ot: Donald sterling

[SK in CV]

[quote=paramount]Gimme a Break – it’s well understood that Rahm has a direct line to cnn.

In fact, wasn’t it rahm who told cnn to breakaway from the Ambassador interview to cover the breaking bieb news?[/quote]

He might. But he hasn’t worked in the administration for 3 1/2 years. It’s possible he has other things to be concerned with.

Is the problem that you haven’t actually followed any news for the last couple years? There is no IRS scandal. Just as many liberal groups were targeted as conservative. There is no Benghazi scandal anymore than there were scandals surrounding the dozen attacks on diplomatic facilities during the previous administration. Attaching the word “scandal” to a news item doesn’t create a scandal.

[paramount]

SK – the only one living under a rock is you.

April 29 – Washington Post

Benghazi scandal tied to White House

April 29 – Lawyer for ex-IRS official Lerner seeks to address House ahead of …

I’m not a republican, just interested in the truth.

Hopefully we’ll find out the truth despite IRS/JD stalling.

[paramount]

In fact, this whole Sterling issue reminds me of a modern day salem witchcraft trial.

Wasn’t his girlfriend black?

[SK in CV]

[quote=paramount]SK – the only one living under a rock is you.

April 29 – Washington Post

Benghazi scandal tied to White House

April 29 – Lawyer for ex-IRS official Lerner seeks to address House ahead of …

I’m not a republican, just interested in the truth.

Hopefully we’ll find out the truth despite IRS/JD stalling.[/quote]

same shit, different day. Rinse, repeat.

[scaredyclassic]

[quote=paramount]I don’t agree with what Sterling apparently said and he’s probably an a hole, but based on the media frenzy and the equally frenzied reaction from the clueless masses/O voters, I’d say the O administration has deployed:

SCORCHED EARTH POLICY

Because they would rather have the world talking about Sterling rather than:

1. Using the IRS against political enemies
2. Benghazi
3. The VA/Administration Veterans Secret Death List

etc, etc….

Aren’t we all entitled to private thoughts and conversations?[/quote]

kind of. he cannot be prosecuted and jailed. but the NBA has its own rules he seems to have signed on to. i am not sure a motion to suppress his statements because they were illegally obtained works in NBA court or the court of public opinion. for these reasons, it is adviseable to behave one’s self when arguing with one’s prostitute/mistress…

he is kind of old and out of it. the whole thing just reeks of patheticness.

[biggoldbear]

This comic pretty much sums it up:
http://xkcd.com/1357/

It actually came out a couple weeks before this latest “scandal”

[NotCranky]

[quote=paramount]In fact, this whole Sterling issue reminds me of a modern day salem witchcraft trial.

Wasn’t his girlfriend black?[/quote]

I don’t normally agree with you but on this I sort of do, but he is an embarrassment and a pain to a large very in the limelight big money organization , he sort of gets what he deserves too.

[spdrun]

In fact, this whole Sterling issue reminds me of a modern day salem witchcraft trial.

Wasn’t his girlfriend black?

OK, I can understand that he could be racist with a Black girlfriend. Maybe he was going blind in his old age and didn’t notice.

But he also bought into a heavily Black business. Coaches, players, etc. Doesn’t make sense for a true racist to have done that.

I lived next to a couple that would fight and call each other all sorts of horrible ethnic names … pertaining to their own ethnicities. People say horrible things in anger, and it doesn’t necessarily speak to their true political views.

Not sure if he wasn’t doing his best to goad her and vice versa. They both seem like pretty vile people, a perfect match, maybe.

My other thought is: what if this is a setup to devalue the team and get it sold. He might be known for rants in private. Get him set up with someone who’s close enough to push him into ranting, tape it, then “leak” it.

She gets a small commission if the right person buys the team…

[livinincali]

[quote=spdrun]
My other thought is: what if this is a setup to devalue the team and get it sold. He might be known for rants in private. Get him set up with someone who’s close enough to push him into ranting, tape it, then “leak” it.
[/quote]

I honestly think it pushes the value of the team up. I think there will be numerous competing parties that want the limelight of the hero that bought the Clippers from evil Sterling.

The only problem I have with this issue is this idea that the masses can force you to sell your property. We have property rights and property laws in this country and if we erode those rights because we don’t like what someone said it could be bad for all property owners in the future. Do you want the government forcing you to sell your rental property because the masses don’t like what you said about a tenant.

[spdrun]

This isn’t the government, though. The team is subject to NBA regulations if it wants to do business with the NBA (play against other teams in the league). I suspect that he signed some sort of morals clause when he bought the team and kept it part of the league. Can I refuse to do business with a client whom I dislike personally? For sure.

As far as pushing the price up or down, maybe the intent was just to have it up for sale. Or maybe the thing got far bigger than the people running the circus intended. Who knows?

I wonder if he could theoretically pull the team from the NBA and start a competing league. Does he really own the team, or did he just buy rights to manage it and profit from TV coverage?

[livinincali]

[quote=spdrun]Can I refuse to do business with a client whom I dislike personally? For sure.
[/quote]

Well as long as that client isn’t gay.

http://www.latimes.com/nation/nationnow/la-na-nn-supreme-court-photographer-gays-20140404,0,126351.story#axzz30U35H9ZZ

[livinincali]

[quote=spdrun]This isn’t the government, though. The team is subject to NBA regulations if it wants to do business with the NBA (play against other teams in the league). I suspect that he signed some sort of morals clause when he bought the team and kept it part of the league.
[/quote]

What if it was the HOA. You belong to an HOA it comes out that you said some particularly nasty things about a gay neighbor. Does the HOA have the rights to fine you. Force you to sell your house if 75% of the members vote you out.

I understand the NBAs reaction, they needed to appeal to popular opinion. The problem is it becomes a slippery slope. How long before the NBA owners don’t like Mark Cuban’s comments about something and force him to sell.

[spdrun]

What if it was the HOA. You belong to an HOA it comes out that you said some particularly nasty things about a gay neighbor. Does the HOA have the rights to fine you. Force you to sell your house if 75% of the members vote you out.

If you signed a contract to that effect or bought a place with a deed covenant of that type, the answer might be “yes.” In the sense that it’s legal, not that it’s necessarily right or moral.

If you buy a place with an HOA, you need to read AND UNDERSTAND the by-laws very well before signing in the dotted line.

[SK in CV]

[quote=livinincali]

What if it was the HOA. You belong to an HOA it comes out that you said some particularly nasty things about a gay neighbor. Does the HOA have the rights to fine you. Force you to sell your house if 75% of the members vote you out.

I understand the NBAs reaction, they needed to appeal to popular opinion. The problem is it becomes a slippery slope. How long before the NBA owners don’t like Mark Cuban’s comments about something and force him to sell.[/quote]

That’s really not a good analogy. NBA teams operate under franchise agreements with the league. There are specific rules under those governing documents granting authority to the league and to the commissioner. The commissioner acted under his contractual authority, and the team owners are expected to vote under their contractual authority to either force him to sell or relinquish his contract.

Cuban actually has expressed his concern about the “slippery slope” problem. Contrary to some claims though, he hasn’t said that he is opposed to forcing Sterling out. No owner has ever been forced out before for non-basketball related issues. I suspect that Cuban and the other owners, despite their concern, will force a sale. Sterling’s behavior is unacceptable, both from a moral standpoint and a business standpoint. Silver’s decision derived from both, as will the owners.

[FlyerInHi]

I think the NBA can’t literally force Sterling to sell his team. But they can take away the franchise unless he sells. Same difference, but still a huge legal difference.

Similarly, if you own a McDonald’s franchise, you have your own business. They can’t take away your business, but if they take away the franchise under which you operate, then you a deprived of revenue. So you are “forced” to sell if they want you to sell.

[Author]

Posts