No, nobody thinks that Obama "ordered" Dee Smith to go after Limbaugh. He didn't need such an order. Dee Smith would, and did, do it all on his own. In fact, Smith was so far out on his own, that he never even polled the NFL players or the team union reps. In every way possible, Dee Smith went out on his own to make a public complaint from his own bully pulpit about Rush Limbaugh.

Dee Smith is a pure Democrat Washington insider. Friends with Eric Holder; a Patton Boggs partner; an Obama transition staff member; a donor to Kerry, and then Obama, and even Eleanor Holmes Norton. Dee Smith didn't need any instruction from the Obama White House to go after Limbaugh, any more than they needed to tell him what to have for brsakfast.

Perhaps your stupidest comment, Alex, was that Dee Smith may have acted as he did in the interest of the NFLPA's position in future collective bargaining. Rush Limbaugh said that before you did!

But I'm not saying anything you didn't know already. And you didn't tell me anything I didn't already know.

The real Limbaugh story is what it has exposed about a big sector of the media and sportswriting. This story was the nadir of journalism so far this year. With sportwriters all across the country happily using fake quotes, only to be called on their inaccuracy, only to then reply that accuracy didn't really matter when it comes to Limbaugh.

There will be blowback for all of these guys. NOt just Dee Smith. Bryan Burwell; Drew Sharp; Michael Wilbon; and too many others to name. If there position was that sports should unite, and not divide along political lines, they have made a mockery of it. They are all exposed. Their politics is on display. The blowback will be with a flame-thrower.

EDung

You are free to complain all you want. Despite the fact that you hate it, America's a great place. You know what really cracks me up: a) you think there's some sort of equivalency between Olbermann and Limbaugh, and b) that you think for even a nanosecond that you have any influence on NBC. That slays me!

Tool.

-- Discoursarian

As to any "equivalency" between Limbaugh and Olbermann, I just think that Rush is much more popular, and much richer, than Olbermann.

As to my having any "influence" at NBC, I am sure that I don't have much. I didn't claim that I'd be successful in seeking Olbermann's dismissal. The fact that Olbermann's NFL-association is so much less controversial than anything having to do with Rush Limbaugh tells us much about the MSM landscape. (The respective ratings of Olbermann and Rush tell us more about what ordinary Americans think.)

My point was simply to show that a liberal bomb-thrower like Olbermann gets a pass. Rush Limbaugh gets slandered. And the fact that Limbaugh's partners dropped him means nothing to me. They dropped him because of the media firestorm. Led by outlets like MSNBC, Salon, NPR, etc. And individual liberal idologues like DeMaurice Smith, Jim Irsay, and the comedy team of Jackson & Sharpton. Dropping Rush was the PC thing to do. Which might also be the smart-money thing to do. Doesn't make it right. People, and corporations, do dumb things in the name of political correctness all the time.

But just as I don't expect to actually get Keith Olbermann fired, you should not expect that this is in any way the end of Rush Limbaugh and the NFL. Who would have known about DeMaurice Smith before this week?

As to my "hating America." Go fuck yourself. I don't hate America. But I do hate you. Perhaps you'd like to get together sometime and discuss it with me in person.

Because while Olbermann has free speech rights, Olbermann's commercial/viewpoint speech is not without consequences.

Of course, being the smart (if poisonously misguided) guy that he is, Olbermann actually took the reasonable position that NFL owners should not be setting up their own moral tests for franchise ownership...

Who knows where Lake Wobegon really is? Well, we at least know that it is fictionally near St. Cloud. In the heart of Minnesota's red-state counties:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/fe/Minnesota_Presidential_Election_Results_by_County,_2008.svg/250px-Minnesota_Presidential_Election_Results_by_County,_2008.svg.png

Quite literally, the award of the Nobel Peace Prize to Obama was the Nobel Committee's bet against America. It was a "bet" in the sense that it was surely aimed at the future Obama, since there's no substantive achievement upon which to base any award to the Current Occupant. By their own terms, the Norwegians, were awarding a prize to "hope."

Moreover, the "bet" in question was a bet against American exceptionalism, the exercise of American power, the extension of American influence, and the protection of American interests. All to be subsumed by global, international interests. American interests and global interests are often one and the same. But if it were so easy, there'd have been no need to give Obama a Nobel Prize. Obama gets this award because the Committee thinks that in a pinch, Obama will side with "global" interests over "American" interests.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB40001424052748704429304574467080047317314.html