Clippers Owner Banned for Life

a reply to: amazing

What do I mean by a "thug league?" I mean a league where inappropriate behavior by players is not immediately addressed for the sake of who or what the player might be in terms of revenue to the league...

A league where at least one referee already admitted in sworn affidavits gambling on games was indeed taking place...

Player behavior, including illicit drug use and off-court crimes, have been typically brushed aside for as long as league sports (not just the professionals) have been in existence...

Thugs...the whole lot of them...

Anyone who does not believe the major sports leagues are scripted entertainment is living in a dream world...

This is just a script...a news story designed to further foment small minded people who cannot otherwise flip burgers at the corner store...

All entertainers make big money...yet we decide to pay people who actually do real work, such as teachers and firefighters and other public servants a pittance...

While Rome burns, we attend to circus acts...gotta have our entertainment...

a reply to: Astrocyte

Laws for taping on people in the United States run from ALL party consent required to NO party consent required to one party consent.

Then those laws get complicated if the communication takes place in a public place vs. a private residence or other area where expectation of privacy is a reasonable one. It gets even more complicated when a recording deals with communication across state lines, where states may not have the same law (The stricter of the two is the one to go by unless someone is a lawyer itching for a precedent fight).

It's a mess..and I wish we had a national standard. Then again..if it would be like those states that require every single person who may be recorded, know and consent individually? Perhaps state by state does work best.

a reply to: Astrocyte

That you can sit there and write and express what you believe is simply what you believe...

Nothing more and nothing less...

Amazing in the open world you so eloquently describe there is no room for humanity...and amazing for someone expressing such high-mindedness, you cannot allow your superior mind to simply ignore such foolishness on the part of others...

Human beings are imperfect, in case you did not know...and not everyone has your sense of perfection...

What if someone was to eventually decide YOU needed to be booted out, for whatever reason...not only that, it would seem the majority, for whatever reason, decided to choose sides with the other guy...

Then what?

a reply to: Wrabbit2000

Thanks for the informative reply.

Then those laws get complicated if the communication takes place in a public place vs. a private residence or other area where expectation of privacy is a reasonable one.

All I can say is, sucks to be him. He''s about to lose his favorite asset, and his case against his ex-girlfriend, from what I understand, may be difficult to prove.

I hope she had the sensibility to consult a lawyer before handing over that personal conversation to TMZ. If she did, and her states law accepts the legality of taping conversations you're a party to, then she's in the clear. As to the question of private vs. public place, I can't imagine how a lawyer could prove where a conversation took place unless it is explicitly mentioned on the recording. If it isn't, an all they have is my word vs. your word, she's pretty much in the clear.

I hope she get's in the clear, because frankly, people like this shouldn't have power. And if it becomes known that my employer considers me to be a second (or third) class human, then I am very much entitled to not wanting any future relationship with him.

It's disturbing how any human being could want to relate to another human being - based on trivial differences in bodily appearance - in such a derogatory way.

a reply to: totallackey

Then those laws get complicated if the communication takes place in a public place vs. a private residence or other area where expectation of privacy is a reasonable one.

I'm not quite getting your point here.

Human beings are imperfect, in case you did not know...and not everyone has your sense of perfection...

What sense of perfection? I don't think were perfect. But I do think we have an obligation to ourselves and OTHERS that we make an effort to think rationally and wisely about things.

What if someone was to eventually decide YOU needed to be booted out, for whatever reason...not only that, it would seem the majority, for whatever reason, decided to choose sides with the other guy...

Care to give me a situation where I would be threatened with being "booted out"? I'm not a racist. I don't think people who are a different skin color from me, or a different sex from myself, to be fundamentally different from the experience of what it means to be human. So what am I in danger of?

Sane people generally think the same. The contemplative religious traditions the world over generally agree with a "golden rule" of morality. Don't mistreat other people. So long as I am being a good human being and holding up my end of the "bargain" i.e my role in the larger context of humanity - than what should I fear?

Just saying "it's a slippery slope" does not mean there is in fact a slipper slope. This guy manifested behavior which any enlightened, normal human being, understands to be wrong.

If you disagree, than I suppose you are simply a moral relativist, in which case, you making an issue of anything I say is a sign of hypocrisy.

a reply to: Astrocyte

I tend to agree that the woman shouldn't be seeing any conviction on it. The law is what it is, but it's also overkill and wrong in many instances for this sort of thing. Among those needing change, to be sure.

In terms of him? Well.... There is a fine line between making someone feel so unwelcome in all areas of professional life, they find a way to leave it (professional side...not life) vs. forcibly removing someone or causing that to happen.

One is every man and woman's right to express themselves as much as he had every right to express himself. No one said free speech was necessarily FREE from recourse. They just made it a bedrock value that no law shall abridge it and no Government or arm of the state should restrict it. Fair enough...so what they did here is technically proper, as far as I know.

Proper doesn't make right though. It's Proper to see the woman charged, booked, convicted and sentenced to the maximum possible. It's not right either. Perhaps the lynch mob mentality to overbalance for wrongs of the past is BECOMING the wrong of the present. Just something I've considered from time to time...

This is going to get interesting. If he loses the franchise, his girlfriend is going to be up a creek, as he can then turn around and sue her for the lose of the franchise.

While he is banned, something tells me he is not going to lay down so easily, and will probably fight it to the bitter, end, especially if he is able to retain the team, as he could then argue that if he can not have a say in the team management or the franchise, he could tie up the players money for years in court.

Probably been said, but he is an ignorant, racist douche.

And that being said, it isn't illegal. There's lots of those folks out there.

(We'll never know the full details of the NBA contract/agreement with the owners. Still a douche).

a reply to: Wrabbit2000

It's not right either

And that, in my mind, is what needs to take precedence. When the law becomes a lifeless vehicle of bureaucratic habit, and doesn't make distinctions at times when the morality - its value - is so clear, then you get a perversion of justice.

Donald Sterling is the type of reptile who loves bureaucratic procedures because they have favor his way of seeing things - i.e not feeling any relationship between himself and other people, not empathizing with every human's need to be respected and valued.

a reply to: Astrocyte

I'm not quite getting your point here.

That is simply because I did not make the post containing the paragraph of which you are trying to make sense...

What sense of perfection? I don't think were perfect. But I do think we have an obligation to ourselves and OTHERS that we make an effort to think rationally and wisely about things.

Tell me how excluding anybody from anything is acting in a rational manner? Everyone here is up in arms about Sterling stating he wanted to exclude others on the basis of skin color...and your enlightened solution is to do the same thing to him? Sounds moronic to me...

Care to give me a situation where I would be threatened with being "booted out"?...So long as I am being a good human being and holding up my end of the "bargain" i.e my role in the larger context of humanity - than what should I fear?

First, I would like to state I find it absolutely amazing a person with such obvious ability to have the "sure fire cure and answer," for what should be done in the case of Sterling suddenly finds him/herself absent of imagination when it comes time to place themselves in a situation where banishment is the penalty. But sure. The situation is this. You are the person commonly referred to as Jesus. Last I checked, he was holding up his end of the bargain, at least according to the Gospels...

What happened to him?

Just saying "it's a slippery slope" does not mean there is in fact a slipper slope. This guy manifested behavior which any enlightened, normal human being, understands to be wrong.

Just to be clear, the wrong you claim was committed, was his expression, "don't bring blacks to the game." Correct?

If you disagree, than I suppose you are simply a moral relativist, in which case, you making an issue of anything I say is a sign of hypocrisy.

It seems you are the moral relativist...you want to exclude Sterling because of what he said...he wanted to exclude people for his own reasons...

It is only because of the current "mob mentality," you feel comfortable with your position.

A few things one might consider. The NBA is a professional entertainment enterprise. The only thing that differentiates this from professional wrestling is the perceived idea that gambling can be done fairly, but a former ref says otherwise on that matter. This, football or any other entertainment system is not hallowed ground at all but a system used for two reasons: gambling first and distraction second - gladiators were wonderful while Rome burned and the Superbowl et al is more of the same.

Sterling has been a nut for years. In fact, he bought the team and turned it into an ATM, doing little to put out a professional entertainment product for decades - the Clippers were seen as purgatory by everyone and anyone. Running a franchise poorly, often without regard for league or the players (he asked the players to tape themselves at one point to save money) was NEVER seen as a crime by the league? Why didn't the NBA ban him then?

He was in a lawsuit several years ago based on his bigotted nature, yet all the team players took his money to play for him? Why weren't those who are crying out now too upset at those actions that led to the lawsuit to avoid taking huge money to play for him? Sterling has been known as an ass, yet Paul, Griffen and those so outraged now took/take millions from him to play basketball?

The leagues of professional sports are VERY controlled. What you see as random acts of owners are all very, very calculated. The league has decided that the Laker team is no longer going to be the favored team - they have been sent to purgatory for reasons the only the league officials only know. The Clippers are now the West Coast Team, the poster team, and their owner has to go. The league cannot invest the energy needed to put the Clippers into the finals year after year with an 80 year old nut. The Celtics are no longer the East Coast team either, look for the Knicks to become the golden child shortly with their West Coast brethren the Clippers.

This is a staged event to had the team owner to an owner who the league sees as a better option then Sterling. Lawsuits will fly in the meantime which has the wonderful byproduct of putting this meaningless, TRULY meaningless event on TV every night with dutifully self righteous idiots fanning the flames of anger and hatred on TV, the net and newspapers - this will go on for ages.

delete

a reply to: Astrocyte

Donald Sterling is the type of reptile who loves bureaucratic procedures because they have favor his way of seeing things - i.e not feeling any relationship between himself and other people, not empathizing with every human's need to be respected and valued.

I think you mentioned you live in Canada and so I take that a bit differently and tend to understand where you're coming from more than I ever could or would an American.

It's been quite an eye opener to me as an American, to find that in other nations someone actually can be arrested and jailed for words said which merely offend someone else. Simply offensive...not encouraging to immediate violence or the known fighting words. When those are societies values? Who am I to say it's a bad take to have?

The thing is... Under the American system, and perhaps this does date me a bit since I'm seeing less and less of this thinking, I was raised and taught to be tolerant of the speech of anyone short of Fire in a theater or a threat of injury or death. Pretty much anything else? Well.. heck.. How much more offensive can it get than to have goose stepping Nazis down main street USA, right in the Heartland...no less..in the 1970's? That pretty well defines offensive to the point of open violence.

However...it was protected. It should have been and it needed to be. If anyone had attacked them in their Nazi parade in small town Illinois....they would have rightly been arrested for it. The coverage seems to show the Nazis were quite aware of how deeply they were hated tho. No overt action or personal consequence in their lives necessary.

I just default to the protection of all speech, in terms of taking real cost from someone or causing them real destruction or injury. After all, what this man said is repugnant and extremely offensive ...but what you and I say may well be to others. In fact, it almost certainly is to someone in a land as diverse as this is happening in.

originally posted by: totallackey
a reply to: amazing

What do I mean by a "thug league?" I mean a league where inappropriate behavior by players is not immediately addressed for the sake of who or what the player might be in terms of revenue to the league...

A league where at least one referee already admitted in sworn affidavits gambling on games was indeed taking place...

Player behavior, including illicit drug use and off-court crimes, have been typically brushed aside for as long as league sports (not just the professionals) have been in existence...

Thugs...the whole lot of them...

Anyone who does not believe the major sports leagues are scripted entertainment is living in a dream world...

This is just a script...a news story designed to further foment small minded people who cannot otherwise flip burgers at the corner store...

All entertainers make big money...yet we decide to pay people who actually do real work, such as teachers and firefighters and other public servants a pittance...

While Rome burns, we attend to circus acts...gotta have our entertainment...

You're obviously very intelligent, so you have to know that using the words thug league when talking about the NBA in this thread, would give most people a racial connotation or frame to your statement. Maybe that wasn't your intent, but I think it was judging by how intelligent and perceptive you are. But we all make mistakes.

But why single out the NBA when there are bad people of all colors in all major league sports and then again why single out sports for your Rome is burning reference when we distract ourselves here ...on line in petty arguments like ours, or watch movies or read books or play video games or smoke or gamble or eat or drink or get high or play sports ourselves while Rome indeed burns?

Just saying. I disagree with your premise that it's a black gang criminal league that is fixed. The NBA is competitive. I don't believe games are fixed or all the refs are bad. I think the NBA goes out of it's way to have a clean image that is appealing to most family people. I think that NFL football players and college football players get away with much much more. Take a good hard look at College Football if you want to see true criminals, cheating, conspiracies and what not.

I have no real comments on this story other than that Sterling is an idiot. And his wife seems to be a gold digger.

There is a whole deeper social discussion that could be had, but likely won't.

originally posted by: amazing

originally posted by: totallackey
a reply to: amazing

What do I mean by a "thug league?" I mean a league where inappropriate behavior by players is not immediately addressed for the sake of who or what the player might be in terms of revenue to the league...

A league where at least one referee already admitted in sworn affidavits gambling on games was indeed taking place...

Player behavior, including illicit drug use and off-court crimes, have been typically brushed aside for as long as league sports (not just the professionals) have been in existence...

Thugs...the whole lot of them...

Anyone who does not believe the major sports leagues are scripted entertainment is living in a dream world...

This is just a script...a news story designed to further foment small minded people who cannot otherwise flip burgers at the corner store...

All entertainers make big money...yet we decide to pay people who actually do real work, such as teachers and firefighters and other public servants a pittance...

While Rome burns, we attend to circus acts...gotta have our entertainment...

You're obviously very intelligent, so you have to know that using the words thug league when talking about the NBA in this thread, would give most people a racial connotation or frame to your statement. Maybe that wasn't your intent, but I think it was judging by how intelligent and perceptive you are. But we all make mistakes.

I did not mean to equivocate "thug," to "black." I used the word "thug," to easily demonstrate, via the follow up responses to my post, the predilection of most persons to immediately jump on the race card...thank you for playing.

But why single out the NBA when there are bad people of all colors in all major league sports and then again why single out sports for your Rome is burning reference when we distract ourselves here ...on line in petty arguments like ours, or watch movies or read books or play video games or smoke or gamble or eat or drink or get high or play sports ourselves while Rome indeed burns?

Did I single out the NBA? Did I narrow it down to any particular color of person(s)?

Just saying. I disagree with your premise that it's a black gang criminal league that is fixed. The NBA is competitive. I don't believe games are fixed or all the refs are bad. I think the NBA goes out of it's way to have a clean image that is appealing to most family people. I think that NFL football players and college football players get away with much much more. Take a good hard look at College Football if you want to see true criminals, cheating, conspiracies and what not.

What part of my post did you not comprehend? Keep on believing in the mirage labeled, "organized league sports." Gamblers, cheats, are involved at all levels.

originally posted by: phinubian
a reply to: combatmaster

Feeling that one is better than another is generally my bar of whether someone is racist , in most instances you can quickly arrive at in conversation whether the person is expressing a racist view or simply expressing from a historically oppressed standpoint of why one feels wronged or even pointing out who he feels is the basis for having perpetrated some wrongdoing towards them in the first place.

This is usually turned around cleverly to say the complainer is racist which is one of the most weak tactics someone is quickly going to invoke or say someone is playing a race card, usually the latter is not attempting to convey superior or inferior views that in itself is not racist, incorrectly classifying someone who speaks out on either being discriminated against or vocal on who they perceive as discriminating against them or receiving unequal privilege compared to them should not be deemed racist, that not so clever tactic needs to be called out also , it is the same thing done to women when they speak out on sexual harassment, they are sometimes made out to look like they caused it or are the problem.

In other words what you are attempting to sell, I am not buying and neither will the informed or educated who have had to hear that kind of nonsense being spun to make them appear racist, when they do not feel superior or want to make anyone feel inferior.

That's your problem, not mine...

I said what i feel and what i know, maybe my viewpoint will change due to more pleasant experiences, but ATM i know that racism is on both sides of the pitch, and for you to say any different is spewing ignorance!

originally posted by: tothetenthpower
Can't have a racist running a team in the NBA.

Obvious is obvious.

~Tenth

0

Why not, you have misogynists running major corporation?

He is a business owner no more no less. What he says in private conversations about his business or employees is his business and his alone. Illegal recordings included. I am sure your bosses have said worse about you in private. Who ya gonna sue? If you can't show material harm it didn't happen. End of story. As an employee if you don't like it - you know where the door is!!!

You have Silver acting as judge, jury and executioner. why? because of rabid political correctness. And it only cuts one way. (if you're white you're crucified) Case in point, that racist POS snoop dog spewed more hate speech about Sterling in 2 minutes than Sterling has probably spoken about blacks in a life time. So where's the outrage in the white or black community about Snoop that racist POS. Oh did I say that already about that racist POS Snoop. (See the You Tube video sorry I don't have the link)

nothing is ever obvious, Mr. obvious

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: John_Rodger_Cornman

He knew he was being recorded though. He recorded his conversations him self cause he forgets what he said.

even with that, is there no "reasonable expectation of privacy" involved?

like if i do a cover tune and give a copy to a friend, and they call BMI and ASCAP, i get sued for copyright infringement, fined and have to sell my guitars?
it's ok?

a reply to: ArtemisE


Screw this racist a-hole. this jerkoff is proof that money cant cure stupidity. I mean, really, insulting your consumer base is the height of stupidity. He can't be allowed to be an NBA team owner if the sport is going to continue to attract talent and customers. Freedom of speech is irrelevant here. The NBA will never allow its owners to be so publicly racist.