Rush: Progressive Truth Squad’s Next Target Is Orlando Magic Owner

Regardless of what your opinion of Rush Limbaugh is, when he makes pronouncements, he tends to be way more often than not. When he says “don’t doubt me on this”, he tends to be right. And said pronouncements aren’t usually the easy. common sense, “well, sure, of course” type ones. Here’s another

(The Blaze) Following the ouster of Los Angeles Clippers owner Donald Sterling, Rush Limbaugh speculated on Wednesday that Rich DeVos, the owner of the Orlando Magic, could be the next person targeted by the NBA because of his views on gay marriage.

Limbaugh cited a CNN report by Rachel Nichols in which she discusses some of the “very unpopular statements” DeVos has made on the issue of gay marriage.

“There are a lot of people in this country who think that that is a problem, and I think that there is gonna be more and more attention paid to what these owners think,” Nichols said in the report. “It’s not just the players in the spotlight now, it’s not just management. They’re accountable, too.”

Limbaugh argued that Nichols was “basically saying that the next target that they’re gonna try to take out is Rich DeVos.”

“So Rich DeVos, Mr. Amway — he happens to be one of the greatest patriots this country has ever seen. Rich DeVos happens to have donated and supported some of the greatest causes in this country, but it doesn’t matter ’cause he doesn’t have his mind right on gay marriage,” he added.

Audio available at The Blaze.

Is Rush right? Time will tell. Let’s remember what Mavericks owner Mark Cuban said a few days ago

“I think you’ve got to be very, very careful when you start making blanket statements about what people say and think, as opposed to what they do. It’s a very, very slippery slope.”

“If it’s about racism and we’re ready to kick people out of the league, OK? Then what about homophobia? What about somebody who doesn’t like a particular religion? What about somebody who’s anti-Semitic? What about a xenophobe?”

“In this country, people are allowed to be morons.”

“But regardless of your background, regardless of the history they have, if we’re taking something somebody said in their home and we’re trying to turn it into something that leads to you being forced to divest property in any way, shape or form, that’s not the United States of America. I don’t want to be part of that.”

It is a very dangerous, slippery slope. Cuban was right that Sterling’s comments where “abhorrent”. I think we can all agree with that (unless you are a racist). And, IMO, Sterling’s comments were racist, being based on hate, rather than just stupidity (like Cliven Bundy). But, are we going to ban people, take their businesses away, possibly jail them? How about “hunting them down”?

(Newsday) The Nassau County district attorney and Hempstead Town officials are investigating what they called a racial incident at a town facility in Levittown that may be considered a hate crime.

A picture of a monkey was displayed on a bulletin board at the town highway facility on Market Lane on Monday, apparently making reference to an African-American employee, officials said.

“We will not rest . . . until the perpetrator is found. We will move to terminate that employee,” Town Supervisor Kate Murray said at a news conference, adding the town will require diversity training for the 25 employees at the facility. “There is absolutely no tolerance for any kind of racial hatred, any kind of intolerance.”

There are many examples of this same thing. I ran across a story on Yahoo News Wednesday where a nice old Black lady, beloved within a diverse community, who had lived there for like 60 years, received a nasty racist letter. This was being investigated as a hate crime. NY City actually has a “Hate Crime Unit”. Thought and speech is being codified and restricted. Violent crime is often being prosecuted more on hate crime than on the actual violence. There are cases where the hate crime penalties are tougher than the actual crime. Democrats want the Justice Department to scour the Internet for “hate speech”.

People who support this should think really hard about that support, because they could be next. You never know when a casual thought and phrase could get you in trouble. People should be allowed to be morons.

Granted, the NBA is a private organization, and can enforce their own rules. The 1st Amendment is about Government not retaliating against speech, protest, or petitioning for redress of grievance (among others). In the private domain, hey, people can respond. And do. But, shutting it down certainly violates the spirit of the 1st.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

6 Responses to “Rush: Progressive Truth Squad’s Next Target Is Orlando Magic Owner”

  1. Jeffery says:

    Private businesses and organizations have an obligation to manage their public perception to maximize their profits. Having one of your top executives harming the business, the brand, the public perception, by their actions (not thoughts), especially when it involves frank racism in an industry tightly tied to the African-American community, could be devastating to the business.

    It bad management to have the boss (Sterling) think so poorly of the employees.

    Sterling does not have to sell the franchise, he can keep it, but the NBA is not obligated to do business with the Clippers. The court of public opinion no longer tolerates the public face of racism.

  2. […] Anyway, watch what you say, you could be next. […]

  3. Kevin says:

    “…he tends to be way more often than not.”

    It’s hard to argue with such a bold statement, Teach. Mostly because it’s missing a word or two :).

  4. You’re mostly right, Jeff. We shouldn’t tolerate racism. But do we have a right to penalize thought?

    Whoops! That’s what happens when have too many thoughts in the am.

  5. Jeffery says:

    Mr. Sterling was not penalized for his thoughts. He was penalized for his actions.

  6. david7134 says:

    The Germans did not like the Jews in the 30’s. So, according to your logic, it was ok for them to separate that group from society.

Pirate's Cove