These fabricated quotes were introduced into the zeitgeist by talking heads, of course, at MSNBC and CNN, putting Rush in the unenviable position of having to prove a negative.  And sensing an opening, professional race-hustler Al Sharpton, armed with extorted corporate cash from his National Action Network, quickly joined the battle.  Now, following Dave Checketts’ letter removing Limbaugh as a member of the proposed ownership group, the Reverend Al is declaring Victory! over his long-time nemesis.  But were the racialist assertions of a grievance pimp, and the ensuing posturing pandering palaver of other owners as well as the NFL commissioner himself, the prime force in this action?

Or, could it have something to do with billionaire George Soros reported involvement or desire to be involved in the Rams ownership group.  It is unclear whether the shadowy Soros has been involved all along, or has recently expressed interest.  But, while much more low key than Rush, Soros is no less controversial or polarizing a figure.  So while many of the usual suspects on the “proggy side of the street” may be celebrating the put down of their long time foe, their resort to both an essentially ideological disqualification as well as the nuclear option of invoking racism may well mean that their Patron, Mr. Soros, may have to be scotched as well lest the obvious double standard soil the entire brand.

The bottom line on all of this is that if the league is going to rely on alleged statements to disqualify a person from owning an NFL franchise, they ought to at least make sure that those egregious remarks were actually made!  And they need to use independent investigators, because as with the Breitbart/Acorn sting, this episode has gone a step further in exposing the inherent bias of the legacy media as well as their willingness to propagate naked hearsay in order to advance the desired narrative.  As Toby Harnden put it:

The irony is, of course, that the people reporting this as fact are the same types who are always denouncing bloggers and the internet as forces of evil intent on destroying proper journalism – proper journalism being the kind that involves checking facts. In the case of Rush Limbaugh, however, it seems to be enough that the intention (i.e. to show the talk radio host is a racist) is considered pure.

[emphasis-ed.]

Especially vile is CNN’s Sanchez’s repeating of the unfounded rumor after receiving a free ride from the press for his own sin of running over a pedestrian while driving drunk, and then leaving the scene of the accident.  But all that aside, it’s OK to dislike Rush the entertainer for the things he actually says, after all, I'm sure he provides so much material on his daily 3 hour show that there’s no need for his ideological opponents, bent on once more making the political-personal, to make anything up; in their zeal to attach to him the most toxic, and lately the most recklessly applied, label there is in America…

UPDATE: The long walkback has begun.  HuffPo removed the phony quotations after only 3 years and 3 months; I'm glad their editors were so thorough.  And that twit Sanchez has twittered, "our bad", as a backhanded apology for the whole affair.  It doesn't matter anyway, their work is done; Limbaugh's chance at part ownership of an NFL franchise has been thwarted...

MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!

Rocketman