OK ... I read what you(Toke) quoted from Chewy ... I do not understand what your point is ... you reinforce what he said but imply he was incorrect. Lincoln did free the slaves.
Clippers owner DONE!
- Thread starter 2canchew
- Start date
Isn't that what the internet is for, to look up information if you want more accuracy?
you are right... wanna come with me to my friends place and you can drop n-bombs all you want.... open invite... pm me, brave boy.
wow, you're drinking some funny shit , there... ^^ perfect example of old white man politics.
there's racism in everyone...even for just a little. But penises are always fown for some pussy in any shape, color or form...
You may have been born in Ireland, but you don't have a clue. If you think Irish people just laugh off the putdowns and past indiscretions of English (or Scots, Protestants/Catholics, etc.) you're either delusional or a liar. Half of the Irish arts are about how oppressed and downtrodden they were/are. I've seen guys get glassed/bottled and beaten down for being mildly pro-English in the wrong place - don't get me started on religious brawls - so please spare me the other people are too thin-skinned b.s.
In fact, I can name at least 7-8 bars in Toronto off the top of my head where I'd never make fun of the Irish (if I were so inclined) based on stereotypes, history, etc., for fear of getting jumped.
Travellers are a whole 'nother story - they choose to live outside of societal norms, often at the expense of private landowners, taxpayers, etc. While they don't deserve to be persecuted, they also need not be embraced. You choose to be different - let alone break laws & societal convention - then all you deserve is basic human rights and a modicum of respect.
Fuzzy Zoeller didn't know and wasn't friendly, let alone friends with Tiger Woods and he dropped an ethnic stereotype out there as a joke about Tiger, so why should Woods pretend that he was okay with it? Again, try going into a bar or social setting and saying stuff like that to a complete stranger.
Like I stated, Tiger could have been more gracious (time has come to show that to be prophetic.) But he was a 21-year old kid of colour playing on an all-white (other than Vijay) tour after having experienced racism for years in the lilly-white world of golf. Fuzzy was what, 47-years old? Who should have known better and been more of an adult?
Wikipedia is neither accurate nor particularly useful information - copying & pasting it without referencing shows a lack of critical and cogent thought.
Back to the topic:
End of the day, Donald Sterling represented the 29 other owners of NBA franchises, the league and its players. Membership in the "ownership club" is a privilege, not a right. He disrespected the vast majority of the labour force. He alienated a good percentage of the fan base (of all colours.) He embarrassed the sponsors, media partners and league. In an environment that is based on revenue sharing, that is the cardinal sin - don't mess with peoples' wallets! Rule #2: don't disrespect the talent and paying customers.
I hate to say this since I understand that Sterling is not a good person. I also understand that he has to go for the greater good of the league. However, how can the league fine him 2.5 mil for something said in private that was illegally taped in a state that has laws against taping people without their consent? I'm against racism but I'm even more pro privacy. The league should just kick him out and that's it.
Anyway, I wonder how successful a lawsuit against the gf will be. I mean, her illegal act of taping is going to cost the Sterling family 300-400 mil in taxes if they are force to sell before Donald sterling and his wife dies.
Anyway, I wonder how successful a lawsuit against the gf will be. I mean, her illegal act of taping is going to cost the Sterling family 300-400 mil in taxes if they are force to sell before Donald sterling and his wife dies.
it's going to take a while and he'll make a pile of dough on the deal, if they can force him to sell. The rules are certainly open to interpretation, and if he decides to fight, he can streach this until he strokes out. It's very difficult to divest an individual against his will in America.
Does the NBA "constitution" conflict with the real U.S. Constitution? Remember when Curt Flood successfully fought the MLB "reserve clause" in a real court?
Using article 13 of the NBA constitution might not be as easy as as some think. It applies as a remedy for financial problems. The Clippers are not in financial difficulties. As for the race part, the NBA will have to prove in court that Sterling was actively racist while running the Clippers. Easy right? Except that Sterling already proved in the court of law that he was not(in front of a jury no less)-a 2009 discrimination suit Sterling vs. Beylor. And of course, there's a breach of contract suit he will file(if not already) against the NBA. It would've been better, cheaper and easier to fine and ban him and leave it at that. Trying to take away his asset unlocked the Pandora's box of shit. The owners will vote him out, but that might not change anything. It's a very complex case.
Unless the league comes up with a compromise, this will play out in the courts until Sterling passes. He has the money and the will to fight it. Should the league lose, the cost to them will be huge, not just financially, in image as well. I think the NBA wants this to go away as quickly and quietly as possible.
Offer the Sterlings $2 billion to go away quietly and never speak about this again. No doubt all those people offended by him asking his GF in PRIVATE to not invite blacks to NBA games will be happy to contribute to the buyout. $2 billion solves a lot of problems.
