NBA comes down hard on racist owner: Fox News defends him

[Rhea]

It's OK to say racist things as long as it's in private?

Plenty of room between "ok" and "2.5 million fine, lifetime ban and forced sale of a business".

What he did and what his punishment is are completely incongruous.

What he did was damage the brand of the company he works for - NBA. Damaged it badly. The heavy hand of the free market spoke. It finds racism a losing product. It's off the shelf now.

He felt that way, acted that way. The first couple of times he got caught the market was somewhat different and they let it go under the rug. But the market has changed. No matter how he got exposed, he is now exposed, and the brand, his bosses (the collective owners and the NBA constitution) and his market felt he was bad for business and now he's gone.

Sounds perfectly congruous to me, you just don't understand the market he's in. Neither did he. But that doesn't dictate the market, which doesn't care what derec and Don Sterling think.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Do you also wonder why racist slave owners owned slaves?

You are equating a sports team with slavery? Seriously?

Actually the guy himself kind of was.

 

[Rhea]

No, she secretly taped their lovers' tiff (a crime in CA) and sent it to TMZ.

It wasn't her that decided on the punishment he received.

I think NBA is unreasonably draconian but not criminal.

I also wonder why he owned a basketball team if he is such a racist. Why not NHL or Nascar instead?

In NHL and Nascar he doesn't get to own black people, now does he?

 

[Derec]

In NHL and Nascar he doesn't get to own black people, now does he?

Neither does he in NBA. Pretending that multimillionaires who freely enter highly paid contracts are somehow "slaves" is height of ridiculousness.

Besides, it seems like "owning" an NBA team doesn't even mean you own it if the league commissioner can ban you from your own team for life and force the sale of the team.

 

[laughing dog]

Do you also wonder why racist slave owners owned slaves?

You are equating a sports team with slavery? Seriously?

Logic fail. If one can understand why racist slave owners could overcome the aversion to black people and own slaves, I would think one could then see how a racist owner of a basketball team could overcome his aversion to black people and employ black people.

 

[laughing dog]

Besides, it seems like "owning" an NBA team doesn't even mean you own it if the league commissioner can ban you from your own team for life and force the sale of the team.

More logic fail. You can own a car but have it confiscated. As it is, from what I read, the NBA is going to try to force the sale.

 

[Derec]

What he did was damage the brand of the company he works for - NBA. Damaged it badly.

Really? An old man saying mean things during a lovers' tiff damaged the NBA badly?

The heavy hand of the free market spoke. It finds racism a losing product. It's off the shelf now.

At least anti-black racism is off the shelf. Anti-white racism of Al Sharpton apparently sells very well over at MSNBC. He is much more racist than Sterling could ever be. After all, he once incited an arson that led to deaths.

He felt that way, acted that way. The first couple of times he got caught the market was somewhat different and they let it go under the rug.

What was he allegedly caught saying before?

But the market has changed. No matter how he got exposed, he is now exposed, and the brand, his bosses (the collective owners and the NBA constitution) and his market felt he was bad for business and now he's gone.

I think it does matter and I hope the bitch gf gets prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

 

[Rhea]

He is the one that tells her to record his conversations.

I hadn't heard this. What's it mean?

She didn't need to dig for his gold. He pays her willingly to essentially serve as an mistress/escort because no one that grotesque could get a pretty young women to hang out with them otherwise.

And then Sterling's wife tries to sue her for the stuff he gave her and paid her. (?)


The right or wrong of her recording him has nothing at all to do with whether he damaged the brand, by the way. Even if she gets brought on charges for it if she did something illegal, it changes not one single thing about whether the NBA did something congruous or whether he is a sympathetic figure for a victim. He's a piece of dung and maybe another piece of dung ratted on him. Doesn't diminish his stink one iota.

 

[Derec]

Besides, it seems like "owning" an NBA team doesn't even mean you own it if the league commissioner can ban you from your own team for life and force the sale of the team.

More logic fail. You can own a car but have it confiscated. As it is, from what I read, the NBA is going to try to force the sale.

If you can lose something you "own" just because you voice an unpopular opinion in private than this "ownership" has very little value.

 

[Rhea]

Really? An old man saying mean things during a lovers' tiff damaged the NBA badly?

Yup. He became a stinky, smooshy disgusting pile on the shoe of the NBA and they scraped it off. Their fan base was outraged. I realize that you are not. But the NBA doesn't care about you. They care about their fan base - their customers.

He felt that way, acted that way. The first couple of times he got caught the market was somewhat different and they let it go under the rug.

What was he allegedly caught saying before?

There were several lawsuits by employees and tenants over racism and discrimination. And horrible behavior. It's in almost every article about this.

 

[Rhea]

Besides, it seems like "owning" an NBA team doesn't even mean you own it if the league commissioner can ban you from your own team for life and force the sale of the team.

More logic fail. You can own a car but have it confiscated. As it is, from what I read, the NBA is going to try to force the sale.

If you can lose something you "own" just because you voice an unpopular opinion in private than this "ownership" has very little value.

you need to read the NBA constitution or contract or whatever they call it. Yes you can, apparently, if what you own is an NBA team. The news I read suggests thia is pretty clearly stated, like when you buy a condo in a homeowner's association. You own it, but there are rules you have to abide.

 

[laughing dog]

Besides, it seems like "owning" an NBA team doesn't even mean you own it if the league commissioner can ban you from your own team for life and force the sale of the team.

More logic fail. You can own a car but have it confiscated. As it is, from what I read, the NBA is going to try to force the sale.

If you can lose something you "own" just because you voice an unpopular opinion in private than this "ownership" has very little value.

Expousing racist views that damage the "club" is more than simply "voicing an unpopular opinion". Are you implying that you have more expert knowledge about what hurts and does not hurt the NBA than the owners?

 

[Derec]

Yup. He became a stinky, smooshy disgusting pile on the shoe of the NBA and they scraped it off. Their fan base was outraged. I realize that you are not. But the NBA doesn't care about you. They care about their fan base - their customers.

Oh I think he said some horrible things. But I do distinguish between private comments (especially made in the heat of a private argument) and public pronouncements.

There were several lawsuits by employees and tenants over racism and discrimination. And horrible behavior. It's in almost every article about this.

Just because there were lawsuits doesn't mean they had any merit. Name me one rich person who hasn't been sued before.
If he was a notorious racist, why was NAACP about to give him an award?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

The irony is that he actually moved the franchise from San Diego to Los Angelos without the approval of the NBA and he still managed to keep the team. The problem that may pop up is that he really hasn't done anything illegal. Forcing someone to sell a team is pretty high stakes and the NBA would likely need to go to court over this. But as long as this guy owns the Clippers, the corporate image of the Clippers is hurt greatly.

Besides, it seems like "owning" an NBA team doesn't even mean you own it if the league commissioner can ban you from your own team for life and force the sale of the team.

More logic fail. You can own a car but have it confiscated. As it is, from what I read, the NBA is going to try to force the sale.

If you can lose something you "own" just because you voice an unpopular opinion...

Unpopular opinion? That is a nice spin on the word "racism".

...in private than this "ownership" has very little value.

Actually it is valued at a few hundred million.

 

[Derec]

That is a nice spin on the word "racism".

Well racism is unpopular, right?
Again, I am not saying that what he said is right but
a) he had a reasonable expectation of privacy which his gf violated
b) punishment doesn't fit the "crime"

Actually it is valued at a few hundred million.

A few hundred million dollars is probably the difference between selling the club on the open market and during a forced sale.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Well racism is unpopular, right?

So is Jose Mourihno. Saying something is unpopular implies something that isn't quite vile.

Again, I am not saying that what he said is right

. Actually you just did!

what he said is right

OMG!!!! Someone call Al Sharpton!!!

but
a) he had a reasonable expectation of privacy which his gf violated

You misspelled gold digging bitch.

b) punishment doesn't fit the "crime"

The Clipper image is most certainly tainted. I think Sterling going out and smiling with Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton won't help mend this. Some stuff you can't come back from. Talk to that guy from Eastbound and Down.

Actually it is valued at a few hundred million.

A few hundred million dollars is probably the difference between selling the club on the open market and during a forced sale.

It is doubtful that the Clippers will be forced to be sold at a less than market value. He could certainly have a good shot at blocking such a thing in court.

 

[Rhea]

Oh I think he said some horrible things. But I do distinguish between private comments (especially made in the heat of a private argument) and public pronouncements.

and I repeat,

Their fan base was outraged. I realize that you are not. But the NBA doesn't care about you. They care about their fan base - their customers.

Same reason New Coke came off the shelf. Open Hand of the Free Market.

But I do distinguish between private comments (especially made in the heat of a private argument) and public pronouncements.

Yeah. Remember how that worked out for Nixon?
And Romney?

 

[Derec]

So is Jose Mourihno. Saying something is unpopular implies something that isn't quite vile.

Snicker at mention of Mourinho! My point was actually that vileness should not enter into not punishing people for private speech, especially speech done in the heat of an argument. We all say things we do not mean when angry.

Again, I am not saying that what he said is right

. Actually you just did!

what he said is right

OMG!!!!

Good point. Are we sure the tape wasn't doctored to sound worse that it is? I mean I would not put it past TMZ for sure. I would not put it past the gf either except I doubt she has the technical skills.

Someone call Al Sharpton!!!

Nobody needs to call Sharpton. He inserts himself in these types of cases by himself.

The Clipper image is most certainly tainted.

On the plus side though, now most people outside of LA have heard of them. That must be worth something!

Talk to that guy from Eastbound and Down.

Who?

It is doubtful that the Clippers will be forced to be sold at a less than market value. He could certainly have a good shot at blocking such a thing in court.

What is the market value other than what you can get on the market. It would be very difficult to estimate what the market value would have been sans the forced sale aspect.

 

[Keith&Co.]

Snicker at mention of Mourinho! My point was actually that vileness should not enter into not punishing people for private speech, especially speech done in the heat of an argument. We all say things we do not mean when angry.

Sure. And if he'd said 'those niggers' in this private conversation, then that might be an 'angry misstep.'
He went into a lot of detail about why she shouldn't be seen in public with blacks. If he 'didn't really mean' these justifications he offered for his position, then that would mean he has some rational, non-racist reason for setting race-based dating rules for his mistress? Non-racist, not-so-offensive reasons he was just too angry to articulate?
If these are just angry statements made in the heat of the moment, you have to think that the underlaying truths of his anger have to be humdingers of reasons, no?
I'm not seeing how a 'heat of the moment' defense could possibly make anything better, here.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Am I the only person who isn't a racist and hasn't dived into a racial diatribe in an argument?