Clippers Owner Donald Sterling Audio Tape...

DarthFed

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
17,724
Reactions
3,477
Points
113
Kieran said:
Actually, a boycott during the play-offs would be a huge signal of how strong their principles are, but why let these little things get in the way of the viewing figures?

So in order to show what they think of racism they should throw away their dreams and forfeit a playoff series? There are other ways to go about it and they are letting the player union and NBA handle the situation for now which is probably the best thing they can do. If things are not handled to their liking that's when you might see coaches and players decide to get out of Dodge.
 

DarthFed

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
17,724
Reactions
3,477
Points
113
britbox said:
Put it this way Darth, I'd imagine there are far more jobs available paying our salaries than there are paying NBA salaries if you're talking about being able to get a "like for like" salary on quitting. There is a finite number of jobs in the NBA and if those guys leave the Clippers then a) They have to find a similar job on a similar salary at another franchise and b) If they do find that job then somebody else is out of work.

Sure, I'm guessing some or maybe even most would find jobs elsewhere... but who would they be hurting? Sterling? Not a great deal... the bigger hit would be on other NBA players who they replace on the roster.

"The players aren't going to boycott now because it is the playoffs" is an interesting comment - one which I agree with because human nature dictates that most people generally put their own interests before wider ranging principles. Not in all cases... but definitely more often than not.

I don't think the players are sacrificing their principles by playing out the playoffs. Playing for a chance at a championship is what they dream of and they are still playing for each other, the coach, the fans, etc.

Sterling would be rich without the team, that's true, but he would be a little less richer and his name is already being dragged through the mud and it will only get worse. There is no way that guy is going to be the owner after this year, so this will all be a moot point.
 

brokenshoelace

Grand Slam Champion
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
9,380
Reactions
1,334
Points
113
So, just to put into perspective what a piece of trash Donald Sterling is, he was sued for discrimination on multiple occasions, and has been forced to pay the largest housing discrimination settlement in Department of Justice history, as he, his wife and three of his companies have refused to rent to black and Hispanic people (you can read more about it here: http://www.edgeofsports.com/2009-11-10-470/index.html ). So yeah, as a man who terrorized the poor, this phone call is probably low on his list of offenses, but it highlights what kind of a man he is. We're not just talking about an 81 year old bigot with outdated ideologies. We're talking about a genuine piece of $hit. That is why this phone call tape, in the grand scheme of things, is a bigger issue than just a man who sounds drunk being baited by a money-hungry girlfriend.

He's also been sued for sexual harassment, has had multiple affairs with employees, etc... you know, all the standard filthy rich men stuff. Speaking of which, here's an excerpt from a Sterling deposition in 2003, relating to a lawsuit involving a former mistress of his. This is Sterling under oath, and I won't lie, it had me absolutely rolling. Hilarious stuff (especially the end), however, be warned, sexually explicit language (though no profanities). As Sterling was describing their relationship as "sex for money, money for sex," he apparently unnecessarily felt the need to relive some of the moments they spent together. This is too idiotic to be made up:

SterlingTalkLikeSex1.png


:lolz::lolz::lolz::lolz:
 

Kieran

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
17,015
Reactions
7,288
Points
113
:lolz: :laydownlaughing :laydownlaughing :lolz:
 

Kieran

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
17,015
Reactions
7,288
Points
113
DarthFed said:
Kieran said:
Actually, a boycott during the play-offs would be a huge signal of how strong their principles are, but why let these little things get in the way of the viewing figures?

So in order to show what they think of racism they should throw away their dreams and forfeit a playoff series? There are other ways to go about it and they are letting the player union and NBA handle the situation for now which is probably the best thing they can do. If things are not handled to their liking that's when you might see coaches and players decide to get out of Dodge.

As an immediate way of saying, yes, we want the gold - but not at any price - yes, I would think they should down tools and make a huge issue of this...
 

DarthFed

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
17,724
Reactions
3,477
Points
113
Kieran said:
DarthFed said:
Kieran said:
Actually, a boycott during the play-offs would be a huge signal of how strong their principles are, but why let these little things get in the way of the viewing figures?

So in order to show what they think of racism they should throw away their dreams and forfeit a playoff series? There are other ways to go about it and they are letting the player union and NBA handle the situation for now which is probably the best thing they can do. If things are not handled to their liking that's when you might see coaches and players decide to get out of Dodge.

As an immediate way of saying, yes, we want the gold - but not at any price - yes, I would think they should down tools and make a huge issue of this...

I disagree. Not that I have been or will be in that situation, but I don't think I'd throw away everything I worked hard for to stick it to a racist owner who is almost certainly not going to be around after the playoffs anyways.
 

Kieran

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
17,015
Reactions
7,288
Points
113
I'm not saying it's easy, and I'm not saying I'd definitely do it, but I like to think I would. For example, if he was an anti-Catholic bigot, it wouldn't be an issue: I'd certainly walk immediately.

But there's another question here: did his players know before this tape that he was so nasty and virile a bigot? And if so, why haven't they acted sooner?
 

GameSetAndMath

The GOAT
Joined
Jul 9, 2013
Messages
21,141
Reactions
3,398
Points
113
Moxie629 said:
GameSetAndMath said:
Going little away form the specific personality involved, I want to discuss
more generally about racism. Here are some questions. Some may be easy
and some may be difficult. I would appreciate folk's views on them.

Is a white father, who advises his daughter not to out with black men
racist?

I was just wondering as to whether a white woman who would not consider going out
with a black man, is a racist?

If a person who is in a leadership capacity (say a company manager or business owner
etc) always makes hiring, promotion and other business decisions purely based on the
merits of people/issues without considering the race angle at all, but who advises
his children never to marry a black person, a racist?

In other words, is it possible to be professionally non-racist and personally racist?

How does racism interferes with personal preferences? Are you not allowed to have
personal preferences, if you want to claim that you are not a racist?

If a white woman wouldn't consider going out with a "black" man, on those grounds, that's racist. If she just doesn't fancy him, it's not. Let me put it this way: my preference is for dark-eyed, dark-haired men. Does that mean that I discriminate against Scandinavian men? No. I just don't prefer them. However, if I were the father that prohibited my daughter from dating/marrying one, yes, I'd be a racist, or somehow anti-Scandinavian bigot.

I understand the "father being a racist" part as he is just passing down the dogmas.
So, let us focus on an individual making personal preference.

Just as you having preference to dark-eyed dark-haired man, is there anything wrong
if a white woman does not consider going out with a black man as she does not have
preference for them. Assume that she is making the decision individually and is not
making the decision due to compulsion from parents etc. She is clearly not going out
with him as he is a black man (i.e., on the grounds that he is a black man) and
that is not her preference.

I am confused as to where is the line between personal preferences and racist
tendencies. I think all of us would agree that people should be allowed to have
personal preferences and yet should not be racists. But, where exactly is the line?
Do you see a clear line in the first place?
 

Murat Baslamisli

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
10,337
Reactions
1,055
Points
113
Age
52
Location
Aurora, Ontario, Canada
Website
www.drummershangout.ca
GSM, the problem with the woman in your example is that she is lumping every single individual black men together . Sure, it is your preference, but if you have a rule that says I am not dating black men, most likely you will not have any close black friends either because something about them is making you uncomfortable, so much so that you would never date one. So, what is it? The answer to that question will determine if this person is a racist or not.

For me, any time you make a blanket statement like that, most likely you are a racist. I mean, who would not date Denzel Washington???? I am a hetero guy and I would consider it...:wow:



Not really...;)
 

GameSetAndMath

The GOAT
Joined
Jul 9, 2013
Messages
21,141
Reactions
3,398
Points
113
1972Murat said:
GSM, the problem with the woman in your example is that she is lumping every single individual black men together . Sure, it is your preference, but if you have a rule that says I am not dating black men, most likely you will not have any close black friends either because something about them is making you uncomfortable, so much so that you would never date one. So, what is it? The answer to that question will determine if this person is a racist or not.

For me, any time you make a blanket statement like that, most likely you are a racist. I mean, who would not date Denzel Washington???? I am a hetero guy and I would consider it...:wow:



Not really...;)

I understand the difference between "individually evaluating each person" and
"lumping people together" under one umbrella. But, it is not as easy as you think.
Let me make two separate points.

1. Going back to Moxie's example, she would not go out with scandinavian men
as it is not her preference. Isn't that an example of lumping people together
under one umbrella (Moxie, I am not trying to make this argument personal,
I am just trying to understand racism clearly and so am using your example;
did not mean to pick on you).

2. Let us say that the woman in my example is fully capable of going beyond
the "lumping" and look at people as individuals. Let me present you a
scenario. There are two urns. You know that urn A has 80 red M&M's
and 20 Green M&M's. You also know that urn B has 80 Green M&M's
and 20 Red M&M's. You know that you have a distinct tase for Green
M&M's and you would not eat Red M&M's. You are hungry and want to
eat an M&M. With the knowledge you have about your preference and
the contents of the two urns, if you are asked to select one Urn
from whcih to select an M&M, one would obviously select Urn B to
maximize the chance of drawing a green M&M.

OK. What is the analogy here? You should not think of the colors as the
race. Think of the Urns as race. Think of the color as your personal
preference. All you care is about eating a green M&M. You don't care
whether it comes from Urn A or Urn B (this clearly means you are
not a racist, right). But, nonetheless you end up picking Urn B from
which to draw an M&M. It is a rational choice as it maximizes the
chances of quickly drawing a green M&M.

The woman in my example does not want to keep dating for a long
time and wants to find a good prospect fast and get married. She
knows what exactly are her preferences and she also knows that
folks of race B are more likely to meet her preferences than folks
of race A. Then she maximizes her chances of finding a good prospect
fast by going out with people exclusively from race B simply because
of the sheer probabilities.

Under these circumstances, would you agree that she is clearly not
a racist, but is just being rational or am I missing something here?
 

Murat Baslamisli

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
10,337
Reactions
1,055
Points
113
Age
52
Location
Aurora, Ontario, Canada
Website
www.drummershangout.ca
GSM,

1-We have to ask Moxie what she would do if she met a Scandinavian man that meets every criteria that she ever wanted in a man. Would she refuse to date this guy because he did not have dark eyes and skin, or would she give him a shot.

2-I grew up in Istanbul , Turkey, and never ever in my wildest dreams I thought I would merry a country gal from Muskoka, Canada, who likes listening to old country music (I am a rock guy myself and I hated country music at the time)and loves baking pies and puts them on windowsills because it reminds her of olden times...I was playing drums in a heavy metal band when I met her and marriage was the last thing on my mind since I was having too much fun with the way I was living my life. Nevertheless, we are married and 14 years later, going stronger than ever.

Moral of the story, probabilities, math , whatever does not work in the matters of the heart because you just don't know who you will meet ...and if you limit yourself to a certain type, you might just end up missing the chance of your life.

Plus, your example girl is still generalizing, ignoring the individual...how does she know race B meets her criteria better than A? What IS her criteria?
 

Moxie

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
43,651
Reactions
14,820
Points
113
^ Perhaps I didn't make my point very clearly. I was only trying to make a distinction between a notion of "type," compared to a presumed father's "prejudice." (And my father is not, to be fair to him.) If you don't have a prejudice against any group, it will come down to who you fancy…by which I mean chemistry/mutual interests/and the "intangible." You can "think" you have a type, but people will always surprise you, as in Murat's example. And if you're open, you can surprise yourself.
 

Moxie

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
43,651
Reactions
14,820
Points
113
DarthFed said:
Kieran said:
DarthFed said:
Kieran said:
Actually, a boycott during the play-offs would be a huge signal of how strong their principles are, but why let these little things get in the way of the viewing figures?

So in order to show what they think of racism they should throw away their dreams and forfeit a playoff series? There are other ways to go about it and they are letting the player union and NBA handle the situation for now which is probably the best thing they can do. If things are not handled to their liking that's when you might see coaches and players decide to get out of Dodge.

As an immediate way of saying, yes, we want the gold - but not at any price - yes, I would think they should down tools and make a huge issue of this...

I disagree. Not that I have been or will be in that situation, but I don't think I'd throw away everything I worked hard for to stick it to a racist owner who is almost certainly not going to be around after the playoffs anyways.

I heard an ex-player for the Clippers interviewed on the radio this afternoon. He said this to that point: that he never felt he played for an owner, but for his family, his coach and his team. If he had a contract, he'd play it out. However, if he were a free agent, he said he would not consider playing for the Clippers. Because the NBA only has certain options as to sanctioning Sterling, I think this will play out over time. But it seems impossible that there won't be long-term ramifications.
 

GameSetAndMath

The GOAT
Joined
Jul 9, 2013
Messages
21,141
Reactions
3,398
Points
113
Getting back to Donald, I read that there is a case brought against this 30 something
GF by his former wife for "bewitching". Apparently, this GF lives in a 1.8 million dollar house
and has four cars and is being paid 240,000 dollars per year of living allowance by Donald.
 

Moxie

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
43,651
Reactions
14,820
Points
113
Sponsors are bailing on the Clippers. No surprise there, I guess.
 

DarthFed

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
17,724
Reactions
3,477
Points
113
Moxie629 said:
DarthFed said:
Kieran said:
DarthFed said:
Kieran said:
Actually, a boycott during the play-offs would be a huge signal of how strong their principles are, but why let these little things get in the way of the viewing figures?

So in order to show what they think of racism they should throw away their dreams and forfeit a playoff series? There are other ways to go about it and they are letting the player union and NBA handle the situation for now which is probably the best thing they can do. If things are not handled to their liking that's when you might see coaches and players decide to get out of Dodge.

As an immediate way of saying, yes, we want the gold - but not at any price - yes, I would think they should down tools and make a huge issue of this...

I disagree. Not that I have been or will be in that situation, but I don't think I'd throw away everything I worked hard for to stick it to a racist owner who is almost certainly not going to be around after the playoffs anyways.

I heard an ex-player for the Clippers interviewed on the radio this afternoon. He said this to that point: that he never felt he played for an owner, but for his family, his coach and his team. If he had a contract, he'd play it out. However, if he were a free agent, he said he would not consider playing for the Clippers. Because the NBA only has certain options as to sanctioning Sterling, I think this will play out over time. But it seems impossible that there won't be long-term ramifications.

There isn't a precedent for this. I am pretty sure Sterling will not be the owner after this. The NBA has a lot of power to assure he is ousted but we will wait and see.
 

nehmeth

Grand Slam Champion
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
8,626
Reactions
1,675
Points
113
Location
State College, PA
Link to Cuban's thoughts on this...

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2014/04/29/cuban_ousting_donald_sterling_slippery_slope_122453.html
 

DarthFed

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
17,724
Reactions
3,477
Points
113
NBA ruled today, Sterling is banned for life, will pay a 2.5 million fee and the NBA will be taking over the Clippers until they are sold.
 

GameSetAndMath

The GOAT
Joined
Jul 9, 2013
Messages
21,141
Reactions
3,398
Points
113
DarthFed said:
NBA ruled today, Sterling is banned for life, will pay a 2.5 million fee and the NBA will be taking over the Clippers until they are sold.

I don't think the last part is accurate. 3/4 of the other owners need to vote to force him out.
Only then he will be gone. However, it is expected that this will happen soon.