Clippers owner, known democrat contributor, makes racist comment

Another lefty bigot...

I haven't been a member for 7 days, so I can't post a link. Go to TMZ, or simply do a google search.
This is from TMZ:

L.A. Clippers owner Donald Sterling told his GF he does NOT want her bringing black people to his games ... including Magic Johnson ... and it's ALL on tape.TMZ Sports has obtained audio of Sterling making the racist declaration during a heated argument on April 9th with V. Stiviano ... after she posted a photo on Instagram posing with Magic. Sterling rails on Stiviano -- who ironically is black and Mexican -- for putting herself out in public with a black person (she has since taken the pic down). But it doesn't end there. You have to listen to the audio to fully grasp the magnitude of Sterling's racist worldview. Among the comments:-- "It bothers me a lot that you want to broadcast that you’re associating with black people. Do you have to?" (3:30) -- "You can sleep with [black people]. You can bring them in, you can do whatever you want. The little I ask you is not to promote it on that ... and not to bring them to my games." (5:15)-- "I’m just saying, in your lousy f******* Instagrams, you don’t have to have yourself with, walking with black people." (7:45)-- "...Don't put him [Magic] on an Instagram for the world to have to see so they have to call me. And don't bring him to my games." (9:13)Sterling has a documented history of allegedly racist behavior -- he's been sued twice by the federal government for allegedly refusing to rent apartments to Blacks and Latinos. He was also sued by former Clippers exec Elgin Baylor for racial discrimination -- though a jury was ultimately not convinced and shot down Baylor's case. Sterling has been separated from his wife Shelly for years. She remains a key player in running the team and sources tell us she's "mortified" by Sterling's comments.We have made several calls to Sterling and his people ... so far, no word back. Magic – ‘He’s Shameful’ Jesse Jackson indignant (audio) Meek Mill – ‘Definition of Racism’ Olbermann – Clips Should Boycott Ex-NBA Player – Gut Check Time for CP3

Well hell, better scrap the whole leftist movement, huh?

Rocinante wrote:Well hell, better scrap the whole leftist movement, huh?

Although I wouldn't oppose that, that was not the intent of the thread. It's just another example that debunks the leftist idea that bigots are strictly from the right.

Wow, I though all left leaning people were awesome and all right leaning people were assholes. What a fool I've been!!!

Rocinante wrote:Wow, I though all left leaning people were awesome and all right leaning people were assholes. What a fool I've been!!!

My bad, I didn't mean to paint with such a wide brush. How liberal of me!

Does this mean that racism is not dead? Does this mean the SCOTUS has underestimated the prevalence of racism in some of its more recent decisions?

Turtleneck wrote:Does this mean that racism is not dead? Does this mean the SCOTUS has underestimated the prevalence of racism in some of its more recent decisions?

Racism will never and has never been dead. It's been a constant throughout human history. Trying to give people an advantage with regards to admittance into college is just a perpetuation of racism in a different brand.

xsanguine wrote:

Racism will never and has never been dead. It's been a constant throughout human history. Trying to give people an advantage with regards to admittance into college is just a perpetuation of racism in a different brand.

But that is not the only time they have waded into the race issue in the past year. In last summers Voting Rights Act decision, Roberts stated that "our country has changed," which was an important part of the majority opinion.

However, in all fairness, in the Voting Rights Act decision the Court did not strike down the rationale of the section in question, and said Congress was welcome to take up the issue if it so desired. Also, in the recent decision about Michigan's ban on race-based preferences, they based much of their decision on not wanting to overturn the preferences of Michigan voters.

Turtleneck wrote:

But that is not the only time they have waded into the race issue in the past year. In last summers Voting Rights Act decision, Roberts stated that "our country has changed," which was an important part of the majority opinion.

However, in all fairness, in the Voting Rights Act decision the Court did not strike down the rationale of the section in question, and said Congress was welcome to take up the issue if it so desired. Also, in the recent decision about Michigan's ban on race-based preferences, they based much of their decision on not wanting to overturn the preferences of Michigan voters.

That's what happens when they've stuck their nose in it since the beginning.

Pervis Muldoon wrote:

The results are what matters.  Affirmative action programs have led to greater representation for minorities and women in colleges and in the workplace.  I don't see how that's a bad thing.

When it comes at the expense of more qualified applications... simply because of their skin color...

That's the bad thing.

xsanguine wrote:

When it comes at the expense of more qualified applications... simply because of their skin color...

That's the bad thing.

In my experience that has happened exactly 0 times.

Please regale us with all the anecdotal evidence you have that unqualified minorities were given jobs over qualified white folks.

I'll hang up and listen.

Rocinante wrote:

In my experience that has happened exactly 0 times.
.

So, because it hasn't happened in your little world, that means it doesn't happen elsewhere?

Rocinante wrote:

In my experience that has happened exactly 0 times.

Please regale us with all the anecdotal evidence you have that unqualified minorities were given jobs over qualified white folks.

I'll hang up and listen.

?

There are laws on the books that gives an applicant extra credit simply because of the color of their skin that an individual with a certain skin color cannot obtain. That is not right.

Youngblood 96 wrote:Another lefty bigot...

I haven't been a member for 7 days, so I can't post a link.  Go to TMZ, or simply do a google search.
This is from TMZ:

L.A. Clippers owner Donald Sterling told his GF he does NOT want her bringing black people to his games ... including Magic Johnson ... and it's ALL on tape.TMZ Sports has obtained audio of Sterling making the racist declaration during a heated argument on April 9th with V. Stiviano ... after she posted a photo on Instagram posing with Magic. Sterling rails on Stiviano -- who ironically is black and Mexican -- for putting herself out in public with a black person (she has since taken the pic down).  But it doesn't end there.  You have to listen to the audio to fully grasp the magnitude of Sterling's racist worldview. Among the comments:-- "It bothers me a lot that you want to broadcast that you’re associating with black people. Do you have to?" (3:30) -- "You can sleep with [black people]. You can bring them in, you can do whatever you want.  The little I ask you is not to promote it on that ... and not to bring them to my games." (5:15)-- "I’m just saying, in your lousy f******* Instagrams, you don’t have to have yourself with, walking with black people." (7:45)-- "...Don't put him [Magic] on an Instagram for the world to have to see so they have to call me.  And don't bring him to my games." (9:13)Sterling has a documented history of allegedly racist behavior -- he's been sued twice by the federal government for allegedly refusing to rent apartments to Blacks and Latinos. He was also sued by former Clippers exec Elgin Baylor for racial discrimination -- though a jury was ultimately not convinced and shot down Baylor's case.  Sterling has been separated from his wife Shelly for years.  She remains a key player in running the team and sources tell us she's "mortified" by Sterling's comments.We have made several calls to Sterling and his people ... so far, no word back. Magic – ‘He’s Shameful’ Jesse Jackson indignant (audio) Meek Mill – ‘Definition of Racism’ Olbermann – Clips Should Boycott Ex-NBA Player – Gut Check Time for CP3

But what are his views on gays?

So I'll take that as a you can't give me any evidence and you're just paranoid. Cool.

Michigan's anti-AA law just got upheld by the supreme court, btw, so keep lashing out against nothing.

Pervis Muldoon wrote:

You saw a thread about an old white guy who doesn't like his girlfriend hanging out with minorities...and you jumped in to bitch about affirmative action.  That's pretty funny.

You know what's more funny? The fact you couldn't read back to see that I was responding to someone else's post regarding affirmative action.

Just curious but why do you have to be a dick to people that have a different opinion than you?

Pervis Muldoon wrote:

I'm just pointing out that your main concern about racism is that white people might lose out on opportunities because of affirmative action.  After seeing quotes from a guy who doesn't want his girlfriend bringing black people to his team's games, you said, "That is not right." - and you were referring to affirmative action.  It's comical how one-sided your perspective is.

You called me an asshole a few days ago, when I was respectfully disagreeing with you, and now you're calling me a dick.  I don't mind being called names, but when you're calling people dicks and assholes, you shouldn't be so sensitive.

Yes, someone made reference to the affirmative action ruling... so I responded. If he wasn't looking for a response to that, he wouldn't have included it.

You were disagreeing with me, certainly... respectfully, however, no. So when you're acting like an asshole/dick for no apparent reason, I'm going to ask you why.

Pervis Muldoon wrote:
It's comical how one-sided your perspective is.

The irony here is what is comical.

Pervis Muldoon wrote:

The results are what matters.  Affirmative action programs have led to greater representation for minorities and women in colleges and in the workplace.  I don't see how that's a bad thing.

Not a single minority or woman student with grades and test scores good enough to be considered for admission to U-M or MSU, would have any difficulty being accepted at some other college if they didn't get accepted here. So nope - AA doesn't increase minority representation at colleges, it only changes very slightly which colleges they are accepted at. Total fail on your part. New board - same Pervis stupidity.  

Anyone else find the irony that the old man is dating/banging (ok, maybe fingerbanging) a black latino?

Pervis Muldoon wrote:

See, xsanguine, even Bullwrinkle says white people aren't harmed by affirmative action.  If their test scores are good enough, they can just go to a different college.  Thanks, Bullwrinkle!

Nope, never said any such thing. Anytime a more qualified individual is passed over in favor of a less qualified individual, harm is involved to that individual. That's what discrimination is all about. Pervis is there any chance you are going to up your game over here, or will you just continue to be a blithering idiot?

Pervis Muldoon wrote:

So if black people can't get into their school of choice, no harm done - but if it happens to a white person, that's harmful.

Why am I not surprised?

If a more qualified black applicant is passed over for a less qualified applicant - white, black, green etc.... then harm is done. If a more qualified white applicant is passed over for a less qualified applicant - black, white, green etc... then harm is done. Try to follow along here Pervis. There are so few concepts you can grasp, but discrimination should be one of them.

Pervis Muldoon wrote:

Please share some information about the white people who've been passed over in favor of less-qualified minorities.  Maybe I'll be able to join you in your outrage.  Thanks in advance!

Well, I'm pretty sure this is why Affirmative Action was banned. Reverse racism is frowned upon...imagine that.

Pervis Muldoon wrote:

I can see by this thread that some of you only like good ol' regular racism.

It's pretty clear that's the only racism you choose to recognize.

Pervis Muldoon wrote:

You only seem to care when it happens to white people, and you apparently think it happens a lot.  Please share some information about the white people who've been passed over in favor of less-qualified minorities.  Maybe I'll be able to join you in your outrage.  Thanks in advance!

You constantly post what you think I think. Just ask and I'll tell you, that way you won't be wrong all the time. I care whenever someone is wrongly discriminated against, anytime the most qualified person is passed over because the conditions of his/her birth weren't correct to fill a quota. You on the other hand are only concerned when this happens to a minority, why is that?

Pervis Muldoon wrote:

You only seem to care when it happens to white people, and you apparently think it happens a lot.  Please share some information about the white people who've been passed over in favor of less-qualified minorities.  Maybe I'll be able to join you in your outrage.  Thanks in advance!

Dude you just don't get it. It's a two way street for who harm may come to- minorities or whites. The point has been clearly laid out for you that spots should be awarded to the highest qualified applicants. You know, a more highly qualified white candidate defeating a minority candidate is not racism nor is the reverse. Just letting you know.

Pervis Muldoon wrote:

Feel free to pass along some stories about white people being passed over for less-qualified minorities.  I asked Bullwrinkle, but he has decided not to provide any.  

She has a story....

Rocinante wrote:Wow, I though all left leaning people were awesome and all right leaning people were assholes. What a fool I've been!!!

I totally agree, you've been a fool.

Pervis Muldoon wrote:

Here's a famous study from a decade ago...

From July 2001 to May 2002, Bertrand and Mullainathan sent fictitious resumes in response to 1,300 help-wanted ads listed in the Boston Globe and the Chicago Tribune. They used the callback rate for interviews to measure the success of each resume. Approximately 5,000 resumes were sent for positions in sales, administrative support, clerical services, and customer service. Jobs ranged from a cashier at a store to the manager of sales at a large firm.

The catch was that the authors manipulated the perception of race via the name of each applicant, with comparable credentials for each racial group. Each resume was randomly assigned either a very white-sounding name (Emily Walsh, Brendan Baker) or a very African-American-sounding name (Lakisha Washington, Jamal Jones).

The authors find that applicants with white-sounding names are 50 percent more likely to get called for an initial interview than applicants with African-American-sounding names. Applicants with white names need to send about 10 resumes to get one callback, whereas applicants with African-American names need to send about 15 resumes to achieve the same result.

Does this indicate a possible problem in our society?  Let me know what you think.

Yes there is racism in our society and it is a problem. Just like there is racism and discrimination in virtually every society today and has been since the beginning of recorded history. So thanks for stating the obvious. But your "solution" to this problem of having the government mandate racism has just been rightfully rejected by the SCOTUS. So accept reality and ponder what might be a better solution to eliminating racism. Perhaps rigorous enforcement of the extensive anti-discrimination laws already on the books? We have an African-American POTUS and Attorney General, so they must be rigorously enforcing them. Why don't you let us know how they're doing with that?