Really Though? Really?
Stephen A Smith.
i have never wanted to kick a muthafucka in throat harder than this bastard right here.
This is Rush Limbaugh the same cat that said slavery wasn't necessarily a bad thing. That makes a living justifying white supremacy so white people can sleep easy at night. And what are you reasons...because he knows football and has money. Hope them same players you called liars whoop yo ass. Kill yoself Steven A Smith..
and while you at it make sure you blam Rashied West too
this shit is sickening. You will allow someone to disrespect your people for money...Cant even stand up on principle and u wonder why our community is in fucking shambles.
On a very real note, the whole ownership group should be shut out for even considering Rush Limbaugh. Man We gotta start ruining every entity that sides with our enemies.
1 comments:
OK, let me go out of bounds here by saying: 1 - Stephen A(ss) Smith...is right about one thing. the players DON'T give a shit. Really, check the dollar traces that they leave behind. Stephen A. Smith is among them, being opinionated, with his latent-"Ludacris"-looking ass. ESPN loves someone who'd talk the "Philly" talk, and show some side of "yes massa, we sick" moments. This isn't the first.
2 - Since when did the MAJORITY of the football players (especially black players)give a damn about racism or Rush Limbaugh's stupid ass comments affecting their payroll or mental state of being, considering the following: *Celebrations and attire of football players (mostly geared to the eccentricism of black players) are warranted.
*Fines are levvied due to comments to the media and/or refs (some old respect the officer/overseer shit),
*and you could get shipped out as quickly as you came on, and blacklisted (fitting word) for crimes you may or may not have committed. In this last case, even IF you commit a crime, you could STILL play football, if you have a great lawyer, and a nice fan base, and won't damage the league's *ahem* "image" (or better yet, Nielsen Ratings). See Ray Lewis and Michael Vick.
3 -No, Rush shouldn't be considered for a football team, NOT because of his asinine views, but because it causes a rift, easily, within the core of ownership. It was one thing to consider letting a black owner have an entire basketbal franchise, but now the majority of owners would care less if plenty of owners of the other persuasions (such as African and Indigenous heritage) run the league. See NBA and Stern's underling, "Stu". The stigma (The Obama effect) that letting black people own or sponsor a team only enfranchises that it will bring in a bigger black market, to numb the minds that this machine will swallow you whole, of your money and your purpose. See Rob Johnson.
Everyone quickly forgets that Marge Schott was imfamous for her treatment and feelings towards black ballplayers on the Cincy Reds some years back. This isn't new.
Players are OWNED...you can get silenced from the media, or benched for speaking your mind, whereas we, the majority here, could get arrested or fired from our jobs for doing so. House and Field niggas. The ballplayers are not neccessarily on some "pro-black" tip. No one is like Craig Hodges or Mahmoud Abdul-Rauf expressing their own culture amongst those who'd rather have you wave THEIR flag, doing THEIR things, on THEIR land. Do you think they would have barred Rush if the white players would have spoken up?
Seriously.
Post a Comment