That Aud Smell Posted May 1, 2014 Report Share Posted May 1, 2014 He has lived a life of luxury and will continue to do so until the day he dies. Yeah, he lost alright. It pays to be a scumbag. And what of it? His standard of living is way, way, way higher than mine, or yours. But I'd bet dollars to doughnuts that I lead a happier and more personally fulfilling life than he does. It's true what they say about money and happiness - it is true. Guy I know from high school dropped out of his Ivy League school mid-way through his freshman year to join a very solid, but not yet overly large or dominant, software company called Microsoft. Within a matter of years, Microsoft began its era of domination. That guy now has a net worth well into 8-figures. I saw him a few years back. Twice-divorced, distant from his kids, had just lost his Mom to cancer after largely ignoring her for years, adrift in what he was doing in life -- just a really unhappy fella. The fact that he was taking his custom-made 96' yacht to somewhere in the Caribbean did not seem to change that for him. Generally speaking, yes. The conversation he had with Stiviano does seem to indicate he's not banging her. Although, if I try to put myself in his shoes for a minute, would my 80 year old billionaire nutsack care if my young, nubile (I don't find her attractive) piece of gold digging arse was nailing a known HIV infected man at the same time? I guess everyone has a price... Good take. It is perplexing, isn't it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IKnowPhysics Posted May 1, 2014 Report Share Posted May 1, 2014 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4aI_0lXJU6A Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattPie Posted May 1, 2014 Report Share Posted May 1, 2014 So now a bidding war is lining up for the Clippers. Sterling is going to walk away with even more money than he already and we'll never hear another word about him. I'm still trying to figure out how he lost on this one. I heard on the radio that Tracy Morgan and Paul Rubens (Pee-Wee Herman) are lining up a bid. :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted May 1, 2014 Report Share Posted May 1, 2014 Well, I don't think most owners buy teams for the express purpose of making money. There's a lot of status and ego involved in owning a major pro franchise. He's going to trade that for an amount of money that will have zero impact on his life outside of numbers on paper. You're aware of the Clippers history, right? He sure as hell hasn't been in this for basketball. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jsixspd Posted May 1, 2014 Report Share Posted May 1, 2014 Sterling, Sterling's wife, and the "alleged" girlfriend - seem like terrible people. There are no heroes in this tale. Charities should have kept Sterling's donations though. Imperfect and flawed people can still do some good, and if the money is put to good use, that's really all that matters. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted May 1, 2014 Report Share Posted May 1, 2014 You're aware of the Clippers history, right? He sure as hell hasn't been in this for basketball. Oh most definitely. My point wasn't that he cared about basketball, but that owning a major pro franchise carries weight in his social circle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LastPommerFan Posted May 1, 2014 Report Share Posted May 1, 2014 Sterling, Sterling's wife, and the "alleged" girlfriend - seem like terrible people. There are no heroes in this tale. Charities should have kept Sterling's donations though. Imperfect and flawed people can still do some good, and if the money is put to good use, that's really all that matters. his gifts were almost always predicated on receiving some sort of award (like the NAACP lifetime award) these awards were for the sole purpose of insulating himself against discrimination lawsuits by his tenants. By accepting the donation and giving the awards these charities were often actively undercutting the very people they are chartered to protect. They should have never accepted the gift in the first place under those conditions, and whatever good they may have been able to do with the money, was most certainly undone by their tacit protection of a racist landlord. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LTS Posted May 1, 2014 Report Share Posted May 1, 2014 Worth keeping an eye on, I guess. Is this a slippery slope? Who knows. I sorta doubt it. I think these pro leagues will act in this way only when they're put in a position so vile and repugnant that they have no choice but to act. The Magic situation sounds like it could go that way -- but maybe not if they keep their position based in genuinely held religious beliefs (however misguided) and don't get caught on tape talking about how God sent AIDS as a gay cancer to eradicate a scourge from the earth. waaaaiiiiiiiiiiiiiiitt a second. what did sherman do? he spoke passionately, loudly, and angrily moments after vanquishing a rival in the most decisive and visible way possible. but because of where he comes from, the color of his skin, and how he talks, people saw this? check yo bias, perfesser. It's not my bias. I didn't judge him as anything more than an idiot. That said, he did go down the notorious "Don't disrespect me" path. I get sick of hearing that path. And there's little doubt that that particular behavior has serious roots in gang culture. So, to that end, people are going to see it. Direct proven guilt? The guy was getting extorted through a taping of a private conversation. He's guilty of being ignorant. He also has the highest ratio of African American players on his team in the league. Some making hundreds of millions of dollars.... Some say Pegula has a "loose" connection to the situation at Penn State. What if per chance there was a tape circulating out there, taped at a cocktail event without Pegula's knowledge. In it he is talking to someone high up in the Penn State food chain and discussing the upcoming indictment of Sandusky and what it means for the sports program. Pegula then says something like "So Jerry went a little too far with some of the kids....we need to make sure we keep these teams afloat. This thing needs to go away. I'll do whatever I can to make sure that arena gets built and the football team doesn't lose the coaching staff and recruits." If that tape was made public, what should the NHL do about it? There was nothing illegal that Sterling did in that tape....just as there isn't anything Pegula would have done illegal in that scenario. This is some spooky stuff how fast and how far things got with the NBA. Yes.... Holy crap....can you imagine the reverse outcry if he said that about Wes Welker? There would be marches in the streets..... GoDD - I am not talking about the recording. I am talking about Sterling's housing discrimination lawsuit -> http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=2542741 (that also includes reference to his 2003 case as well). As for the rest of your premise, I understand what you are saying. But I am not talking about what-ifs, I am talking about what-ares. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IKnowPhysics Posted May 1, 2014 Report Share Posted May 1, 2014 his gifts were almost always predicated on receiving some sort of award (like the NAACP lifetime award) these awards were for the sole purpose of insulating himself against discrimination lawsuits by his tenants. By accepting the donation and giving the awards these charities were often actively undercutting the very people they are chartered to protect. They should have never accepted the gift in the first place under those conditions, and whatever good they may have been able to do with the money, was most certainly undone by their tacit protection of a racist landlord. I have no evidence, but it could be worse than that. Those gifts may have been directed by the settlements in those court cases. "You're going to pay the people you ######, and for being a ######head, you're going to donate to charity." I don't know, but it seems possible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jsixspd Posted May 1, 2014 Report Share Posted May 1, 2014 his gifts were almost always predicated on receiving some sort of award (like the NAACP lifetime award) these awards were for the sole purpose of insulating himself against discrimination lawsuits by his tenants. By accepting the donation and giving the awards these charities were often actively undercutting the very people they are chartered to protect. They should have never accepted the gift in the first place under those conditions, and whatever good they may have been able to do with the money, was most certainly undone by their tacit protection of a racist landlord. Ahhh, ok, thanks for the clarification! What a bastard. Washington Post has an interesting article - apparently the NBA turned a blind eye to this guy's appalling statements and actions for years. They just couldn't keep the lid on it any longer, but it seems as if they should have taken action years ago. http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2014/04/28/why-the-world-finally-noticed-donald-sterlings-appalling-history/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jad1 Posted May 1, 2014 Report Share Posted May 1, 2014 Generally speaking, yes. The conversation he had with Stiviano does seem to indicate he's not banging her. Although, if I try to put myself in his shoes for a minute, would my 80 year old billionaire nutsack care if my young, nubile (I don't find her attractive) piece of gold digging arse was nailing a known HIV infected man at the same time? I guess everyone has a price... After reading this artice by Bill Simmons, it appears that in addition to being his mistress,V. Stiviano worked as an assistant to Sterling. As his assistant, he asked her to record their conversations because he often forgot what they discussed. So he was aware that his conversations with her were being taped. So is Sterling admonishing his mistress or his employee, or in his mind, both? And did this happen during a business call or a personal one (or both). It also sounds like from the article, that Sterling probably generated animosity from the people that directly worked for him. So maybe this is a case of a gold digger trying to blackmail her doddering suger daddy, or perhaps a member of Sterling's disgruntled staff found the recording (maybe he has his recorded conversations transcribed) and decided to make it public. Anyway, here's the link to the artcle. It's an interesting read, just to learn that Sterling is a big fan of soup. http://grantland.com/features/sterlings-fold/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of Dwight Drane Posted May 1, 2014 Report Share Posted May 1, 2014 It's not my bias. I didn't judge him as anything more than an idiot. That said, he did go down the notorious "Don't disrespect me" path. I get sick of hearing that path. And there's little doubt that that particular behavior has serious roots in gang culture. So, to that end, people are going to see it. GoDD - I am not talking about the recording. I am talking about Sterling's housing discrimination lawsuit -> http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=2542741 (that also includes reference to his 2003 case as well). As for the rest of your premise, I understand what you are saying. But I am not talking about what-ifs, I am talking about what-ares. I hear you. There are tons of "what-ares" with Penn State though. My point was it wasn't enough for the NBA to act or the NHL to act. Only when there was an illegal and maliciously motivated tape circulated which tipped public opinion, then the NBA acted. I won't hammer the what-ares on Penn St.....I just think everyone is happy keeping things hushed as long as $$$$$ rolls in. Tis life.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jsixspd Posted May 1, 2014 Report Share Posted May 1, 2014 Well, Sterling's wife sure seems to think she was his mistress, if you look at the wording of the lawsuit she's brought against her. He bought her a Bentley, a Ferrari and a Land Rover, and she lives in a $1.8 million dollar home. As far as I can tell, her job with the team was pretty much social director and charity coordinator. Seems like pretty lavish pay and benefits for an ordinary 20 something employee (she started working for the Clippers in her late 20s). She said he was his 'archivist' Her exact 'job' with the Clippers seems even more vague and ill-defined than Battista's is with the Sabres. LOL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted May 1, 2014 Report Share Posted May 1, 2014 Oh most definitely. My point wasn't that he cared about basketball, but that owning a major pro franchise carries weight in his social circle. I think it's more about the money than anything. The money brings that social status. And let's face it, there are plenty of people who are still going to associate with him simply because of that money. We all know why the minority girlfriend who apparently couldn't stand his racist tendencies stuck around. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That Aud Smell Posted May 1, 2014 Report Share Posted May 1, 2014 (edited) It's not my bias. I didn't judge him as anything more than an idiot. I inferred that you were judging him as more than an idiot, based on this: If someone chooses to speak in such a way, dress in such a way, and act in such a way that is incredibly similar to people who are commonly thought of as thugs doesn't it seem inevitable that said person would also be classified as such? If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck kind of thing. he did go down the notorious "Don't disrespect me" path. I get sick of hearing that path. And there's little doubt that that particular behavior has serious roots in gang culture. So, to that end, people are going to see it. the who now? seems to me that we're back where we started on this point. EDIT: let's talk about the "disrespect" trope. it is common. we do hear about it a lot. and it's a black thing, right? gotta be a black thing. except when it's an italian thing (like when a mafia stooge gets whacked for disrespecting a made man), or when it's an irish thing (when a gang of gritty north dubliners get whisky'd up and roll into a toney pub near stephen's green to exact revenge on a refined lad for a perceived slight), or when it's a russian thing (because vodka). the overwhelming urge for and insistence on "respect" is as old as the sun, but it's common to the species and arises from matters of class and socioeconomics, not race or ethnicity. (and, fwiw, i'm not sure you were implying otherwise.) Her exact 'job' with the Clippers seems even more vague and ill-defined than Battista's is with the Sabres. LOL oh, heavens - the thought/image that just flitted across my brain. Edited May 1, 2014 by That Aud Smell Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Campy Posted May 1, 2014 Report Share Posted May 1, 2014 It's not my bias. I didn't judge him as anything more than an idiot. That said, he did go down the notorious "Don't disrespect me" path. I get sick of hearing that path. And there's little doubt that that particular behavior has serious roots in gang culture. So, to that end, people are going to see it. <snip> I lost track of who was arguing what and I'm too lazy to go back and look, but if I understand what you're saying - that disrespect is only an affront to people because of the importance of respect in gang culture - then you couldn't be more wrong. Ever heard of the Hamilton-Burr duel? Two rich white politicians who had been going at it for 10 years until one day... Tensions reached a boiling point with Hamilton's journalistic defamation of Burr's character during the 1804 New York gubernatorial race in which Burr was a candidate. Fought at a time when the practice was being outlawed in the northern United States, the duel had immense political ramifications. Burr, who survived the duel, was indicted for murder in both New York and New Jersey, though these charges were later either dismissed or resulted in acquittal. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burr%E2%80%93Hamilton_duel Shooting a dude because he wrote bad things in a paper? Yeah, that's totally gangtsa. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That Aud Smell Posted May 1, 2014 Report Share Posted May 1, 2014 I lost track of who was arguing what and I'm too lazy to go back and look, but if I understand what you're saying - that disrespect is only an affront to people because of the importance of respect in gang culture - then you couldn't be more wrong. Ever heard of the Hamilton-Burr duel? Two rich white politicians who had been going at it for 10 years until one day... Shooting a dude because he wrote bad things in a paper? Yeah, that's totally gangtsa. better example than the ones i cited. and it prompts me to re-think my theory that the obsession with "respect" is one that seems common to people in lower castes of society, or otherwise out on its periphery. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattPie Posted May 1, 2014 Report Share Posted May 1, 2014 better example than the ones i cited. and it prompts me to re-think my theory that the obsession with "respect" is one that seems common to people in lower castes of society, or otherwise out on its periphery. There's plenty of "That person made me look bad, I'll try to get back at them" in political and corporate circles as well. And sports, really, so it's far more likely a trait of competitive people, People at the bottom economically have to compete more since they're on the edge of failing and don't have much to fall back on other than reputation (that's my own supposition). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That Aud Smell Posted May 1, 2014 Report Share Posted May 1, 2014 it's far more likely a trait of competitive people that may be right. and/or a trait of ambitious people, of proud people, etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inkman Posted May 1, 2014 Report Share Posted May 1, 2014 Shooting a dude because he wrote bad things in a paper? Yeah, that's totally gangtsa. Perhaps even a little thug Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleven Posted May 1, 2014 Report Share Posted May 1, 2014 I lost track of who was arguing what and I'm too lazy to go back and look, but if I understand what you're saying - that disrespect is only an affront to people because of the importance of respect in gang culture - then you couldn't be more wrong. Ever heard of the Hamilton-Burr duel? Two rich white politicians who had been going at it for 10 years until one day... http://en.wikipedia....r–Hamilton_duel Shooting a dude because he wrote bad things in a paper? Yeah, that's totally gangtsa. What kind of badass does that make Stalin? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That Aud Smell Posted May 1, 2014 Report Share Posted May 1, 2014 Perhaps even a little thug fair play. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jsixspd Posted May 1, 2014 Report Share Posted May 1, 2014 oh, heavens - the thought/image that just flitted across my brain. You know, as soon as I posted that, I thought - "I didn't just go there.... did I?" ;) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Campy Posted May 1, 2014 Report Share Posted May 1, 2014 I posted this on TSW and thought the Bills fans here might get a kick out of it, too. It's a quick game of Who Said It featuring Sterling and Trump. Check it out at http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/04/donald-sterling-donald-trump-quiz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LTS Posted May 2, 2014 Report Share Posted May 2, 2014 I inferred that you were judging him as more than an idiot, based on this: the who now? seems to me that we're back where we started on this point. EDIT: let's talk about the "disrespect" trope. it is common. we do hear about it a lot. and it's a black thing, right? gotta be a black thing. except when it's an italian thing (like when a mafia stooge gets whacked for disrespecting a made man), or when it's an irish thing (when a gang of gritty north dubliners get whisky'd up and roll into a toney pub near stephen's green to exact revenge on a refined lad for a perceived slight), or when it's a russian thing (because vodka). the overwhelming urge for and insistence on "respect" is as old as the sun, but it's common to the species and arises from matters of class and socioeconomics, not race or ethnicity. (and, fwiw, i'm not sure you were implying otherwise.) oh, heavens - the thought/image that just flitted across my brain. I think people misinterpreted my "serious roots" statement. I did not intend that it was the only place it exists but that it does exist, with strong roots, in gang culture (notice, I said gang, not black gang, latino gang, white gang, etc.) Along those lines, there is real disrespect and perceived, generated disrespect, right? So, can we agree that a dictator committing genocide is a tad more disrespectful than bumping into someone on the street or looking at some guy's girl wrong? Furthermore, helping to define things are the responses to actual disrespect and perceived disrespect. However, responding with murder to either should pretty much be considered out of line. I get that at some points in time there were societal norms that allowed for such things but those same societies also allowed for other things we have long since outlawed. Thus, a bit of a stretch to use Burr-Hamilton as some have. So, what you describe above is an accurate statement. But to counter, I am not likely to perceive Richard Sherman as part of the following gangs: Latin Kings, Triads, Sicilian Mafia, Irish Mob, etc. Why? Because his physical features do not put him in those groups. So, the most likely comparison would be to a gang that matches his physical description. There are certainly common traits among gangs and gangs may well be full of thugs. I can summarize my views on race fairly succinctly. It's a physical trait, nothing more. As a black friend of mine growing up once said, there are (insert any slur you'd like) of every color. The ****** of one color do as much harm to the rest of their race as do the ****** of another color (I inserted the asterisks). He would be insulted when called that, not because of his color, but because of the representation that he was associated with that ***** of his color. I feel sorry for anyone who feels that any physical trait implies that a group sharing that trait is somehow inferior to others. Especially when it is a trait that has no practical meaning. It's like discriminating on hair or eye color. (don't go there). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.