbaugh's comments, McNabb is quoted as telling the Philadelphia Daily News , "It's sad that you've got to go to skin color. I thought we were through with that whole deal."
In this respect, I have to thoroughly agree with McNabb; it is sad that we have to go so skin color in this day and age. The problem is that his observation is both naive and too narrow.
I call it naive because there is and has been for many years a tremendous amount of "social concern," in America about whether blacks in any profession "do well." Congress is "very desirous" that blacks in America do well, so we have affirmative action laws on the books.
The Supreme Court of the United States feels similarly, ruling earlier this year that the University of Michigan can continue to use race rather than merit in determining who may attend its law school.
This is indeed a sad commentary on 21st Century America, as McNabb rightly asserts. Affirmative action presumes that blacks and other minorities don't have the wherewithal to succeed on their own, a terrible and, frankly, racist assumption.
Some argue that affirmative action is necessary to overcome many long years of prejudice and oppression, but in application, the practice favors one class of citizens over another based only on race, all the while perpetuating a culture of victimhood that's essential to the advancement of socialist policy. It also hurts efforts to improve race relations by creating artificial, government-sanctioned divides between groups of people.
Presuming that Donovan McNabb truly believes what he says about Limbaugh's ESPN remarks, what he ought to now do is take it to the next level.
McNabb should take his message to the hierarchy of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, the halls of Congress and state legislatures, and other organizations that perpetuate racial victimhood and make the case that, "It's sad that you've got to go to skin color. I thought we were through with that whole deal."
Scott Hogenson is executive editor of CNSNews.com.
Maybe this will be good for some ratings points on his weekend show.
As I type this..........the 2:00 news on the radio led off with this story and played Rush's (previous ESPN.....)and McNabb's (latest....) remarks.
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ.
What really upsets me about all of this is that McNabb IS overrated, but not because of race. (The defenses just caught up to him). People that believe that black QB's are overrated because of race, will look skeptically at all the praise that MY favorite QB is receiving: Steve McNair. This is his year. He's tougher than most linebackers, almost as fast as Vick, can't be brought down, and he's finally playing smarter than any other QB in the league. He deserves every bit of credit he gets. Now, in the back of everyone's mind, when McNair gets praise it will be thought, "How much of the praise is because he's black"? That's just wrong.
I think you would find many Bears fans denying that.
I agree with that 100% -- Steve McNair has been one of my favorites since he came in the league. The Oilers used to train in San Antonio and took my kids down to see their practice. Steve McNair and Eddie George are two very class acts with their fans. I really want to see the Titans win the Super Bowl this year.
Personally think Rush should keep his social commentary to his radio program and leave it off ESPN. I want to see the best 11 players on the field and I don't care about their color. Last year I was complaining when Dallas benched Carter and put in Hutchinson who cannot scramble!
Good! This will bump up Rush's and ESPN's ratings! CNN NOT!
I have gotten away from it compared to once upon a time but, as I recall, great performances are always recognized, like Doug Williams when he won a superbowl with the Redskins and was superbowl MVP, all when his career was supposed to be essentially over.
I thought excellence on the playing field, or court, was generally recognized independent of anything else, good, bad, racial, whatever. Several NBA examples come to mind. McNabb does some good things, but McNair and Vick eclipse him easily. Favre is struggling something awful, and the question arises about how many interceptions one QB has to throw before someone says he might have lost the edge he once had, but its a Greenbay thing, not a race thing!
Nobody is questioning the competitive fire of McNabb or Favre, just as they haven't with many QBs in the past when they started to loose their edge due to injury, age, or whatever. To point out someone isn't performing to hype or erroneous expectation isn't racist, nor is to point out why hype or erroneous expectations are in place.
Excellence is recognized on it's on merit. If someone is making claims of excellence when it is not in evidence, why? Maybe Rush is right, again? - LOL!
You get no arguement from me. I think McNabb is nowhere near as "spectacular" as people make him out to be. He's had a good line to protect him. Give even the worst quarterbacks a good line, and they can throw balls all day long.
I have to agree with you about McNair. I call him the League's one true "Iron Man." He plays hard, he's tougher, he's smarter, he's stronger than all the other quarterbacks in the League. He plays hurt. He puts out the 110% that the best players are supposed to put out there.
He's simply the best.
I like this piece, especially the writer saying "socialism," instead of the usual euphemism, "liberalism." However, like many other writers, he refers to "affirmative action laws." While the federal government clearly PRACTICES AA, I'm not aware of any federal AA "laws."
Last year, the Jersey Giants, led by Kerry Collins, were leading the Oilers, er, Titans, by 20 points after three quarters. Collins is one of the better NFL QBs, with one of the strongest arms in the league. No matter. McNair led a charge that inspired his team on both sides of the ball, and suddenly the Giants looked like pikers. Meanwhile, Collins turned into a plastic man, and melted under the heat. I believe McNair led the Titans to a tie at the end of regulation, and that they won it in overtime. In any event, I know he led them to the seemingly impossible win. Statistics notwithstanding, I believe you spell that kind of a player, "M-V-P."
The Eagles defense carried the team until this year when they lost the best guys to free agency. Put McNabb on the Chargers and the Chargers will still suck.
Michael Vick is certainly talented and versatile. When will start to see more versatile QB's regardless of whether they're white, orange, green purple??? I like versatility vs. a unilateral offense...
--erik
As a native of the 'Burgh, I want to make it perfectly clear that Rush Limbaugh's comments are NOT reflective of true Stiller fans. IMHO, he's just a Stiller fan wannabe: a 50-yard-line, luxury skybox, country-club RINO. He just don't fit in with us beer drinkin', die-hard, blue collar, endzone-seats-in-the-dead-of-winter types who judge players STRICTLY on the merits of their capabilities on the field.
Football is WAR. Yes, there are rules to abide by that make it a somewhat more civilized substitute for war, but it is war nonetheless. And there just isn't any room in the game for the nonsense that Rush was alluding to.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.