OT: Donald Sterling

Dback Jon

Killer Snail
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
May 14, 2002
Posts
80,233
Reaction score
39,103
Location
Scottsdale
I'd be curious to see a link to the above.

One of his milder quotes:

When HIV first came out, President Reagan formed a commission and I was honored to be on that commission. I listened to 300 witnesses tell us that it was every body else’s fault but their own. Nothing to do with their conduct, just that the government didn’t fix this disease. At the end of that I put in the document, it was the conclusion document from the commission, that actions have consequences and you are responsible for yours. AIDS is a disease people gain because of their actions. It wasn’t like cancer. We all made the exceptions for how you got it, by accident, that was all solved a long time ago. That’s when they started hanging me in effigy because I wasn’t sympathetic to all their requests for special treatment. Because at that time it was always someone else’s fault. I said, you are responsible for your actions too, you know. Conduct yourself properly, which is a pretty solid Christian principle.
http://griid.org/2012/11/27/aids-and-activism-part-ii-reagan-devos-and-the-1980s-crisis/

I will look for his more damning statements.

DeVos got his spot on the committee to appease the religious right, led by Jerry Falwell - who stated:


“AIDS is not just God’s punishment for homosexuals, It is God’s punishment for a society that tolerates homosexuals.”


If you have read "And the Band Played On", you will understand the animosity that exists towards DeVos, and Reagan and his cabal.
 

Cheesebeef

ASFN IDOL
Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2003
Posts
90,244
Reaction score
65,401
One of his milder quotes:

When HIV first came out, President Reagan formed a commission and I was honored to be on that commission. I listened to 300 witnesses tell us that it was every body else’s fault but their own. Nothing to do with their conduct, just that the government didn’t fix this disease. At the end of that I put in the document, it was the conclusion document from the commission, that actions have consequences and you are responsible for yours. AIDS is a disease people gain because of their actions. It wasn’t like cancer. We all made the exceptions for how you got it, by accident, that was all solved a long time ago. That’s when they started hanging me in effigy because I wasn’t sympathetic to all their requests for special treatment. Because at that time it was always someone else’s fault. I said, you are responsible for your actions too, you know. Conduct yourself properly, which is a pretty solid Christian principle.
http://griid.org/2012/11/27/aids-and-activism-part-ii-reagan-devos-and-the-1980s-crisis/

I will look for his more damning statements.

DeVos got his spot on the committee to appease the religious right, led by Jerry Falwell - who stated:


“AIDS is not just God’s punishment for homosexuals, It is God’s punishment for a society that tolerates homosexuals.”


If you have read "And the Band Played On", you will understand the animosity that exists towards DeVos, and Reagan and his cabal.

yeah...the idea that those people were asking for "special treatment" in regards to getting AIDS funding is pretty disgusting.
 

devilalum

Heavily Redacted
Joined
Jul 30, 2002
Posts
16,776
Reaction score
3,187
Has Sterling filed his law suit against the NBA yet?
Am I the only one who believes this is just the beginning?
 

Mainstreet

Cruisin' Mainstreet
Supporting Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2003
Posts
114,665
Reaction score
54,539
Has Sterling filed his law suit against the NBA yet?
Am I the only one who believes this is just the beginning?

I agree. No way this is over unless Sterling wants it to be over.
 

Matt L

formerly known as mattyboy
Joined
Sep 14, 2002
Posts
4,380
Reaction score
589
Location
Phoenix, Arizona
Has Sterling filed his law suit against the NBA yet?
Am I the only one who believes this is just the beginning?

Based on the following on ESPN.COM:

Q: Sterling is notoriously litigious. Can he go to court to stop Silver from punishing him?

A: Not effectively. When Silver issues his punishment to Sterling, the decision is final. The constitution provides in Paragraph 24(m) that a commissioner's decision shall be "final, binding, and conclusive" and shall be as final as an award of arbitration. It is almost impossible to find a judge in the United States judicial system who would set aside an award of arbitration. Sterling can file a lawsuit, but he would face a humiliating defeat early in the process. There is no antitrust theory or principle that would help him against Silver and the NBA. He could claim an antitrust violation, for example, if he were trying to move his team to a different market. But under the terms of the NBA constitution, he has no chance to succeed in litigation over punishment.


I don't think Silver can sue to keep his team if the other owner's vote him out of the league. That said, there is no guarantee they get the votes. I think it will be interesting to see what happens but it doesn't sound like suing the commissioner/league is really an option.

Here is the full link:
http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/10852199/challenge-donald-sterling
 
Last edited:

BillsCarnage

ASFN Addict
Joined
Dec 2, 2005
Posts
5,827
Reaction score
1,197
Location
The Flip Side
Has Sterling filed his law suit against the NBA yet?
Am I the only one who believes this is just the beginning?
I'd be surprised if he does. I doesn't really serve a purpose and there's not much to gain from it besides losing money. Though, I curious how the NBA can force him to sell the team. I guess if he really wanted to get back at the NBA he could fold the team, but I'm not sure who actually "owns" the rights to the Clippers - him or the NBA?

At his age, as mentioned, he's better off selling the team, pocketing the money and retiring from sports. Get out of the light.
 

Bert

Walkin' on Sunshine
LEGACY MEMBER
Joined
Oct 16, 2008
Posts
10,139
Reaction score
3,234
Location
Arizona
Lol people playing the first amendment card.

The first amendment gives you free speech. Nowhere in the amendment does it say you are free from consequences of any type based on the things you say.

If you tell your boss to go have intercourse with a donkey, chances are you are going to get fired. You have the right to say it, he cant put you in jail, but he has the right to fire you.

This guy, as all the owners did, signed a contract with the NBA as all the players do which states they will refrain from conduct detrimental to the league. It's not like the man was strung up and hung in town square, he's being punished because the things he said are DAMAGING the NBA.

Give me a freaking break with the first amendment on this one. Yep, we all have the right to be *******s but there are consequences for doing so whether you like it or not, as there should be. I'm sick of people using the constitution as an excuse to cry anytime they get called on being a disgusting excuse for a human being.
 
Last edited:

Cheesebeef

ASFN IDOL
Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2003
Posts
90,244
Reaction score
65,401
for all the talk of "illegal taping" by those who seemingly want to find a weird excuse for Sterling, can anyone here tell me why he hasn't filed a lawsuit against this woman yet? There were TMZ people on the radio yesterday saying what they know is that Sterling is a bit Nixon-esque and that he TOLD people (specifically his girlfriend who also moonlit as a sometime assistant) to tape everything he says because...well...he's insane, I guess.

I mean, people keeping dropping the illegality of the taping without even knowing if it was illegal taping.
 

KloD

ASFN Icon
Joined
Dec 31, 2002
Posts
10,374
Reaction score
1
Location
Portland, OR
for all the talk of "illegal taping" by those who seemingly want to find a weird excuse for Sterling, can anyone here tell me why he hasn't filed a lawsuit against this woman yet? There were TMZ people on the radio yesterday saying what they know is that Sterling is a bit Nixon-esque and that he TOLD people (specifically his girlfriend who also moonlit as a sometime assistant) to tape everything he says because...well...he's insane, I guess.

I mean, people keeping dropping the illegality of the taping without even knowing if it was illegal taping.

I've mentioned it being illegal because California has a two party consent law in recording conversations. Yes, I do not know if Sterling gave his consent to be recorded, but that's because I find it incredibly hard to believe he did. So you are right, I do not know if it was illegal, but I highly suspect it was. FYI (LINK)

Anyway, this whole thing, from all directions is disturbing to me. Such hypocrisy all over and it's just so damn disturbing to me. I think I need to walk away and let it go.
 

Buckybird

Hoist the Lombardi Trophy
Joined
Nov 11, 2002
Posts
25,242
Reaction score
6,108
Location
Dallas, TX
Hats off to Silver & the NBA on this decision!!! Sterling losing that team was the only real answer to his distasteful ignorant remarks. :notworthy::notworthy::notworthy:

I'm curious to see if Sterlings wife attends the game tonight or future games. I know she blasted his comments in the media, but IMO she might be putting herself at risk attending Clipper or any other NBA games. I wonder if the league has the power to keep his whole family away from the league?
 

Catlover

Hall of Famer
Joined
Oct 12, 2010
Posts
1,887
Reaction score
1
Location
California
Hats off to Silver & the NBA on this decision!!! Sterling losing that team was the only real answer to his distasteful ignorant remarks. :notworthy::notworthy::notworthy:

I'm curious to see if Sterlings wife attends the game tonight or future games. I know she blasted his comments in the media, but IMO she might be putting herself at risk attending Clipper or any other NBA games. I wonder if the league has the power to keep his whole family away from the league?

That doesn't seem like punishing one person for the actions of another?
 

desertdawg

ASFN Icon
BANNED BY MODERATORS
Joined
Sep 1, 2010
Posts
21,831
Reaction score
1
Location
@Desertdawg777
Props to the commish, now that's how you handle that in this day and age. I do wish he would have said (while describing the depth of the ban) that he didn't even want Sterling looking at the stadium when driving by it. He was cheating on his Lady, when stuff like this happens I ask myself who was mad at the person being roasted... a woman can be a very dangerous enemy.
 

desertdawg

ASFN Icon
BANNED BY MODERATORS
Joined
Sep 1, 2010
Posts
21,831
Reaction score
1
Location
@Desertdawg777
I've mentioned it being illegal because California has a two party consent law in recording conversations. Yes, I do not know if Sterling gave his consent to be recorded, but that's because I find it incredibly hard to believe he did. So you are right, I do not know if it was illegal, but I highly suspect it was. FYI (LINK)

Anyway, this whole thing, from all directions is disturbing to me. Such hypocrisy all over and it's just so damn disturbing to me. I think I need to walk away and let it go.
For it to be admissible in court, I think the party must know about the recording. But it was already heard by millions and the NBA just can't have that, it has to protect it's self and distance it's self from any recording like this that has already gone viral.
 

Hoop Head

ASFN Icon
Joined
Feb 4, 2005
Posts
16,650
Reaction score
11,755
Location
Tempe, AZ
One thing I'm surprised hasn't come up here yet is how quick Sarver backed Silver's punishment to Sterling. I saw it mentioned in an ESPN article discussing what the punishment was going to be and it was mentioned how Sarver already commented that he will be voting Sterling out. I thought it was interesting that he spoke up so quick, given that he hasn't said anything up until now about the whole debacle. I wonder if it was purely PR based to get his comment out first in hopes to repair his own image and help the Suns lure free agents this summer since the past few years rep has hurt Phoenix more than helped.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/apr/29/suns-owner-expresses-full-support-for-silver/
 

Cheesebeef

ASFN IDOL
Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2003
Posts
90,244
Reaction score
65,401
One thing I'm surprised hasn't come up here yet is how quick Sarver backed Silver's punishment to Sterling. I saw it mentioned in an ESPN article discussing what the punishment was going to be and it was mentioned how Sarver already commented that he will be voting Sterling out. I thought it was interesting that he spoke up so quick, given that he hasn't said anything up until now about the whole debacle. I wonder if it was purely PR based to get his comment out first in hopes to repair his own image and help the Suns lure free agents this summer since the past few years rep has hurt Phoenix more than helped.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/apr/29/suns-owner-expresses-full-support-for-silver/

for all his warts, Sarver has a pretty big bleeding heart apparently. I never knew this, but back in the 2010 WCF, right when Prop 1070 passed, Sarver had the Suns wear their Los Suns uniforms during the game to make a statement. I actually remember them wearing the uni's and always being confused as to why they were wearing them, but after reading an article about this today, it made more sense.
 

Bert

Walkin' on Sunshine
LEGACY MEMBER
Joined
Oct 16, 2008
Posts
10,139
Reaction score
3,234
Location
Arizona
One thing I'm surprised hasn't come up here yet is how quick Sarver backed Silver's punishment to Sterling. I saw it mentioned in an ESPN article discussing what the punishment was going to be and it was mentioned how Sarver already commented that he will be voting Sterling out. I thought it was interesting that he spoke up so quick, given that he hasn't said anything up until now about the whole debacle. I wonder if it was purely PR based to get his comment out first in hopes to repair his own image and help the Suns lure free agents this summer since the past few years rep has hurt Phoenix more than helped.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/apr/29/suns-owner-expresses-full-support-for-silver/

Yes like Cheese said Sarver has never been shy about voicing his opinion on these matters. Love him or hate him for it, he made no bones about his opposition to 1070 and he was consistent on this topic with his swift response.

If people think that's a marketing ploy explain to me how, in Arizona, where 1070 was overwhelmingly favored by the public, (especially the demographic that goes to NBA games) how does that favor the team from a PR standpoint?

Same for this, Arizona does not have a huge African American population nor are it's citizens known for being bleeding heart racially sensitive folks, so I really see no evidence to support your question of whether or not it's a PR move. I think he was being genuine.
 

sunsfan88

ASFN Icon
BANNED BY MODERATORS
Joined
Feb 1, 2010
Posts
11,660
Reaction score
844
This league is so much better off without him.

I liked what Silver said when asked about it being recorded in a personal conversation..."It doesn't matter, it represents his views now".
 

Hoop Head

ASFN Icon
Joined
Feb 4, 2005
Posts
16,650
Reaction score
11,755
Location
Tempe, AZ
Yes like Cheese said Sarver has never been shy about voicing his opinion on these matters. Love him or hate him for it, he made no bones about his opposition to 1070 and he was consistent on this topic with his swift response.

If people think that's a marketing ploy explain to me how, in Arizona, where 1070 was overwhelmingly favored by the public, (especially the demographic that goes to NBA games) how does that favor the team from a PR standpoint?

Same for this, Arizona does not have a huge African American population nor are it's citizens known for being bleeding heart racially sensitive folks, so I really see no evidence to support your question of whether or not it's a PR move. I think he was being genuine.

I didn't know about his past in regards to being outspoken against SB 1070 but I don't see how you can't see the possible spin to make him look better. Maybe saying "PR spin" was the wrong way to put it because it's not so much meant to effect the way the public, in Phoenix or nationally, but to look positive to the rest of the league, the players and personnel. His reputation inside the league itself wasn't really positive. Since he is getting in front of this as being an outspoken owner against Sterling it could make the view of him amongst other players more positive. I know Cuban spoke out but not in the same way Sarver did and Cuban always voices his opinion, Jordan did also but as the only black majority owner in the NBA that was expected.

We all know Sarver has spotty reputation with the fans in Phoenix and his history didn't only rub fans the wrong way it did the same to players. It's been mentioned before that players and other owners looked at the Suns negatively because of Sarver. His history of bottom line driven moves, sideline antics, and also his involvement in the last CBA/Lockout was all viewed negatively. Him stepping to the plate like this could help repair his reputation and image with players, other owners, and league personnel. However since he has taken a stance against SB 1070 and has a history of standing against racial injustice I don't think this was done for the sole purpose of currying favor with other players in the league.
 

sunsfan88

ASFN Icon
BANNED BY MODERATORS
Joined
Feb 1, 2010
Posts
11,660
Reaction score
844
Proud of Sarver for taking a strong position against this.
 

sunsfan88

ASFN Icon
BANNED BY MODERATORS
Joined
Feb 1, 2010
Posts
11,660
Reaction score
844
NBA Constitution Excerpt On Termination Of Ownership
Apr 29, 2014 6:38 PM EDT


The NBA has released a copy of their Constitution and By-Laws to the media:

The following are the excerpted portions pertaining to the termination of ownership that the NBA will pursue in regards to Donald Sterling and the Los Angeles Clippers.

----

ARTICLE 13

TERMINATION OF OWNERSHIP OR MEMBERSHIP

The Membership of a Member or the interest of any Owner may be terminated by a vote of three fourths (3/4) of the Board of Governors if the Member or Owner shall do or suffer any of the following:

(a) Willfully violate any of the provisions of the Constitution and By-Laws, resolutions, or agreements of the Association.

(b) Transfer or attempt to transfer a Membership or an interest in a Member without complying with the provisions of Article 5.

(c) Fail to pay any dues or other indebtedness owing to the Association within thirty (30) days after Written Notice from the Commissioner of default in such payment.

(d) Fail or refuse 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. (e) Wager or countenance wagering by its officers or employees on any game in which a Team operated by a Member of the Association participates.

(f) Willfully permit open betting, pool selling, or any other form of gambling upon any premises owned, leased, or otherwise controlled by the Member or an Owner, except, subject to Article 8(a), for gambling activities that are lawful in the applicable jurisdiction and do not involve in any way, directly or indirectly, gambling with respect to any aspect of the Association’s games, events, property, players, or other personnel.

(g) Offer, agree, conspire, or attempt to lose or control the score of any game participated in by a Team operated by a Member of the Association, or fail to suspend immediately any officer or any Player or other employee of the Member who shall be found guilty, in a court of law or in any hearing sanctioned by this Constitution and By- Laws, of offering, agreeing, conspiring, or attempting to lose or control the score of any such game or of being interested in any pool or wager on any game in which a Team operated by a Member of the Association participates.

(h) Disband its Team during the Season, dissolve its business, or cease its operation.

(i) Willfully fail to present its Team at the time and place it is scheduled to play in an Exhibition, Regular Season, or Playoff Game.

(j) Willfully misrepresent any material fact contained in its application for Membership in the Association.

ARTICLE 14
PROCEDURE FOR TERMINATION

The Membership of a Member or the interest of any Owner shall be terminated on the occurrence of any of the events described in Article 13 by the following procedure:

(a) Any Member of the Association or the Commissioner may charge that a Member or Owner has violated one (1) or more of the provisions of Article 13. Said charge shall be made in Writing and shall be filed with the Commissioner, who shall, no later than three (3) business days after the charges are filed, cause a copy thereof to be served by a Writing upon the Member or Owner against whom such charges have been made. (b) The Member or Owner so charged shall, within five (5) days after receipt of the charges, file with the Commissioner its written answer thereto. The Commissioner shall thereupon transmit said charges and answer to each of the Governors of the Association and shall call a special meeting of the Governors to hear the charges, to be held on a date not more than ten (10) days after the filing of a Member’s or Owner’s answer, due notice to be given.

(c) Willful failure by a Member or Owner so charged to answer the charges during such five (5) day period or to appear at the hearing shall be deemed an admission by said Member or Owner of the total validity of the charges as presented.

(d) At such hearing, the Chairman of the Board of Governors shall be the presiding officer, except that if the Chairman of the Board of Governors represents either the complaining Member or the Member charged, then the Commissioner shall designate an alternate Chairman for purposes of the hearing.

(e) At the hearing, the Member or Owner so charged shall have the right to be represented by counsel. Strict rules of evidence shall not apply, and all relevant and material evidence submitted prior to and at the hearing may be received and considered.

(f) After duly considering all the evidence, the Board of Governors shall vote upon the proposition that the charges have been sustained in whole or in part. The affirmative vote of three-fourths (3/4) of all the Governors shall be required to sustain the charges.

(g) If, by a three-fourths (3/4) vote, the Board of Governors votes to sustain the charges, the Membership of the guilty Member or the Member in which the guilty Owner has an interest shall automatically be terminated, unless, following a motion duly made and seconded, two-thirds (2/3) of all the Governors vote instead to terminate the ownership interest of the guilty Owner or to invoke the provisions of Article 15. (h) Notwithstanding Article 14(g) above, in the case of a violation of Article 13 by an Owner who has an interest of ten percent (10%) or less in, and does not have effective control over, a Member, the Membership of such Member may not be terminated solely because of such Owner’s violation. In such case, if the charges are sustained against such Owner by a three-fourths (3/4) vote of the Board of Governors, the ownership interest of that Owner shall be automatically terminated unless, following a motion duly made and seconded, twothirds (2/3) of all the Governors vote to invoke the provisions of Article 15.

(i) If any Membership or interest of an Owner shall be terminated pursuant to this Article 14, the provisions of Article 14A shall apply.

(j) The decisions of the Association made in accordance with the foregoing procedure shall be final, binding, and conclusive, and each Member and Owner waives any and all recourse to any court of law to review any such decision.

ARTICLE 14A
CONSEQUENCES OF TERMINATION

(a) When the Membership of a Member is terminated, such Member and its assets, properties and operations shall be placed under the management and control of the Commissioner, who shall have the following powers: to cause the Member’s Team to continue to play its Exhibition, Regular Season, and Playoff Games; to collect all revenues from every source payable to the Member and apply such revenues, to the extent available, to the payment of such Member’s debts and obligations; and, as directed by a majority of the Board of Governors (the Member whose Membership was terminated not being considered a Member of the Board of Governors for the purposes of this Article), either to transfer such Member’s Membership (including its Player Contracts and other assets) in accordance with and subject to Article 5 or to liquidate the Player Contracts and other assets of the Member in an orderly manner in the best interests of the Member and its creditors, and the Association, in each case at such prices and on such terms as the Commissioner shall deem reasonable and appropriate.

(b) When the interest of any Owner is terminated, that interest shall, unless the Commissioner has approved an alternative arrangement, be placed under the management and control of the Commissioner, who shall have the power to exercise all of the rights otherwise exercisable by the Owner of that interest, including, but not limited to, any management or voting rights and the right to transfer all or any portion of that interest in accordance with and subject to Article 5 at such prices and on such terms as the Commissioner shall deem reasonable and appropriate.

(c) All proceeds from any transfer of a Member’s Membership or the liquidation of its Player Contracts and other assets, or of an Owner’s interest in a Member, shall be applied first to discharge the liabilities and obligations to all creditors of the Member (or Owner), including the Association and its Members but excluding any Owner of the Member, second to discharge the liabilities and obligations to any Owner of the Member, and any balance shall be remitted to the Member (or Owner). The existence or implementation of this Article 14A shall not impose upon the Association or any of its Members any requirement to provide funds to any Member (or Owner) or any liability for any debts or obligations of any Member (or Owner). ARTICLE 15
ALTERNATIVES TO TERMINATION

If a charge that a Member or Owner has committed any of the offenses described in Article 13 is sustained, two-thirds (2/3) of all the Governors may waive the remedy of termination, and instead direct the Member or Owner to pay a stated fine in a stipulated manner and by a stipulated date, which fine may be required to be paid, in whole or in part, to any other Member or Members as compensation to such Member or Members for damages sustained by it or them by reason of such act or acts of omission or commission by such offending Member or Owner. Such fine shall be payable within five (5) days after its imposition. Moreover, the Board of Governors may, in its discretion, either in addition to, or in lieu of, such fine, direct the forfeiture of the offending Member’s Draft rights.
Things are about to get real interesting if Sterling wants to fight against this & remain as owner...
 

SunsTzu

ASFN Lifer
Joined
Aug 28, 2003
Posts
4,838
Reaction score
1,625
for all his warts, Sarver has a pretty big bleeding heart apparently. I never knew this, but back in the 2010 WCF, right when Prop 1070 passed, Sarver had the Suns wear their Los Suns uniforms during the game to make a statement. I actually remember them wearing the uni's and always being confused as to why they were wearing them, but after reading an article about this today, it made more sense.

It was a pretty big deal at the time, there was certainly a backlash when he made the decision.
 

BigRedRage

Reckless
Supporting Member
Joined
Mar 25, 2005
Posts
48,274
Reaction score
12,524
Location
SE valley
Funny thought this morning:

Sterling says something racist: banned for life.

Riley cooper yelling racist expletives: Shiny new contract.
 

Russ Smith

The Original Whizzinator
Supporting Member
Joined
May 14, 2002
Posts
86,208
Reaction score
36,330
for all the talk of "illegal taping" by those who seemingly want to find a weird excuse for Sterling, can anyone here tell me why he hasn't filed a lawsuit against this woman yet? There were TMZ people on the radio yesterday saying what they know is that Sterling is a bit Nixon-esque and that he TOLD people (specifically his girlfriend who also moonlit as a sometime assistant) to tape everything he says because...well...he's insane, I guess.

I mean, people keeping dropping the illegality of the taping without even knowing if it was illegal taping.

There was a story out that ESPN was talking about the other day that said Sterling thinks he's losing his memory due to age and routinely tapes conversations so he won't forget what was said. They suspect strongly that the tape was actually his tape, released by the woman.

So it may well be he DID know he was being taped, she just baited him into saying what he really thinks

and apparently the California statute requires CONSENT by both parties, not just they know it's being taped but they consent to it being taped. But if it was his tape that would imply consent from him.
 
Last edited:

Staff online

Forum statistics

Threads
547,388
Posts
5,350,967
Members
6,303
Latest member
Sunchaser
Top