The Radio Equalizer: Brian Maloney

10 August 2007

Ed Schultz Barry Bonds Baseball Remarks, Rush Limbaugh

ON THE LEFT FOOT

Libtalk Hypocrisy On Racial Sports Analogies?







Nearly four years ago, talk titan Rush Limbaugh was raked over the coals for injecting a bit of racial politics into football commentary. During an ESPN broadcast, El Rushbo essentially called Philadelphia Eagles quarterback Donovan McNabb overrated:


I don't think he's been that good from the get-go. I think what we've had here is a little social concern in the NFL. The media has been very desirous that a black quarterback do well. They're interested in black coaches and black quarterbacks doing well... McNabb got a lot of the credit for the performance of the team that he really didn't deserve. The defense carried this team.


The subsequent media firestorm endured for weeks, involving the usual "civil rights" suspects and resulted in Limbaugh's resignation as commentator on ESPN's Sunday NFL Countdown pregame program.


Given the headache that particular comment created for Rush, would it be reasonable to believe other talk show hosts would very carefully choose their words while discussing sport and race?

And what happens when the shoe is on the other foot, as in the "left" one? Are white libtalk hosts held to the same standard as Rush in 2003?

For your consideration, here's nationally- syndicated "progressive" talk host Ed Schultz comparing Barry Bonds (who he has been adamantly supporting on-air for some time) to Babe Ruth:


SCHULTZ: (Wednesday, 8 August 2007, 14:07EDT) Babe Ruth didn’t play against any brothas. He didn’t play against any Latin Americans. He didn’t face the pitching that Barry Bonds faced, or Roger Maris faced, for that matter, right?

I mean, when Babe Ruth played baseball, everybody basically sucked compared to today’s standards. So it’s all relative. So who’s the greatest? Ah, how do we know that the booze that Babe Ruth, I mean, he had a couple of cool ones, right?

Alright, we all know that. How do we know that he didn’t have a few cool ones before he went to the plate? Made him a little juiced up, his adrenaline, so to speak. We don’t know. But in today’s world, man, we’re under the microscope big time.

I say give Barry Bonds his due right now and I’ll respect the brotha’ for the 756th home run last night, when the focus should be on the Mets fan that got the ball. We gotta find out if he’s gonna be paying any taxes on this thing or not.

So, I found that to be an interesting e-mail, you should have an asterisk by ALL of Babe Ruth’s records, cause he played against zero black guys and that’s like playing hockey with no Canadians!

That would be a lousy league, wouldn’t it. That would be a very lousy league. The National Hockey League with just Americans? The NHL wouldn’t even have a TV contract if that was the case.


So, from the great wisdom of Ed Schultz, here's what we've learned to date:


Barry Bonds is a better player than Babe Ruth ever was because the former is up against black and latino opponents, while the white players "sucked" during the latter's reign.


Because Barry was never officially caught using steroids, we must give him the benefit of the doubt.


Pro sporting events without black players simply can't hold the public's interest.


So far, the reaction to Big Eddie's remarks has been less than zero. Sure, he didn't say it during an ESPN pregame show and libtalk's audience is considerably smaller than El Rushbo's. For all we know, your Radio Equalizer may have been the only one listening.

Nonetheless, what entitles Schultz to a free pass, when the same remarks by a conservative would set off a firestorm? The question is certainly worth asking.


FOR Boston- area talk radio updates, see our other site.


Your Amazon orders that begin with clicks here, regardless of what you ultimately purchase, help to further this site's efforts.

Or, if you would prefer, please contribute at the Honor System box in the upper right corner. Thanks again!



Technorati tags:

5 Comments:

  • Brian wrote:

    Barry Bonds is a better player than Babe Ruth ever was because the former is up against black and latino opponents, while the white players "sucked" during the latter's reign.


    Because Barry was never officially caught using steroids, we must give him the benefit of the doubt.


    Pro sporting events without black players simply can't hold the public's interest.
    ----------------


    Rush was saying that people gave McNabb too much credit, credit his performance wouldn't support, because he is black , and people wanted to see a black quarterback succeed.

    Schultz seems to be saying that today's baseball players are better than players of the 30's and 40's, because they are able to play against the best players from all over the world. If his point was strictly race based, he would not have brought up the point about playing baseball against Latin Americans or playing hockey against Canadians or other non-Americans.

    It's logical that when the best baseball players, of any racial background, can come from anywhere on the earth, the quality of play in the league will be better than if the potential participants are restricted to people of one race, from one small part of the world.

    Schultz' point had to do with quality of play, not race. To believe otherwise, you have to completely ignore his mentioning of the viability of televised broadcast hockey that excluded Canadians, or his mentioning of Latino baseball players (who could be of any race).

    Regarding Bonds steroid use, there's been plenty of evidence, but as of yet he hasn't been convicted of using steroids. He hasn't failed a drug test.It's been several years since he's been in the spotlight for his alleged steroid use, yet he continues to hit home runs and an amazing pace (especially for his age).

    Regarding the last point you took from Ed Schultz's show:
    "Pro sporting events without black players simply can't hold the public's interest."

    I don't know where you got that from??? The only time he addressed a sport not holding the public's interest, it had to do with hockey , if there were just Americans in the league. Last I checked there weren't very many Black Canadian hockey players, and many other great NHL players come from the other side of the Atlantic ocean, and they aren't Black either.

    By Blogger Ezsuds, at 11 August, 2007 00:30  

  • Fast Eddie said: Babe Ruth didn’t play against any brothas.

    Well then, Fast Eddie is calling the late Negro Leaguer great Buck O'Neil a liar:

    COACH: What is your fondest recollection from your playing days? Is there a moment, a game, or season that stands out above the rest?

    O'NEIL: Just the idea that I played with some of the greatest ballplayers in the world: Satchel Paige, "Bullet" Joe Rogan, and Newt Allen. They were great, great baseball players. I played against Josh Gibson, Cool Papa Bell, and Buck Leonard--the great Negro League players. I also played against Babe Ruth and Dizzy Dean.

    The first time I played against Babe Ruth was on the South Side of Chicago. It was an exhibition game between the Satchel Paige All-Stars and the Babe Ruth All-Stars. Back then they didn't have a fence--they had these tall cedar trees in the outfield. His first time up, Babe hit the first pitch off Satchel and it went over those trees. It must have traveled 500 feet.

    Do you know who was the first person to greet Babe Ruth at home plate after he trotted around the bases? It was Satchel Paige. He wanted to congratulate him. They held up the game for 15 minutes while they sent a kid out to find the ball, bring it back, and have Babe Ruth autograph it for Satchel Paige. And the fans just went crazy.


    findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0FIH/is_4_74/ai_n17207698

    Fast Eddie said: He didn’t play against any Latin Americans.

    Ruth was suspended the first month of the 1924 season by Commissioner Landis for barnstorming. Anybody want to guess just who it was he barnstormed against?

    By Blogger Smack, at 11 August, 2007 18:06  

  • Nice try.

    Playing against someone in an exhibition game is NOT the same as competing against them on a daily basis, throughout a twenty year Major League career.

    By Blogger Ezsuds, at 12 August, 2007 21:44  

  • Playing against someone in an exhibition game is NOT the same as competing against them on a daily basis, throughout a twenty year Major League career.

    What, you thought it was the only time it happened?

    Did your goalposts come with wheels, or do you have to weld them on?

    By Blogger Smack, at 13 August, 2007 17:32  

  • Funny how many Negro Leaguers didn't dispute Ruth's greatness.

    By Blogger Smack, at 13 August, 2007 17:37  

Post a Comment

<< Home



 
Page Rank Checker

Powered by Blogger