Donald Sterling

@BillRM,

BillRM wrote:

Quote:
We had a couple hundred thousand dead and wounded,

Even throwing in the wounded that number seems high on it face so please link to the source of your numbers....thanks.

Traumatic brain injuries[edit]
A March 4, 2009, article in USA Today[119] reported that according to a Pentagon estimate, as many as 360,000 U.S. veterans of the Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts may have suffered traumatic brain injuries (TBI), including 45,000 to 90,000 veterans with persistent symptoms requiring specialized care. (A separate estimate for the Iraq conflict alone was not specified.)

-- Wikipedia

There were many more casualties, many recently diagnosed, suffering from PTSD and other mental illnesses. The cost to the USA for these disabled people will be truly enormous.

2 Replies

@Advocate,

Advocate wrote:

BillRM wrote:

Quote:
We had a couple hundred thousand dead and wounded,

Even throwing in the wounded that number seems high on it face so please link to the source of your numbers....thanks.

Traumatic brain injuries[edit]
A March 4, 2009, article in USA Today[119] reported that according to a Pentagon estimate, as many as 360,000 U.S. veterans of the Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts may have suffered traumatic brain injuries (TBI), including 45,000 to 90,000 veterans with persistent symptoms requiring specialized care. (A separate estimate for the Iraq conflict alone was not specified.)

-- Wikipedia

There were many more casualties, many recently diagnosed, suffering from PTSD and other mental illnesses. The cost to the USA for these disabled people will be truly enormous.

How is that relevant to Donald Sterling??

0 Replies

@Thomas,

Quote:

Firefly, did anyone elect you thought-sheriff of A2K? If not, I suggest you stop sounding like one.

Do you also think this situation is about tickets being given away to blacks rather than paid for by them?

There is such a thing as reality--generally agreed on by a consensus in perception of events. This situation has nothing to do with the sort of fanciful thinking David is engaging in with the ticket nonsense.

You stop playing "thought-sheriff"--if I think David sounds like a jerk, I'll call him a jerk.

4 Replies

@firefly,

firefly wrote:

Do you also think this situation is about tickets being given away to blacks rather than paid for by them?

I think this situation is about forcing Donald Sterling to sell the NBA team he owns. Under Article 13 of the NBA Constitution (PDF), this requires a 75% vote and a reason (out of ten reasons enumerated). As far as I can make out, making racist remarks in private is not among the reasons Article 13 enumerates. So the question for me is, what provision in Article 13 did Mr. Sterling violate, and how? You asked me what I think this situation is about. That's what I think the situation is about.

firefly wrote:

You stop playing "thought-sheriff"--if I think David sounds like a jerk, I'll call him a jerk.

No problem so far. But while you get to tell David that he sounds like a jerk, you don't get to tell him to stop sounding like a jerk. Well, technically you do get to tell him, but it never works. You just demonstrated this yourself, after I suggested that you stop sounding like a thought sheriff.

0 Replies

@Advocate,

Sorry given the fairly small total number of US troops involved compare to other conflicts the US had been involved in those numbers seem crazy on the surface.

Hundreds of thousands out of a total US military of a million and a half or so give me a break.

I need to look up the numbers but in order to get those crazy numbers every US military man that got near the conflict zone would had likely needed to had been "wounded".

0 Replies

@firefly,

The REALITY is that Sterling did NOT
post guards at the arena entrances with orders to prevent blacks from entering.
He complained to his mistress in regard to her giving them away for free to blacks.
If he has objected to their purchasing tickets at the box office, then that is more than I know.

The only issue here is whether he is free to make gifts to donee-beneficiaries of his choice
and NOT to make free gifts to those who dont have his favor and to instruct his people accordingly.

As I have walked thru the world during the last few decades, (not so much now)
I 've worn vested suits in whose right front bottom pocket
I 've carried some $1OO.oo bills.

I have had a hobby of giving away $1OO.oo bills to people who don t expect it
(most ofen nice-looking ambient young ladies); sometimes to bums in the streets.
I 've been capricious. I do not give to those to whom I dont wish to give.

I have that freedom; so does he.

David

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

Quote:

The REALITY is that Sterling did NOT
post guards at the arena entrances with orders to prevent blacks from entering.

discrimination has been redefined, it used to mean harming people of certain groups that we have decided dont deserve to be harmed by their affiliation, now it means vocalizing that you dont like groups that you are "supposed" to like.

2 Replies

Quote:

Donald Sterling: 'I'm apologizing and I'm asking for forgiveness'
By Matt Moore | NBA writer
May 11, 2014

In an interview with CNN, banned Clippers owner Donald Sterling denied he's a racist and apologized for his comments which were released to the public from a recorded conversation two weeks ago.

"I'm a good member who made a mistake and I'm apologizing and I'm asking for forgiveness," he told CNN's Anderson Cooper in an exclusive interview set to air on Monday. "Am I entitled to one mistake, am I after 35 years? I mean, I love my league, I love my partners. Am I entitled to one mistake? It's a terrible mistake, and I'll never do it again."

"I'm not a racist," Sterling told Cooper. "I made a terrible mistake. I'm here to apologize."

Asked by Cooper why he took so long to say he's sorry, Sterling said he was "emotionally distraught."

"The reason it's hard for me, very hard for me, is that I'm wrong. I caused the problem. I don't know how to correct it," he said.

"If the owners feel I have another chance, then they'll give it to me," he said.

I'm asking for forgiveness' .

Sterling was banned for life from the NBA by Commissioner Adam Silver two weeks ago after Sterling confirmed that it was his voice on the recorded tapes. At the time, Silver said that Sterling had not expressed any other views regarding remorse or regret on the comments.

The interview comes as the NBA continues the process of dismantling Sterling's ownership. The NBA Advisory Committee placed president Andy Roeser, a long-time confidante of Sterling's, on indefinite leave, and placed Dick Parsons in charge as CEO of the team while granting Doc Rivers wide basketball operations powers.

Meanwhile, Shelly Sterling told ABC this weekend that she intends to fight any effort from the league to remove her from her stake of ownership, despite her lack of having been approved by the NBA Board of Governors.

Sterling has been accused of racism and illegal housing discrimination policies going back for more than 20 years, with most incidents having been settled out of civil court.

http://www.cbssports.com/nba/eye-on-basketball/24559040/donald-sterling-im-apologizing-and-im-asking-for-forgiveness

2 Replies

@hawkeye10,

hawkeye10 wrote:

Quote:
The REALITY is that Sterling did NOT
post guards at the arena entrances with orders to prevent blacks from entering.
discrimination has been redefined, it used to mean harming people of certain groups that we have decided dont deserve to be harmed by their affiliation, now it means vocalizing that you dont like groups that you are "supposed" to like.

Discrimination is choosing between 1 thing and another.
When I order from a restaurant menu, I discriminate in favor
of my preferred food, unless I order the entire menu.

We have a right to capriciously discriminate in the bestowal of our gifts;
in Don 's case: free tickets.

David

0 Replies

@firefly,

Quote:

Sterling has been accused of racism and illegal housing discrimination policies going back for more than 20 years, with most incidents having been settled out of civil court.

Which most people will assume to mean that he does not like to rent to non-whites, but in this case what it means is that he loves to rent to Koreans but does not like to rent to blacks, which he claims is a reasonable rational response to his experience of renting to people who belong to these two groups. He feels so strongly about this that he is willing to pay the penalty for not obeying open housing laws. "racist" in this case most certainly does not mean a white man trying to hold on to historical white privilege .

0 Replies

@firefly,

firefly, quoteing CBS sports, wrote:

The interview comes as the NBA continues the process of dismantling Sterling's ownership.

Is the NBA saying which provision of their constitution's article 13 Mr Sterling allegedly violated?

Firefly, quoting CBS sports, wrote:

Sterling has been accused of racism and illegal housing discrimination policies going back for more than 20 years, with most incidents having been settled out of civil court.

"Has been accused of" is not the same as "has been found guilty of". And even if he had been found guilty of it --- what provision of the NBA constitution's article 13 would that violate, and how?

So far, this doesn't look to me as if the NBA has found any solid grounds on which to impeach Mr. Sterling. This sounds as if the NBA is throwing up a smoke screen, using scary words like "the process of dismantling Sterling's ownership" and "has been accused of racism". If the NBA is lucky, this will succeed in bullying Mr. Sterling into a deal. But if this conflict goes to trial, I don't see the legal argument that would win the NBA's case.

2 Replies

@hawkeye10,

Quote:

now it means vocalizing that you dont like groups that you are "supposed" to like

It go way way beyond that, see some of Buttermilk postings, it is racism to post anything that a member of such groups do not wish to hear or care for and it is even borderline racism to not repeat not to take part in attacking anyone who dare to post anything that those group members do not wish to hear.

Poor Buttermilk took to task a number of members here who did not attacked me for my postings.

1 Reply

@Thomas,

Thomas wrote:

Is the NBA saying which provision of their constitution's article 13 Mr Sterling allegedly violated?

USA Today has an article in which it answers this question.

USA Today wrote:

While no article in the NBA's constitution addresses the Sterling incident specifically, Article 13(d) is a catch-all violation.

That article states an owner's may be terminated if the person fails or refuses "to fulfill its contractual obligations to the Association, its Members, Players, or any other third party in such a way as to affect the Association or its Members adversely."

Several paragraphs up from there, USA Today reports that the NBA is looking into contractual obligations that Sterling may have violated.

USA Today wrote:

The NBA not only is relying on its constitution and by-laws to force Los Angeles Clipper owner Donald Sterling to sell the team, but also plans to rely on moral and ethical contracts with the league Sterling has signed over the years, a person familiar with the situation told USA TODAY Sports.

The person requested anonymity because he was not authorized to speak publicly about the highly sensitive situation.

Language in those contracts prevent Sterling from expressing views or taking actions that are detrimental to the league, the person said.

Google searches do not yet unveil what contracts it the NBA thinks Sterling has violated.

2 Replies

@firefly,

Shud we all start calling each other jerks now ?

0 Replies

@Thomas,

The NBA seems to be counting on the sentance (paraphrased) " the commissioner shall be the sole arbiter of when this agreement is violated" will keep the courts from claiming jurisdiction. I doubt it works.

2 Replies

@hawkeye10,

I am just hoping he is not too old, sick and tired to have his lawyers go to war with these fools.

0 Replies

@Thomas,

Thomas wrote:

USA Today wrote:
While no article in the NBA's constitution addresses the Sterling incident specifically, Article 13(d) is a catch-all violation.

That article states an owner's may be terminated if the person fails or refuses "to fulfill its contractual obligations to the Association, its Members, Players, or any other third party in such a way as to affect the Association or its Members adversely."

It does not appear that he has REFUSED to do anything.
Whether, retrospectively, he shud have let his mistress continue
giving free tickets to the blacks, as a matter of contractual necessity, remains for judicial determination.

Thomas wrote:

Several paragraphs up from there,
USA Today reports that the NBA is looking into contractual obligations that Sterling may have violated.

It sounds like thay are really scraping the bottom of the barrel
in their efforts to come up with ways to get him in this witch-hunt.

0 Replies

@Thomas,

Thomas wrote:

USA Today wrote:
While no article in the NBA's constitution addresses the Sterling incident specifically, Article 13(d) is a catch-all violation.

That article states an owner's may be terminated if the person fails or refuses "to fulfill its contractual obligations to the Association, its Members, Players, or any other third party in such a way as to affect the Association or its Members adversely."

It does not appear that he has REFUSED to do anything.
Whether, retrospectively, he shud have let his mistress continue
giving free tickets to the blacks, as a matter of contractual necessity,
or NBA Constitutional necessity, remains for judicial determination.
Such judicial rulings shud include considerations of NOTICE and scienter
within the contractual intendment of the contracting parties
at the time that those contracts were made.

Did thay intend to bind themselves in contract qua private,
personal conversations in regard to future free gifts ?
In my opinion, a fair minded court will find that this was not
the intent of the contracting parties at the time.

Thomas wrote:

Several paragraphs up from there,
USA Today reports that the NBA is looking into contractual obligations that Sterling may have violated.

It sounds like thay are really scraping the bottom of the barrel
in their efforts to come up with ways to get him in this witch-hunt.

0 Replies

@engineer,

NICE FIND! This is what I'm talking about people. Thank you, Bill Maher. Even though you may be disgusted by what the dude (Sterling) said, we could ALL be relegated to this bogus lynching due to private conversations. I say NO.

engineer wrote:

Quote:

Liberal talk show host Bill Maher on Sterling:

"Last week when President Obama was asked about the Sterling episode, he said, 'When ignorant folks want to advertise their ignorance, just let them talk.' But Sterling didn't advertise," Maher explained, "He was bugged. And while he may not be worth defending, the 4th Amendment is."

...

"So let me get this straight, we should concede that there's no such thing anymore as a private conversation, so therefore remember to 'lawyer' everything you say before you say it, and hey, speaking your mind was overrated anyway, so you won't miss it. Well, I'll miss it, I'll miss it a lot."

0 Replies

It may be weird to be yelled at on a public board when you're a newby, so I'd like to add that I think Buttermilk could be a valuable addition to our super white perspectives, and I would be glad if he stayed. Arguments or no.

2 Replies

Donald Sterling

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know