Moderated Donald Sterling, Owner of the Clippers, is Racist

[Darth Rotor]

I mean that my entire tedious shtick is picking up on people's misspellings and typos, and you apparently confused discreet (being careful with one's speech or behaviour) and discrete (composed of distinct parts; not continuous).

I will go away now.

OK, I started with discreet, but I did change the spelling. I should have gone with the gut instinct. Sadly, I missed the jest, my bad not yours.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

Not so. That thing could be anyone named Sterling.

In all seriousness, is there some reason not to believe that he is a registered republican ?

I'm sure that it doesn't matter, one way or the other.

But I can't really fathom at this point why you wouldn't believe it, based on the evidence given . Do you believe the media outlets are trying to trick you ? Is it somehow impossible to be a republican and racist ? What ???

 

[Neally]

Getting deseperate, are we?
I am pretty sure that the contract that Sterling signed when he bouth the Clippers included a binding agreement to be governed by the NBA's rules, which probably includes a clause about punishement for an owner for bad behavior, sort of a "morlals Clause".

Looks more like you are the "deseperate" one, going from "clearly violates" to "pretty sure...".

Point is that Striling has embarassed the NBA by his actions,and in a industry that is dependent on image as professional spots is, that is enough for his fellow owners to throw him under the bus, and I am betting the agreement he signed when he joined the NBA as an owner will give the NBA the fight to punich him.

No, the point is Sterling has embarrassed no one but himself. He wasn't speaking on behalf of the NBA. Hell, he wasn't even speaking on behalf of his own team. It was a private conversation which appearantly was illegally recorded without his consent and publicized without his consent. He was then fined for that illegally obtained private conversation. Classic thought police action. Too bad we don't have more monitoring of private conversations to ferret out the bad thoughts people have in order to properly punish the bad thinkers. That way we wouldn't have to rely on random clips supplied by disgruntled mistresses.

I find it ineresting that you are so passionate about defending bigotry.

I find it interesting that:
1. You think I'm defending bigotry.
2. You think it's acceptable to punish people based on illegally obtained private conversations.

 

[Lisa Simpson]

2. You think it's acceptable to punish people based on illegally obtained private conversations.

You do not know this is the case. She claims to have recorded him frequently as his "archivist".

http://www.tmz.com/2014/04/27/donald-sterling-racist-audio-v-stiviano-recorded-clippers/

http://www.tmz.com/2014/04/29/donald-sterling-recording-real-racist-authenticated-nba-lawyer/

TMZ Sports has also learned ... people who have heard the entire recording say there is "NO DOUBT" Donald Sterling KNEW he was being recorded.

 

[Neally]

You do not know this is the case. She claims to have recorded him frequently as his "archivist".

http://www.tmz.com/2014/04/27/donald-sterling-racist-audio-v-stiviano-recorded-clippers/

http://www.tmz.com/2014/04/29/donald-sterling-recording-real-racist-authenticated-nba-lawyer/

I know very well what she claims. Do you actually believe he wanted her to record that particular conversation and publicly share it? Your other link and quote is irrelevant. I never claimed the conversation was not of Sterling.

 

[ABC10]

In all seriousness, is there some reason not to believe that he is a registered republican ?

I'm sure that it doesn't matter, one way or the other.

But I can't really fathom at this point why you wouldn't believe it, based on the evidence given . Do you believe the media outlets are trying to trick you ? Is it somehow impossible to be a republican and racist ? What ???

I'm like to see a voter registration card in his name, Donald Tokowitz Sterling not some last name only thing. Asking for validation in this day and age is not unreasonable. The truth will set us all free.
How many Sterling are there in LA?

 

[Meed]

Near as I can tell Sterling has never been a political player. So why should I care what party affiliation he has?

Because if he'd have been a Democrat then the republaconservatives would have scored a point, but since he's a Republican the point was scored by the demoliberals. I don't know what people find confusing about this. If you can understand basketball, you can understand internets.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

In both Sterling's case and the hypotheticals above, the issue would be with the person who made the offensive comments public. Not an unjust employer, and certainly not some imaginary "thought police".

What Sterling did clearly violates a clause in his contract with the NBA, and Silver is well within his rights to do what he did. He bears no responsibility for how the information became public, and he was duty-bound to act on it once it did.

If Sterling takes issue with the actions of the NBA, the courts are always at his disposal.

What "issue" do you refer to?

Please cite the exact clause he is in violation of.

Who defines that duty that he is bound to act upon, and please cite that duty.

I was fired for reprimanding my girlfriend for her homophobic behavior. Guess my only recourse is to take the issue to court. If I lose there, then I just must be wrong since whatever the law/courts say is right, must be morally/ethically justified.

Why does anyone need to cite the contract paragraph Sterling is in violation of, Neally? It's not a public opinion matter, it's a franchise matter. A franchise is not the same as independent ownership.

I don't think there really is any more "free speech" in this age of trial by the court of public opinion.

~Dr. Imago

This is not about free speech, it's about franchise contract and that contract language. If Sterling's comments financially damage the franchise, free speech is not the issue.

It was only an issue right up to the point where the people who were making it an issue found out he was a Republican.

No reason you should (except for the caveat that follows). He's a vile racist no matter his political affiliation.

The caveat: The right wing echo chamber jumped all over Sterling's supposed Democratic affiliation, spewing falsehoods hither and yon. (Playing what I call the race-card card.) These falsehoods are swallowed as fact by gullible ideologues -- hook, line, and sinker. The only reason you might care about Sterling's affiliation is for the purpose of rebutting these falsehoods.

This sidetrack is bizarre. Is the right wing trying to make political hay of this? They might want to be careful trying to make bigotry a left wing quality. Do they expect this to rally the base or hoodwink the independents? At some point the very far right wing will be the only group left that doesn't roll their eyes to yet another ludicrous outburst of fake outrage.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Because if he'd have been a Democrat then the republaconservatives would have scored a point, but since he's a Republican the point was scored by the demoliberals. I don't know what people find confusing about this. If you can understand basketball, you can understand internets.

But it is soooo not a political talking point regardless, trying to make it one only makes the idiots doing so look like fools.

 

[varwoche]

Wrong again. It could be anyone with:

(1) last name Sterling and
(2) birth date of 4/26/34 and
(3) street address number 808 and
(4) zip code 90210

Donald Tokowitz would be nice.

Just for fun... 90210 has population of 21k. Assume equal distribution of birth dates. Then some wild assumptions: say 1 in 1000 people have last name of Sterling, and say there are 25 streets in 90210 with 808 street number. Hell, it defies all odds there's even one of "poor Don", much less dupes.

Add: The formula needs to take into account that some percentage of the people with birth date 4/26/34 were dead at the time.

 

[Lisa Simpson]

Just for fun... 90210 has population of 21k. Assume equal distribution of birth dates. Then some wild assumptions: say 1 in 1000 people have last name of Sterling, and say there are 25 streets in 90210 with 808 street number. Hell, it defies all odds there's even one of "poor Don", much less dupes.

Add: The formula needs to take into account that some percentage of the people with birth date 4/26/34 were dead at the time.

I don't know the frequency of the name Sterling, but according to the 2000 census it is ranked #1333 in America.

http://www.pbs.org/pov/thesweetestsound/popindex.php?name=sterling&Submit=Submit

 

[332nd]

2. You think it's acceptable to punish people based on illegally obtained private conversations.

And?...

 

[johnny karate]

What "issue" do you refer to?

Unfairness. Injustice. Whatever it is that's got your dander up.

Please cite the exact clause he is in violation of.

Constitution and By-Laws of the NBA Article 35A(c)

Any person who gives, makes, issues, authorizes or endorses any statement having, or designed to have, an effect prejudicial or detrimental to the best interests of basketball or of the Association or of a Member or its Team, shall be liable to a fine not exceeding $1,000,000 to be imposed by the Commissioner.

Who defines that duty that he is bound to act upon, and please cite that duty.

Constitution and By-Laws of the NBA - Article 24(c)

The Commissioner shall have the responsibility for the general supervision and direction of all business and affairs of the League and shall have all such other powers as may be necessary or appropriate to fulfill this responsibility.

Constitution and By-Laws of the NBA - Article 24(e)

The Commissioner shall have the right to investigate all charges, accusations, or other matters that may adversely affect the Association or its Members.

Constitution and By-Laws of the NBA - Article 35A(d)

The Commissioner shall have the power to suspend for a definite or indefinite period, or to impose a fine not exceeding $1,000,000, or inflict both such suspension and fine upon any person who, in his opinion, shall have been guilty of conduct prejudicial or detrimental to the Association.

Feel free to educate yourself.

I was fired for reprimanding my girlfriend for her homophobic behavior. Guess my only recourse is to take the issue to court. If I lose there, then I just must be wrong since whatever the law/courts say is right, must be morally/ethically justified.

Sucks to be you, I guess.

But we are bound by laws, not anyone individual's personal moral or ethical views, no matter how much that individual may stomp their feet and cry "No fair!" like a spoiled child denied a cookie.

 

[johnny karate]

No, the point is Sterling has embarrassed no one but himself. He wasn't speaking on behalf of the NBA. Hell, he wasn't even speaking on behalf of his own team. It was a private conversation which appearantly was illegally recorded without his consent and publicized without his consent. He was then fined for that illegally obtained private conversation. Classic thought police action. Too bad we don't have more monitoring of private conversations to ferret out the bad thoughts people have in order to properly punish the bad thinkers. That way we wouldn't have to rely on random clips supplied by disgruntled mistresses.

Private organizations can act in any way they want in accordance with the law and their own internal set of rules and by-laws.

This has nothing to do with the "thought police" and everything to do with a private organization making a decision based on its own best interest.

Whining abut it won't change anything.

You think it's acceptable to punish people based on illegally obtained private conversations.

You do realize you're conflating two separate issues, right? The legality of the recording has absolutely nothing to do with the NBA's right and ability to act as they have.

The illegality belongs solely to Sterling's mistress, and if there are any criminal repercussions, they will fall on her and her alone.

The NBA is not liable, responsible, or even remotely answerable to any issue of legality regarding the recording. Nor do they have an obligation to somehow verify the recording was made legally before they are free to act.

In short, your gripe is with the mistress, and not whatever "thought police" your fevered imagination perceives.

 

[MattusMaximus]

I find it amazing that some here, who ordinarily are all about letting private organizations/businesses determine their own rules without outside interference from government (i.e. "thought police"), are complaining about how the NBA, a private organization/business, is handling this thing.

The words "hypocrisy" and "double standard" spring to mind

 

[MattusMaximus]

I was fired for reprimanding my girlfriend for her homophobic behavior. Guess my only recourse is to take the issue to court. If I lose there, then I just must be wrong since whatever the law/courts say is right, must be morally/ethically justified.

If it really bugs you that much, then yes you should take the issue to court.

Or... you could whine about it.

 

[applecorped]

Just wait until mind reading is possible.

You're all racists!

 

[johnny karate]

I find it amazing that some here, who ordinarily are all about letting private organizations/businesses determine their own rules without outside interference from government (i.e. "thought police"), are complaining about how the NBA, a private organization/business, is handling this thing.

The words "hypocrisy" and "double standard" spring to mind

And my favorite part is how pretty much every member of said private organization is in agreement with this decision, but somehow an unrelated second party thinks they know better.

 

[MattusMaximus]

Just wait until mind reading is possible.

You're all racists!

If you don't like the NBA's decision, then by all means protest it. Good luck with that.

Me, I couldn't care less one way or another, since I don't like basketball.

 

[ABC10]

I know very well what she claims. Do you actually believe he wanted her to record that particular conversation and publicly share it? Your other link and quote is irrelevant. I never claimed the conversation was not of Sterling.

She's killed the Goose that laid her the Golden Egg. How stupid is that?