• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Would you vote to take the Clippers from Donald Sterling?

Donald Sterling must sell his NBA team


  • Total voters
    56
  • Poll closed .
I wonder how this would play out if Mr. Sterling was under fire for expressing an opinion that is controversial, but on a side that those on the far-wrong tend to favor, such as supporting “gay marriage” or drug legalization.

In neither of those cases do we see an attack on people and nor do I think that it would hurt the brand as much as what he did say, so your point is just not at all relevant. You are comparing dynamite and cream cheese.


I rather suspect that the very same people who are defending the efforts to punish him for expressing the opinion that he did would be his staunchest defenders if that was the case
.

that may be true for some, but in the end the issue is about hurting the league and the right for the league to drum him out. So the question is what opinion would be so uncomfortable for a majority of the people to have a bad reaction to the point it would hurt the league? I can think of a scenario? Help me out.


The far wrong is all for free thought and free speech, as long as you only use it for thoughts and speech with which they agree.

I know you think that is clever but it is an insane statement.

Now I must address your signature:



The five great lies of the Left Wrong:

Again your attempt to be clever makes you sound like a sheep of the right wing noise machine.

We can be Godless and free.

Well you can but most liberals don't believe this as many of us are religious.

• “Social justice” through forced redistribution of wealth. •

What do you even mean>

Silencing religious opinions counts as “diversity”.

Again most liberals are religious. Oh you seem to be talking about being critical of bigotry disguised as religion. I guess you are defending hate.
• Freedom without moral and personal responsibility.

Most liberals have a morality and take responsibility. The failure of the right is to be comfortable with the notion that others might see what is moral differently from them.

Civilization can survive the intentional undermining of the family.

Liberals aren't intentionally undermining the family, that is a lie. But that said isn't it the right blocking people who love each other from formalizing their love through marriage and creating strong families?
 
Wasn't aware that you were a Marxist-Leninist.

It's called "socialist". I made no mention of class struggle, at all. However, if you continue making middle school quality jokes about michael sam i really don't care if it bothers you or you can't make the distinction.
 
It's called "socialist". I made no mention of class struggle, at all. However, if you continue making middle school quality jokes about michael sam i really don't care if it bothers you or you can't make the distinction.

Advocating the seizure of private property from the bourgeoisie and declaring popular control is straight out of Lenin's playbook. What do you think the October Revolution vs. the czars was about, Halloween candy?

And how the hell does Michael Sam affect THIS?
 
Advocating the seizure of private property from the bourgeoisie and declaring popular control is straight out of Lenin's playbook. What do you think the October Revolution vs. the czars was about, Halloween candy?

And how the hell does Michael Sam affect THIS?

It's not private when they get subsidies from the govt and the stadiums are built with taxpayer $. Some of the NBA teams even had to take bailouts from others cause of massive debt.

Even if this particular desire was leninist it's only one aspect of the economy, ownership of pro sports teams due to said owners showing such pigheadedness (marge schott's "Hitler wasn't so bad" and "no one is more upset than me" when an ump died on the field also comes to mind) i'd rather they're just all gone so i don't need to hear of them again.

Do you want all high school and college sports teams converted into for profit too?

Sam doesn't affect this at all, but after reading that trash, go ahead and think i'm marxist-leninist, all good to me.
 
Freedom of speech period.

The man has a right to his opinion, The bigger issue here is why was she taping their conversations in the first place was she just trying to get something on this gentlemen?

from what i have read she had over 100 hours of audio conversations, and that was all she could hang him with? wow clearly she had an agenda.
 
I wonder how this would play out if Mr. Sterling was under fire for expressing an opinion that is controversial, but on a side that those on the far-wrong tend to favor, such as supporting “gay marriage” or drug legalization. I rather suspect that the very same people who are defending the efforts to punish him for expressing the opinion that he did would be his staunchest defenders if that was the case. The far wrong is all for free thought and free speech, as long as you only use it for thoughts and speech with which they agree.

C'mon, Bob. That's not what this is about. The other NBA owners have to decide if he's bad for business. Simple. The thought of black people all over the US boycotting whenever the Clippers come to town probably causes a lot of rich, old white guys to burst their hemorrhoids.
 
This is why you don't get invited to the good parties.

Then, the truth hurts, maybe too much......and I am never invited to parties....don't like them anyway.....too much phoniness and dishonesty for me.
 
Back
Top Bottom