ESPN Plaza Bristol, CT 06010
October 5, 2003
You forced Rush Limbaugh to resign from his job after his alleged racist comment, yet you routinely allow your other commentators to make race-related comments and champion unquestioningly what are essentially racist crusades. “The media has been very desirous that a black quarterback do well,” Limbaugh said when he opined that Philadelphia Eagles quarterback Donovan McNabb is overrated.
In judging Limbaugh’s comment, however, you should have considered comments made that morning on your earlier show “The Sports Reporters.” The subject was Ty Willingham.
First, let me say it was obvious that some ESPN commentators were gleeful over Willingham’s initial success last year — explicitly because he is black. Michael Wilbon of “Pardon the Interruption,” for one, openly stated his satisfaction about Willingham’s winning record because it allegedly showed the (white) Notre Dame elite that a black man could be a competent coach. This year, however, the Fighting Irish are losing, and the contrast between Willingham’s first two seasons was the topic on “The Sports Reporters.” On that show, Sal Palantonio said there are “some people” (whites) who don’t want Willingham to succeed. Mike Lupica followed up with this rhetorical question: “Are you suggesting that some people don’t want to see Willingham succeed because he’s African American?” Obviously there are some white people who want Willingham to fail because he’s black. But then how is this truth any different from Limbaugh’s comment about the media? The opinion that McNabb is overrated is debatable (I disagree with Limbaugh), but it is just as obviously true that whether the black quarterback in question is as good as McNabb or as bad as Kordell Stewart, there are many people (i.e., advocates of racial “diversity”) who want to see him succeed because he is black. You at ESPN were uncomfortable with Limbaugh’s comment because, deep down, you know it’s true and suspect (correctly) that it is just as racist to hope a man will succeed because he is black. But you won’t dare question the “diversity” advocates’ fundamental premises.
Unfortunately, Limbaugh gave no examples to ground his comment. But an objective observer of mainstream sports journalism, of which ESPN is at the center, recognizes that it largely cheerleads for the crusade to install more blacks in the quarterback and head coaching positions. Thanks in part to the sports media’s unquestioning support, this crusades gained such widespread support that it emboldened “civil rights” activists Jesse Jackson and Johnny Cochran to threaten coercive measures against the NFL. These measures intimidated the league into instituting a policy that mandated each football franchise to interview at least one “minority” candidate when seeking a new head coach. It’s only logical to conclude then that a sports media that champions such “diversity” crusades, by extension wants to see blacks succeed as quarterbacks and head coaches.
Even if the crusaders claim they merely want to see blacks have these opportunities, they still support what is essentially a racist policy in “diversity.” Any policy that promotes race as a relevant issue when ability is (or should be) the sole criterion is, at root, built on racist premises.
Further, these diversity crusades always operate on the premise that the lack of black quarterbacks and coaches is due to racism among white team owners. Yet these owners’ teams are comprised, on average, of about 70 percent black players. Curiously, the crusaders never offer evidence of racism by the owners, but their cries that there are too few black head coaches nevertheless suggests racism is at play. Observe, however, that this type of smear is the real goal of the diversity crusaders.
If you doubt this, consider that these crusaders say nothing about the fact that there are no black punters or kickers in the league. Why? Because those positions require much fewer abilities and much less intelligence than significant positions such as quarterback and head coach. At root, diversity advocates crusade, not primarily to get more blacks into more walks of American life, but to promote the irrational view — passed down to them by (black and white) multiculturalist college professors — that white America, whether conscious of it or not, has a hopelessly racial supremacist mentality.
This unfounded, entrenched dogma explains why these crusaders feel no need to provide specific evidence to back up their charges of racism against NFL team owners. It also explains why ESPN allowed former commentator Sterling Sharp to report that there was once only one white cornerback in the NFL, then New York Giant Jason Sehorn, and suggested that whites are just not athletic enough compared with blacks to play that position, or that (to use a PC-permissible title of a popular movie) white men can’t jump. Perhaps there’s some truth physiologically to Sharp’s conclusion. But if someone dared to report that physiology may have something to do with why few blacks play hockey or swim, ESPN and the general sports media would brand him a racist unfit for commentary.
”If I wasn’t right, there wouldn’t be this cacophony of outrage that has sprung up in the sports writer community,” Limbaugh said on his radio show after his resignation.
Limbaugh is right. The sports media in general does desire to see black quarterbacks succeed — because they are black. And the outrage he faced comes from the fact that the media knows he is right. ESPN dumped Limbaugh because, like the appeasing NFL, it is too cowardly to stand up and state these truths that I’ve presented here. ESPN has allowed itself to be intimidated by the “diversity” crusaders who threaten to brand anyone a racist simply because they dare to question the irrational premises and contradictions inherent in their racist dogma.