******************** THIS BLOG HAS MOVED TO WWW.LEGALINSURRECTION.COM ********************

This blog is moving to www.legalinsurrection.com. If you have not been automatically redirected please click on the link.

NEW COMMENTS will NOT be put through and will NOT be transferred to the new website.

Tuesday, October 13, 2009

Psychology Today: "Will Blacks play football for Massah Limbaugh?"

A columnist at Psychology Today has posted an article about the possibility that Rush Limbaugh will be part of a group to purchase the St. Louis Rams. The article is a must be read, for those who want a good look at racial stereotyping by someone who holds himself out as racially enlightened.

The article is titled If Rush Limbaugh buys the St. Louis Rams, Will it Become All White or All Right?. The sub-heading of the article is "Will Blacks play football for Massah Limbaugh?"

The article is a bizarre rant by someone who is a retired professor of "media psychology." The author devoted much of his professional life to studying media stereotyping.

Which makes the article even more stunning. The thesis of the article boils down to one big stereotype that only black athletes who share the author's liberal values are good athletes, and that any black athlete who would play for a Rush Limbaugh-owned team would not only be a sellout, but also no good on the field:
For racists, Limbaugh is a gift that keeps on giving. For minorities, he's something else that keeps on giving.

It's doubtful, even if a race-deaf, all-white team or a team with Black players who would play the Faust card for their "opportunity," that the Rams could break out of the league cellar. Truth is, today, without Black players on an NFL team, you might as well be playing in the JFL (Japanese Football League).
This is the same type of stereotyping used against Condoleeza Rice, Colin Powell (when he was Secretary of State, not now), Clarence Thomas, and any other black who rises to power without appropriate liberal credentials.

The sellout card is a pernicious type of racial stereotyping, and it is not surprising that the author, who falsely accuses Limbaugh of being a racist, is incapable of seeing his own hypocrisy and double-standards. Physician, heal thyself.

Related Posts:
Al Sharpton for NFL Commissioner
Farce Repeats Itself As History
An Allergic Reaction To The Race Card

Follow me on Twitter and Facebook


  1. It's the same old tired liberal double standard.

    If you are a liberal, racial stereotyping is fine. You're applauded for your acumen.

    If you're Jimmy-the-Greek you're fired and branded as a RACIST.

    And in the present day with the "leader of the free world" and his buddies accusing anyone who is not onboard with his socialist agenda as a RACIST - the term is being slowly but surely diluted and made irrelevant.

  2. I wonder if the folks at Psychology Today are familiar with the concept of "projection"?

  3. Fischoff assumes that he knows so much about racial injustices and being black in the US that he can summarize the collective actions of the every black player in the NFL concerning Limbaugh. I mean his use of "Massah" Rush makes that all the more obvious. Fischoff's down for the cause. He understands.


    He's a moron.

  4. Thanks for the heads-up on this. I've put the story up so that those of us in the biz with more balanced psyches can point and laugh.

  5. Rush's response to some of this stuff:

    The play by play on how the Left invented the false quotes they are now attacking him with: http://maaadddog.wordpress.com/2009/03/04/quotation-attributed-to-rush-limbaugh-is-a-damnable-lie/

    Ace on it all: http://ace.mu.nu/archives/293591.php

    No dirty trick is too low. Conservatives, myself included, need to ditch our natural assumption that when the Left makes an outlandish claim, that there must at least be some exaggerated speck of truth in it. There doesn't. We need to start assuming that everything they say is a lie until proven otherwise. How many whoppers have we let get past us simply because we assume nobody would ever make up such a thing?

  6. When I was getting my masters in counseling psych, a course in psych research and writing was a prerequisite to acceptance in the program. In the very first class the prof discussed credible psych resources. Guess which publication was singled out as an unacceptable source for a serious psych research paper? The prof described Psychology Today as the "People Magazine" of psychology publications. He then went on something of a rant about how it serves to undermine the credibility of the field. This article proves the point.

    I would just add, I am an Eagles fan. There is absolutely nothing Limbaugh said about Donovan McNabb that isn't debated daily by Eagles fans of all races. McNabb is the one who makes his race an issue whenever he is criticized. I don't know a single Eagles fan who cares a hoot about his race. We all want him to win, believe me. The question whether he can win the big one has nothing to do with his race, which was the point Limbaugh was trying to make.

  7. I was just reading another article that totally debunked Limbaugh ever making either quote - the slave one, and the James Earl Ray quote - the person most likely responsible for the James Earl Ray quote is someone who goes by the name Cobra.

    I find it very strange and very petty vindictive that these people are going to such lengths to put down another person. I do believe that Limbaugh has the grounds to sue the pants off Psychology Today over the publishing of an article that contains a vindictive lie about him.

    It is this vindictiveness that is so extreme in its viciousness. It is the same sort of vindictive comments that are being made about Fox News (good old Rupert Murdoch), about the TEA Party Movement in general, and about anybody who dares to say anything against the Naked Emperor.

    This is not the good ol' USA. It is something quite foreign and to this non USA citizen it is very perplexing indeed.

    Just a side note about Murdoch. He is a newspaper owner here in Australia (at least he used to own newspapers in the major capital cities such as Melbourne and Sydney). Murdoch is not a conservative but is one who can hedge his bets both ways, and yes in the past he gave money and promoted the ALP to put them into power. I am not sure what is accomplished by going after Rupert Murdoch in this fashion.

    The people staffing the White House have proved their own immaturity in that they find it necessary to play such petty vindictive politics. Dismissing the TEA Party movement was one thing, and then dismissing the gay rights movement is quite another. What better way to bring two disparate groups together to form a bond? The demonstration by the TEA Party movement was probably at least 2 or 3 times the size of the gay rights demonstration. That is a lot of people from all walks of life who have come to Washington and then being dismissed as though they did not exist.

    Obama has once again paid lip service to the gays. Lieberman has tried to address the issue that they want resolved. However, Obama himself could not care less about those very issues, for they are only convenient to help get him elected.... but those left wing gays are like battered wives....

    As for Rush, I do know that I have sometimes used his own phrasing to talk about feminists - namely calling them feminazis. I had no idea who Rush was, or had even heard him speak when I used that term.

    I still think Rush should sue... and I hope he wins.....

  8. How many whoppers have we let get past us simply because we assume nobody would ever make up such a thing?

    1) There is no biological basis to the concept of race. It is merely a social construct.

    2) The 1965 Immigration Act according to Ted Kennedy...

    "First, our cities will not be flooded with a million immigrants annually. Under the proposed bill, the present level of immigration remains substantially the same.... Secondly, the ethnic mix of this country will not be upset.... Contrary to the charges in some quarters, [the bill] will not inundate America with immigrants from any one country or area, or the most populated and deprived nations of Africa and Asia....

    Those are two pretty big ones that have had horrendous effects on this nation. Horrendous and probably irreversible.

  9. Rush Limbaugh can't be racist!

    Any perception of racism by a right-winger is simply imaginary.

    The right can't be racist, since the right-wing says there is no such thing as racism by the right-wing.

    Only minorities, liberals and Democrats can be racist, but not Republicans and the right-wing.

    This allows the right-wing to be as racist as they want, since right-wing racism doesn't exist.

  10. davemartin states:

    Let's see, you want a liberal to say that say other people or other races can be bigots, which is absolutely true, a racist can be anyone... even Samoan or Inuit.

    Very good, Dave. First time I heard a liberal actually acknowledge this very evident fact. But then, here you go messing all over yourself with...

    There absolutely is racism by minorities, but the last time I checked out of the Fortune 500 CEO's fewer than 5 are non-white, only 20 are women.

    What does that have to do with anything, Dave? That's like saying..."yeah, I'm racist though the last I checked I only direct it at N*****". It kinda falls apart, don't you think, Dave? What moron of a professor told you that you need to have power in order for racism to mean anything, Dave? Some idiot I'm sure but the more pressing question is why were you so quick to lap it up?

    BTW, my questions are simply rhetorical. Not only is there no need to answer, I actually prefer you do not.

    More doodoo from Dave...

    Trust me, not all Republicans are racist, but you can bet that all racists vote Republican.

    First part is correct. Second part is definitely wrong. Why? Because you forgot that all liberals are racist. Whites who cannot get past race in every thing they do and push for. Do I really need to give examples? Then we have all the non-white minorities who you yourself clearly stated they can be racist. Be more careful when making such grand sweeping and obviously wrong statements.