It has been announced that the REAL voice of the republican party WILL NOT be in on the deal to buy the St.Louis Rams. Now, here's where I start to piss people off. I don't think he should have been excluded. I know what you're thinking, "Complaint Department Manager, have you lost your damn mind?!?!" Actually, no. Here's why:
Like it or not, the guy has the cash. Now, having said that, we live in a country where you can buy pretty much anything you want, so long as you got the cheese to get it with(at least in theory). He's got the cheese and him buying the Rams doesn't break any law. In this country, you have the right to be an owner of a business and you have the right to prosper by it...but you also may fail and with that, you're on your own. Let that just set with you for a while, now.
The players were out in force saying they won't play for the walking drugstore, BULLSHIT! I agree wholeheartedly with Stephen A. Smith who has been ALL over this since it came out. We agree in the point that these guys won't risk not having a job JUST because they don't like the owner, I ain't buyin' it and not even if you spotted me the cash. When it's all said and done, if you have a choice between being unemployed and getting a multi-million dollar payday financed by someone who you personally loathe...I'm sorry, but you're ALL taking the payday. Unless you are already so financially well off that you don't need the money, you're going to cash that check. You may talk shit about the guy, but you'll be doing it all the way to the bank.
Someone try to talk me down from here. Think about it for a while, let it marinade on the brain before you throw rocks.
I am the Complaint Department Manager and I'm taking the payday.
51 comments:
re " buy in bulk " ROFLMAO==love the symbolism.
I've read a little and listened to some talk but I'm not really up on this deal C. Isn't it true football is made up of mostly conservatives or something like that? It seems like the management(or whatever you call them who are selling the team) doesn't want the Limpballs associated with the team, it would be bad for them. OK, nuf said by stupid, knowing-nothing-about-football woman...
I understand what you are saying completely. I worked for about a year for a subsidiary of Halliburton while Cheney was CEO. I thought Cheney was an ass at that time, but it didn't stop me from cashing the ol' paycheck.
JC; as long as you were not doing the electrical work for the showers in iraq built by KBR i do not have a problem with that. -:)
Jerry - Exactly. My take is this, if you're going to be this up in arms, then be prepared to be called on it. I myself have worked at a company where I had a disdain for the owner, but I still needed a check. I do think though, it would be hilarious for him to buy the team only for it to go belly up.
RZ - yes, it did not involve electrical work. In fact, it was before Iraq, before Cheney as VP, and when KBR was just K and BR -- two separate companies.
Guess he can lick his wounds when he gets to judge the 2010 Miss America Pageant. ; )
Hey Sharpton,didn't Rush make a reference about Roscoe Parish to "Chicken and Waffles"?
Ooops wrong commentator. Okay no biggie.
The best thing about Rush being kicked off the group wanting to buy the Rams is that they may be short of money. You see, I live in the Rams broadcast area. Each week I am subjected to the misery of a Rams game while the Steelers are playing the Patriots. Or Dallas is playing the Giants. I've been tough on Rush through the years and I thought this was his way of punishing me. Helping to keep the Rams in St.Louis.
Nice blog. Enjoyed your song playlist.
Truth - I used to live in Spokane, Wa. Try watching nothing but Seahawk games...oh, the humanity. I hear ya.
Of course he tried to pin all of the negative reaction on everyone but himself, playing the victim yet again.
Jim Irsay of the Colts was the first to speak up against Limbaugh being part of the management group, but I'm sure there were more than a few owners who didn't want him anywhere near the National Football League.
But as was said....he still has The Miss America Pageant...and what the hell are THEY thinking? LOL?
The Miss America Pageant -- Limbaugh will be following in the footsteps of Perez Hilton. Now there is a twosome for you -- Hilton and Limbaugh. Hugh, you are right. What are they thinking?
CDM.........forget the payday stuff. It ain't worth all the crap that comes out of this man's mouth.
I've found that nine times out of ten, the people who curse Rush Limbaugh the loudest are those who have never listened to his show. My mother can't stand him and has never listened to anything he has said, but rather she has listened to what OTHERS say about him. Rush explained how these rumors and false statements got started, and there is no proof that he made the statements, but that doesn't stop Jessie Jackson and Al Sharpton from running around crying "racist."
I'm glad he won't be distracted by ownership in a team. It will be better for America if he stays focused on his most important job...energizing conservatism in America. Wait until I get my helmet on before you start throwing things!
OH Linda please! Rush says from his own dirty big mouth that he's all entertainment and does it for the money! It's all about the money with old limpballs, He doesn't give 2 shits about America and you naive conservatives. He says Baaa Baaa when he sees you coming!
Linda, I did before he went on satellite AND his B.S. show on TV all those years he claimed "Bill Clinton held the U.S. hostage." My best friend used to live across the street from me when we both lived in Arkansas and his dad loved that wind bag. I used to think it was funny, at first, but you can only take so much of that drivel.
You can't build a shovel big enough to shovel the crap he dishes out.
Sue and CDM ~ I completely disagree with your assessment of Rush Limbaugh's purpose. He does care very much about America and he understands completely how liberalism is endangering our liberty and solvency as a nation. He supports the concept of pulling yourself up from adversity with the strength of your own "spine," but (I know you won't believe this) he is all for helping those who truly are helpless and in need. Sure he makes a boatload of money from what he does, because his show is THE most important and effective talk show available, and he makes TONS of money for his sponsors. Why shouldn't he make as much money as he can? You would do the same thing if it were possible for you. He raises millions of dollars every year for leukemia (I think it's leukemia) and MATCHES the total donation. He is not perfect, of course, but he is probably the most maligned person in the media today...and the most effective!
Charity man, effective, money maker..., does not make the man worth listening to. He is a pompous bigmouth who loves to stir up the rightwing wackos. If not for the wackos he would be gone!
Republicans give/democrats take.
I think there is a disconnect here lisa with that kind of statement. CDM and I had a conversation about this very subject. We see how richass rethugs throw their money at charities, they get the tax credit and thats the end of that. They don't give a fuck about the poor and the needy, they prove that with every single piece of legislation that comes before them, they puke on it! Get real girlfriend, the liberal/progressives in this country are the true humanitarians!!
If I hear one more holier than thou conservative talk about their money-giving-to-the-poor, I will SCREAM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! It's not always about YOUR MONEY!
First of all I don't have money Sue and the concern me and many others have is that the democrats are looking to take more from us and they use the stupid lame argument about the poor meanwhile Goldman Sacks is raking in record profits,the unemployment is and forclosures are at record highs and you cheerlead this?
I guess you will have your rude awakening when inflation hits you directly while you are waiting for your number to be called for your medical procedures.
I love the way rich liberals justify their wealth by pretending to care while they are all getting richer and the rest of us are getting poorer.
They use the poor and the minorities for vo3747280tes.
That's their tactic. Always has been always will be.
lisa didn't you tell me last week you won a million from a lawsuit?? I asked you for a loan, remember?
Inflation has already hit me directly, I'm living on unemployment and have no insurance. Now can I have that loan??
That was satire Sue. I was sing a pun on how carried away harassment suits can get.
You are unemployed and it doesn't bother you that the policies this administration is putting in place with it's over burden on business will cause less jobs? I don't see your reasoning.
Obama and the democrats have nothing better to do than to bash those who disagree with them instead of actually trying to do something about the economy? Without jobs all the rest of it is moot.
Although maybe when we hand over alot of our economy over to China as payback then maybe we will see more jobs. But the rich liberals need not worry because they won't be the ones working for those Chines Companies because they will be working in cohorts with them with all their influence of human
rights of 8 hour work days and 1 hour lunches.
I know it will be tough to deal with but who will you be able to complain to the guy in the White House with the Red Chinese Communist Flag waving acroos the street?
I know I shouldn't be fear mongering because after all this is America and that can never happen in America. Obama will never let that happen.
I am a realist. As bad as things were and are, Obama can not snap his fingers and millions of jobs will appear. The stimulus is working and by next year things will be looking up. He has not lied about his plans, it is a process and he knows what he is doing. I trust him so far.
http://philanthropy.com/free/articles/v19/i04/04001101.htm
http://philanthropy.com/news/prospecting/index.php?id=6166
http://www.620wtmj.com/shows/charliesykes/45185897.html
-- Although liberal families' incomes average 6 percent higher than those of conservative families, conservative-headed households give, on average, 30 percent more to charity than the average liberal-headed household ($1,600 per year vs. $1,227).
-- Conservatives also donate more time and give more blood.
-- Residents of the states that voted for John Kerry in 2004 gave smaller percentages of their incomes to charity than did residents of states that voted for George Bush.
-- Bush carried 24 of the 25 states where charitable giving was above average.
-- In the 10 reddest states, in which Bush got more than 60 percent majorities, the average percentage of personal income donated to charity was 3.5. Residents of the bluest states, which gave Bush less than 40 percent, donated just 1.9 percent.
-- People who reject the idea that "government has a responsibility to reduce income inequality" give an average of four times more than people who accept that proposition.
Brooks demonstrates a correlation between charitable behavior and "the values that lie beneath" liberal and conservative labels. Two influences on charitable behavior are religion and attitudes about the proper role of government.
I think you will see, Sue, that conservatives are the ones who REALLY care about the poor - not so much liberals.
Oh, and who knew that LIBERAL households have larger on average incomes than conservatives. Kinda' deflates your "rich selfish conservative" argument, doesn't it?
I fogot to put quote marks around the section after the links to articles. It is a quote from the last of the links posted. Sorry for the omission.
I repeat, its not about YOUR money and how much you give. That does not make you a caring person. Caring comes from the heart not the pocketbook.
So because liberals "say" they care that means they do.
They are so heartfelt.
C, perhaps Rush wanted some anabolic steroids to add to his collection. :-)
Sue ~ Yeah, all your "I feel your pain" sentiments will help no one! Believe it or not, sharing your money, time, and lifeblood are VERY caring ways to help people. You can tell them you care all day long, but if you don't give of yourself in any form, then what good is it? Democrats love to think that because they want to put everyone on the public rolls and "pay" for everything using the public's own money, that THAT is showing how much they care. What a load of baloney!! If you really care, you will help people to help themselves, and then they won't HAVE to rely upon the charity of others. They will also gain a little pride in their self-reliance and ability to do it on their own without handouts from the "caring" Dems. The only reason to keep people dependent generation after generation is in order to insure the certainty of a large block of "loyal" voters. Power is the name of the game. It's always been about power...and money.
RZ, CDM, & TC ~ Do you have the same attitude about drug use among, musicians, actors, athletes and your own friends? It always amazes me how quickly people can forgive the addiction problems and alcohol problems of their favorite stars, but just let a conservative become addicted because of a physical problem and BAM! You have no human sympathy at all for conservatives...as a matter of fact you laugh in derision over their problems, but you can eek out all kinds of compassion for the crack addict on your favorite NFL team or the steroid abuser on the baseball team or a whole boatload of drug use by some singer. What a bunch of hypocrits.
where do you come up with these ridiculous notions that dems want handouts, freebys, government to take care of them?? Its a fuckin bullshit lie and I am sick to death of hearing it!! From back to welfare reform to todays organizations where people are helping people get back on their feet after hardships. All they want is to have pride to help themselves have a better life, to take care of themselves and their families with good paying jobs and a roof over their heads. BUT some people need a helping hand! These preconceived notions of yours are WRONG!!!!
AND your accusations about the guys here and their attitude about drug use, well maybe you should ask first and accuse afterwards. POOR, poor friggin conservatives, always getting the short end of the stick... Pretty wimpy of you Linda
Another thing, where is your sense of compassion for the helpless and those in need of government support at certain times in their lives, you despise them but at the same time condone and even encourage the greedy wall street hoodlums and insurance thieves. You should be ashamed Linda. Trickledown Reaganomics is a sham and a lie and todays economy proves it never worked. BUT... don't let anyone dare say a bad word about your partys "god" reagan.
Sue ~ Today's financial problems can be traced directly back to the housing sub-prime loan scheme. That falls on none other but the democrats in Congress who forced--FORCED lending institutions to make sub-prime loans available to people with bad credit ratings. The crooks at Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae drummed up thousands of "deserving" people who wanted to buy homes...they were aided in this noble pursuit by more crooks at ACORN. The only problem was that the people who were given these sub-prime loans had little or no ability or inclination to repay the loans. That started the whole thing. Then Senator Barack Obama, who was running for President did nothing for 3 long years but talk down the economy. Many members in Congress tried to stop the stupid lending that was going on, but they were called "racist" (surprise, surprise) because the democrats were busy buying voters with the sub-prime loan scheme. The lending institutions sat with stacks of toxic loans. Consumer confidence was shaken and the whole thing started collapsing. The beginning of it all began with Barney Frank, Chris Dodd and others who refused to stop the stupid practice of loaning money to people who obviously were unable or unwilling to repay the money.
Reagan was right, as evidenced by the long period of prosperity we enjoyed because of his wisdom.
Sue ~ I didn't criticize the guys for their attitude about drug use. I criticized their smirking ridicule of Rush Limbaugh who became addicted to pain medication because of a back injury.
Here is another point of view of what Reagan did to the economy.
http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/08/06/3003
"In addition to badly throwing the nation into debt, Reagan's tax cut blew out the ceiling on the accumulation of wealth, leading to a new Gilded Age and the rise of a generation of super-wealthy that hadn't been seen since the Robber Baron era of the 1890s or the Roaring 20s.
And, most tragically, Reagan's tax cuts caused America to stop investing in infrastructure. As a nation, we've been coasting since the early 1980s, living on borrowed money while we burn through (in some cases literally) the hospitals, roads, bridges, steam tunnels, and other infrastructure we built in the Golden Age of the Middle Class between the 1940s and the 1980s.
We even stopped investing in the intellectual infrastructure of this nation: college education. A degree that a student in the 1970s could have paid for by working as a waitress at a Howard Johnson's restaurant (what my wife did in the late 60s - I did so working as a near-minimum-wage DJ) now means incurring massive and life-altering debt for all but the very wealthy. Reagan, who as governor ended free tuition at the University of California, put into place the foundations for the explosion in college tuition we see today."
"Do you have the same attitude about drug use among, musicians, actors, athletes and your own friends?"
I take a no tolerance policy with those you have listed. So, yes. It doesn't matter what persuasion they are. Does this make you feel less suspicious?
To me, once someone crosses the line, they're fair game.
thanks for that expert comment Jerry!!
hey C, where ya been??
Observing. Is it me, or is anyone seeing a trend?
I need clarity on that one C
I'm just noticing how easy it is for some to advocate on the side of their known spreader of irresponsible hatred, while someone like Grayson is just unacceptable.
Just an observation.
Your own crap always smells better than someone else's.
JC ~ Thanks for stating your opinion so...eloquently...sigh.
you gotta point there Jerry...
Nope, I'm pretty sure mine is worse.
*giggles and runs away...still giggling*
Thanks Sue, but it is not really about scoring points.
I think Reagan is given a lot of undeserved credit. He started the mess we are in now. He is not the only one and there are a lot of democrats as well as republican to blame, but he started it all. Of course, that's all for another post. This one is supposed to be about Limbaugh.
Yes let's blame Rush Limbaugh instead of addressing the real reasons of the state of poor black communities.
Of course it has nothing to do with entitlement mentality.
Post a Comment