This is the World That We Live In

[swish7]

You want a chance to take this back? Thankfully you still can't run a Whites-only counter at Woolworth's.

You want a chance to take this back? Thankfully you still can't run a Whites-only counter at Woolworth's.

If you are going to quote a deleted post, then quote it in it's full context. I think the dude is a billionaire doofus. That said, I am quite leery of some zoning board out there being the judge and jury of all things acceptable to say in public. If everyone were to be fired for making inappropriate comments, a lot of people, black, white, etc would be out of work.

What do you mean by the Woolworth's comment? Am I now a racist in your eyes? Or less racist than you? Or racist in a more unacceptable way? Do you want me fired from my job? You must somehow know that I am white. (I am, and male too, double zinger!). Did we meet at a board tailgate? Was I espousing my racist views then? I'm so happy some silicone lipped gold digging girlfriend for hire illegally goaded this statement out of and secretly recorded old man salty balls. She's the next Rosa Parks. A true heroine for all sleezy gold diggers. I'm really more than happy to not have a viewport into either of those people.

I'm no lawyer, but I believe there is a difference between racism and discrimination.


~~~~~~~
Interesting page format idea for future board debates.
http://www.debate.org/opinions/should-racism-be-illegal

 

[PoppyHart]

I'm a newbie to this thread, so maybe you've addressed it -- but a question from me: Why do you care to defend this guy? He didn't write a book or even a school paper -- he expressed an opinion in which fellow billionaires in his club thought would cost them money, so they pushed him out. None of them are Branch Rickey. But you should still feel free to say whatever you want in your backyard BBQ. I'll still think Amy Schumer is comical. But I'll have no sympathy when supposedly sophisticated people don't know their audience or are actually demeaning (e.g., Paula Deen).

I'm not defending him. I think what he said was hurtful at the personal level and irresponsible at the business level. But I find the more fascinating questions to revolve around the justification for, and legality of, the actions that the NBA took, and the potential defenses which he might assert.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

You need to read more into this story than you have. Listen to the Bomani Jones interview from the Dan Le Betard show -- where he talks about this racist douche from nine years ago. That's the problem -- this guy has been an avowed racist up until the point the NBA can't deny it.

Just my opinion, but I think this went beyond "racism" in the way that word is bandied about casually to denigrate anyone with whom one disagrees politically. This was core from the heart racism in that the owner of a team in a league in the nation's second largest city (1) was caught expressing support for illegal discrimination based on race, (2) admitted it, (3) didn't express remorse, (4) had a history of similar issues that the league had basically ignored (and they were about to get lots of shiz for ignoring it up till now), and (5) the league's black players were (rightfully) up in arms and threatening to boycott the playoffs if swift action to remove him weren't taken. I view this as a one-off case with the right result, and not having anything to do with the usual knee-jerk race/PC reaction like Deen and Phil Robertson got (both of which I thought were unjustifiably railroaded: Sterling not at all).

I bolded two parts from the above quotes, re: this being about Sterling's history.

If it is about Sterling's history, Silver lied in his press conference.

Q. The word you used specifically was outrage. You said that you were personally outraged, yet many people believe that they are outraged that for years people have known that this man is a racist slumlord and the NBA hasn't done anything until today. Can you please answer why.

ADAM SILVER: I can't speak to past actions other than to say that when specific evidence was brought to the NBA, we acted.

Q. Was the punishment designed in effect to get the message across to Mr. Sterling that there's no point in him there's no advantage, nothing to be gained from him continuing his ownership? And also in determining what the punishment would be, including the suggestion to the Board of Governors, did you take into account Mr. Sterling's past behavior, or was it just based on this one particular incident?

ADAM SILVER: In meting out this punishment we did not take into account his past behavior. When the board ultimately considers his overall fitness to be an owner in the NBA, they will take into account a lifetime of behavior.

Q. Just to be clear, you said when specific evidence was brought to the league you did act. In past cases, has Donald Sterling ever been fined or suspended for racial or offensive remarks, and if not, why not?

ADAM SILVER: He's never been suspended or fined by the league because while there have been well documented rumors and cases filed, he was sued and the plaintiff lost the lawsuit. That was Elgin Baylor. There was a case brought by the Department of Justice in which ultimately Donald Sterling settled and there was no finding of guilt, and those are the only cases that have been brought to our attention. When those two litigations were brought, they were followed closely by the league office.

Q. Just a follow to that, one of the greatest players of all time, Elgin Baylor, accused Donald Sterling of running a plantation style franchise. Did that not concern you, and why was that not investigated? Despite the fact he lost the case, he has a prominent standing in the league and he said some very serious things.

ADAM SILVER: It concerned us greatly. We followed the litigation closely, and ultimately Elgin Baylor did not prevail in that litigation.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sport...er-opening-statement-donald-sterling/8467947/

 

[Todd Gack]

If you are going to quote a deleted post, then quote it in it's full context. I think the dude is a billionaire doofus. That said, I am quite leery of some zoning board out there being the judge and jury of all things acceptable to say in public. If everyone were to be fired for making inappropriate comments, a lot of people, black, white, etc would be out of work. What do you mean by the Woolworth's comment? Am I now a racist in your eyes? Or less racist than you? Or racist in a more unacceptable way? Do you want me fired from my job? You must somehow know that I am white. (I am, and male too, double zinger!). Did we meet at a board tailgate? Was I espousing my racist views then? I'm so happy some silicone lipped gold digging girlfriend for hire illegally goaded this statement out of and secretly recorded old man salty balls. She's the next Rosa Parks. A true heroine for all sleezy gold diggers. I'm really more than happy to not have a viewport into either of those people. I'm no lawyer, but I believe there is a difference between racism and discrimination.

Well, to begin with: did you delete your post or did the moderators? I didn't, obviously. But as I recall you asked whether it's illegal to be racist -- and who was to be the judge. The second part of your question -- both legally and socially -- requires Potter Stewart's viewpoint, but as to the first part, yes, it can be absolutely illegal to be racist. Do you not think there are Clippers personnel preparing their lawsuits now? I'm not accusing you of being a racist -- but I think you're naive.

Also, I stopped reading after your fourth sentence, Screech.

 

[Todd Gack]

irresponsible at the business level.

Here's your answer. He can fight and stay -- and they can never give him another home game again, and can make him draft last every year going forward. A lesson from the real politic world: The strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must. As we say about Maryland: These are the rules you agreed to play by.

 

[Todd Gack]

I bolded two parts from the above quotes, re: this being about Sterling's history. If it is about Sterling's history, Silver lied in his press conference. Q. The word you used specifically was outrage. You said that you were personally outraged, yet many people believe that they are outraged that for years people have known that this man is a racist slumlord and the NBA hasn't done anything until today. Can you please answer why. ADAM SILVER: I can't speak to past actions other than to say that when specific evidence was brought to the NBA, we acted. Q. Was the punishment designed in effect to get the message across to Mr. Sterling that there's no point in him there's no advantage, nothing to be gained from him continuing his ownership? And also in determining what the punishment would be, including the suggestion to the Board of Governors, did you take into account Mr. Sterling's past behavior, or was it just based on this one particular incident? ADAM SILVER: In meting out this punishment we did not take into account his past behavior. When the board ultimately considers his overall fitness to be an owner in the NBA, they will take into account a lifetime of behavior. Q. Just to be clear, you said when specific evidence was brought to the league you did act. In past cases, has Donald Sterling ever been fined or suspended for racial or offensive remarks, and if not, why not? ADAM SILVER: He's never been suspended or fined by the league because while there have been well documented rumors and cases filed, he was sued and the plaintiff lost the lawsuit. That was Elgin Baylor. There was a case brought by the Department of Justice in which ultimately Donald Sterling settled and there was no finding of guilt, and those are the only cases that have been brought to our attention. When those two litigations were brought, they were followed closely by the league office. Q. Just a follow to that, one of the greatest players of all time, Elgin Baylor, accused Donald Sterling of running a plantation style franchise. Did that not concern you, and why was that not investigated? Despite the fact he lost the case, he has a prominent standing in the league and he said some very serious things. ADAM SILVER: It concerned us greatly. We followed the litigation closely, and ultimately Elgin Baylor did not prevail in that litigation. http://www.usatoday.com/story/sport...er-opening-statement-donald-sterling/8467947/

Do you honestly think he's going to throw Stern under the bus?

 

[OttoinGrotto]

Do you honestly think he's going to throw Stern under the bus?

I have no idea. Did Silver lie?

 

[Todd Gack]

I have no idea. Did Silver lie?

He probably has -- but not in anything you just pointed out, where he said we're not looking at the past (which, by the way, further proves my point: Stern was an enabler).

 

[OttoinGrotto]

He probably has -- but not in anything you just pointed out, where he said we're not looking at the past (which, by the way, further proves my point: Stern was an enabler).

If the past was considered, and Silver said it wasn't, he lied.

On the continuum of sins I'm not sure where racism and lying fall in relation to each other, but I want the people meting out justice to do so in as clean and pure a matter as possible. I'm not convinced that this has been handled in a clean and pure matter, at all.

 

[Todd Gack]

If the past was considered, and Silver said it wasn't, he lied. On the continuum of sins I'm not sure where racism and lying fall in relation to each other, but I want the people meting out justice to do so in as clean and pure a matter as possible. I'm not convinced that this has been handled in a clean and pure matter, at all.

So your argument is that this alone isn't a fire-able offense? It's a perfectly legitimate position to take -- but one that would rightfully get you run out of the league in any position of authority. He admitted these were his words. For Silver to say what happened before is politics -- you've probably voted for someone who played the same game. No doubt his past actions made kicking him to the curb easier today.

On your last point, lying and racism aren't on the same scale -- and for you to think that they might be in the same zip code amazes me.

 

[Toga]

I have to say, Sterling has proven himself to be a bigot and a racist. I fully approve of the measures the NBA and Silver took today.

That being said.. Can we calm the f down now!? Skip Bayless is on FirstTake being the poster boy for white guilt, every network is covering this story like Sterling lynched Chris Paul with his Klan henchmen.

This is why it's so hard to have progress without pissing people off because no one in this country can be rational. We're now at the point of irrational in response to this story. Sterling is a bigot and racist, he just got knocked the F out by Silver.

Everyone can relax now, but no this story is going to continue to morph into lunacy while everyone pretends to be super surprised and offended.

Quick, everyone wear black tomorrow and turn your shirt inside out! We need unity against ONE 81 YEAR OLD SENILE MAN.

Well OK but it's going to be a pain in the ass to button.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

So your argument is that this alone isn't a fire-able offense? It's a perfectly legitimate position to take -- but one that would rightfully get you run out of the league in any position of authority. He admitted these were his words. For Silver to say what happened before is politics -- you've probably voted for someone who played the same game. No doubt his past actions made kicking him to the curb easier today.

On your last point, lying and racism aren't on the same scale -- and for you to think that they might be in the same zip code amazes me.

That isn't what I said at all.

 

[Todd Gack]

That isn't what I said at all.

Then where did I get it wrong?

 

[Todd Gack]

Then where did I get it wrong?

Just to refresh our audience -- and make clear of my rightness -- here's the post of yours I was responding to:

"If the past was considered, and Silver said it, he lied.

"On the continuum of sins Im not sure where racism and lying fall in relation to each other, but I want the people meting out justice to do so in as clean and pure a matter as possible. Im not convinced that this has been handled in a clean and pure matter, at all."

 

[CuseFaninVT]

I have no idea. Did Silver lie?

I don't think he lied in that the punishment he handed out yesterday was the banishment and the fine. The past actions of Sterling will be considered in trying to get the franchise away from him. That's what he was saying. In my mind.

 

[NineOneSeven]

Epic thread is epic

 

[TinyManInside]

Because they got recorded in a private conversation?

Privacy is DEAD.

 

[CuseFaninVT]

Privacy is DEAD.

I've seen reported on two different news channels that he asked her to record him because he tends to forget things and they are writing a book together. So, if that's true, can he really ever have an expectation of privacy?

 

[CousCuse]

In Salem they would accuse a person of witchcraft in order to create the legal footing to steal their . Same mentality here , and the same outcome.

 

[shandeezy7]

In Salem they would accuse a person of witchcraft in order to create the legal footing to steal their . Same mentality here , and the same outcome.

LOL right, because the accusations against Sterling were completely made up and there wasn't a crystal clear recording of him being a racist a-hole. Excellent comparison :crazy:

 

[AirForceOrange]

Ok...my opinion on all this:

1. His girlfriend was wrong for recording those conversations without his knowledge. If he did know, she was wrong for releasing them. Every person, regardless of their beliefs/ideals should have an expectation of privacy. If she gets in toruble or has to pay for her actions, whatever she gets she deserves.

2. That being said and the cat out of the proverbial bag...and it ain't going back in...He has derserved/deserves what he got/gets. Yes, he has every right to say what he feels/believes, just as companies have the right to drop sponsorships, players protesting and the league banning him.

Let's be honest on the surface the NBA banned him to show they don't support his ideas/beliefs. However, the main reason the NBA banned him is it would affect their brand and marketing. Don't kid yourself into thinking the NBA has taken some high morality stand against a racist. They have known about this fool for years and did nothing until it became a major story and they saw it would affect their wallets. The NBA is just like any other corporation, they will tolerate/ignore things like this until it affects their public persona and their brand.

As far as making him sell his team, again don't be naive and think the owners are taking a stand against racism...it's all about money and branding. I would be shocked to find one owner to vote to keep him in, only because they would be risking money from sponsors and take a major publicity hit. Whether it is right or wrong as far as "free speech" goes, I am really not on either side. I look at it this way...he is one part of a large business, if that part becomes non-viable or a liability affecting your overall income and the other parts of your business, then you cut it loose. Really, free speech is not guaranteed nor protected when it comes to business. You may have right to say what you want, but a business owner also has the right to fire your ass if it affects his business.

 

[CousCuse]

LOL right, because the accusations against Sterling were completely made up and there wasn't a crystal clear recording of him being a racist a-hole. Excellent comparison :crazy:

No. But I think it was said better by someone else. You who have committed no errors , cast the first stone.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

Let's be honest on the surface the NBA banned him to show they don't support his ideas/beliefs. However, the main reason the NBA banned him is it would affect their brand and marketing. Don't kid yourself into thinking the NBA has taken some high morality stand against a racist. They have known about this fool for years and did nothing until it became a major story and they saw it would affect their wallets. The NBA is just like any other corporation, they will tolerate/ignore things like this until it affects their public persona and their brand.

As far as making him sell his team, again don't be naive and think the owners are taking a stand against racism...it's all about money and branding. I would be shocked to find one owner to vote to keep him in, only because they would be risking money from sponsors and take a major publicity hit. Whether it is right or wrong as far as "free speech" goes, I am really not on either side. I look at it this way...he is one part of a large business, if that part becomes non-viable or a liability affecting your overall income and the other parts of your business, then you cut it loose. Really, free speech is not guaranteed nor protected when it comes to business. You may have right to say what you want, but a business owner also has the right to fire your ass if it affects his business.

I think you're right about a lot of this.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

Just to refresh our audience -- and make clear of my rightness

OK, that's just hilarious. Don't pull anything patting yourself on the back or develop a sore throat congratulating yourself.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

I don't think he lied in that the punishment he handed out yesterday was the banishment and the fine. The past actions of Sterling will be considered in trying to get the franchise away from him. That's what he was saying. In my mind.

OK, fair enough. But again, is anybody able to define what exactly the "crime" was that merited the punishment? The best I've been able to pull from the presser is that Sterling shared "hateful opinions," "views... deeply offensive and harmful,"and "sentiments... contrary to the principles of inclusion and respect that for the foundation of our... league" in a private setting that later became public.

That seems very imbalanced. He said something racist, which given his past isn't surprising (again, a past that was ignored when considering this punishment according to Silver). However, there doesn't seem to be any evidence brought forward at this time that his franchise is actually run in a racist manner. Does that not matter? Maybe what the NBA and public opinion is saying here is that there's no difference between what you say and what you do.

I think the NBA has a burden here to be clear.