Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Kansas City)   Dan Lebatard explains how the Donald Sterling situation is just like how Pat Sajak admitted he drinks 3 margaritas before hosting Wheel of Fortune   (kansascity.com ) divider line
    More: Strange, Pat Sajak, Donald Sterling, reseller hosting, angry mobs, nba teams, drinks  
•       •       •

890 clicks; posted to Sports » on 05 May 2014 at 1:25 PM (2 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



60 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2014-05-05 01:18:09 PM  
Well written column.
His analogy makes sense.
 
2014-05-05 01:32:17 PM  
Putting the tard in Lebatard
 
2014-05-05 01:38:33 PM  
It's basically the same thing Kareem said last week...."you farktards haven't said anything for 30 years about Sterling being a piece of shiat....and NOW all of a sudden you're "offended" and "aghast"?  Assholes, the lot of you."
 
2014-05-05 01:40:03 PM  
Thats a good article. Not the first time I've seen the Capone/Sterling analogy, though that doesn't make it s bad analogy.
 
2014-05-05 01:42:36 PM  

chevydeuce: It's basically the same thing Kareem said last week...."you farktards haven't said anything for 30 years about Sterling being a piece of shiat....and NOW all of a sudden you're "offended" and "aghast"?  Assholes, the lot of you."


Does that apply to those of use who knew absolutely nothing about Sterling til the tape came out?

/not a Clippers fan
//rarely watch any NBA, actually
///slashies in threes
 
2014-05-05 01:42:50 PM  
Important and not-important people around the NBA knew Sterling was a racist long before this recording, so it wasn't the racism that got him gone, evidently, as much as it was the recording that put it out before all of us in the light. . . .The very idea that this is the bigotry that got Sterling banned minimizes all his more damaging and meaningful bigotry we tolerated and ignored ... and that should be more offensive to black people, and all of us, than anything a crazy, old coot articulated incoherently at the very end of his decades-long racist run.
 
this is the part i have a hard time with, in the aftermath of -- this being like, Day 9, after the tapes were made public -- all the "ZOMG WE ALL KNEW HE WAS RACIST".  I knew he was a slumlord and a cheapskate owner, but as a fairly casual NBA fan, I didn't "know" he was racist.  only after the tapes surfaced did so many come out of the woodwork, beating their chest about how We Knew This All Along.  they were complicit in silence, basically. 

i compare it to how so many in the baseball media looked the other way on steroids, and then only after it became fashionable to bash steroid users, or after MLB had adopted a policy, did so many writers/pundits wear sackcloth and ashes, walking the streets (and airwaves) with, "i feel like such an idiot for missing all the signs, how could I -- no, we -- all be so naive?"  bullshiat.  they knew but did nothing.

so spare me the "we all knew this, it was basically common knowledge" stuff.  only after Silver put the stake in his ownership heart did you come out of the woodwork.
 
2014-05-05 01:43:17 PM  
Incidentally, LeBatard's opinion here is clearly informed by what Bomani Jones said on Dan's show...
 
2014-05-05 01:45:48 PM  

chevydeuce: It's basically the same thing Kareem said last week...."you farktards haven't said anything for 30 years about Sterling being a piece of shiat....and NOW all of a sudden you're "offended" and "aghast"?  Assholes, the lot of you."



i heard the story of his remarks, but not his remarks.  and he's right.  if "everybody knew", but no one reported on it, they waive the right to be heard after he became persona non grata.  I mean, "breaking news: 2/5/10 years ago we knew he was a racist" isn't a story.

report, reporter.
 
2014-05-05 01:48:24 PM  

rickythepenguin: Important and not-important people around the NBA knew Sterling was a racist long before this recording, so it wasn't the racism that got him gone, evidently, as much as it was the recording that put it out before all of us in the light. . . .The very idea that this is the bigotry that got Sterling banned minimizes all his more damaging and meaningful bigotry we tolerated and ignored ... and that should be more offensive to black people, and all of us, than anything a crazy, old coot articulated incoherently at the very end of his decades-long racist run.
 
this is the part i have a hard time with, in the aftermath of -- this being like, Day 9, after the tapes were made public -- all the "ZOMG WE ALL KNEW HE WAS RACIST".  I knew he was a slumlord and a cheapskate owner, but as a fairly casual NBA fan, I didn't "know" he was racist.  only after the tapes surfaced did so many come out of the woodwork, beating their chest about how We Knew This All Along.  they were complicit in silence, basically. 

i compare it to how so many in the baseball media looked the other way on steroids, and then only after it became fashionable to bash steroid users, or after MLB had adopted a policy, did so many writers/pundits wear sackcloth and ashes, walking the streets (and airwaves) with, "i feel like such an idiot for missing all the signs, how could I -- no, we -- all be so naive?"  bullshiat.  they knew but did nothing.

so spare me the "we all knew this, it was basically common knowledge" stuff.  only after Silver put the stake in his ownership heart did you come out of the woodwork.


I knew what Sterling was, and I'm not obsessive about the NBA. I knew baseball was full of steroid users, too. All you had to do was look at Jose Canseco or Mark McGwire. That stuff was there for anyone who wanted to see it. Apparently, you didn't.
 
2014-05-05 01:52:42 PM  

chevydeuce: It's basically the same thing Kareem said last week...."you farktards haven't said anything for 30 years about Sterling being a piece of shiat....and NOW all of a sudden you're "offended" and "aghast"?  Assholes, the lot of you."


Here's where that argument loses me: until this tape, I had no farking idea who owned the Clippers. More importantly, I really didn't care. Why would I? It's not like the media was saying "Hey Spurs fans, the Clippers are in town tonight. By the way, their owner is a racist piece of crap."

In a perfect world, I guess I'd do research on the owners of various franchises, but it's sports. It's my pleasant diversion from daily life. As the saying goes, "Ain't nobody got time for that."

If I'm seeing Clippers highlights, I want to see Blake Griffing dunking. I don't want to be reminded of issues of social justice. That's the root cause of why the Association had to tell Sterling to GTFO. He would have had an impact on the bottom line.
 
2014-05-05 01:53:47 PM  

forgotmydamnusername: I knew baseball was full of steroid users, too. All you had to do was look at Jose Canseco or Mark McGwire. That stuff was there for anyone who wanted to see it. Apparently, you didn't.



of course we knew.  my issue is with the writers who spent 162 games in the clubhouses, chartered flights, "off the record" talks with team officials, the players themselves, who said nothing, then became the first to bleat about "how did we all miss this?"  that's the analogy i'm drawing here;  the MLB writers who stuck their heads in the sand until it becamse societally acceptable to bash steroid users.  the writers writing these, "we all knew sterling was a racist, it is high time he's gone" remind me of that.  like i said, just 10 or so days ago, the only story about the Clippers was whether they can get out of the first round.  no, they've become  a rallying point against racism, and leading the charge are scribes who didn't write about this until now.
 
2014-05-05 01:59:21 PM  
I am so tired of this "everybody has known about this forever" argument, particularly when it is so often being used to criticize the effort to do something now. Imagine if anybody had tried to do something about it before. Imagine if the NBA had tried to push Sterling out because "everybody knows" he's a racist, despite having no concrete physical evidence of it. Hell, even now there are people right here on FARK saying his statements didn't rise to the level of serious racism because he didn't use the n-word, and complaining that he is being forced out due to vague PC concerns. There's a difference between "everyone knowing" something and having an actionable grievance.
 
2014-05-05 01:59:55 PM  

rickythepenguin: Important and not-important people around the NBA knew Sterling was a racist long before this recording, so it wasn't the racism that got him gone, evidently, as much as it was the recording that put it out before all of us in the light. . . .The very idea that this is the bigotry that got Sterling banned minimizes all his more damaging and meaningful bigotry we tolerated and ignored ... and that should be more offensive to black people, and all of us, than anything a crazy, old coot articulated incoherently at the very end of his decades-long racist run.

this is the part i have a hard time with, in the aftermath of -- this being like, Day 9, after the tapes were made public -- all the "ZOMG WE ALL KNEW HE WAS RACIST".  I knew he was a slumlord and a cheapskate owner, but as a fairly casual NBA fan, I didn't "know" he was racist.  only after the tapes surfaced did so many come out of the woodwork, beating their chest about how We Knew This All Along.  they were complicit in silence, basically.
i compare it to how so many in the baseball media looked the other way on steroids, and then only after it became fashionable to bash steroid users, or after MLB had adopted a policy, did so many writers/pundits wear sackcloth and ashes, walking the streets (and airwaves) with, "i feel like such an idiot for missing all the signs, how could I -- no, we -- all be so naive?"  bullshiat.  they knew but did nothing.

so spare me the "we all knew this, it was basically common knowledge" stuff.  only after Silver put the stake in his ownership heart did you come out of the woodwork.


Simmons wrote an article on his racisms 2 years ago. I hear he has a fairly wide audience.
 
2014-05-05 02:00:57 PM  

chevydeuce: It's basically the same thing Kareem said last week...."you farktards haven't said anything for 30 years about Sterling being a piece of shiat....and NOW all of a sudden you're "offended" and "aghast"?  Assholes, the lot of you."


But loads of us had no idea he was a racist piece of shiat until the comments came out.

How much research into obscure semi-public figures' levels of racism are we expected to do?
 
2014-05-05 02:03:01 PM  

rickythepenguin: my issue is with the writers who spent 162 games in the clubhouses, chartered flights, "off the record" talks with team officials, the players themselves, who said nothing, then became the first to bleat about "how did we all miss this?"



the story i always tell on this point is seeing a Snakes/Padres, prehaps Snakes/Giants game in the late 90s or early 00s.  Bobby Estallella was catching.  we had good seats, lower box but not "close", but from our seats, my dad says, "he's juicing.  just look at him!"  My dad spent 20+ years coaching high school athletics and could spot it.  werent' no MLB writers writing about steroids in sports.

fast forward about, ohhhhhh, 5-6 years.  maybe less.  either way, one Bobby Freaking Estalella testifies before the federal grand jury in BALCO case.  my dad can spot a juicer from the stands but writers who are assigned a team fro a given paper can't see this?  spare me the "how did we miss this?" self-flagellation.
 
2014-05-05 02:03:34 PM  
The Clippers are a west coast team.  I live in the Midwest and root for the Pistons, which means I don't watch or follow the Clippers at all and until the recordings became public, I knew absolutely nothing about Donald Sterling and couldn't tell you who owned the Clippers on a bet.
 
2014-05-05 02:04:18 PM  

Tigger: chevydeuce: It's basically the same thing Kareem said last week...."you farktards haven't said anything for 30 years about Sterling being a piece of shiat....and NOW all of a sudden you're "offended" and "aghast"?  Assholes, the lot of you."

But loads of us had no idea he was a racist piece of shiat until the comments came out.

How much research into obscure semi-public figures' levels of racism are we expected to do?


I can understand being annoyed by sports reporters who seem to have conveniently ignored this for a long time for the sake of access.
 
2014-05-05 02:07:27 PM  

someonelse: Tigger: chevydeuce: It's basically the same thing Kareem said last week...."you farktards haven't said anything for 30 years about Sterling being a piece of shiat....and NOW all of a sudden you're "offended" and "aghast"?  Assholes, the lot of you."

But loads of us had no idea he was a racist piece of shiat until the comments came out.

How much research into obscure semi-public figures' levels of racism are we expected to do?

I can understand being annoyed by sports reporters who seem to have conveniently ignored this for a long time for the sake of access.


Oh for sure I totally agree on that. But I find rather strange the comments of "why wasn't there outrage before", because for the vast majority of the US the answer is "because I don't keep my obscure racists database updated as frequently as perhaps I should and had no idea who this yambag was'.
 
2014-05-05 02:11:00 PM  

Gonz: Here's where that argument loses me: until this tape, I had no farking idea who owned the Clippers. More importantly, I really didn't care. Why would I? It's not like the media was saying "Hey Spurs fans, the Clippers are in town tonight. By the way, their owner is a racist piece of crap."


So why should you care now?
 
2014-05-05 02:11:05 PM  

Tigger: someonelse: Tigger: chevydeuce: It's basically the same thing Kareem said last week...."you farktards haven't said anything for 30 years about Sterling being a piece of shiat....and NOW all of a sudden you're "offended" and "aghast"?  Assholes, the lot of you."

But loads of us had no idea he was a racist piece of shiat until the comments came out.

How much research into obscure semi-public figures' levels of racism are we expected to do?

I can understand being annoyed by sports reporters who seem to have conveniently ignored this for a long time for the sake of access.

Oh for sure I totally agree on that. But I find rather strange the comments of "why wasn't there outrage before", because for the vast majority of the US the answer is "because I don't keep my obscure racists database updated as frequently as perhaps I should and had no idea who this yambag was'.


It's not "why hasn't the vast majority of the US been outraged", it's "why hasn't sports media been outraged?"

And Bomani Jones nailed it last week.  The sort of discriminatory housing practices people like Sterling practiced led, directly, to crime and violence in places like Chicago.
 
2014-05-05 02:12:47 PM  

Tigger: someonelse: Tigger: chevydeuce: It's basically the same thing Kareem said last week...."you farktards haven't said anything for 30 years about Sterling being a piece of shiat....and NOW all of a sudden you're "offended" and "aghast"?  Assholes, the lot of you."

But loads of us had no idea he was a racist piece of shiat until the comments came out.

How much research into obscure semi-public figures' levels of racism are we expected to do?

I can understand being annoyed by sports reporters who seem to have conveniently ignored this for a long time for the sake of access.

Oh for sure I totally agree on that. But I find rather strange the comments of "why wasn't there outrage before", because for the vast majority of the US the answer is "because I don't keep my obscure racists database updated as frequently as perhaps I should and had no idea who this yambag was'.


Agreed.
 
2014-05-05 02:15:17 PM  

Tigger: But loads of us had no idea he was a racist piece of shiat until the comments came out.How much research into obscure semi-public figures' levels of racism are we expected to do?


I'm not reading these "you KNEW this all along..." comments from public people as a blanket condemnation of literally everyone. They're first and foremost directed at other members of the media. Even sportswriter A and commentator B have Twitter accounts in which they'll fire off pithy feel-goodism after expressing "shock" when they are exactly the kind of people who, if they really gave a single solitary fark about the area in which they are covering professionally, would have known exactly the kind of person Sterling was. And, I'm pretty goddamn sure if you're paid to cover the NBA at all, considering the kind of people you'd rub shoulders with and the conversations on and off the record you could have...yeah, they knew.
 
2014-05-05 02:17:27 PM  

Dafatone: It's not "why hasn't the vast majority of the US been outraged", it's "why hasn't sports media been outraged?"


I think there are two distinct veins of questioning going on. The "why hasn't the sports media been outraged" is a legit question. Or, at least, "why hasn't the sports media done more reporting on this?" But there has also been a lot of weird assumption that everyone in the general public knew about this, when of course everyone didn't. And that assumption seems to go hand-in-hand with the argument that nothing should be done about Sterling now because nobody did anything about it in the past.
 
2014-05-05 02:23:17 PM  
Sterling owns this mess, no doubt.  But I think (and I wouldn't claim to speak for Jabbar or LeBetard) what they both are saying, is the media, you know, the guys and gals who cover sports (and the NBA specifically) have just kind of let this dog lie for many, many years.  Every now and then, some little tidbit of info would leak out (the housing discrimination deal, the Elgin Baylor mess), it would get a few column inches and then "oh look, Lebron is wearing a new type of sweatband" and it was forgotten.  That many of you/us weren't aware of it isn't an indictment against you/us, it's an indictment against a news media that is more interested in other, frivoulous shiat....

/not a Clippers fan, nor even that big an NBA fan
 
2014-05-05 02:24:40 PM  

mjbok: Gonz: Here's where that argument loses me: until this tape, I had no farking idea who owned the Clippers. More importantly, I really didn't care. Why would I? It's not like the media was saying "Hey Spurs fans, the Clippers are in town tonight. By the way, their owner is a racist piece of crap."

So why should you care now?


Because I can now make a more informed consumer decision. I prefer to participate in the free market as an informed consumer, whenever possible. I can then make a rational decision about how to cast my dollar votes.

There are some situations where I will overlook an individual's personal views. There are others where I will say "even if this good or service would benefit me, I will not support that individual."

For example, there's a local mattress store that, economically, offers a fairly good combination of price and quality. However, https://www.courthousenews.com/2012/10/22/51497.htm . That owner's behavior causes my personal economic calculus to change from "that's a tempting bargain" to "I'd rather sleep on a bare floor than give that sumbiatch a dollar".

That's how the marketplace is supposed to work.
 
2014-05-05 02:26:32 PM  

chevydeuce: Sterling owns this mess, no doubt. But I think (and I wouldn't claim to speak for Jabbar or LeBetard)


Jabbar was arguably closer to the situation than any sports writer would be and he said he had no idea.
 
2014-05-05 02:28:07 PM  

Killer Cars: I'm not reading these "you KNEW this all along..." comments from public people as a blanket condemnation of literally everyone. They're first and foremost directed at other members of the media. Even sportswriter A and commentator B have Twitter accounts in which they'll fire off pithy feel-goodism after expressing "shock" when they are exactly the kind of people who, if they really gave a single solitary fark about the area in which they are covering professionally, would have known exactly the kind of person Sterling was. And, I'm pretty goddamn sure if you're paid to cover the NBA at all, considering the kind of people you'd rub shoulders with and the conversations on and off the record you could have...yeah, they knew.


A hooker with a grudge and a smartphone accomplished more in 10 minutes than any NBA reporter, franchise owner or commissioner had accomplished in three decades.  Now they want to pat themselves on the back for taking literally the only reasonable course of action.

Kudos all around!
 
2014-05-05 02:28:47 PM  

Gonz: For example, there's a local mattress store that, economically, offers a fairly good combination of price and quality. However, https://www.courthousenews.com/2012/10/22/51497.htm . That owner's behavior causes my personal economic calculus to change from "that's a tempting bargain" to "I'd rather sleep on a bare floor than give that sumbiatch a dollar".


Sounds like he got....((sunglasses)) .... the Bootz
 
2014-05-05 02:30:08 PM  
Didn't know him, now do and know he is an asshat but ...... I'm more than a little concerned about the privacy issue.  That girlfriend recorded him in a gotcha and that does not seem to have any legs. I think we all say some crazy things now and then.  Maybe not racial but embarrassing, something said while we are sick, drunk or egged on and to have someone tape it and sell it to the media and is it lawful? Not sure.  I'm all for shining a light on racism, sexism or any of the other isms that are nasty but it's too easy to manipulate the situation.  OK this time it revealed a cockroach but it may not always be the case.
 
2014-05-05 02:35:23 PM  

Yanks_RSJ: A hooker with a grudge and a smartphone accomplished more in 10 minutes than any NBA reporter, franchise owner or commissioner had accomplished in three decades. Now they want to pat themselves on the back for taking literally the only reasonable course of action.Kudos all around!


Exactly. Although, hey now...technically she was his "archivist", and...what? What? Why is everyone laughing?
 
2014-05-05 02:36:11 PM  

mjbok: chevydeuce: Sterling owns this mess, no doubt. But I think (and I wouldn't claim to speak for Jabbar or LeBetard)

Jabbar was arguably closer to the situation than any sports writer would be and he said he had no idea.


Jabbar said that while he was employed by Sterling, nothing was ever said or done to him personally.  I think if Bill Simmons knew a thing or two about Sterling's behavior, I'm pretty sure Jabbar had gotten wind of a few things over the years.
 
2014-05-05 02:43:44 PM  

lilbjorn: Putting the tard in Lebatard


"Lebatard" was originally the surname of the famous English king who appended a "The Conqueror" to his name because the original surname means exactly what you think it does and he really didn't like being called "Billy the Bastard"

Dan, is aptly named.
 
2014-05-05 02:46:46 PM  

chevydeuce: Sterling owns this mess, no doubt.  But I think (and I wouldn't claim to speak for Jabbar or LeBetard) what they both are saying, is the media, you know, the guys and gals who cover sports (and the NBA specifically) have just kind of let this dog lie for many, many years.  Every now and then, some little tidbit of info would leak out (the housing discrimination deal, the Elgin Baylor mess), it would get a few column inches and then "oh look, Lebron is wearing a new type of sweatband" and it was forgotten.  That many of you/us weren't aware of it isn't an indictment against you/us, it's an indictment against a news media that is more interested in other, frivoulous shiat....

/not a Clippers fan, nor even that big an NBA fan


Which was kind of the point of that Bomani Jones (awesome) tirade last week.  He was all pissed because he said back in '06 that the freaking LA Times used a wire story to report Sterling's (largest) housing settlement with the feds and that it took a handful of clicks to find the story on his employer's website.

I honestly think that the NBA (and even the LA Times) let this crap slide because the Clippers were just bad and they made a profit.  Consider this, every team in the LA Metro area has won a championship since the Clip Show came to LA (Dodgers, Angels, Lakers, Kings, Ducks).  Even our ex-teams either won a championship (Rams) or made it to the the Superbowl (Raiders) in that time period.
 
2014-05-05 02:47:17 PM  
I gotta tell you, Vanna White is an old mare, and Im surprised they kept her all these years, but shes still doable
 
2014-05-05 02:48:49 PM  

Snubnose: Didn't know him, now do and know he is an asshat but ...... I'm more than a little concerned about the privacy issue.  That girlfriend recorded him in a gotcha and that does not seem to have any legs. I think we all say some crazy things now and then.  Maybe not racial but embarrassing, something said while we are sick, drunk or egged on and to have someone tape it and sell it to the media and is it lawful? Not sure.  I'm all for shining a light on racism, sexism or any of the other isms that are nasty but it's too easy to manipulate the situation.  OK this time it revealed a cockroach but it may not always be the case.


We've seen this concern troll line before. Please get a new one if you genuinely want people to think you're an idiot rather than just figure out you're being a fake idiot.
 
2014-05-05 02:59:01 PM  
Whether or not the average farker should of known Sterling is racist really isirrelevant. The people in power, the other owners and the commissioner knew about it and looked the other way for years. The discrimination lawsuit as well as Elgin Baylor's lawsuit (even though Sterling ultimately won) made his racism public record. Bomani Jones wrote an article for ESPN about it 8 years ago. Something should have been done about this clown after he lost the discrimination lawsuit. He never got so much as a sanction or rebuke from his peers. I think that is the part that Lebatard and others are objecting to imo.

I linked the Bomani article from 2006 below. Sorry about the copy/paste but i cant hotlink on mobile.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/ story?page=jones/060810
 
2014-05-05 02:59:25 PM  

FWIW, as a Clippers season ticket holder Simmons did call Sterling out for being a vile human being, as well as just an incompetent owner. This is from 2011, and there are earlier ones:

If anyone other than Donald Sterling owned the Clippers, the franchise would be worth twice as much money.19 He's squatting on a billion-dollar property the same way he squats on his Malibu lots - he's like a wealthy version of somebody on Hoarders. Hasn't the man done enough harm to warrant a legal intervention? How many times has he fired an employee, then refused to pay him and forced that person to chase the money in court? How many times have the Clippers made damaging trades just to save money? How many times has Sterling been accused of insulting minorities or even his own players? Bud Selig sucked it up and went after Frank McCourt's team, legal consequences be damned; why couldn't Stern do the same with Sterling? He's a dreadful owner, a disgrace to the league, and someone who knocks down the value of his franchise in half just by being alive. That's not enough grounds?
 
2014-05-05 03:14:40 PM  

Gonz: mjbok: Gonz: Here's where that argument loses me: until this tape, I had no farking idea who owned the Clippers. More importantly, I really didn't care. Why would I? It's not like the media was saying "Hey Spurs fans, the Clippers are in town tonight. By the way, their owner is a racist piece of crap."

So why should you care now?

Because I can now make a more informed consumer decision. I prefer to participate in the free market as an informed consumer, whenever possible. I can then make a rational decision about how to cast my dollar votes.

There are some situations where I will overlook an individual's personal views. There are others where I will say "even if this good or service would benefit me, I will not support that individual."

For example, there's a local mattress store that, economically, offers a fairly good combination of price and quality. However, https://www.courthousenews.com/2012/10/22/51497.htm . That owner's behavior causes my personal economic calculus to change from "that's a tempting bargain" to "I'd rather sleep on a bare floor than give that sumbiatch a dollar".

That's how the marketplace is supposed to work.


How much Clips gear were you buying before this tape came out?
 
2014-05-05 03:21:46 PM  

Tigger: chevydeuce: It's basically the same thing Kareem said last week...."you farktards haven't said anything for 30 years about Sterling being a piece of shiat....and NOW all of a sudden you're "offended" and "aghast"?  Assholes, the lot of you."

But loads of us had no idea he was a racist piece of shiat until the comments came out.

How much research into obscure semi-public figures' levels of racism are we expected to do?


See, the argument is not that the layman would know that Sterling is racist, but that the NBA and its owners knew that Sterling was racist, but did nothing about it until it was brought out in public. Basically, it's almost analagous to the Jerry Sandusky situation, where people at Penn State knew that he was an active pedo but no one did anything about it until someone finally went to the media. Practically the only thing that changed in the NBA scenario was the commissioner, which makes me believe that had this tape come out 2 years ago, it would've just blown over and Sterling wouldn't have gone anywhere, because Stern would have been able to blunt it enough to not hurt the league.
 
2014-05-05 03:25:36 PM  

gwowen: FWIW, as a Clippers season ticket holder Simmons did call Sterling out for being a vile human being, as well as just an incompetent owner. This is from 2011, and there are earlier ones: If anyone other than Donald Sterling owned the Clippers, the franchise would be worth twice as much money.19 He's squatting on a billion-dollar property the same way he squats on his Malibu lots - he's like a wealthy version of somebody on Hoarders. Hasn't the man done enough harm to warrant a legal intervention? How many times has he fired an employee, then refused to pay him and forced that person to chase the money in court? How many times have the Clippers made damaging trades just to save money? How many times has Sterling been accused of insulting minorities or even his own players? Bud Selig sucked it up and went after Frank McCourt's team, legal consequences be damned; why couldn't Stern do the same with Sterling? He's a dreadful owner, a disgrace to the league, and someone who knocks down the value of his franchise in half just by being alive. That's not enough grounds?


Sadly, that probably isn't enough grounds. To get rid of Sterling, Stern would have needed 22 or 23 of the other owners to sign off on it. While none of the others are as bad as Sterling, some of them would have been afraid of the precedent set. Or liked having the perennially crappy Clippers to smack around.

The vote to remove him will almost certainly be unanimous now, though.
 
2014-05-05 03:31:17 PM  

Neeek: gwowen: FWIW, as a Clippers season ticket holder Simmons did call Sterling out for being a vile human being, as well as just an incompetent owner. This is from 2011, and there are earlier ones: If anyone other than Donald Sterling owned the Clippers, the franchise would be worth twice as much money.19 He's squatting on a billion-dollar property the same way he squats on his Malibu lots - he's like a wealthy version of somebody on Hoarders. Hasn't the man done enough harm to warrant a legal intervention? How many times has he fired an employee, then refused to pay him and forced that person to chase the money in court? How many times have the Clippers made damaging trades just to save money? How many times has Sterling been accused of insulting minorities or even his own players? Bud Selig sucked it up and went after Frank McCourt's team, legal consequences be damned; why couldn't Stern do the same with Sterling? He's a dreadful owner, a disgrace to the league, and someone who knocks down the value of his franchise in half just by being alive. That's not enough grounds?

Sadly, that probably isn't enough grounds. To get rid of Sterling, Stern would have needed 22 or 23 of the other owners to sign off on it. While none of the others are as bad as Sterling, some of them would have been afraid of the precedent set. Or liked having the perennially crappy Clippers to smack around.

The vote to remove him will almost certainly be unanimous now, though.


Cuban said essentially the same thing last week before the vote (though he rightly voted for blackballing Sterling), but you know they are all sitting around privately wondering "okay, what did I tell that stupid little skank from the hotel the other night/weekend/month?"
 
2014-05-05 03:37:29 PM  

chevydeuce: Cuban said essentially the same thing last week before the vote (though he rightly voted for blackballing Sterling), but you know they are all sitting around privately wondering "okay, what did I tell that stupid little skank from the hotel the other night/weekend/month?"



yeah, the local guys juuuuuuuuuuuuuuuust said that; "donald sterling battled a lawsuit over $1,000*; do you think he'll just agree to sell the Clippers for his comments?"  they said, "if you are an owner, and sterling sues, does the thought of being deposed by his army of lawyers and asked if you had ever told a racist joke, used the 'n' word, disparaged black people or other races....does the prospect of having your dirty laundry aired via a lawsuit give you pause, when you consider your vote on sterling?"


*apparently a few years ago he made a bit with some folks who visited the facility, about a shooting contest.  the winner was a former college player.  he won. sterling refused to pay the guy the $1,000.  dude had to spend whatever he did on lawyers to win his $1,000.
 
2014-05-05 03:38:18 PM  

Tigger: We've seen this concern troll line before. Please get a new one if you genuinely want people to think you're an idiot rather than just figure out you're being a fake idiot.


The original statement wasn't from me, but I think it is valid.  It is a privacy concern.
 
2014-05-05 03:38:22 PM  
Oblig?

fc05.deviantart.net
 
2014-05-05 03:53:04 PM  

skrame: Oblig?


Considering the headline and the topic...absolutely.
 
2014-05-05 03:54:21 PM  

Igor Jakovsky: Gonz: mjbok: Gonz: Here's where that argument loses me: until this tape, I had no farking idea who owned the Clippers. More importantly, I really didn't care. Why would I? It's not like the media was saying "Hey Spurs fans, the Clippers are in town tonight. By the way, their owner is a racist piece of crap."

So why should you care now?

Because I can now make a more informed consumer decision. I prefer to participate in the free market as an informed consumer, whenever possible. I can then make a rational decision about how to cast my dollar votes.

There are some situations where I will overlook an individual's personal views. There are others where I will say "even if this good or service would benefit me, I will not support that individual."

For example, there's a local mattress store that, economically, offers a fairly good combination of price and quality. However, https://www.courthousenews.com/2012/10/22/51497.htm . That owner's behavior causes my personal economic calculus to change from "that's a tempting bargain" to "I'd rather sleep on a bare floor than give that sumbiatch a dollar".

That's how the marketplace is supposed to work.

How much Clips gear were you buying before this tape came out?


Clips? None. Spurs? I'd say the San Antonio minimum, at least.

Now, how much would my behavior have changed if Sterling was still in the Association? Some. I don't know exactly how much, but certainly some. It's not like I'd be calling for a boycott of any company that sponsored a team in the league, but I'd definitely be- at a minimum- asking myself just how comfortable I felt about supporting a business organization that would associate with someone like Sterling.

Which is why the other owners are going to kick him out. They don't care about his views. They care about his views' ability to shrink their own bottom line.
 
2014-05-05 03:57:21 PM  

Gonz: Now, how much would my behavior have changed if Sterling was still in the Association? Some. I don't know exactly how much, but certainly some. It's not like I'd be calling for a boycott of any company that sponsored a team in the league, but I'd definitely be- at a minimum- asking myself just how comfortable I felt about supporting a business organization that would associate with someone like Sterling.


Anything you buy.  Any clothes you wear, any restaurant you go to, any electronics item you own, etc. (probably) has some connection to and is lining the pockets of someone who is racist/sexist/someotherist.  If you own just about any electronics item manufactured in the last decade you are part of the problem with working conditions at Foxconn.
 
2014-05-05 04:02:35 PM  

chevydeuce: Neeek: gwowen: FWIW, as a Clippers season ticket holder Simmons did call Sterling out for being a vile human being, as well as just an incompetent owner. This is from 2011, and there are earlier ones: If anyone other than Donald Sterling owned the Clippers, the franchise would be worth twice as much money.19 He's squatting on a billion-dollar property the same way he squats on his Malibu lots - he's like a wealthy version of somebody on Hoarders. Hasn't the man done enough harm to warrant a legal intervention? How many times has he fired an employee, then refused to pay him and forced that person to chase the money in court? How many times have the Clippers made damaging trades just to save money? How many times has Sterling been accused of insulting minorities or even his own players? Bud Selig sucked it up and went after Frank McCourt's team, legal consequences be damned; why couldn't Stern do the same with Sterling? He's a dreadful owner, a disgrace to the league, and someone who knocks down the value of his franchise in half just by being alive. That's not enough grounds?

Sadly, that probably isn't enough grounds. To get rid of Sterling, Stern would have needed 22 or 23 of the other owners to sign off on it. While none of the others are as bad as Sterling, some of them would have been afraid of the precedent set. Or liked having the perennially crappy Clippers to smack around.

The vote to remove him will almost certainly be unanimous now, though.

Cuban said essentially the same thing last week before the vote (though he rightly voted for blackballing Sterling), but you know they are all sitting around privately wondering "okay, what did I tell that stupid little skank from the hotel the other night/weekend/month?"


As has been said, Silver is a smart guy and he'll be sure that the owners are fully aware that they're not expelling him for ten minutes of racism - they're expelling him for a lifetime of being an appalling detriment to their entire ownership group, and the Association at large. He's getting the nuclear option now for 30 years of incompetent and despicable behaviour, and a contempt for his employees and humanity in general, thats brought them all into disrepute. The TMZ tape is just the convenient smoking gun that they have to finally nail him.
 
2014-05-05 04:08:37 PM  

rickythepenguin: chevydeuce: Cuban said essentially the same thing last week before the vote (though he rightly voted for blackballing Sterling), but you know they are all sitting around privately wondering "okay, what did I tell that stupid little skank from the hotel the other night/weekend/month?"


yeah, the local guys juuuuuuuuuuuuuuuust said that; "donald sterling battled a lawsuit over $1,000*; do you think he'll just agree to sell the Clippers for his comments?"  they said, "if you are an owner, and sterling sues, does the thought of being deposed by his army of lawyers and asked if you had ever told a racist joke, used the 'n' word, disparaged black people or other races....does the prospect of having your dirty laundry aired via a lawsuit give you pause, when you consider your vote on sterling?"


*apparently a few years ago he made a bit with some folks who visited the facility, about a shooting contest.  the winner was a former college player.  he won. sterling refused to pay the guy the $1,000.  dude had to spend whatever he did on lawyers to win his $1,000.


Hmm. At $1,000 he'd be in small claims court. You usually can't be represented by a lawyer in small claims.
 
2014-05-05 04:09:06 PM  
I also have a question regarding his $2.5 mil "fine"....How does the NBA enforce that particular clause if they are simultaneously kicking him out of their club?  Withhold a portion of his revenue sharing? Do the owners have to put some amount in some sort of a league-administered safety deposit box for paying various fees/fines on behalf of the respective owners?   Just strikes me as odd that they're saying "we don't want you to be here anymore, so you need to leave....but pay us an assload of money on the way out!"  Sterling's (or anybody's response would probably be something along the lines of "uh....fark you very much?"
 
Displayed 50 of 60 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter








In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report