[AUDIO] Donald Sterling - "Don't bring black people to my games" [AGREES TO SELL TEAM]

[philmonroe]

This is the world we live in today, there's been plenty of precedent set with inflammatory remarks getting people removed from their positions of power. It's not against the law to say anything inflammatory, and it's not against the law for a businesses to remove you for making such statements. You can express your beliefs privately all you want, but if they become public they become public and it's free game on them.

If I was in a position of power and got caught on tape slipping saying something non PC in private, I have to accept the responsibility of the things that I said. Look at the Romney 47% comment in the 2012 election. He expressed his beliefs to what he thought was a private audience, but once it's out there it's out there. Nothing is stopping you from saying what you want, and nothing is stopping people from exposing what you said. It's a two way street, freedom of speech for both parties technically speaking.

If you're afraid of getting caught slipping being politically incorrect, don't say it to people who you don't fully trust. This doesn't even affect normal people. If you or me said some shyt that was politically incorrect and some groupie hoe recorded it and put it in public, no one would care, but when you're in the public eye you're held to a higher standard. That's the way the world works my dude, and it's been like that for as long as I can remember.

This is nothing but truth that's why alot of people on here and on the net in general don't mind saying the shyt they do but let them get status switch shyt up real quick. If you want that real freedom of speech stay a "nobody" because once you have any kind of status its a wrap people looking for you to fukk up however wack sauce that is to me.

 

[Lakers Offseason]

This is the world we live in today, there's been plenty of precedent set with inflammatory remarks getting people removed from their positions of power. It's not against the law to say anything inflammatory, and it's not against the law for a businesses to remove you for making such statements. You can express your beliefs privately all you want, but if they become public they become public and it's free game on them.

If I was in a position of power and got caught on tape slipping saying something non PC in private, I have to accept the responsibility of the things that I said. Look at the Romney 47% comment in the 2012 election. He expressed his beliefs to what he thought was a private audience, but once it's out there it's out there. Nothing is stopping you from saying what you want, and nothing is stopping people from exposing what you said. It's a two way street, freedom of speech for both parties technically speaking.

If you're afraid of getting caught slipping being politically incorrect, don't say it to people who you don't fully trust. This doesn't even affect normal people. If you or me said some shyt that was politically incorrect and some groupie hoe recorded it and put it in public, no one would care, but when you're in the public eye you're held to a higher standard. That's the way the world works my dude, and it's been like that for as long as I can remember.

Comparing Romney and Sterling ain't the same breh. Romney was speaking to an audience. Even if it was a private event, one should know better when you are speaking to a couple of hundred people especially during a presidential campaign. That was just plain stupidity on his part. The Sterling shyt on the other hand was having a private convo with your girl at home. Imagine shooting the shyt with your breh at your crib, and you start going on about conspiracy theories and shyt. And then later on, your breh reveals that he taped the convo and uses it against you to ridicule you in public? That shyt is unacceptable IMO and sets a bad precedent.

Again, Sterling should have been kicked out of the league well before this shyt was made public.

 

[George's Dilemma]

I think there's something to be said we've become more reactive to soundbytes than active racism. Sterling's actions as a landlord should have ousted him from the league years ago. Instead this broad becomes part of the story.

It's concerning that other owners never stepped up years back to voice their displeasure with Sterlings views.

This is essentially my viewpoint, and why this "victory" rings hollow. I don't feel sorry for this guy at all, I'm not remotely sympathetic towards his situation. If anything, sad to say, he's gonna actually benefit off of this financially once it's all said and done. But the sad part again, is that action should have happened a long time ago. For action to only be taken towards him now, at this point by the NBA, indicates that they were forced to make a move on him. In other words, their motives where financial in nature, and not because of a moral obligation, which is quite frankly, sad. In other words, they didn't give a fukk, and neither did the players, or coaches. The guy had a reputation, that for the most part was known throughout the league, but tolerated.

The privacy part is disturbing as an extention what I already said, that it took essentially an unethical and possibly illegal action to make a move on this guy. Not to mention, there's the bigger picture to consider regarding privacy and trust. Kareem Abdul Jabar expressed concerns regarding the recording of private conversations. Article below sums up my concerns.

Sterling’s racism is ugly, but the loss of privacy will be even worse - Opinion - The Boston Globe

 

[12345677]

Comparing Romney and Sterling ain't the same breh. Romney was speaking to an audience. Even if it was a private event, one should know better when you are speaking to a couple of hundred people especially during a presidential campaign. That was just plain stupidity on his part. The Sterling shyt on the other hand was having a private convo with your girl at home. Imagine shooting the shyt with your breh at your crib, and you start going on about conspiracy theories and shyt. And then later on, you breh reveals that he taped the convo and uses it against you to ridicule you in public? That shyt is unacceptable IMO and sets a bad precedent.

Again, Sterling should have been kicked out of the league well before this shyt was made public.

This is more of a political interpretative thing than an actual discussion based on facts.

There's been plenty of legal precedent set that whatever you say in private can be used against you. Tell all of the people who are sitting in jail right now for talking on a hot wire that they were unfairly treated. This shyt is nothing new, and it's crazy that people think it is. Being politically incorrect can't remove you completely from a position of power. Chick Fil A doesn't agree with gay marriage, that's their right to vocalize and god bless them for saying how they feel. Mozilla doesn't want their CEO to be anti-gay, and god bless them for taking action and doing what they feel is right for their business.

This isn't an issue about individuals having freedom of speech or any of that bullshyt. This is a BUSINESS taking action on an INDIVIDUAL WITHIN THEIR BUSINESS that agreed to rules & regulations and then broke those rules & regulations and did things that were in opposition of what the BUSINESS he's involved in wanted. Individuals recover from this type of shyt, look at Mel Gibson...he's gotten jobs after his fiasco. But when you're in BUSINESS with other people and your views are exposed, whether legally or not, you have no choice but to accept the responsibility of them and face the consequences.

There's no dangerous precedent set here, the government does this exact same thing with C.I.'s to put people in jail. This time it was a groupie hoe exposing the views of a wealthy businessman and the people who he was in business with are going to kick him out legally. I don't see any controversy in this. If he was working with an organization that was in agreement with his views, nothing would've happened. But he wasn't and this situation is the result.

 

[BlackMajik]

So Sterling tryna sneak into games now lol

 

[Trip]

This is more of a political interpretative thing than an actual discussion based on facts.

There's been plenty of legal precedent set that whatever you say in private can be used against you. Tell all of the people who are sitting in jail right now for talking on a hot wire that they were unfairly treated. This shyt is nothing new, and it's crazy that people think it is. Being politically incorrect can't remove you completely from a position of power. Chick Fil A doesn't agree with gay marriage, that's their right to vocalize and god bless them for saying how they feel. Mozilla doesn't want their CEO to be anti-gay, and god bless them for taking action and doing what they feel is right for their business.

This isn't an issue about individuals having freedom of speech or any of that bullshyt. This is a BUSINESS taking action on an INDIVIDUAL WITHIN THEIR BUSINESS that agreed to rules & regulations and then broke those rules & regulations and did things that were in opposition of what the BUSINESS he's involved in wanted. Individuals recover from this type of shyt, look at Mel Gibson...he's gotten jobs after his fiasco. But when you're in BUSINESS with other people and your views are exposed, whether legally or not, you have no choice but to accept responsibility of them and face the consequences.

There's no dangerous precedent set here, the government does this exact same thing with C.I.'s to put people in jail. This time it was a groupie hoe exposing the views of a wealthy businessman and the people who he were in business with are going to kick him out legally. I don't see any controversy in this. If he was working with an organization that was in agreement with his views, nothing would've happened. But he wasn't and this situation is the result.

What determines views though? Words? That's debatable. Sterling's actions a long, long time ago showed the type of person he was. Everyone knew already this guy was a bigot...

 

[12345677]

What determines views though? Words? That's debatable. Sterling's actions a long, long time ago showed the type of person he was. Everyone knew already this guy was a bigot...

I'm not arguing that at all, and agree that owners in the past should've taken action......but they didn't and it took a groupie hoe to expose him to bring action. That's sad, but that's the reality of the situation and I've already accepted it. We know this culture runs rampant and I wouldn't be surprised if it ran within the views of other NBA owners and owners in athletics worldwide.

What do you mean views are debatable? the supreme court has already ruled that money = free speech. Political causes that people donate to, whether it be a pro-black group, an anti-gay organization, or the KKK represents your views. You words represent your views. What you write represents your views on something. What's there to debate?

There's nothing debatable about what Sterling said represented his views on minorities, especially blacks...and his past actions reinforce those views even stronger.

 

[Trip]

I'm not arguing that at all, and agree that owners in the past should've taken action......but they didn't and it took a groupie hoe to expose him to bring action. That's sad, but that's the reality of the situation and I've already accepted it. We know this culture runs rampant and I wouldn't be surprised if it ran within the views of other NBA owners and owners in athletics worldwide.

What do you mean views are debatable? the supreme court has already ruled that money = free speech. Political causes that people donate to, whether it be a pro-black group, an anti-gay organization, or the KKK represents your views. You words represent your views. What you write represents your views on something. What's there to debate?

There's nothing debatable about what Sterling said represented his views on minorities, especially blacks...and his past actions reinforce those views even stronger.

I'm saying if some random person makes an off color comment and someone happens to record it doesn't necessarily mean that's definitively his or her "views." I'm not talking about large hate groups who carry out those words with actions. I'm talking about folks who put their foot in their mouth around the wrong person and get railroaded. I thought the Dolphins incident was pretty shytty in that regard. Ronan Tynan the old singer for the Yankees...etc. Roy Hibbert last year.

 

[Nigerianwonder]

Bullshyt.

Exactly. Adam silver already atated their will be no bidding war. League will set the price at the clippers current value.

 

[12345677]

I'm saying if some random person makes an off color comment and someone happens to record it doesn't necessarily mean that's definitively his or her "views" I'm not talking about large hate groups who carry out those words with actions. I'm talking about folks who put their foot in their mouth around the wrong person and get railroaded. I thought the Dolphins incident was pretty shytty in that regard. Ronan Tynan the old singer for the Yankees...etc.

If that off-color comment is not reflective of your views and you're a public figure then by all means deny it and say it isn't reflective of your views and that it was an off color comment. Defend yourself.

If you're working as an individual, unlike all of the people you mentioned, you only have to face the court of public opinion (like Mel Gibson). If you're actively engaged in business deals with other people, and those people have power to remove you (Incognito with the Dolphins, Tynan with the Yankees, Bill Maher with ABC, Paula Deen with the Food Network) they have a legal right to fire you based on what you said, whether you meant it or not. That's been established long in the past and a lot of contracts even have clauses in them that grant the business that right in case you try to sue about your termination.

You personally may not like it and personally may not think it shouldn't be that way, but that's how it is. It's not illegal to say whatever the hell you want...but a business you work for or with can hold you responsible for what you say, whether you mean it or not. This ain't nothing new y'all.

 

[GzUp]

On OTL saying the Sterling could have dirt on other owners and maybe even Stern

 

[GoldenGlove]

On OTL saying the Sterling could have dirt on other owners and maybe even Stern

 

[The Nigerian]

On OTL saying the Sterling could have dirt on other owners and maybe even Stern

Out them all.

Once people realize that the entire culture is tainted they'll wake up and realize that an entirely new system is needed.

 

[Lakers Offseason]

This is more of a political interpretative thing than an actual discussion based on facts.

There's been plenty of legal precedent set that whatever you say in private can be used against you. Tell all of the people who are sitting in jail right now for talking on a hot wire that they were unfairly treated. This shyt is nothing new, and it's crazy that people think it is. Being politically incorrect can't remove you completely from a position of power. Chick Fil A doesn't agree with gay marriage, that's their right to vocalize and god bless them for saying how they feel. Mozilla doesn't want their CEO to be anti-gay, and god bless them for taking action and doing what they feel is right for their business.

This isn't an issue about individuals having freedom of speech or any of that bullshyt. This is a BUSINESS taking action on an INDIVIDUAL WITHIN THEIR BUSINESS that agreed to rules & regulations and then broke those rules & regulations and did things that were in opposition of what the BUSINESS he's involved in wanted. Individuals recover from this type of shyt, look at Mel Gibson...he's gotten jobs after his fiasco. But when you're in BUSINESS with other people and your views are exposed, whether legally or not, you have no choice but to accept the responsibility of them and face the consequences.

There's no dangerous precedent set here, the government does this exact same thing with C.I.'s to put people in jail. This time it was a groupie hoe exposing the views of a wealthy businessman and the people who he was in business with are going to kick him out legally. I don't see any controversy in this. If he was working with an organization that was in agreement with his views, nothing would've happened. But he wasn't and this situation is the result.

I'm not refuting any of what you posted because those are all facts. But this is not an episode of The Wire where the police department gets a judge to sign off on wire-tapping criminals. Keep in mind there is a protocol for doing that legally, otherwise the evidence is thrown out of court.

This is a simple conversation where unbeknownst to one party, they are being recorded and goaded into making comments that the individual taping it knows are controversial and then used against that person.

While I'm glad there was a positive that happened because of this, I would hate to be recorded while having a seemingly innocent conversation and then used that against me. I ain't perfect and I'm sure I've said some stupid shyt before.

 

[12345677]

I'm not refuting any of what you posted because those are all facts. But this is not an episode of The Wire where the police department gets a judge to sign off on wire-tapping criminals. Keep in mind there is a protocol for doing that legally, otherwise the evidence is thrown out of court.

This is a simple conversation where unbeknownst to one party, they are being recorded and goaded into making comments that the individual taping it knows are controversial and then used against that person.

While I'm glad there was a positive that happened because of this, I would hate to be recorded while having a seemingly innocent conversation and then used that against me. I ain't perfect and I'm sure I've said some stupid shyt before.

I would hate to be recorded as well, I'm not in disagreement. The words she recorded weren't being used against him in an ongoing lawsuit, so the whole "throw them out in a court" thing is irrelevant. The damage has been done. Whether his words were put out there legally or illegally, they're out there and that boat has sailed.

The only person who should be worried about legal action is the chick for recording him illegally, but she's not the focal point of this story therefore I don't give a fukk about what happens to her at the end of the day.