Limbaugh’s comments tactless, but not racist

First, let me state, unequivocally and for the record: I do not like Rush Limbaugh. I find his manner irritating and his politics offensive. I am disgusted by the way he attempts to advance his ideology by personally disparaging his opponents. I am disturbed by his obsession with the Clinton administration. I stand for everything Limbaugh finds wrong with the world.

So I am appalled to now be defending him.

This past Sunday, on ESPN’s “Sunday NFL Countdown,” Limbaugh stated his belief that Philadelphia Eagles quarterback Donovan McNabb is overrated: “I think what we’ve had here is a little social concern in the NFL. I think the media has been very desirous that a black quarterback do well. We’re interested in black coaches and black quarterbacks doing well. I think there is a little hope invested in McNabb and he got a lot of credit for the performance of this team that he really didn’t deserve. ... I’m saying (McNabb as a player) is a good investment, don’t misunderstand. I just don’t think he’s as good as everybody says he has been.”

These remarks sparked a controversy that resulted in Limbaugh’s resignation from the sports talk show. Limbaugh was accused of racism and has been pilloried in the press for his so-called “hateful and ignorant speech.”

But what, exactly, was so hateful and ignorant about Limbaugh’s comments?

Let’s be clear. Limbaugh did not say that McNabb wasn’t a good player because he is black. He did not say that black quarterbacks don’t deserve acclaim. To have done so would have been both hateful and ignorant.

What Limbaugh actually suggested was that the media is responsible for a kind of reverse racism – or, as Bill Maher puts it, “accolades affirmative action.” Limbaugh was calling out the media – not McNabb and not black football players. He implied that McNabb should stand on his talent alone and not be judged based on his race – he should not be a “social concern.”

But this is clearly not what people heard. They heard a social conservative criticize a particular way in which society deals with issues of race and oppression, and immediately concluded that Limbaugh was somehow making a racist comment.

For good or ill, there may be some truth to the idea that the media has an interest in promoting black players. Professional sports have long been at the forefront of the civil rights movement in popular culture. The industry has been a leader when it comes to breaking racial barriers, and has been quick to punish its own – be they coaches, sportswriters, commentators or players – for racist remarks or practices. Because of its visibility, its history, and its ability to foster change in the rest of society, it is vital that sports remain on the leading edge of racial equality.

So no, I do not think it entirely out of line to suggest the media may have an interest in promoting black players. Whether or not you believe it, there is certainly an argument to be made. And if the argument is there, should it not be discussed?

Granted, Limbaugh is not known for his tolerance. His comment was clearly without tact and I question the value of discussing the issue in such a forum. But was it racist and hateful? No.

I am reminded of Howard Cosell’s near career-ending comment: “Look at that monkey run!” Certainly it was in questionable taste, given the similarity to a particularly nasty racial slur, but no one stopped to check Cosell’s history – they simply burned his effigy. Cosell had long used the phrase while covering college football – in reference to both black and white players. He called his own grandchildren monkeys. It was a term of affection.

Likewise, no one seems to remember Limbaugh’s monologue four weeks ago regarding the NFL policy requiring teams to interview at least one minority candidate for any open-head coaching position. Limbaugh feared the policy would turn minority coaches into political tokens: “It is important folks, because 71 percent of the players are black in the NFL but only three of 32 head coaches are black. But this rule says nothing about hiring anybody. I’m gonna tell you, this could be a setback for minority hiring; this is the opposite of what everybody wants. This rule, this policy, has the potential to become a charade with black coaches becoming pawns in the process.”

Limbaugh has been thinking about race and equality for a long time. He is firmly against affirmative action in all its forms. But whether or not you agree with his politics, I do not believe we can afford to label him a racist on the basis of those politics.

This kind of witch-hunt takes attention away from real racism by fostering an atmosphere in which the discussion of race is not allowed. If I am not allowed to expose a bias – whether the intent of that bias is positive or negative – then what is the point of the discussion in the first place? We will not achieve a truly equal society until all forms of bias are at least recognized and examined in an open forum.

Is Limbaugh himself a racist? I don’t know. If I searched, it is possible I would find statements of his that could be labeled as racist. I am positive I could find statements I would label as ignorant. As I have said before, I have many problems with the man.

But in this instance, I have to defend him.

Sutton is an assistant Viewpoint editor. E-mail her at jsutton@media.ucla.edu.