Though we had hoped to disregard Donald Sterling’s momentary roasting on the Liberal spite–excuse please, Liberal spit, the relentless media campaign forbids. One can after all, ignore even an annoying housefly only so long before giving up and going for the fly swatter. This is our fly swatter for the case of Mr. Sterling.
The gentleman in question, if he is such; we don’t profess to know — is held up for the Liberal Race War based upon a recording of a bawling-out of his much younger ‘lady friend’ for her choice of guests at basketball games featuring Mr. Sterling’s team. This tells us that Sterling is, besides decades older than his lady friend, incredibly wealthy since that is the only access to team ownership. We have no idea whether his wealth was stolen, inherited or earned by some huge or not-so-huge contribution to society. We have been told that he is a registered Democrat.
The recording is now used to brand Mr. Sterling as a: “racist.” No matter that the lady friend in question and both black and white basketball players deny this on his behalf; such testimony may be bought by such as Mr. Sterling. Responding to all this, the Basketball Gods banned Sterling from games — for life — and fined him $2.5 million.
This seems strange; if he is banned from games for life, why would he pay such a fine? But, it gets stranger yet. The basketball league let it be known that he would be forced to sell his franchise and politicians spoke of government forcing him to do so. We are now living in the Union of Soviet Socialist Americas? Does not the archaic, out-of-date and often inconvenient, Constitution require due process of law and compensation to deprive folks of their property? Guess not, anymore. That illusion vanished with General Motors and Chrysler after 2008 with few noticing.
Nobody brings up questions such as: Was the recording made with Mr. Sterling’s permission? Aren’t there some laws about such things? Bigger though than that, are we well served when our personal, allegedly private, words can justify such draconian punishments by both the state and others, mostly as a result of media hype? We don’t profess to know Me. Sterling or whether he is a saint or a sinner or how often he washes. We do however, know a little of the American Constitution and there, we see nothing providing for persecution as a result of ones’ personal views, however odious others may see them. Perhaps Sterling waived his Constitutional rights via a contract with the League? A court would have to sort out such an event and if so, Mr. Sterling should at least, fire his attorney.
Add to that, the matter of a sports team owner’s views and private conversations hardly seems worthy of much attention in economic hard times amidst such foreign policy failures as Ukraine and the Middle East coupled with such scandals as Benghazi and the IRS and NSA. Then again, perhaps those are the point ..?