Showing posts with label Larry Edler. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Larry Edler. Show all posts
Tuesday, May 27, 2014
Saturday, May 3, 2014
 |
| NBA Commissioner Adam Silver |
By Larry Elder, May 3, 2014
History or just the tape? This
is not a trick question. It is a multiple choice with only two possible
answers.
Based on what NBA
commissioner Adam Silver said during
the press conference, why did he impose a $2.5 million fine and recommend a ban
of Sterling and a forced sale of the Clippers from their embattled owner Donald
Sterling?
Did Silver impose this
punishment:
A) because of this tape and
this tape only?
Or
B) because of Sterling’s
track record, including the offensive tape; two settlements with the housing
authorities over accusations of refusing to rent to blacks; lawsuit filed by former
general manager Elgin Baylor alleging wage and age discrimination; Sterling’s
demeaning treatment of employees and others both within and without the
Clippers and the NBA; and finally the cold, tightfisted way Sterling's run the
Clippers for most of his 33 years of ownership?
Pick one. Which was it? On
what did Silver say he based his
decision -- the tape or Sterling’s conduct during his 30+ years as owner?
Most people would probably say
B), that Silver urges a ban for an ownership tenure full of offensive actions
with the tape serving as the last straw, the final offense in a series of them.
Sterling certainly piled up
quite a track record. In a piece for Time Magazine -- written before Silver
imposed the ban -- former Laker great Kareem Abdul-Jabbar summarizes the most cited
and troubling issues:
“2006: U.S. Dept. of Justice sued Sterling for housing discrimination. Allegedly, he said, ‘Black tenants smell and attract vermin.’
“2009: [Sterling] reportedly paid $2.73 million in a Justice Dept. suit alleging he discriminated against blacks, Hispanics, and families with children in his rentals. (He also had to pay an additional nearly $5 million in attorneys fees and costs due to his counsel’s ‘sometimes outrageous conduct.’)
“2009: Clippers executive (and one of the greatest NBA players in history) sued for employment discrimination based on age and race.”
For the record, Baylor lost
his lawsuit -- a detail often omitted in the litany of Sterling's supposed
racism-revealing offenses.
This gets us back to the
tape. What did he say that was so
offensive? Smart people see different things in the same tape. But nearly all
have reached the same conclusion. The tape is slam-dunk, smoking gun, exhibit A
of Sterling’s “racism” -- confirmed by a long track record.
But a lot of smart people
are dead wrong. Again, what did Sterling say?
Of course, he said many things, including a strange dissertation on the treatment
of “black Jews” in Israel.
For example, I asked TMZ's
Harvey Levin the following question: Can you name the most egregious thing that
Don Sterling said in that tape? Levin said it was his “disdain.”
I repeated my question, what
were his "words" -- not
your interpretation of them. The most offensive “words”? Harvey eventually said, Sterling said he didn't want her
bringing Magic Johnson a game.
That’s it? Johnson, mind
you, was given permission from Sterling -- as he says on the tape -- to sleep
with his girlfriend. And Johnson can attend a game without Sterling’s
girlfriend. And Sterling never came close to saying he did not want blacks at
games. He just doesn’t want the
embarrassment of his friends telling him about it the next day. This may call
for a shrink -- or for remedial courses at Racism School -- but taking away his
team?
Meanwhile, media have collectively
agreed not to ask about the nature of Johnson’s friendship with Sterling’s
girlfriend. That’s too personal. But a
secretly recorded tape of someone in private quarters by an enemy/mistress -- no
worries.
I also put the question to
L.A. City Councilman Bernard Parks, a former LAPD chief. Provide us, I said,
with the most offensive words that Sterling uttered.
As with TMZ’s Levin, he summarized
what he thought were Sterling’s views
on the tape. As with Harvey, I demanded specifics. He finally described the
haughty way in which Sterling said, “I buy them” cars, clothing, houses etc.
A boss who expresses a
condescending attitude towards his employees is racist? Does it matter that two
of his 14 players are white. Does he not also buy their things, too?
For reasons unfair to
Sterling, these exculpatory passages from the recording are rarely mentioned:
V. Stiviano: What's wrong
with minorities? What's wrong with black people?
Sterling: Nothing, nothing.
Stiviano: What's wrong with
Hispanics?
Sterling: It's like talking
to an enemy. There's nothing wrong with minorities, they're fabulous. Fabulous.
Because you’re an enemy to me. …
Stiviano: You can’t even be
seen with someone in which is considered a different skin color.
Sterling: They can be with
me all day long and all night long. … I’m not a good person in your eyes. If I
was a good person, you wouldn’t say ‘I can’t believe’ this, ‘I can’t believe’
that -- which are all lies. I love the black people.
Before we look at Silver's
press conference transcript, we ask again.
Did Silver ban Sterling solely because of the offensive tape?
Or did Silver take action
based on Sterling’s “body of work” -- acts of offensive, demeaning and
"racist" behavior over a long tenure?
Here are the parts of Silver
press conference, in which he addresses how Silver reached his decision to ban
Sterling:
Silver: The views expressed by Mr. Sterling are deeply offensive and harmful; that they came from an NBA owner only heightens the damage and my personal outrage.
Silver: We stand together in condemning Mr. Sterling’s views. They simply have no place in the NBA.
Q: The word you used specifically was outrage. You said that you were personally outraged, yet many people believe that they are outraged that for years people have known that this man is a racist slumlord and the NBA hasn’t done anything until today. Can you please answer why?
Silver: I can’t speak to past actions other than to say that when specific evidence was brought to the NBA, we acted.
Q: Should someone lose their team for remarks shared in private, as this is a slippery slope?
Silver: Whether or not these remarks were initially shared in private, they are now public, and they represent his views
Q: [In] determining what the punishment would be, including the suggestion to the Board of Governors, did you take into account Mr. Sterling’s past behavior, or was it just based on this one particular incident?
Silver: In meting out this punishment, we did not take into account his past behavior [emphasis added]. When the board ultimately considers his overall fitness to be an owner in the NBA, they will take into account a lifetime of behavior.
Q: Just to be clear, you said when specific evidence was brought to the league you did act. In past cases, has Donald Sterling ever been fined or suspended for racial or offensive remarks, and if not, why not?
Silver: He’s never been suspended or fined by the league because while there have been well-documented rumors and cases filed, he was sued and the plaintiff lost the lawsuit. That was Elgin Baylor. There was a case brought by the Department of Justice in which ultimately Donald Sterling settled and there was no finding of guilt, and those are the only cases that have been brought to our attention. When those two litigations were brought, they were followed closely by the league office.
Q: Just a follow to that, one of the greatest players of all time, Elgin Baylor, accused Donald Sterling of running a plantation style franchise. Did that not concern you, and why was that not investigated? Despite the fact he lost the case, he has a prominent standing in the league and he said some very serious things.
Silver: It concerned us greatly. We followed the litigation closely, and ultimately Elgin Baylor did not prevail n that litigation [emphasis added].
As you can see, Silver
emphatically insists he reached his harsh decision based solely on what he heard on the tape. None of Sterling’s prior behavior
was a factor. Indeed, Silver defends the NBA’s prior lack of action against
Sterling by saying no one brought actionable leads. So Sterling’s record, as
far as the league is concerned, is clean.
The owners can, as Silver says,
use prior behavior in making their vote to kick Sterling out. But Silver’s
decision to fine and recommend a ban is just
based only on what Sterling said in the tape.
Again, listen to Sterling’s
words.
Sterling never says the
"n" word, speaks about his respect for Magic Johnson and even shrieks
"I love the black people." Stripping the conversation to its bones, we
are left with this. An old billionaire is jealous of Magic Johnson -- and
doesn’t want his girlfriend sitting next to him at games. She can sleep with Magic,
he tells her, in fact, she can sleep with anybody she wants, just don't
embarrass him:
“How about the -- how about
your whole life, every day, you could do whatever you want? You could sleep
with them. You could bring them in. You could do whatever you want. The little
I ask you is not to promote it on that, and not to bring them to my games.”
And for these Jerry Springer
outtakes Donald Sterling loses his team?
Follow Larry Elder on Twitter
"Like" Larry Elder on Facebook
Wednesday, April 30, 2014
 |
| "The Blind Leading the Blind" by Pieter Bruegel's 1568 |
Donald Sterling has spent the week being figuratively pummeled, disgraced, humiliated, scoffed, derided, shamed, dishonored, tarred, feathered, and run out of town. Or at least out of the NBA.
Said NBA has also put forth a not so polite request for the Los Angeles Clippers owner to pony up $2.5 million dollars for what he was clandestinely recorded saying by his supposed “mistress”.
But not everyone in the media has jumped aboard the Donald Sterling is the worst human being to ever walk the earth “ban” wagon.
In fact, Larry Elder, who hosts an afternoon drive show on KABC 790 in Los Angeles, told TMZ, Donald Sterling is getting “SCREWED” by the NBA, and that it’s actually Magic Johnson who blew the whole Sterling-is-a-racist thing out of proportion.
The African American libertarian, author, and radio personality, Elder, acknowledges Donald Sterling is a “dolt” and that Sterling has long said stupid and racist things, but that the current outcry against Sterling is that of “black and white victicrats” and those in the “racism industry” are making the most of Donald Sterling’s idiocy.
Elder has long railed against the likes of Bill Maher, Michael Moore, Al Sharpton, Spike Lee and many other outspoken liberal personalities, generally winning any debate against anyone willing to take him on. Both Bill Maher and Michael Moore choose not to.
Appearing on Fox 11 in L.A. on Tuesday, TMZ says Elder defended Donald Sterling, arguing that the only reason Sterling was taking so much heat is because Magic didn’t keep his cool after the audio was released:
“Magic Johnson could have taken this thing to a nice high level… and he could’ve said, ‘I don’t care what Donald Sterling says,’” Elder said.
What TMZ leaves out, however, in a very Michael Moore-ish fashion, is that Elder started his comments by saying Magic should have acted more like Larry Bird when Isaiah Thomas said that if Bird was black, he’d just be regarded as just another player. Bird’s response when asked what he thought? “I don’t care what he said.” Which is what Elder thinks Magic should’ve said with regard to Sterling’s comments.
Read the full story: www.inquisitr.com
Follow Larry Elder on Twitter
"Like" Larry Elder on Facebook
Saturday, April 26, 2014
Last week's column contained excerpts from my interview with Robert Spencer, author of "Onward Muslim Soldiers: How Jihad Still Threatens America and the West." (Click HERE to purchase. Sales help fund JWR. ) He makes the case that violent Islam stems from a straight reading of Islamic religious texts, and that moderate Muslims need to face up to and repudiate this so that true reform can take place.
This is Part II of the interview:
Larry Elder: You cite Koran passages that state Jews, Christians and nonbelievers have three choices: conversion, second-class citizenship or death. When people say these kinds of things are "taken out of context," you say this simply isn't true?
Robert Spencer: Yes. They're dealing from a broad tradition within Islam that mandates violence against nonbelievers. It's an unpleasant fact . . . but . . . I give abundant testimony from Islamic sources to this effect, and it's no use denying it.
Elder: These madrasas where they are teaching the Koran, teaching hatred of Jews, Christianity and the West — your argument is that they are not corrupting Islamic text, they are teaching actual text.
Spencer: They're working from very clear Islamic text. Radical Muslims around the world call Jews "monkeys" and "pigs." This comes from several very clear passages in the Koran that say Jews and Christians are under the curse of Allah, because of their disobedience and refusal to accept that Muhammad is a prophet . . . G-d turned them into monkeys and pigs. The fact that this kind of hatred is so deeply rooted in core Islamic text makes it all the more difficult to eradicate.
Spencer: When people say that jihad is a peaceful struggle — it means "struggle," literally — it means to bring the soul into line with the teachings of the Koran and the will of the law, that's true. But it's not the only meaning of jihad, or even the principal meaning. Throughout Islamic history, and Islamic theology and law, you have violent jihad being the primary understanding of what it means — this collective responsibility of the Islamic community to wage war against non-Muslims until they either convert or submit as second-class citizens under Islamic rule.
Elder: There are about 1.2 billion Muslims worldwide. What percentage subscribes to this violent jihad ideology?
Spencer: It's difficult to tell. Some people have estimated 10 percent, which sounds comforting until you realize it's 100 million people. There are also more disturbing indications. A recent poll in the Palestinian Authority indicated that 71 percent approved of suicide attacks against civilians in Israel. Noncombatants are not to be targeted . . . but if they are considered to be aiding in the war effort, then they can legitimately be fought. This is the justification that Osama bin Laden used for 9/11, and the Palestinians use for suicide bombing attacks in Israel.
Elder: If the West hadn't interfered in the Middle East, if the U.S. hadn't propped up the Shah of Iran, if we didn't have troops in Saudi Arabia, if we weren't supporting Israel, then would this part of the Arab world have it in for us?
Spencer: They might not be as stirred up as they are, but there's no doubt that they would have it in for us, nonetheless. You're talking about a group of people that gets their intellectual justification from passages such as . . . the prophet Muhammad saying, "I have been commanded to fight against people until they confess that there is no God but Allah and that I am His Messenger." The Muslim world took that seriously and acted it out for centuries. Before there was any Crusade, they overran Egypt, Syria, North Africa and the rest of the Middle East, which were all Christian lands before the Muslim conquest. For centuries, they continued to press into Europe from the west and the east, into Spain and France until they were stopped, and on the Eastern side up to Vienna, where they were ultimately turned back. . . .
No Islamic sect has ever repudiated the doctrines of violent jihad that the radicals are using today. The radicals see themselves as continuing a conflict that's gone on for 14 centuries, that doesn't ultimately have anything to do with the causes that you named. It started long before (these causes) ever existed and will continue long after they are solved.
.png)
