FanIQ News: NFL owners are opposed to Rush Limbaugh buying the St. Louis Rams

10/13/09

1	Whatever!

10/13/09

THE_Smoot

4	Maybe he would light a fire under the Rams and they'd win three games next season.

10/13/09

aerockyulhim

7

The NFL is still a business, and the NFL owners have witnessed (just like the rest of us) sponsors pulling their ads from guys like Glenn Beck. The owners know full well that they might lose some sponsors (and they'd definitely have a thorn in their side from the Sharptons and Jacksons of the country). So I think it's not so shocking that the conservative old white men would block out Limbaugh. It's just business as usual

10/13/09

pizzlewizzle

2	They are lying. He will get his share of the team.

10/13/09

ManningsOffense

2	“Women were doing quite well in this country before feminism came along” your hero rush

10/13/09

ManningsOffense

1

On the April 1 edition of his nationally syndicated radio show, Rush Limbaugh said of a potential Hillary Clinton presidency, "[Y]ou have to understand the mindset of a lot of these feminists and women. They think they're owed this -- just like Obama supporters think they're owed this." Limbaugh continued: "These women have paid their dues. They've been married two or three times; they've had two or three abortions; they've done everything that feminism asked them to do. They have cut men out of their lives; they have devoted themselves to causes and careers. And this -- the candidacy of Hillary Clinton -- is the culmination of all of these women's efforts." He further stated: "And if it gets stolen from them, in their minds -- not actually stolen, but if the country or if the Democrat [sic] Party rejects this wonderfully great, lying woman in exchange for a rookie, radical black guy who can't tell the time of day, they are going to be so miffed. They are going to be so upset."

Limbaugh went on to claim: "[T]his is what the Democrat Party has sown ... The blacks one part of the constituency, the women another part. And both of them think they're owed this by the party, and if whoever doesn't get this -- the Hillary side, the Obama side -- they're going to think the party screwed them."

10/13/09

4	get real if you had a problem with Rush, look at the hate behind sharpton. chow

10/13/09

ManningsOffense

1	your right he's no better

10/13/09

ManningsOffense

1

On the April 1 edition of his nationally syndicated radio show, Rush Limbaugh said of a potential Hillary Clinton presidency, "[Y]ou have to understand the mindset of a lot of these feminists and women. They think they're owed this -- just like Obama supporters think they're owed this." Limbaugh continued: "These women have paid their dues. They've been married two or three times; they've had two or three abortions; they've done everything that feminism asked them to do. They have cut men out of their lives; they have devoted themselves to causes and careers. And this -- the candidacy of Hillary Clinton -- is the culmination of all of these women's efforts." He further stated: "And if it gets stolen from them, in their minds -- not actually stolen, but if the country or if the Democrat [sic] Party rejects this wonderfully great, lying woman in exchange for a rookie, radical black guy who can't tell the time of day, they are going to be so miffed. They are going to be so upset."

Limbaugh went on to claim: "[T]his is what the Democrat Party has sown ... The blacks one part of the constituency, the women another part. And both of them think they're owed this by the party, and if whoever doesn't get this -- the Hillary side, the Obama side -- they're going to think the party screwed them."

10/13/09

ManningsOffense

2	I find it funny how u assume I support Rev. Al Sharpton. I think maybe you should check yourself.

10/13/09

RockieAgs

2	Just sad that he's shut out of it before it even begins. Liberals act open minded, but are the exact opposite.

10/13/09

RockieAgs

2	Just sad that he's shut out of it before it even begins. Liberals act open minded, but are the exact opposite.

10/13/09

ManningsOffense

1	RockieAgs wrote: Just sad that he's shut out of it before it even begins. Liberals act open minded, but are the exact opposite. that's why independent is the way to, because the D's and the R's are both a bunch of crooks, liars, scum bums, agree or disagree?

10/14/09

lakerskins

3	This comment was voted poor quality by FanIQ (Show anyway) typical greed...he makes money speaking about them with very racist views, comments and tirades. now he wants in?...hell no! im glad, its enough racial tension out here now. with him as an owner, all the nfl news would be about him and some little tantrum that he's thrown.

10/14/09

YankeeGirl226

8

RockieAgs wrote:

Just sad that he's shut out of it before it even begins. Liberals act open minded, but are the exact opposite.

Oh shut up! Being liberal does not mean sitting there and taking crap. People like him are setting every major movement of the last century back with his stupid comments. No one cares about him being conservative because there are plenty of them in sports. He, on the other hand, does not seem to have the common sense that an adult of his age should have. And it's getting really damn old.

10/14/09

Heyhey1970

3	I'm certain this blow-hard will resurface. There are plenty of stupid people who can be swayed by fear appeals. Thank you Jim Irsay for saying what had to be said.

10/14/09

jaxscorpio

4

This comment was voted poor quality by FanIQ (Show anyway)

10/14/09

liuweba

0	This comment was voted poor quality by FanIQ (Show anyway)

10/14/09

Scottpositron27

1	(Edited by Scottpositron27) people need to step back and reexamine what was said about McNabb. read it and understand the comments. Not the BS. Is Limbaugh as bad as Schotz?

10/14/09

kwheels

1	guessi wont be making comments on this site ,sense i plan on puttin a bid on a team soon...on a side note,when did ppl start puttin spam on this site,been gone for a week and this is wut this site has come to now?

10/14/09

lakerskins

1

jaxscorpio wrote:

I've been a listener of Rush for years, and I have never heard anything sexist or racist ever exit his lips. the man has been correct on most of the things he has said, and when he's wrong, he's man enough to admit it. Al Sharpton, the liberals favorite race baiter, has never admited it when he wrongly accuses white cops of raping a black woman (all officers were aquitted), and when he accuses a bunch of evil rich white lacrosse players of raping a poor black stripper (the lacrosse players were found INNOCENT. that being said, why would it be such a bad thing for Rush Limbaugh to own an NFL team? it might do the Rams good to have a leader like El Rushbo at the helm. Liberals hate Rush Limbaugh because the little peons listen to him and hear truth instead of watching the State Run Media (NBC, ABC, CBS, CNN, PMSNBC for all you liberals) and hearing the messiah (Barack H Obama, for all you liberals) talking points straight from the white house. I hope you're happy with your "Hope and change" everyone, because very soon, we will have the North American Union, and kiss the Constitution goodbye!

well, this so called nwo was supposed to have been happened. rush never being biased or racist?... come on fam be realistic! if he becomes part owner or owner whatever it may be, it'll be a sad day for pro football! liberals conservatives??? this is about football not politicks, and i'd take hope and change anyday over shock and awe-ful!! get it? it was a shock that, the plan to invade iraq was sooooooooo awful!! lmao!

10/14/09

justincaseof1

2

His political views should not have anything to do with ownership. Do you think he will be at the games talking like he does on his show? I think not. He is giving his money and is in it for money. That being said, there are plenty of other so-called racist around and that is okay. Nevertheless, Rush will be knocked out of running for ownership and the group he is with (yes he would not be sole owener) will be out of luck. This group is only looking at 60% ownership, since Stan Kronke owns 40%. Then again, the team might not even be for sale. I say sell the team to another group move the team out of St. Louis and then St. Louis will be without a football team again and will not get another one.

10/14/09

BigTone2475

2

It's 2009 we have a black man as president and still everything has to be turned into a race issue. I'm sick of it. There is nothing racial about this its a business deal plain and simple. Even if Rush wanted to use it as a political stage the NFL would never allow it. I bet if Sharpton or Jackson wanted to buy in and white players and owners threw a fit the sh!t would hit the fan. There would be so many lawsuits your head would spin. There is such a double standard in this country.

10/14/09

ManningsOffense

0

On the April 1 edition of his nationally syndicated radio show, Rush Limbaugh said of a potential Hillary Clinton presidency, "[Y]ou have to understand the mindset of a lot of these feminists and women. They think they're owed this -- just like Obama supporters think they're owed this." Limbaugh continued: "These women have paid their dues. They've been married two or three times; they've had two or three abortions; they've done everything that feminism asked them to do. They have cut men out of their lives; they have devoted themselves to causes and careers. And this -- the candidacy of Hillary Clinton -- is the culmination of all of these women's efforts." He further stated: "And if it gets stolen from them, in their minds -- not actually stolen, but if the country or if the Democrat [sic] Party rejects this wonderfully great, lying woman in exchange for a rookie, radical black guy who can't tell the time of day, they are going to be so miffed. They are going to be so upset."

Limbaugh went on to claim: "[T]his is what the Democrat Party has sown ... The blacks one part of the constituency, the women another part. And both of them think they're owed this by the party, and if whoever doesn't get this -- the Hillary side, the Obama side -- they're going to think the party screwed them."

10/14/09

thjacobsjr

3

Individuals such as Rush Limbaugh is a poor example of American ideals, just the fact alone that he is a adv it prescription pain med abuser, that should be the number one reason to disqualify him. Second and most of all his opinions and core belief system is contradictory to all that the average American works and fights for today, and it would be hugely insulting to the memory of all those who fought and died in each movement for civil liberties and equal rights. Yes he has a following but they are just as confused as he is, and I guess next Glen Beck will be in Giddell's office tearing up about loving America and the team he wants to buy. I think we and citizens of the greatest country on the planet should seek to get on the same page so that we won't be viewed as Hippocrates to the rest of the world as we have been for so long.

10/14/09

daddybair33

1	we are talking about the rams, like anybody would notice

10/15/09

jaxscorpio

1

thjacobsjr wrote:

Individuals such as Rush Limbaugh is a poor example of American ideals, just the fact alone that he is a adv it prescription pain med abuser, that should be the number one reason to disqualify him. Second and most of all his opinions and core belief system is contradictory to all that the average American works and fights for today, and it would be hugely insulting to the memory of all those who fought and died in each movement for civil liberties and equal rights. Yes he has a following but they are just as confused as he is, and I guess next Glen Beck will be in Giddell's office tearing up about loving America and the team he wants to buy. I think we and citizens of the greatest country on the planet should seek to get on the same page so that we won't be viewed as Hippocrates to the rest of the world as we have been for so long.

First off, he WAS addicted to pain meds, not anymore. second, more Americans consider themselves right of center, than left of center. Who do you think the people were at the forefront of the civil rights movement? it wasn't Democrats. It was a Republican President who issued the Executive Order known as the Emancipation Proclimation that freed the slaves, and it was Republicans who introduced legislation that gave blacks the rights they enjoy today. The democrats, led by Strom Thurmond, actually voted against the Civil Rights Amendment! Please do research before posting something as idiotic as your post was. Again, Rush Limbaugh has never said any of the things that he has been accused of. those are lies from the left wing. I agree with the posts that said that Rush Limbaugh owning a football team has nothing to do with his politics, and everything to do with business. it's just a shame that people like "Rev" Jesse Jackson and "Rev" Al Sharpton always feel the need to stick their noses where they don't belong.

10/15/09

aerockyulhim

1

jaxscorpio wrote:

First off, he WAS addicted to pain meds, not anymore. second, more Americans consider themselves right of center, than left of center. Who do you think the people were at the forefront of the civil rights movement? it wasn't Democrats. It was a Republican President who issued the Executive Order known as the Emancipation Proclimation that freed the slaves, and it was Republicans who introduced legislation that gave blacks the rights they enjoy today. The democrats, led by Strom Thurmond, actually voted against the Civil Rights Amendment! Please do research before posting something as idiotic as your post was. Again, Rush Limbaugh has never said any of the things that he has been accused of. those are lies from the left wing. I agree with the posts that said that Rush Limbaugh owning a football team has nothing to do with his politics, and everything to do with business. it's just a shame that people like "Rev" Jesse Jackson and "Rev" Al Sharpton always feel the need to stick their noses where they don't belong.

If you think the Republicans of today are the same as the Republicans of the 19th century (or hell, even the first half of the 20th century), you are sadly mistaken. Same can be said of the Democrats, who used to be the slave-owners and opposed to civil rights. There was a radical shift in the middle of the 20th century where both parties completely changed their ideologies. Modern republicans are nothing like they used to be.