It's interesting how standards change from issue to issue. Consider how liberals and conservatives think about accusations of being unpatriotic. On the defensive, liberals loudly insist that people shouldn't call each other unpatriotic just because they've made several borderline comments. On the offensive, conservatives are glad to lower the bar, the way liberals do when it comes to accusations of racism.

So, a pox on both our houses? No. I just challenge both sides to raise the bar when it comes to throwing around accusations that can be very damaging.

This is the kind of comment that drives me a bit up the wall. If your “honest” discussions of race cause people to call you a racist, perhaps your opinions are grown from a racist mindset. It seems that so few actually consider the possibility that they do hold some racist opinions, and start from the given that they are not.

Arg…this whole thread is so typical. A bunch of white people sitting around saying that a certain white person is or isn't racist, no way no how. Or maybe he's just a “race baiter”, or is just playing to the audience, or whatever. If this guy makes his money pandering to a racist audience by specifically insiting racial tensions, he is a racist. Why is this ambiguous? If you care so little about a certain group of people that you are willing to get rich by insiting hatred or prejudice against a certain group, that is a racist act, even if in your heart of hearts you really don't think that group is “worse” than any other group. It's entirely possible that Rush thinks everyone but himself is a blathering idiot, and just chooses to pick on certain groups to make money, but the damage is no less for those certain groups.

I do think that most of those comments are racist, yes — some more breathtakingly so than others. Some are on the edge. But I think it's a mistake to use some kind of precise legal framework for “defining” racism (“I expect a clear standard to be laid out” et al.). And I don't agree with your assertion to JSpencer that Rush Limbaugh cannot reasonably be accused of racism unless one can “prove” in some kind of legal or scientific way, that he agrees with the statement “Black people are inherently inferior to white people.” Nobody comes out and says that anymore other than committed white supremacists, and even they usually parse their language so as to not come out and say that.

Most of the Limbaugh comments that people point to when talking about how racist he is, use generalizations or false or misleading analogies to associate individuals with persistent, obnoxious racial stereotypes. And everyone recognizes these stereotypes, even when they buy into them. That's what makes them so easy to use and so effective. Comparing basketball players to gang members? “Barack the Magic Negro”? I mean, come on.

So will I keep up my 4.0 grade point average with this answer?

JSpencer, you suggest that any one of Rush's comments in isolation doesn't amount to proof he's a racist, but together they make a strong case. I disagree. Rush is in the business of offering provocative commentary from the right. You might say it's his business model, and it's made him rich. So I don't think all of his comments together add up to anything other than a business model.

If you want to persuade me he's a racist, give me a crystal clear indication that he considers black people inherently inferior to white ones. That was the attraction of the fake quotes that CNN and others attributed to Rush. They were so damn clear, you didn't have offer complicated explanations of why Rush is actually a racist even if none of his comments are clearly so.

That alone should make NFL owners queasy.

My apologies Mr. Adesnik!

To preface, I haven't listened to Limbaugh for several years but at one time I listened to him a lot. While he may be a out-of-touch overbearing blowhard, I don't think he's a racist. I don't think he is an appropriate NFL owner because of his controversial public persona, but not because of anything to do with race.

As JeffD suggests it's almost impossible to discuss race honestly without being branded a racist by someone. By honestly I mean acknowledging both the positives and the negatives, instead of pretending it's all positive.

The NBA has had image problems exacerbated by players embracing hip-hop dress and culture, and when Ron Artest charges into the stands and a fight erupts it's not a huge stretch to bring up gangs. When Pacman Jones' entourage is involved in a gun battle outside a strip club, again it's not a huge stretch to bring up gangs. It may not be fair – some of the most gangsta-looking players are model citizens – but it's not necessarily racist.

???????

I'm not a Limbaugh “ditto head”. I do listen to the man to balance out what I get from Ed Shultz; as I like to hear both sides of issues. But he is not a racist.

Because you HONESTLY confront issues facing blacks in this nation, it does not make you a racist. Uncouth or abrupt perhaps, but not racist. Even black leaders (including Jeremiah Wright, Al Sharpton, etc) have admitted that many of the ills facing blacks come from within the black community. The one thing those leaders do not address is the never-ending cycle of the entitlement-state spoon that's being fed to them. If those leaders addressed that, they would lose power in the black community. Of course, it's not black and white in the first place. It's CLASS warfare that is the root. But that's another thread.

Well said. Either Rush knows he's a racist or he doesn't. Either way he's still a racist. How much of a racist? I guess that's a matter of opinion, but you know what they say about denial. Anyone see the story about the justice of the peace who refused to marry an interracial couple recently? Great to see us making such good progress in the 21st.