Suddenly Al Sharpton is concerned with accuracy in reporting:

Reverend Al Sharpton and his lawyers say they are preparing to file a defamation lawsuit against conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh for an op-ed published Saturday, which Sharpton alleges “erroneously” characterizes his (Sharpton’s) role in a string of violent incidents in New York in the early 90′s.

Hey Rush, don’t forget about Al’s part in saying the white Duke lacrosse players who were accused of raping a black woman were guilty (Al was joined by Jesse Jackson) when in fact they were being railroaded and all charges were subsequently dropped.

If anybody should be suing, it’s Limbaugh. Here’s Sharpton, along with other pathetic agenda-driven slimeballs disguised as “reporters” and the rabid reptilian undertaker James Carville on an MSNBC show running with the bogus quote about “slavery building the south” that was attributed to Limbaugh:

SANCHEZ: Limbaugh’s perceived racist diatribes are (pause) too many to name. Here’s a sampling. He once declared that “slavery built the South. I’m not saying we should bring it back; I’m just saying it had its merits. For one thing, the streets were safer after dark.”

SHUSTER: Critics are saying Limbaugh’s racially charged remarks through the years, among them: “slavery…had its merits.”

HALL: Should a person who says there are “merits” with slavery be able to have this privilege of owning a team?

CARVILLE: The problem is — is — and it is not Rush’s ideology. It’s some of his statements [have] just been very, very unsettling to everybody particularly to African-Americans. He also spoke with some nostalgia about slavery which is, you know, ungh! Not even going to try to go there.

HALL: “Slavery…had its merits,” and you’re talking –

REPORTER: That’s what he said.

SHARPTON: — in an industry [with] over two-thirds black players and we’re sitting around acting as though that, uhh, this should be questioned?

SHARPTON: Doesn’t matter. I think that he sells racial kind of, uh, statements. Whether in his heart he means it or not is really immaterial. You cannot sell that in the daytime and then go to the conference table later and go against what you sold as your personality. He has to be the same person. Are we going to say that Rush is going to say, “Now, that’s really just my schtick and here I’m somebody else”? Of course not! He’d put himself out of business.

Sanchez retracted his phony accusation, after the damage was done of course, and others have as well, but on the retraction issue, Al Sharpton was AWOL as usual.

What Sharpton means about whether it’s “in his heart or not” being immaterial is that it’s also immaterial if Limbaugh actually said it at all.

If Sharpton sues, Limbaugh should propose a settlement that would include buying Al a stake in the St. Louis Rams. The NFL and Al Sharpton deserve each other.

Update: Ann Althouse: Look out, Reverend Al — it’s a trap!

Comments

One Response to “Sharpton vs. Limbaugh: Who’s Suing Who?”

  1. bbop on November 21st, 2010 3:27 am

    when people resort to name calling, they generally have nothing substantial to say

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.