But it was just a matter of time before the usual culprits on the left would attempt to make an issue of it, in what seems to be an effort to gin up some reason for the talk show host not to have an ownership stake in an NFL team. And, MSNBC's Ed Schultz isn't waiting for pointers from the left-wing blogosphere to set the "Stop Rush's Bid for the Rams" agenda. He took it to Limbaugh on his Oct. 6 program immediately.
"There's also some comical football news out there," Schultz said. "The drugster's talking about buying the St. Louis Rams. That's right, the leader of the Republican Party is bidding for ownership of a team that's been giving more money to Democrats than any other team has over the last 10 years, at least that's what the survey says. He'll have to do something about that I'm sure."
In Monday's Washington Post, it became clear which Super Bowl ad the liberal Posties dislike the most: one from the athletic apparel (and now shoe) makers at Under Armour. They probably shudder at the brand name. The Post sports section ran snippets of its columnist (and radio and TV personality) Tony Kornheiser live-blogging during the big game: "I think I've seen the Under Armour ad before or one very much like it. It doesn't do much for me. It's too militaristic."
But Post TV critic Tom Shales really hated it, and dropped the political F-word on it: "Among the most overproduced spots was one featuring musclebound models in the 'American Gladiator' mode wearing tight spandex athletic garb from Underarmour.com. A huge mob surging through the streets seemed stolen from the underrated futuristic thriller 'V for Vendetta.' It was hard to tell, though, who were the fascist oppressors and who were the liberated hordes."