Not So Sterling-Silver and the Slippery Slope

The National Basketball Association (NBA) Commissioner Adam Silver on Tuesday banned Los Angeles Clippers owner Donald Sterling for life following racist comments he made in private that were recorded.  He was quoted as telling his MGW (Mistress/Girlfriend/Whatever) that he did not want her to bring "black people" to his games and that he more or less did not appreciate her hanging around "them".  While reading the transcripts and listening to what audio I could listen to, this man is appalling in every sense of the word.  However, I am somewhat confused of what has transpired over the past few days.

On Sunday, the day after the audio was released, it is reported that Sterling has a long history of racial discrimination including charges in the NBA and that nobody should be surprised by this.  On the panel discussing these charges was National Association for the Advancement of Colored People Interim President and CEO Lorraine C. Miller.  The NAACP Los Angeles chapter was planning to honor Sterling for a Humanitarian Award, which has since been rescinded.  Sterling was honored by NAACP once before in 2008.  If Sterling has a history of this behavior, is a well-known racist and nobody should be surprised by this outcome, how in the world can an esteemed organization such as the NAACP not only honor him once, but almost twice.  I guess money can buy just about anything.  This is obviously a mistake by the NAACP and I would hope they review their high end donors and honorees after this debacle.

To quote Dallas Mavericks owner Mark Cuban when interviewed about the possibility of forcing a sale of the Clippers by the league "it will be a slippery slope" and it most likely will not happen overnight.  This all goes back to the "history" of this man's behavior, why now?  When he was evicting colored people illegally in rent controlled housing it wasn't an issue? It wasn't an issue when the Department of Justice brought discrimination charges against him and he was quoted as saying that the reason he did not like to African-Americans was "Black tenants smell and attract vermin." and that Hispanics "smoke, drink and just hang around the building,"? Mark Cuban feels that forcing a sale will open a Pandora's Box from special interest groups to pressure league officials into action when people aren't aligned with their views, and he could be right.

The question of the players being able to opt out of contracts because of this was brought up during the press conference and I must say that is not an option.  It comes down to two things.  First, and I keep going back to it, is the history of Sterling, if the agents of these players did their homework rather than go after the biggest contract they would have known this.  Second, when you sell your soul to the devil you live with the consequence.  The NAACP learned that the hard way and they reportedly returned the money Sterling donated.  Will the NBA players wishing to opt out do the same thing? Unlikely!

Donald Sterling is a vile human being.  He is married with a mistress, OUT IN THE OPEN.    When asked about his actions as a landlord his quote was "I own the building, so I can be racist".  He just doesn't care and that compounds the issue.  He was also quoted as saying to an emplyee that reported a request for repairs and refund due to damage "I'm not going to do that, just evict the bitch"

If you have been following this story and are celebrating the decision keep in mind this does not solve the problem.  The players still "play" for Sterling, he still signs the checks.  What does forcing the sale of the franchise do to Sterling?  He stands to make a 480% profit on his investment, just on the sale.  That's showing him.  He will still be a racist, just a half of a billion dollars richer. While the courts haggle over the sale of the team, and they will, does that mean his "ban" mean he doesn't have to pay the bills?  The punishment at this point is on the surface.  This is far from over.

The NBA needs to tread lightly here on how they react to public discourse.  They have opened the door, now it is a matter of who they let in to voice their issues.  Leading to a "slippery slope".

3D

If you don't take it from me, ask my wife

Please Set Me Straight

For the past couple of days I have been pent up with frustration, disgust and anger over the decision that came down on Tuesday in the Justina Pelletier case.  Maybe I am just confused, maybe I am just misinformed or maybe I just don't get it.  So I am asking anyone who reads this and has a differing opinion to set me straight.  Unfortunately for me I have not been able to find anyone to set me straight.  So, I am begging, please set me straight.

For those of you that don't know what I am talking about here is a quick summary from the website www.justiceforjustina.com.  "Justina Pelletier, a 15-year-old from West Hartford, Conn., is in the fight of her life. After being diagnosed and treated for a rare genetic disorder, Boston Children’s Hospital (BCH) overruled the diagnosis and said it was “all just in her head.” When Justina’s parents refused to stop her treatment, BCH assumed custody of Justina and locked her up in the psych ward — against her parents’ wishes. Shouldn’t the parents of this young girl have the right to make decisions regarding her welfare?"

For the past 14 months Justina has been sheltered away from her parents only able to see them for an hour a week under the supervision of the Department of Children and Families (DCF) and the police.  They are not allowed to ask her how she is feeling or how she is doing.  Evidently, Justina is wheel chair bound, legs swollen and her condition that was "in her head" has worsened.

On Tuesday, Judge Joseph Johnston ruled giving permanent custody to DCF in this case.  In reading the ruling I noticed it had nothing to do with what is in the best interest of Justina's treatment but how the Pelletier's hurt the doctors at BCH and DCF officials feeling.  Calling them "Nazi's", swearing at them and threatening to sue.  What has that got do with any of this?  If my children were in this situation the offenses above would be the least of their worries.

These are the facts that I know.  Justina has been diagnosed and treated for mitochondrial disease, which is a very controversial disease and some doctors don't believe it is a valid disease.  This is where the issue starts.  I get if a doctor doesn't believe in a diagnosis, but the actions that are being taken are just far too extreme.   Second, if the Pelletier's are such horrible parents why hasn't the DCF in Connecticut taken any action against them?  Because they refuse to.  They feel there is no basis to get involved.  Lastly, why is DCF fighting so hard on this?  Is it because they have had several misses lately?  Are they trying to flex their muscle? It just doesn't make sense.

I have contacted the Governor’s office, my state rep and Senator Warren to help end this.  I did not contact Senator Markey because I just think he's useless (low blow, sorry).  Needless to say, nobody has contacted me back.  So, I am asking someone on the other side of this argument to set me straight.  Please, don't tell me to get all the facts, I am asking you to present them to me.  I will respect anyone's position on this.  But I need to be set straight.

3D

If you don't take it from me, ask my wife

The Lottery is Not the Problem

The most heinous thing happened the other day and, if true, the man should spend the rest of his life behind bars.  That, however, is the less likely scenario of the situation involving Daniel Snay of Uxbridge.  Snay, a four time convicted Level 3 sex offender was arrested for yet another sex crime against a child.  It was reported that Snay used money that he won on a scratch ticket in 2008 to lure the victim.  So instead of tightening up the incarceration laws in the Commonwealth, Rep. Richard Moore of Uxbridge has proposed a bill that will solve this issue going forward, he wants to ban sex offenders from participating in the Lottery.  That makes almost as much sense as CNN anchor Don Lemon asking if supernatural powers were involved in the missing Malaysian Airlines flight.

Rep. Moore's heart is in the right place, unfortunately as a lawmaker he needs to take the emotion out of it and look at this with a clear head.  The lottery winnings were a contributing factor, not the reason.  If convicted, again, shall the winnings be forfeited? Yes.  But to prevent them from participating?  Not only is that a civil rights violation how you could possibly police that? 

This is where it gets tricky.  If a convicted felon, of any crime is released from prison they have supposedly paid their debt to society and or, are rehabilitated according to parole boards.  If Snay had been released four times by the Commonwealth, the parole board obviously felt he was not a danger to society and would not commit this crime again, or again, or again. Preventing him to purchase a lottery ticket, where the odds are in the millions of him winning, is going to prevent him from committing this act again, or again, or again.

It's staggering to me while watching the news and I hear stories of people getting arrested and I hear it's their "sixth DUI", or it's their "eighth drug charge" or "fourth sexual assault on a child".  There is the problem people.  I am all for rehabilitation, but I am also a proponent of three strikes and you are out, must be the umpire in me.

If we are going to take away the ability of a convicted sex offender to purchase lottery tickets then we need to prevent convicted DUI offender from purchasing cars, convicted arsonists from buying cigarettes or convicted drug dealers from buying aspirin.  If we are going to start banning what they can do on the outside, then why not keep them on the inside.  This is coming from a state that First Degree Murder by a juvenile does not carry an automatic life sentence.

I hope Snay spends the rest of his days in prison, because I know the treatment he will get will be much more appropriate.  But as the lights dim down on this issue the lawmakers should abandon the ban on lottery tickets and focus it more on keeping monsters like Snay behind bars.  The money may have contributed, but he would have continued to do this without the lottery ticket.

3D

If you don't take it from, ask my wife.