[thfootball]

People of the same race can hate on each other, depends where they come from,where they live, beliefs, and that's only a few to mention.

[Chi_archie]

Freedom of Speech

Who gives a fuk what we say about blacks or whites

Its OPEN GAME IN MY MIND

Sterling is a hero in many eyes

yeah,

in that spirit why don't you go tell SBR Lou to orally manipulate one of your smaller body parts again and see how that works out

[James D]

The vote will not be 29-1, I promise you that. Itll be very close to the 75% needed.

It won't be close

Since the vote going to be private...if will be close

I wish, but it won't be . If you can get under 2.5 for Don bet it with your life

Why shouldn't an Association be able to vote out owners in their own business?

Just because a contract exists doesn't make it legal. That is what will be decided.

His economic interest is not being taken away. He can still make a shit fortune by selling the team. It's not like he simply forfeits his interest. He's in a partnership. He signed a partnership agreement. If they follow the partnership rules in booting him then why should anyone including the govt thru the courts intrude on that. I see it just the opposite. He signed the damn contract. As an owner in the association he' gotta follow the rules or suffer the consequences.

again just because someone signs a contract that doesn't mean the terms are legal. The interpretation of the bylaws they are using are very very vague. I have seen the entire nba owners agreement. This is far from cut and dry. HIS ECONOMIC INTERESTS ARE OF COURSE BEING AFFECTED HE IS TAKING A 300 million dollar tax hit by being forced to sell.

The NBA Constitution, that HE signed, disagrees with all of this. There is nothing in their Constitution that differentiates between private or public actions. In fact, they even specify that the Board of Governors do not need proof of evidence to find him guilty, they can use anything they want as evidence to why they are voting him out. The owners themselves would have to be the guys making the decision that a private conversation should not warrant being forced out of their Association. As for Sterling's case in court?

He has none. He signed a contract that specifies who has the rights to kick him out.

I have absolutely no problem with an Association being able to vote on their own organization and vote owners out that are not holding up to the standards of their organization. Not a single court in the country would force an owner in to an organization that does not want that owner there.

He is basically done for, and maybe the NBA alters their Constitution after this, but for now... he has nothing other than hoping the owners back him which I highly doubt.

the law they are using to kick him out is very very vague. It's not like the law says "say racist statements to your girlfriend and we kick you out " LOL. Anyone who thinks this is going to be easy is way way off base. The only chance they have for a quick fight with Don is he looks and feels exhausted. Shelly won't be going that easy

[akphidelt]

the law they are using to kick him out is very very vague. It's not like the law says "say racist statements to your girlfriend and we kick you out " LOL. Anyone who thinks this is going to be easy is way way off base. The only chance they have for a quick fight with Don is he looks and feels exhausted. Shelly won't be going that easy

I disagree. First it's not a "law" they are using. It's an article written in their Constitution. The reason I disagree is because the Constitution lays out who determines whether or not the Constitution was broken. And that is the Board of Governors (aka the owners). He will not be presenting his case to a court. And the Constitution says that the Board of Governors decision is final, binding, and the owner waives the right to sue based on the decision. Also, the owners do not need to have proof of evidence and they can use any evidence that is provided to them. Basically the owners are the judge, jury, and executioner according to the Constitution.

He has no real legal recourse if the owners vote him out. He'd have to come up with some lawsuit that the Constitution he signed was illegal and violated some kind of state or federal law. But he definitely can't go to the courts and say that he didn't violate the Constitution because the Constitution gives the owners the right to determine whether or not he violated it.

Dude is done for.

[SharkAA]

Cuban is actually right and knows what he's talking about. I don't find anything what he said, offensive. If anybody else finds it offensive, that's his problem.

[jjgold]

People are so weak in todays world

Its why some day America will be taken over

When names bother you its time to pack it in and jump off a bld

[Dr.Gonzo]

People are so weak in todays world

Its why some day America will be taken over

When names bother you its time to pack it in and jump off a bld

Your people have already taken over.

This racism fetish was created by Trotsky and pushed by scum like the Frankfurt school.

[akphidelt]

Just as I expected. The Sterlings are going down without a fight. The NBA Constitution would have been impossible for Donald to beat.

[akphidelt]

People are so weak in todays world

Its why some day America will be taken over

When names bother you its time to pack it in and jump off a bld

For some people it is tough living in a civilized society. You'd be better off in Nigeria snatching schoolchildren.

[face]

he's lying he's not that scared. or maybe he is scared, idk
cuban is scared lmao

[ChalkyDog]

Your people have already taken over.

This racism fetish was created by Trotsky and pushed by scum like the Frankfurt school.

Did you just call JJ a Marxist? I almost want to nudge this one a bit. See if we can get this thread into a full on Anti-Obama rant.

[akphidelt]

Did you just call JJ a Marxist? I almost want to nudge this one a bit. See if we can get this thread into a full on Anti-Obama rant.

Definitely not happening in my thread. This is for Obama supporters only.

[Thor4140]

Thanks for stating the obvious. Im not the one that made the connection or said they were related, just pointing it out to thor.

u are pointing nothing out to me.

[marcoloco]

FREE STERLING! lol

[JeffTheShark]

It's not about prejudices. It is about statistics.

Avoid people who statistically are more likely to hurt you. It is common sense.

Hypothetically, if people who wear blue shirts were 4 times more likely to commit a violent crime than people who wear red shirts, wouldn't you avoid people with blue shirts?

Sadly, African Americans are 4 times more likely to commit crimes than whites. It is what it is.

[James D]

This has nothing to do with Cuban being a racist. It has to do with the poor choice of words for a black kid in a hoodie after all the NBA players and a lot of the country supported Trayvon and his hoodie.

Just more about his choice of words, not about if he is racist or not.

Amazing people have to be afraid to talk about hoodies now LOL. But I understand him apologizing The language police are getting ridiculous but why have another headache. I am a person that was extremely anti Zimmerman That kid had no business dying that day

Being forced to sell, no matter how much he has gained monetarily as a result, is still a forced relinquishment of an economic interest. They are essentially taking away, by force, his interest in potential future gains that he has a right to.

Now, if he wants to sell, hell yes. Point is that he doesn't and is being forced to. That shit is a serious issue, and it scares me that so many people look at this whole situation and quickly side with Silver as the "right" thing to do. Maybe it's a fear of being lumped in with Sterling as a racist.

This whole racial thing is supposed to be a non-issue by now. It's 2014, and people are more afraid to even have an honest conversation about it now than before.

totally agree chalky

It's a business man. So if you were a part of a business with multiple partners, and one of those partners was caught making racist comments on Facebook or something and caused people to stop paying for your product you don't think you should be able to kick him out and protect the business?

Why say on facebook? Why don't you use the exact example in play here? In a illegally recorded private conversation where only the parts the perpetrator wants you to hear are being played for the world? Also if you think people are going to stop watching the Detroit pistons or Milwaukee bucks because the clippers owner is racist you are out of touch.

[mcdonae101]

Sterling for president!!!!!

[akphidelt]

Amazing people have to be afraid to talk about hoodies now LOL. But I understand him apologizing The language police are getting ridiculous but why have another headache. I am a person that was extremely anti Zimmerman That kid had no business dying that day

It's not being afraid, it's being smart. When you are a billionaire owner and a public figure, you should be more considerate with your words especially when many NBA players took a stand with the "hoodies". Has no affect on my life, just was shocked that he said it knowing what many people would take from it. And of course the day after he apologizes to the Martin family. So it's not like I'm alone here.

Why say on facebook? Why don't you use the exact example in play here? In a illegally recorded private conversation where only the parts the perpetrator wants you to hear are being played for the world? Also if you think people are going to stop watching the Detroit pistons or Milwaukee bucks because the clippers owner is racist you are out of touch.

Use the example of an "illegal" recording. Absolutely no difference. Just because you hook up with a conniving biatch who records your conversations does not change the fact you are a racist. If you are not racist in private, you'll never be one in public. And it's not really people watching. It is more advertising and marketing where companies would not want to be associated with an organization that keeps an individual as an owner who has those beliefs. It's hilarious how out of touch you are with reality.

[BCC585]

It's sad that people like OP here missed the whole purpose of Cuban's interview about everyone stereotyping and only focus on one sentence about a black kid in a hoodie.
You're just proving how over sensitive our society is.

[jtoler]

It's not about prejudices. It is about statistics.

Avoid people who statistically are more likely to hurt you. It is common sense.

Hypothetically, if people who wear blue shirts were 4 times more likely to commit a violent crime than people who wear red shirts, wouldn't you avoid people with blue shirts?

Sadly, African Americans are 4 times more likely to commit crimes than whites. It is what it is.

So avoid all African Americans, got it.

[opie1988]

It's not about prejudices. It is about statistics.

Avoid people who statistically are more likely to hurt you. It is common sense.

Hypothetically, if people who wear blue shirts were 4 times more likely to commit a violent crime than people who wear red shirts, wouldn't you avoid people with blue shirts?

Sadly, African Americans are 4 times more likely to commit crimes than whites. It is what it is.

Jeff gets it

Well said, Jeffrey

[Chi_archie]

It's not about prejudices. It is about statistics.

Avoid people who statistically are more likely to hurt you. It is common sense.

Hypothetically, if people who wear blue shirts were 4 times more likely to commit a violent crime than people who wear red shirts, wouldn't you avoid people with blue shirts?

Sadly, African Americans are 4 times more likely to commit crimes than whites. It is what it is.

good points. Maybe we need to look at black on white vs white on white violent crime rates?

[James D]

It's not being afraid, it's being smart. When you are a billionaire owner and a public figure, you should be more considerate with your words especially when many NBA players took a stand with the "hoodies". Has no affect on my life, just was shocked that he said it knowing what many people would take from it. And of course the day after he apologizes to the Martin family. So it's not like I'm alone here.



Use the example of an "illegal" recording. Absolutely no difference. Just because you hook up with a conniving biatch who records your conversations does not change the fact you are a racist. If you are not racist in private, you'll never be one in public. And it's not really people watching. It is more advertising and marketing where companies would not want to be associated with an organization that keeps an individual as an owner who has those beliefs. It's hilarious how out of touch you are with reality.

So you think being smart as more important then being honest? If you think this debate hurts MarK Cuban you are not half a smart as you think. As far as the NBA players "taking a stand "on hoodies LOL what exactly did they do? They were appalled by the death of Mr. Martin and took pictures ? So was I that POS Zimmerman idiot was a disgrace (that probably surprises some people) and I wish he was locked up. Taking a stand means drawing a line versus an enemy not doing a photo shoot, it's a military reference.

I have said this repeatedly, at least 50x since this story unfolded. I never said Don shouldn't be punished I just said the degree of punishment is ridiculous. I said the same thing about Michael Vick when the PETA people were protesting at jets camp because this year because of his past issues. I am a Hard core animal lover but I feel Vick has paid his debt, enough already. Just like a felt a 2 year suspension (which he prolly won't survive anyway) would have been sufficient.

It's sad that people like OP here missed the whole purpose of Cuban's interview about everyone stereotyping and only focus on one sentence about a black kid in a hoodie.
You're just proving how over sensitive our society is.

I agree 100%

good points. Maybe we need to look at black on white vs white on white violent crime rates?

There is an obvious reason this is not looked at in America. Unfortunately certain honest discussions can not take place.

[James D]

I disagree. First it's not a "law" they are using. It's an article written in their Constitution. The reason I disagree is because the Constitution lays out who determines whether or not the Constitution was broken. And that is the Board of Governors (aka the owners). He will not be presenting his case to a court. And the Constitution says that the Board of Governors decision is final, binding, and the owner waives the right to sue based on the decision. Also, the owners do not need to have proof of evidence and they can use any evidence that is provided to them. Basically the owners are the judge, jury, and executioner according to the Constitution.

He has no real legal recourse if the owners vote him out. He'd have to come up with some lawsuit that the Constitution he signed was illegal and violated some kind of state or federal law. But he definitely can't go to the courts and say that he didn't violate the Constitution because the Constitution gives the owners the right to determine whether or not he violated it.

Dude is done for.

I have read virtually the entire NBA charter and absolutely all the relevant parts, the charter is far more vague then you think. This entire discussion by Cuban was a well thought out extensive revealing perspective from a high profile NBA owner and all you took from it was a hoodie reference. These are the reasons no one can have a discussion about race. akphidelt let me ask you a question, I seriously want to know your opinion. Would this be a racial act or a business decision?

Lets say the mavericks local network KTXA changed its affiliation to BET. Could Mark Cuban complain as a business person that BET is not the type of network that services the Dallas mavericks fans,advertisers, and target audience ? Could he attempt to void his contract and sign a deal elsewhere because the contract he signed was with a CBS network affiliate and reaches a broader audience and the BET affiliate did not reach his broader target audience?

I really would like to know your opinion on this. Is this a business decision? Racist? Both? Should he be allowed? Should he be punished ?

[akphidelt]

So you think being smart as more important then being honest? If you think this debate hurts MarK Cuban you are not half a smart as you think. As far as the NBA players "taking a stand "on hoodies LOL what exactly did they do? They were appalled by the death of Mr. Martin and took pictures ? So was I that POS Zimmerman idiot was a disgrace (that probably surprises some people) and I wish he was locked up. Taking a stand means drawing a line versus an enemy not doing a photo shoot, it's a military reference.

I have said this repeatedly, at least 50x since this story unfolded. I never said Don shouldn't be punished I just said the degree of punishment is ridiculous. I said the same thing about Michael Vick when the PETA people were protesting at jets camp because this year because of his past issues. I am a Hard core animal lover but I feel Vick has paid his debt, enough already. Just like a felt a 2 year suspension (which he prolly won't survive anyway) would have been sufficient.

Well this isn't the 1800s any more. Taking a stand does not mean you have to get your pistols out and meet up at the saloon. I'm speaking about common sense. Just from a PR perspective, the second I read those comments I knew he'd get backlash for using "black kid in a hoodie" reference. Do I personally care that he said it, no... do I find it interesting what the rest of the PC community will do about it yes. And sure enough, within a day he apologized to the Martin family, so it was obvious that he got enough backlash that he realized he had to apologize. Just a bad choice of words in my opinion.

And, if this was an isolated incident or he just said one comment, I can see the punishment being too harsh. But he has a serious history of racist behavior, the 15 minute audio they released was brutal. Then his responses on national tv to Anderson Cooper was the nail in the coffin. The vote will be 29-1 if it even gets to that point. And the punishment is justified in my opinion.

[akphidelt]

I have read virtually the entire NBA charter and absolutely all the relevant parts, the charter is far more vague then you think. This entire discussion by Cuban was a well thought out extensive revealing perspective from a high profile NBA owner and all you took from it was a hoodie reference. These are the reasons no one can have a discussion about race. akphidelt let me ask you a question, I seriously want to know your opinion. Would this be a racial act or a business decision?

In terms of kicking Sterling out... the Charter is not vague at all. In fact that's one of the reasons from the very beginning I said this was a done deal. It gives all the rights to the owners. The charges the NBA has to present to the owners is vague though.

Lets say the mavericks local network KTXA changed its affiliation to BET. Could Mark Cuban complain as a business person that BET is not the type of network that services the Dallas mavericks fans,advertisers, and target audience ? Could he attempt to void his contract and sign a deal elsewhere because the contract he signed was with a CBS network affiliate and reaches a broader audience and the BET affiliate did not reach his broader target audience?

I really would like to know your opinion on this. Is this a business decision? Racist? Both? Should he be allowed? Should he be punished ?

Depends how he sold it. If he didn't want BET because the message it delivers to youths, etc, etc... then maybe he can get away with it. I personally think it would be dumb and there would be backlash, but definitely would come down to his reasons and how he portrays those reasons.

[JeffTheShark]

good points. Maybe we need to look at black on white vs white on white violent crime rates?

I've certainly looked at those before. While it is true that most violent crime is black on black crime and white on white crime, the reality is that for STRANGERS, black on white is the most common form of violent crime.

What that means is that people usually commit violence against people they know. That makes perfect sense.

But if you separate for only violent crimes against strangers, black on white violent crime is by far the most common.

I think the best thing to do in this discussion is to separate crimes where the people already know each other. I work with and know plenty of African Americans. I don't worry about them attacking me.

But when I go out in society and deal with people who I know nothing about except their skin color, it'd be preposterous to ignore the statistical odds of a stranger attacking me. I'll make my judgments based on skin color, how they are dressed, how they speak to me and other people, and any other useful information. Anyone who claims to ignore these things is stupid, lying, naive, or all three.

[eidolon]

Yeah, some topics you just don't talk about to the media, because there are just too many people with different views on touchy subjects, and it will always bite you in the ass in the end

[frugalgambler]

This is a pretty entertaining thread, after all. Interwebs is the last "public" places where it is OK to be non-PC. Sure NBA has all the rights to kick Sterling out, according to their "constitution". You guys are also forgetting that Sterling has been despised for ~20 years by his fellows because he was dragging down the NBA product, while making a lot of money off luxury taxes paid by other owners.

However, what I found interesting is that virtually everybody, every media outlet, completely ignored the fact that it was a private, illegally-recorded conversation that was used in this broohaha. In a normal, free-speech society, that sh.t would be contained to tabloids. You need to also ask yourself, how long will it take before you, yourself, will not be free to stray from the party line even in the privacy of your home or risk being fired from your job, especially if your job is worth anything to somebody else. Cuban was the only public figure who tried to say something about that, but he sorta mumbled something and then started to apologize. That was actually pretty funny.

[TheMoneyShot]

If someone made me a "FREE STERLING" T-Shirt. I'd wear it right in the city of Detroit.

[frugalgambler]

Yeah, some topics you just don't talk about to the media, because there are just too many people with different views on touchy subjects, and it will always bite you in the ass in the end

The problem is that this leads to many important issues completely vanishing from public discourse and the decisions on those topics are then being made by the ultra-rich and connected. Basically, this has been happening over the past 20 years or so. The quality of life for common folks has been rapidly falling and the whole concept of American dream is becoming completely obsolete. The forecast is for the USofA to become more and more Brazilized, only with uglier women.

[akphidelt]

The problem is that this leads to many important issues completely vanishing from public discourse and the decisions on those topics are then being made by the ultra-rich and connected. Basically, this has been happening over the past 20 years or so. The quality of life for common folks has been rapidly falling and the whole concept of American dream is becoming completely obsolete. The forecast is for the USofA to become more and more Brazilized, only with uglier women.

The quality of life in America is far greater than it was 20 years ago. The only thing that has changed is the Internet and the constant negative news that is shoved in everyone's throat on a minute by minute basis. If you had the Internet, social media, and up to the second news on everything happening throughout the world 20 years ago, 50 years ago, 100 years ago, 1000 years ago, there were far sicker and more atrocious things happening to people. In fact violent crime has improved greatly over the past 20-30 years. People are much safer now. But the Internet makes it feel like a criminal is next to you at all times.

[akphidelt]

This is a pretty entertaining thread, after all. Interwebs is the last "public" places where it is OK to be non-PC. Sure NBA has all the rights to kick Sterling out, according to their "constitution". You guys are also forgetting that Sterling has been despised for ~20 years by his fellows because he was dragging down the NBA product, while making a lot of money off luxury taxes paid by other owners.

However, what I found interesting is that virtually everybody, every media outlet, completely ignored the fact that it was a private, illegally-recorded conversation that was used in this broohaha. In a normal, free-speech society, that sh.t would be contained to tabloids. You need to also ask yourself, how long will it take before you, yourself, will not be free to stray from the party line even in the privacy of your home or risk being fired from your job, especially if your job is worth anything to somebody else. Cuban was the only public figure who tried to say something about that, but he sorta mumbled something and then started to apologize. That was actually pretty funny.

"Illegally obtained" is only a phrase for federal/state courts. The NBA does not have to worry about whether or not the evidence was illegally or legally obtained. In fact in their Constitution they specify that the owners do not have to have proof of evidence and they can take anything in consideration for their decisions.

[akphidelt]

I've certainly looked at those before. While it is true that most violent crime is black on black crime and white on white crime, the reality is that for STRANGERS, black on white is the most common form of violent crime.

What that means is that people usually commit violence against people they know. That makes perfect sense.

But if you separate for only violent crimes against strangers, black on white violent crime is by far the most common.

I think the best thing to do in this discussion is to separate crimes where the people already know each other. I work with and know plenty of African Americans. I don't worry about them attacking me.

But when I go out in society and deal with people who I know nothing about except their skin color, it'd be preposterous to ignore the statistical odds of a stranger attacking me. I'll make my judgments based on skin color, how they are dressed, how they speak to me and other people, and any other useful information. Anyone who claims to ignore these things is stupid, lying, naive, or all three.

The problem people don't look at in this situation is statistically there are far more black people who don't commit crimes than do commit crimes. So when you are saying that a black kid in a hoodie scares you, there are millions of black families, especially in the NBA, out there who have children that walk down the street and take offense to the fact that they are being subjected to this stereotype.

Don't get me wrong, from a personal view, at a poker table with friends, I completely agree. If I saw a black kid in my neighborhood with a hoodie walking down the street, I would immediately be on the alert. But that does not change the fact that when you are a billionaire owner of a publicly known franchise in a globally known organization, you should probably not tell people who you are scared of walking down the street as there are far more people that aren't criminals than that are that you might be insulting.

[JeffTheShark]

The problem people don't look at in this situation is statistically there are far more black people who don't commit crimes than do commit crimes. So when you are saying that a black kid in a hoodie scares you, there are millions of black families, especially in the NBA, out there who have children that walk down the street and take offense to the fact that they are being subjected to this stereotype.

Don't get me wrong, from a personal view, at a poker table with friends, I completely agree. If I saw a black kid in my neighborhood with a hoodie walking down the street, I would immediately be on the alert. But that does not change the fact that when you are a billionaire owner of a publicly known franchise in a globally known organization, you should probably not tell people who you are scared of walking down the street as there are far more people that aren't criminals than that are that you might be insulting.

People can take different things from a comment. I took from this comment that Cuban is saying that every single person has prejudices, but that these prejudices do not necessarily make someone racist, nor is it okay to be flat out racist as Sterling was/is.