Rush Limbaugh was removed from a group of bidders that are interested in purchasing the St. Louis Rams because, according to David Checketts, his "involvement in our group has become a complication and a distraction to our intentions". Rush says it is not about him, it is the “race hustlers”, “Obamaites”, and "'misreporting", "lying", "made-up quotes" and "blind hatred" from "unhappy, angry, agitated people". Last night I was enjoying the company of some of my oldest friends, I mean our friendship is old – they’re not old people. Anyway, we were playing cards when this topic was raised and my friend said that no matter how you slice it, it was reverse-racism. He said that Rush “has every right to purchase a team” and that the only thing that is standing in his way is reverse-racism. At first, I respectfully disagreed and he returned the favor. Another friend chimed in at a feverish pitch, had a soapbox moment, not allowing us to have further input, and in my attempt to be heard over him (because he was starting to get off subject) the volume and temperature of the conversation inadvertently increased. Alcohol and testosterone may have played a role, but not a key role. Most readers who follow my work know that even when I’m sober, politics and racism are hot buttons that have the ability to set me off – and it did. I value my friendship far more than politics, and hope our conversation doesn’t put a damper on that. We were friends long before either of us chose a political aisle to reside on, and far longer than Rush Limbaugh caught either of our attention. So for a disagreement about Rush to come between us, to me, would only serve as further indication of his separatist platform. All that said I would like to address “the Rush issue” and my friend without interruption, at whatever volume the reader finds suitable.

One thing that bothered me about my friend’s argument is that just like the majority of Republicans that I debate, you all say the same tired lines over and over again. It amazes me how the terminology and ideology is virtually verbatim. This only means one thing my Republican friends and associates – you’re getting this rhetoric from the exact same source. You are all spewing the same twaddle that is being fed to you by the likes of Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck, and Fox News in general. If you diversify your source of news, you will have the ability to diversify your perspective. I find myself debating the exact same article of faith over and over again – you’re like robots! It is like you are programmed to say the same lines like a GI Joe doll with a pull string coming out of your back - “it’s reverse-racism”, “socialist”, “I’m not a racist I just disagree with his policies”, “Rush was misquoted”, “every time someone disagrees with Obama you play the race card”, “black people can say anything and no one says a word” – spare me! I find it interesting that I can search YouTube for Fox News and hear every exact quote that my Republican friends recite in defense of their party, and in their criticism of so-called liberals - because that’s your sole source of information (well, that and Limbaugh). What makes it so dangerous, and so different than a Black comedian telling a joke about White people, is that you guys are considering this news, not a joke – that is far more precarious. Black people can laugh at a White comic who tells a joke about Black people, it happens all the time. It’s a fallacy that you should stop buying into, I did comedy for 8 years – trust me on this one. There are more fallacies in regards to the aforementioned commonly spewed rhetoric, and I’ll point them out as they resurface in the text.

Back to the NFL issue at hand, Rush – you’re wrong! It is not about politics, it is not about Obama, it IS about you! It is perfectly within your right to criticize Obama and any other Black person you please. You love to stride a line very close to the edge by making the most outlandish comments regarding Black people. You have made it your business to display disrespect to Black people and succeed in the face of it. It’s your shtick! You succeed despite us. Yes, you have Black fans, but Black people are not part of your target audience. If you lost every Black fan, you’d still make millions…that’s your point. I get that, and it’s your right to do all that. You have gone out of your way to damage your relationship with the average American Black person, so you and your listeners should expect resistance when you try to own some. You want to own Black athletes, and they spoke out against being owned by you. That’s not politics, that’s the monster YOU created! Don’t act surprised now. Don’t pick a fight and then cry foul when you get punched in the chin. The NFL and ESPN took a chance on you once, and you embarrassed them on national television by exposing your true colors. The NFL is a fine-tuned machine that doesn’t need shock-jock tactics to get attention. American football is a team sport, and a team works together as one – you do not display the persona of a team guy. You weren’t ousted over politics Rush, you were excluded over money.

As for my friend, and a true friend indeed, I first want to apologize for letting my emotions get the best of me, however I do stand firm against the rhetoric you’re blindly accepting from Fox News and the Rushites. Our disagreement started when you said it was reverse-racism…FALACY! Think about that statement for a minute, and truly think in your heart how you define “reverse-racism”. One might say “If racism is reversed, that would mean there is none”, another might say “racism reversed is msicar, and that’s not a real word”. A less sarcastic person might say “reverse-racism is when a Black person carries out a racist act against a White person”. Is that what happened here? Before I address that, you also said that Rush has “every right to purchase a team”. Does he really? He has the right to bid on a team, and he’s not been denied that right. He can still bid on a team, just not with David Checketts’ group. See Rush isn’t the only one with rights here. Roger Goodell, the NFL Commissioner, also has rights, including the right to deny ownership. Let’s be very clear, Rush wasn’t buying the team, he was part of a group that is putting in their bid to buy a team. This group isn’t guaranteed to win the bid with or without Rush, because it is NOT their right to own the team. Goodell has the right to choose which bidder will win the privilege of owning a team. Is it right to deny ownership because of race? Of course not, but do you honestly believe Rush was denied because he is White? I don’t. I think Rush was booted from the group because they realized that the tension he created between himself and the Black community at large was making it harder for them to win a bid – in fact, it was likely going to play a major role in the denial of their bid. In short, his reputation was quite simply bad for business. If you had to guess, what percentage of Black people do you think are in the group who ousted Rush? David Checketts, who made the announcement, also owns the St. Louis Blues (a professional hockey team). If you had to guess, would you say he’s Black or White? Yes there were rumbles from Black players who basically said “I will not be owned by Rush Limbaugh”, a few prominent Black figures that spoke against the move (including the president of the NFL players union), and of course Al “Mr. Do” Sharpton graced us with his ever-loving presence. They all have the right to those stances as well. Beyond all that noise what you had was a group of White people, realizing that another group of White people will likely deny their bid if they included this White guy – so they cut him loose. So I ask again, if you agree with the notion that “reverse-racism is when a Black person carries out a racist act against a White person”, is that really what happened here?

When I said to my friend that Rush was known for making offensive remarks, he told me that Rush was misquoted and asked me to cite the remarks. I cited the infamous remark he made about Donovan McNabb – he conceded. I cited the airing of “Barack the Magic Negro” – he said “that’s not racist”. I got so caught up in that response that I neglected to mention the comment that Colin Powell’s endorsement of Obama was all about race (which he likely would have said was not racist), and the comment that Obama is president because of “stupid, ignorant people”. For the sake of argument, let’s say that none of these comments are racist. Doesn’t it still stand to reason that there will be some Black people that take offense to that point of view? Is it unreasonable for a Black man to consider those remarks and think “I don’t want to be owned by this guy”? I visited YouTube today and searched Fox News to see where my friend was going with the “misquote” argument, and sure enough there it was…a 10 minute Bill O’Reilly video having that very conversation. Bill played a clip from an interview with Drew Sharp, a sportswriter for the Detroit Free Press who is known for saying anything to get a rise out of someone. Drew referenced Rush’s controversial sound clips and was asked (just as I was asked) to cite one, and Drew cited a comment regarding the NAACP. Bill said research has yet to find that quote and basically asked Drew to prove it, and Drew choked – stumbled on his words, ate them, and choked on them. The clip was then cut off as Bill went on to banter about Drew’s comment with friendly fire shooting interviewees. Drew was suddenly referred to as “they”, as to imply that he spoke for every media outlet outside of Fox Republican Network television. I guess my friend thought I would be as careless as Drew was, or that Drew was my sole source of information…but no.

I used to work for a guy named Earl, who was one of the smartest and most powerful Black men in the American automotive industry. I learned a lot from Earl. However, I made one disturbing discovery about him, one that someone eventually exploited and led him to his eventual demise. I discovered that as long as you agree with Earl, he will buy anything you sell. There used to be a joke in the office that an Earl meeting went like this:

Employee 1: That’s a great idea Mr. Earl.

Earl: Who is that guy? He’s smart. I like that guy. Give him a raise.

Employee 2: Actually Mr. Earl, I think we would do better if we did things this way.

Earl: Who is that guy? He’s fired!

A day finally came when the joke was on us, and someone exploited his desire to be agreed with. Quite frankly, it took the dumbest person with the lowest self-esteem to stoop lower than any self-respecting human being would to satisfy his need to be authoritative. She did horrible work, she started trouble galore, she couldn’t spell, yet she was paid more than everyone, could get anyone fired at the drop of a dime, and eventually suckered him into marriage. Why? Because she agreed with everything he said, and spewed his rhetoric as if it were her own. Are you still searching for relevance? Republicans tend to encompass this same desire, this desire to be better than others, to be smarter, to be more powerful than their peers, and all it takes is for someone to feed that desire and they will have the right to feed you anything. As long as they make you believe you’re king, you’ll buy anything they sell, believe anything they say, and that is how they’ve turned you into robots. They say “you’re smarter than them, you’re better than them, because you know that (enter whatever you please)”, suddenly you trust that parenthesized “whatever” because you were led to believe that it makes you better than me. It only makes you manipulated by idiom. That is why brilliant minds are being wasted spewing repetitive drivel and believing they are speaking their own mind. Diversify your input. A friend once told me that the further right you go politically, the closer you are to being in line with scripture. I believe someone is exploiting his spiritual passion for political gain. Scripture says that no man is perfect, and in return no man is perfectly imperfect. If that is true for individuals, it is also true for a group of individuals. So when the Rushites feed you oratory that says Republicans are right 100% of the times, and Democrats are wrong 100% of the times – that is far from being in line with scripture…in fact, it’s downright blasphemous. Scripture says the only perfect being to ever walk this earth was Jesus. So when the Rushites declare themselves perfect, are they ordaining themselves to be God, God-like, or the second coming? There is a reason why the Rushites teach you that anyone who doesn’t agree with them 100% of the time is being unfair or biased against them. Do a little research on the term “God Complex”, and give it some real honest thought, and please – use your own mind in the process.