LA Clippers owner racist rant at girlfriend

[bradley]

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/nb...ba-adam-silver-clippers-lawsuit-lifetime-ban/

 

[Colt45]

so why is this national news but an elected official publicly calling someone an Uncle Tom is of no note?

http://blog.al.com/wire/2014/02/alabamas_rep_alvin_holmes_stan.html

Cause it isn't news?

 

[CPA]

Kareem Abdul-Jabar had a great take on it in TIME. Probably already been posted but I'm too lazy to check.
http://time.com/79590/donald-sterling-kareem-abdul-jabbar-racism/

When Stirling was refusing to rent apartments to blacks and Hispanics, why did the public turn a blind eye. What makes this incident the sudden smoking gun? Not only that but why in a post-Snowden era is nobody upset that he was recorded illegally in the privacy of own home? Basically, nobody has clean hands in this story. Not Stirling, not his girlfriend, and most of all not the American public.

I wish I could be so elequent, rational and logical in my writing. That was THE best take on this whole tawdry affair yet.

 

[Sephire]

Can't wait for the blowback.

 

[Perknose]

I'll bet you money that doesn't happen.

I'm not saying it's not possible, I'm saying only 4 out of 30 owners will support such an action.

Howdy Nebor. Is it a grand day in the Nebor-hood?

I'll put up a grand, $1,000 to be exact, to your measly $200 (that's 5 to 1 odds for the digitally illiterate) that says you're so wrong it hurts.

I know you're not the usual OT pussy/blowhard/basement dweller, so I'm assuming you'll post up and stand behind your prediction and take my bet like a man.

Pm me. I always answer, because I care. :biggrin:

 

[Perknose]

Rochelle, Rochelle!

Well, it's been a long journey, from Milan to Minsk, but she shows up even when it blows up:

Rochelle Sterling, the estranged wife of Los Angeles Clippers owner Donald Sterling, attended the Clippers' 113-103 win over the Golden State Warriors on Tuesday night after asking Doc Rivers whether he would be fine with her attending.

[...]

Rochelle Sterling didn't talk to the media Tuesday but tried to distance herself from her husband when she spoke to ESPN on Sunday.

"I don't condone those statements and I don't believe in them," she said. "I'm not a racist. Never have been, never will be. The team is the most important thing to my family."

"When the nay sayers nay you picked up your pace.
You said nothing's going to stop me so get out of my face.
I'm having adventures all over the place
Rochelle! Rochelle!"

 

[lupi]

A little bit of time and the grandeur of outrage will fade, and then we get to enjoy the virtual exploding of heads when he infact remains owner.

 

[Vdubchaos]

Few things that come to my mind

a) why did she date/bang a "known" racists? His record goes deep. She is a WHORE, that's how and overlooked all that for money? Than she conveniently recorded him and shared the tape?

That makes her look pretty bad, all around.

b) I'm MORE than sure there is more racism going on in NBA/teams than this guy. That goes for owners, staff AND players!!! To make this big deal is kind of stupid.

c) he deserves it, but this entire thing is blown WAY out of proportion.

I think EVERYONE has a little bit of racism in them. For some it's very minor (jokes, laughs etc). Some have medium racism where they might be outspoken like this guy.......and some go and kill the people of other race.

I only have the problem with the last. Minor and medium can simply be ignored all together and do no harm.

Just me though.

 

[SP33Demon]

A little bit of time and the grandeur of outrage will fade, and then we get to enjoy the virtual exploding of heads when he infact remains owner.

This. Also, I think this was simply a power grab and/or revenge. They knew the guy's weakness (young golddiggers) and paid her to get some dirt on him. Sterling probably pissed off the wrong person in the past, would anyone be surprised? Nope. Well done to whoever orchestrated this.

 

[allisolm]

"While I don't have a problem with Magic, many of the rich don't want to associate with him and that's because he has AIDS."

"I didn't understand what he was getting at with Magic. Was it b/c Magic has AIDS?"

"Hardly the only one and I'd be very concerned of my gold digger GF getting friendly with another rich dude that has AIDS!"



Not to derail the thread, but Magic Johnson does not have AIDS. He has the HIV virus. BIG difference. According to Magic Johnson, his HIV is dormant.

Now back to regularly scheduled programming.

 

[edro]

"While I don't have a problem with Magic, many of the rich don't want to associate with him and that's because he has AIDS."

"I didn't understand what he was getting at with Magic. Was it b/c Magic has AIDS?"

"Hardly the only one and I'd be very concerned of my gold digger GF getting friendly with another rich dude that has AIDS!"



Not to derail the thread, but Magic Johnson does not have AIDS. He has the HIV virus. BIG difference. According to Magic Johnson, his HIV is dormant.

Now back to regularly scheduled programming.

Derailment begun.

Let's discuss the benefits of having HIV but not AIDS.

 

[surfsatwerk]

Derailment begun.

Let's discuss the benefits of having HIV but not AIDS.

Well the whole dying horribly part is a good start.

 

[rh71]

Didn't read the responses, but personally I don't think a private conversation between private people should result in a lifetime ban in a professional setting. It's not like he said that to a business partner or another owner. Fining the guy based on these circumstances is even more absurd.

It's like banning a partner from a country club because he said he hates gays to his wife. Let's fine him too.

I'm a minority myself and don't defend the words, but I don't have an issue because he said it to his gf. It's only a big deal because it has become public. A racist making racist remarks happens all the damn time - should you sue and ban every one of them?

 

[IHateMyJob2004]

Derailment begun.

Let's discuss the benefits of having HIV but not AIDS.

Apparently having HIV is a good thing. Where can I get some?

 

[Dari]

Didn't read the responses, but personally I don't think a private conversation between private people should result in a lifetime ban in a professional setting. It's not like he said that to a business partner or another owner. Fining the guy based on these circumstances is even more absurd.

It's like banning a partner from a country club because he said he hates gays to his wife. Let's fine him too.

I'm a minority myself and don't defend the words, but I don't have an issue because he said it to his gf. It's only a big deal because it has become public. A racist making racist remarks happens all the damn time - should you sue and ban every one of them?

Well, if his words were not backed up with a past heavy with racism then he'd probably be able to apologize and the league would move on. But this guy has been bad news for decades. He definitely deserves this.

 

[rh71]

Well, if his words were not backed up with a past heavy with racism then he'd probably be able to apologize and the league would move on. But this guy has been bad news for decades. He definitely deserves this.

It's fine to hate the guy and wish he'd lose tons of money, but unless there's a specific NBA bylaw I'm missing, I just don't see how this should result in a ban from his business and a fine. Silly precedent.

 

[JulesMaximus]

No love lost here in San Diego. We still hate him for moving the Clippers to Los Angeles.

<--Lakers fan for lyfe.

 

[unokitty]

Sterling Should NOT Be Sanctioned By The NBA [OPINION]

Odd how we all hate intolerance, yet scream his comments must not be tolerated. Odd how when someone speaks hate, we answer with more hate. It’s never quelled bigotry, and always makes things worse, but who cares? It’s pure pleasure to feel self-righteous...

Sterling’s body is just the latest to be loaded on the pyre and sprayed with accelerant; as we continue this ideological cleanse one bad statement at a time. We consecrate these men and women, flushing them for saying something to someone once. Phil Robertson, Paula Dean, Isaiah Washington; the list is stunningly long and could be updated weekly. America has apparently decided to deal with racism and intolerance with tactics that would make Joe McCarthy proud.

What’s the end game? Are we doing this because we’re hoping to purge everyone who’s ever thought or said something unpopular? Will there be a day when America is ideologically pure? Are we looking forward to that day?

Interesting opinion from Detroit.

Uno

 

[cabri]

It's fine to hate the guy and wish he'd lose tons of money, but unless there's a specific NBA bylaw I'm missing, I just don't see how this should result in a ban from his business and a fine. Silly precedent.

Apparently the way the NBA is setup, ownership/participation of a team is a privilege granted.

So even though he had to pay money for the team and makes money from the team, the usage of team itself is under final say of the NBA "company". So the NBA can "pull" the franchise agreement.


Similar to like a McDonalds franchise. Independently owned/operated but dependent on the branding and supplies from corporate.

Corporate pulls the branding and supplies; then the owner would have to have a new store and get his own non corporate supplies. More than likely the store would fold, get sold or be renamed/badged.

With respect to the Clippers, the NBA can pull the supplies (games and NBA branding) - ANTI-TRUST?

That brings the value to NILL and the Clipper organization is still on the hook for the contracted expenses.

As Cuban though previously indicated, it will set a nasty precedent and more than likely create a massive nasty legal battle as well as skeletons/publicity that may not be desired.

From what I have read, while the owners may denounce Sterling, it may be in their best interests to not force a sale. And the secret vote protects the individual decision.

 

[NetWareHead]

And the secret vote protects the individual decision.

Can you confirm there is a secret vote and owners will stay anonymous? Been asking this in this thread a few times.

 

[edro]

Can you confirm there is a secret vote and owners will stay anonymous? Been asking this in this thread a few times.

I have heard sports radio say it is private, but the votes could easily be leaked.

 

[waggy]

It's fine to hate the guy and wish he'd lose tons of money, but unless there's a specific NBA bylaw I'm missing, I just don't see how this should result in a ban from his business and a fine. Silly precedent.

that and forcing the sell? i am not sure the other owners would go for that. i think that would be a really bad precedent. having to be forced to sell the team over a unpopular and private statement? Does the owners really want that happening and being precedent? would anyone want that?

I'm all for the fine. sponsors pulling from the clippers. All these things cost him money.

But the lifetime ban and the potential sell of the his team? frankly i think that's going overboard.

 

[waggy]

Can you confirm there is a secret vote and owners will stay anonymous? Been asking this in this thread a few times.

of course nobody here can confirm that. its silly to even ask.

 

[momeNt]

Sterling Should NOT Be Sanctioned By The NBA [OPINION]



Interesting opinion from Detroit.

Uno

With aggressive racial equality leaders like Jesse Jackson (aggressive compared to MLK not Malcom-x type aggression) this kind of response is normal. But I have a feeling that MLK would have been more like when John Paul II visited the person who attempted to assassinate him than how we deal with the majority of racists or bigots today.

Exclusion just makes it easier for racists to band together in their exclusion, but if a guy like Sterling could be reformed similar to how JPII's assassin was reformed, then it becomes a real victory for race equality.

 

[NetWareHead]

of course nobody here can confirm that. its silly to even ask.

I don't think it is a silly question at all. Perhaps someone here is familiar with the bylaws. Are the bylaws secret as well?

I'm sure this is also NOT the first time the owners have voted on something. Were all of the previous votes about other issues secret or public?

If the votes are to be publicized then the owners wont dare vote to maintain Sterling as owner. The public backlash will be tremendous against anyone who "maintains racism in the NBA" or some other media hyped headline.

But if the owners know the votes will stay sealed and private, they can vote as they wish and know they will be protected. If the team owners truly see this as a slippery slope and do not wish to set this precedent, they might vote to maintain Sterling's ownership.