DS: It's the world! You go to Israel, the blacks are just treated like dogs.

V: So do you have to treat them like that too?

DS: The white Jews, there's white Jews and black Jews, do you understand?

V: And are the black Jews less than the white Jews?

DS: A hundred percent, fifty, a hundred percent.

V: And is that right?

DS: It isn't a question—we don't evaluate what's right and wrong, we live in a society. We live in a culture. We have to live within that culture.

V: But shouldn't we take a stand for what's wrong? And be the change and the difference?

DS: I don't want to change the culture, because I can't. It's too big and too [unknown].

V: But you can change yourself.

DS: I don't want to change. If my girl can't do what I want, I don't want the girl. I'll find a girl that will do what I want! Believe me. I thought you were that girl—because I tried to do what you want. But you're not that girl.

But it doesn't matter if you're racist or not. You can think Sterling is a miserable old racist POS, and still think the media's glee in covering this story is unseemly and falsely sanctimonious.

Fly's playbook is to label people racist when they disagree with him, he's done it over and over again.

See now to me.. It's just the opposite, because: "He doth protest too much".

People like Flywf who are quick to label someone they don't even know a racist, are much more likely to be racist themselves, and are simply trying to cover it up through overreaction and over protestation. IOW, you can just feel the fear dripping ITT from people who are scared to death of expressing a dissenting view. Let me just pile on and call anyone and everyone who disagrees a racist. That'll prove I'm not racist!

Rather, it's the people who are sure that they don't hold bigoted thoughts, who are comfortable enough to have an open and free discussion about it without fear of what others think. I find this to be true whether it's race, sexual orientation, or any other sensitive subject being discussed. You can easily spot the people who are hiding their bigotry, by how far out of their way they go to accommodate the popular viewpoint.

Of course we should decry racism, but the media loves to cover these things as if we've caught America's most wanted. It's over the top. A guy saying something racist is barely news yet how many hours has the media devoted to it already?

The news media is racist in itself which makes it even more hypocritical. How many hours for ex. does the news media spend on a missing white girl vs. a black one? Or a murdered white person vs. black? Yet here they are covering this decrepit old moron, as if it's some sort of victory for US civil rights.

You could, but you'd still be more than halfway stupid for not understanding why this is a big deal that deserves the coverage it's getting.

Fly calls racists racists.

The thing is that bigots are stupid and think they can hide their bigotry behind stuff like say... accusations of media hypocrisy.

You think that I'm about to be out of line when I do this epic soul read on you and say that you're far more bothered by the media coverage because it's making you realize that your point of view isn't welcome in the conversation. I'm not calling you racist because I disagree with you, I'm calling you racist because I believe you to be a racist, because it's racists who make the arguments you're making.

The sad thing about being stupid is that you don't realize that other people can see through you, and that we've seen the playbook from which you are working in action before. I've been having these conversations on the internet for 15 years and y'all aren't getting any more sophisticated. (you're getting worse, because as society more strongly rejects your values, it gets harder and harder to make your argument without admitting it)

This absolutely is a victory. Maybe not for US civil rights, but certainly a victory against the idea that bigotry is ok and not a big deal. If one blames "political correctness" for this, then it's an argument for and not against political correctness.

can you politards start a politards thread on this in the politards forum and do all your politarding in there?

this is SE.

Always amazing when public outcry and boycotting are the right and proper solutions to racist businesses in the abstract, but as soon as that actually happens, now that's the tyranny of trial by public opinion.

When you're trying to hold yourself up as the paragon of intelligent debate, maybe don't let your entry point to the thread be "I haven't read any of this or understand anything, but here's my opinion." That's not how smart people actually interested in a meaningful conversation approach things.

'Cause absent the political talk this thread would be about how this impacts the Clipper's pick and roll and draft status?

I'm all for things being where they belong, but this topic is the intersection of politics and sports and this one happens to be more active. Don't see any good in stifling the conversation.

Yeah, thread is fine. Lestat not coming off good ITT, but isn't out of line.

It is the right thing. Let the public boycott the Clippers until his team becomes insolvent. Forcing him to sell now for a billion is doing him a favor. No ban or suspension just let him keep running his team,let the fans stop coming, no good players wanting to be there and see what he can get for it in 2 or 3 years.

That seems more like punishment for the team than Donald. No reason to punish the players and coaches and fans of the Clippers for 1 scumbag owner.

With Stiviano, is it V for Vendetta?

The league's goal is not the ruin and appropriate punishment of Donald Sterling. The league's goal was to get rid of Donald Sterling for a variety of moral and financial reasons. (had they not, it appears very likely we wouldn't have had basketball games player last night, so let's see how your 2-3 plan works out).

If they hold off on acting wouldn't that just diminish the value of the entire product? IMO. it makes a lot of sense to act now for the short/long term of the league.

Also, yeah, I don't think people condemning Sterling think should be the last thing we do to combat racism?

There's this bizarre nonsense line going through here that because other people are also racist(true!) and because this isn't the most racist thing Sterling has ever done(also true!)... something?

Naw, man, **** Sterling. **** him for this recording, **** him for the other ****, who cares? He's a dip**** and not welcome in polite society. Al Capone's defense for tax evasion wasn't "lol you get me for this, but what about all the dudes I murdered? GOTCHA LIBRUL ACTIVIST JUDGES"

And if Sterling getting publicly and triumphantly shunned for being an unreconstructed white supremacist makes anyone uncomfortable because of how they want "open and free" discussion where they can share their "unique" and "dissenting" views about race without getting mocked for being a racist and stupid piece of ****(aka "trial of public opinion"), GOOD.

And the reason I'm not coming off good is why, exactly? Because I question whether this might not be an overreaction by the public and media over a single phone call? That makes me a bad guy and a racist?

What if I questioned the reaction to what's going on in the Ukraine right now? Would you automatically label me a war monger or pacifist? There are no gray areas or subjects open to inquiry in your world?

That would punish Clippers fans who waited so long for the team to get good.

In the actual world no, in the world of 2+2 forums yes.

lol at giving **** to lestat, might be the best poster in the thread

Looks like jason whitlock hit the issue spot on and you can see this mentality itt:

First, I'm not trying to hold myself up as the person you describe. Second, my comments were directed specifically at what I do know about.

His banishment and fine from the NBA was specifically due to this one incident! Nothing else! This came straight from the commissioner's mouth. He could have been a prior member of the Klu Klux Klan and it had nothing to do with what was imposed yesterday. That was made very clear in the press conference.

All I did was question whether this might have been severe given this single incident. If your problem is with why no one ever bothered to condemn him for his +30 years of racism, then go argue with someone else. That's not my issue.

I simply questioned the mob mentality to try and convict him publicly over this one isolated incident. The majority of this "mob" knows little of his past transgressions, yet they are willing to hang and ruin a guy over stupid stuff said during a private phone with a girlfriend.

I also stated that people have the right to hold an unpopular view. Obviously, people (as a mob) disagree with that? I find that scary, because I live in the USA. Where do you guys live? I thought N. Korea didn't have the internets.

You also should pay some attention to what I haven't said: I never said the guy wasn't a racist. I never said his views if true, weren't despicable. I never said he doesn't deserve everything he has coming to him for past transgressions.

Tax evasion is a crime. Being a closed-minded idiot isn't.

I'm surprised liberals of all people don't have any problem with this. The ACLU would likely be the first group to come to Sterling's legal defense. I guess the desire to see a racist get what he deserves trumps freedom of speech?

Because at the end of the day this is a person being punished for saying he doesn't like black people. It's a repugnant thing to say but we have to decide how much we want to punish thought crimes.

hey another person who doesn't understand freedom of speech