RUSH: As you know, the National Football League and the players association came to an agreement on a massive lawsuit for benefits to players who played in the past, suffered head injuries. It was $675 million. And there are like 4,000 players that were party to the suit. Everybody was celebrating when it was agreed to, the settlement was reached, all sides signed off on it. Some players are not gonna get a dime. Other players are gonna get a different proportion. It was not going to be equally distributed.

Well, the upshot of this is that when the details first emerged regarding the proposed settlement between the NFL and the thousands of former players of the concussion litigation, some thought the league got too good a deal. “What do you mean, 4,000 players and $675 million? That’s nothing. That’s chump change when you do the math.” Well, the judge, Anita Brody, not to be confused with Anita Hill, “Judge Anita Brody has rejected the motion for preliminary approval of the settlement, a week after the formal motion was filed. Judge Brody reportedly has concerns about the ability of the proposed $675 million compensation fund to cover benefits.”

In other words, the judge has rejected the concussion settlement ’cause it’s not enough. “The development,” it says here, “comes as a surprise, given that the settlement was brokered by a retired judge appointed by Judge Brody and ultimately assessed by a Special Master also appointed by Judge Brody. It could be simply a matter of Judge Brody being cautious, especially since the worst-case scenario would arise if, in 30 or 40 years, recently-retired players develop AlzheimerÂ’s disease or ALS, they make a claim for compensation, and they discover that no money is left.”

Little did we know that this money was to cover future players as well, not just the 4,000 in the past. So now a monkey wrench is thrown into this. It’s not big enough, the judge says, reportedly. “ItÂ’s too early to conclude that the decision will derail the settlement completely.” But it looks like the NFL and the players thought they had this taken care of and moved on down the road, and are now gonna have to go back to it.

In the midst of this we have a story today in USA Today from Indianapolis. “By the end of a morning lecture Monday, Sandra Chapman, Ph.D., had essentially told an auditorium full of football coaches that all the doomsday stuff they’ve been hearing about concussions isn’t quite as bad the media has made it seem. ‘What’s being touted is ahead of the evidence,’ Chapman later told a small group of reporters off to the side. Welcome to the newest twist in the discussion of head injuries and football — commissioned and endorsed, of course, by the folks whose livelihood depends on football.

But the bottom line is, we now have a Ph.D., a female Ph.D., practically unassailable here, who says that everything you think you know about football and concussions can’t be proven, that these people have assumed way too much about injury, long-term effect. None of it’s provable yet. You can’t link a concussion to ALS. You can’t link it to Alzheimer’s. You can’t link a concussion to anything. All you can do is assume based on your common sense. But the science isn’t there.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: I remember saying this isn’t gonna be enough money. These players don’t understand that $675 million divided by 4,000 isn’t gonna be anything. They think they got all these problems behind them.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: By the way, full disclosure, ladies and gentlemen, on the USA Today story on the Ph.D., Sandra Chapman, who says that this concussion stuff in the NFL is so overblown and there isn’t enough science to know anything like what is being claimed. There isn’t enough science to link concussions to life-altering effects once one quits the game. USA Today points out that Sandra Chapman, Ph.D., the concussion expert, is also “a former Texas cheerleader,” which means it’s implied that we can’t take anything she says seriously.

They’re very, very, very careful to point out that she was a former cheerleader, which means what? (interruption) No. Well, “pretty, good looking.” That’s exactly what you mean. (interruption) No in the liberal world, “cheerleader” means “bimbo.” “Cheerleader” means “lover of jocks,” “groupie.” In the liberal world, “Cheerleaders, they’re not real. Getting out there, wearing stuff like they wear in cheering for their team.” You know, ‘”Block that vibe! Block that vibe!” whatever. They think it’s just silly.

They think football’s silly, too. “It’s very, very brutal and it maims people — and why would a civilized society even engage in it?” There’s also a quote from David Cutcliffe in this story. He’s the coach at Duke. But more importantly, he is the Mannings’ coach. That’s right. “Coach Cut” is who Peyton Manning went to work out with when he was recovering from the neck surgery. Well, Coach Cutcliffe says, “In 38 years…”

This is in quotes: “In 38 years, I don’t have one former player who isn’t functional due to concussions, but I do have a whole lot of healthy players. That’s a case study, isn’t it? We’re trying to make people think before they react.” So the official coach to the Mannings says in 38 years he doesn’t have one former player who is an idiot or an invalid or anything else because of concussions. Because he does have, after 38 years, a whole lot of healthy former players.

The left is saying, “We knew there was a reason not to like this guy,” even though he’s among the best at what he does. Yes, the concussion thing in the NFL is political, too, folks. Just trust me. I know. That’s one of the times people say, “Come on, Rush, is everything political?” All you have to do, folks, is to find out who’s behind something. All you have to do to find out if it’s political is identify who it is that is attempting to move something along on a pathway they think it should take, and you will be answered correctly every time you ask that question.

So, yes.

Now, the people involved, the last thing they want you to think is “political” about this. This is a health issue. “This is why Limbaugh’s dangerous, ’cause he just goes extremist!” That’d be their reaction. I’m not gonna back away from it. Look at what they’re trying to do. There’s no science here, just like global warming. There really isn’t any science to prove it. But the left cares about it. It’s a compassionate thing. “What are we doing to our football players?” as Meryl Streep asked about our kids and Alar.

“What are we doing to our children?”

Nothing, as it turned out, except making apples look better.