Bob Costas arrogance is surpassed solely by his pompousness. Dan Steinberg over at the WaPo's DC Sports Blog provides the evidence:
I know I’ll get yelled at for posting this, but I think Bob Costas talking about a D.C. sports issue during what is consistently the highest-rated program on network primetime television is appropriate fodder for this blog. And I think the same thing about Costas discussing that commentary during Dan Patrick’s radio program, as he did Monday morning.
...
Anyhow, here’s what was said during the approximately eight-minute interview Monday morning. It
started with Patrick asking Costas what the reaction to his comments has been.
Costas: ”Well I just woke up, but from what I’ve been able to determine from the NBC people, it’s much more muted than the gun thing, and any negative reaction comes from an extreme fringe. I had much more time this time. The difference, as you know, between one minute and two minutes is much greater in television than the difference between two minutes and three minutes. You have enough time to develop a thought. And even if some disagreed, I don’t think they could misunderstand where I was coming from. I’m sure many people saw it, but for those who didn’t, my point was this is not about a political correctness. This nonsense that Braves or Warriors or Chiefs is automatically offensive, it’s silly.
“But Redskins, if you take a step back, we’ve become used to it, because it’s been in common usage for so long. But if you take a step back and you think of what the equivalent of Redskins would be if applied to an African American, a Hispanic, an Asian, or any other ethnic group, then you have to start thinking of it a different way. Or put it in these terms: if you were to walk into a gathering of Native Americans — if you were on a reservation or happened to come across a family of Native Americans in a restaurant, and you began conversing with them — would you feel comfortable referring to them as Redskins? Using the term Redskins over and over again? Once you take a step back, it’s very obvious. And that was the point that I was making.
“I wasn’t even calling for a specific action, although I was implying it. What I was asking the audience to do was to consider that even though — and I went out of my way to say this — CLEARLY no offense is intended. No one should think that Dan Snyder or any NFL official wishes to disrespect, consciously wishes to disrespect Native Americans. But even though no offense is intended, isn’t it clear — if you’re fair — to see how some offense could legitimately be taken? Not necessarily by all Native Americans. I noted that the best polling we have at this point — we may get new polling — but the best polling we have at this point says that a majority of Native Americans say it’s not particularly an issue for them. But for many, it is. And I was just asking the audience to take a step back. They’ve become used to the term Washington Redskins, but think about what it means, and what it might mean if you yourself were a Native American.”
Patrick: ”Why now?”
Costas: “Because the issue has come to a head. The issue is out there now. You have an active group that is pushing the issue, there’s a meeting that is going to take place in the next few weeks between NFL officials and the Oneida Nation representatives. President Obama has addressed it. Roger Goodell has addressed it. It’s been editorialized in The Washington Post and other places. It is now a front-burner issue in the NFL. It’s an NFL issue, it’s not a random political issue. And Washington was playing Dallas on our air last night.”
Patrick: ”How do you answer the charges of using Football Night in America for what is maybe sports but also social causes?”
Costas: “Nonsense. Nonsense. Dan, I’m surprised. This is so obvious. No, it’s a football issue. It’s right there. It’s a football issue. You guys talked about it on the pregame show, to some extent.”
Patrick: “Bob, I’m giving you a question based on the response, not what I think. I think that it is a sports-related topic. I don’t have any problem. But people are saying, have said already this morning, stick to sports.”
Costas: “People say lots of stuff. I’m sure — and I’m not comparing this in importance, or comparing myself to any of those who crusaded for a worthy cause — but I’m sure that people said if someone wrote in a New York newspaper in 1947, or prior to that, saying it’s wrong that there are not black players in Major League Baseball — stick to sports. Tell me who hit the groundball to short. Don’t talk about Tommie Smith and John Carlos and their clenched fists. Don’t talk about what Billie Jean King has to say. Don’t talk about any of these issues. Just tell me who won the game. There are people that are gonna say that. But very often, sports inevitably has intersected with issues that appear, to some extent, to be outside the field. And on some occasions, sports has actually been the best vehicle for discussing these issues, because sports cuts across so many demographic lines.”
An Associated Press-GfK poll taken back in April of this year would suggest that nearly 80% of Americans are, using Costas' logic, part of an extreme fringe:
Nearly four in five Americans don’t think the team should change its name, the survey found. Only 11 percent think it should be changed, while 8 percent weren’t sure and 2 percent didn’t answer.
Although 79 percent favor keeping the name, that does represent a 10 percentage point drop from the last national poll on the subject, conducted in 1992 by The Washington Post and ABC News just before the team won its most recent Super Bowl. Then, 89 percent said the name should not be changed, and 7 percent said it should.
The AP-GfK poll was conducted from April 11-15 and included interviews with 1,004 adults on both land lines and cell phones. It has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 3.9 percentage points.
Isn't it amazing how mere disagreement today with cultural elitists, also known largely as liberals or progressives, is enough to brand those disagreeing as extremists?
Shaking my head. Just shaking my head.
Carry on.
